The Wound

 "Having an appearance of godliness, but denying its power".       2 Timothy 3:5.

The ascension of disobedience is a very real hardship - we don't have to look very far around to see how this so readily freezes out even what Paul defines as 'natural affection' (normal care and concern for each other). In the secular realm, it has become commonplace to not only criticise but to entirely expel and ostracise anyone and everyone who does not comply with the acceptable narrative of the day - a generation of a "merciless cauldron of blamers", as one minister put it.

We would hope that this emptying of mercy would be something foreign to the church, but what happens when "religion" is employed in such a fashion that certain scruples and beliefs cripple the very nature of the faith in respects to how it is understood and practiced.

In my last entry here, I touched on how a notion of Christianity views itself as correct, even when it is comparing itself with the actual revelation of God in Christ as witnessed by scripture.

It is imperative to understand both the implicit meaning of such 'adjustments' and the actual truth that scripture is expounding, so, in the case I raised last time, the essential maxim that establishes our redemption is the ramifications of Christ's incarnation (birth, life, death, resurrection and ascension) as beautifully noted here by Athanasius:

"not that we might become such as the Father, for to become so is impossible for us creatures, who have been brought out of nothing... there is only one true Son by nature, true and only begotten, hence we become sons, not as He in nature and truth, but according to the grace of Him that calls, and though we are men from the dust of the earth, yet we are referred to as 'gods', not as the true God or His Word, but as he has God who has been given such grace" (Against the Arians 3.25.19).

When we allow 'other' notions to arise which effectively undermine and thereby replace such truth, we find the faith readily slipping into alternative views of God's revelation and the ramifications of this, and this leads us away from Christ's true work into a cul-de-sac of error.

Which brings me to the issue of the trouble of 'weaker brother' theology, as spoken of in Romans 14.

Dr R C Sproul provides a helpful examination on the general themes of this here, and touches on when it is charitable to accommodate the needs of an individual's troubled conscience and when it is essential to renounce such troubles when they threaten the very nature of faith and truth.

These past two years have provided us of a very clear application of 'weaker' belief and practice in the main body of the majority of churches. By succumbing to these 'necessary' requirements, the church closed its doors - quite literally in most cases - to the ministry and 'stronger' application of God's living word.

Think for a moment how anaemic our faith would be if God Himself had applied the same criteria in respect to our tragedy as we have employed in actively segregating ourselves because of 'health concerns'. Can we imagine where we would be if God had refused to engage with our fallen race because they had become entirely defined by the awfulness of sin? What consolation would there have been for our first parents if a fiery sword had merely expelled them, with no promise of help, and such a wrath had continually been evidenced by all throughout the ages. What if God had continually closed Himself off in the fashion that Christianity willingly chose to do in 2020 and 21?

As I've noted before, the premise for this was a poor reading and understanding of Romans 13, but the application is clearly an equally poor use of Romans 14, and these impoverished notions have not gone away - they have not even been questioned or challenged in most cases, hence the main body of believers remain exactly where they were before and during the crisis - woefully poor in their application of Gospel truth and, clearly, unprepared to do the necessary 'spade work' of repenting and reforming.

It is entirely because such folly reigns that Christians cannot grow to deepening their faith or provide a viable and radiant witness to the world of Christ's true saving Lordship in times of crisis.

There must be genuine reform if this is to be different in the future.

An Inferno of Apotheosis

"How many were killed?" "That's Incidental".

Zoe vs Clarice - Caprica: Apotheosis.

"Professing themselves wise, they become fools".

Paul - Romans 1.

(Please bear with me in this post - the 'destination' won't be obvious at first, but the diverse themes at the beginning are going to help us get to where we need to go...)

Sometimes, the various strands combine to grant a grander view of what's taking place around us.

This morning, I came across this interesting conversation between Ben Shapiro and Jordan Peterson on the distinctions between Judaism and Christianity - but it says quote a bit more.

Notice, first, Peterson's definition of the key themes of Christianity (in the first two minutes) where 'redemption' becomes all about what 'we take on' (in respect to things like suffering). Then notice Ben Shapiro's telling response to this (2:40 mark) - that Christianity isn't, crucially, about our 'imitation' of the divine, but is about GOD SAVING US. He then goes on, after defining what Christianity teaches (God saving us through Jesus Christ) to state that he personally, as a Jew, agrees with Peterson's ORIGINAL statements, because for him, "salvation"  is 'taking responsibility for his own sins' without a mediator.

So that sets out the boundaries, but what comes next is really interesting.

Peterson decides to zone-in on what he defines as the 'confusion' on this issue (how we are saved) in the Christian community (around the 3:30 mark onwards). He states that Shaprio's definition of substitutionary atonement as "Protestant", and the Roman Catholic but especially Orthodox views would be far more akin to his definition of what makes the Christian religion tick. Notice how he defines this - "it is their sense", he states, "Of the imitation" (of Jesus) "that is of primary importance" (4 minute mark). Then he goes on to say that, in reality, Protestantism belongs in this basket as well, because although it may teach Christ died for our sins, that does not "alleviate the moral burden". In other words, Christianity 'gets it' when, like Judaism, it sees Jesus as a great example of what we should be like, and through suffering and the like, seeks to mimic His manner of behaviour. He then goes on to conclude his argument by quoting from Dostoevsky about how the church 'lowers' the high moral calling of Christ because it was too high. Peterson sees this as the church's compromise - to make the religion viable, and therefore more like Judaism, but Shapiro then comes back and states again, that 'theological' (protestant) Christianity isn't like that - it is about believing in Jesus.

The important thing to notice here is an underlying idea that essentially defines the abrupt arrival of the sacrificing work of Jesus as, well, pretty unnecessary and, spiritually, almost certainly irrelevant.

The basic notion goes like this - yes, we have this nagging little problem we define as sin, which, at its worst manifestation, is something aligned with real evil, but don't fret, God has given you a free will and with some help from His trove of mercy, and with some good resolve on your part (along with some suffering to hammer all this into place), you can become fit for eternity - religion just becomes an aide to help get you there.

The thorn in this otherwise "wonderful" little elixir is an Apostolic Christianity that refutes this by stating that only faith in Christ makes the ungodly acceptable to God - it's trust in Christ's singular atoning work, or it's judgement (See Romans chapter 1 to 5).

The thing which fascinates me here is what happens when we ask what transpires in our world when the Peterson/Shapiro preference is given precedence as THE Christian faith? How does this 'manner' of Christianity seek to "deliver' itself amongst us?

The other item I came across today was this insightful article by Giles Fraser on the nature of the vision behind the actions of Vladimir Putin.

Beginning with the historical sources of the world as we now find it, Fraser shows not only what is now motivating the invasion of Balkan regions in 2022, but how this derives from a very particular rendition of religious belief which causes Putin to view himself as a virtuous agent of God in what he is seeking to achieve. This may bring bloodshed, may take the world into war, and may even bring a major division into a manner of belief which is supposed to be indissoluble, but that is all viewed as inconsequential in the light of what is viewed as a 'divine' mandate.

The church has, of course, been there many times before (a brief reading of Peter De Rosa's 'Vicars of Christ' will show how often this same folly was evident amongst the Popes), and it has allowed the same powers to go as far as to anathematise the very gospel (The Council of Trent articles on Justification by Faith alone), but this all leads us to one very telling and disturbing point.

How much of today's Christianity is revolving around "Christ and Him crucified", and how much of it has left that universe entirely?

The opening conversation by Peterson and Shapiro is telling.

So many want Christianity to be something that it isn't - a "form" of godliness that we can identify as "our" righteousness, but that won't come anywhere close to making the grade. It was Him who was 'bruised for our transgressions' that singularly heals us 'by His stripes' (Isaiah 53). If our focus isn't on that complete and perfect work, then we're going to find ourselves severely wanting on the last day.

The Letter

"This story has been attributed to Mr. Conan Doyle: A friend of his had often been told that there is a skeleton in the cupboard of every household, no matter how respectable that household may be; and he determined to put this opinion to a practical test. Selecting for the subject of his experiment a venerable Archdeacon of the Church, against whom the most censorious critic had never breathed a word, he went to the nearest post-office, and dispatched a telegram to the revered gentleman: ‘All is discovered! Fly at once!’ The Archdeacon disappeared, and has never been heard of since".  The Strand - 1897.

Following through from my prior mailings here which focused on the fact that American Evangelical leaders have been actively involved in promoting and supporting the Government line on the pandemic whilst denouncing any alternatives, it is time to bring the issue closer to home...

In this week's Irreverend Podcast, the regular team examined Justin Welby's latest statement in which he sought to distance himself from his words back in 2020, requiring churches to close.

I was pleased to hear the words of Daniel French in the podcast in respect to his own experience as an Anglican minister:

"Ministry is the one main vocation that I have had, and after 23 years - now 25 - and to read that letter (Welby's original in 2020 requiring all churches to be closed) I burst into tears, I stormed out and I thought 'what the heck am I doing in this job?' There's a part of me that has never recovered from that. There's a part of me that remains broken. What on earth happened....

In some dioceses, the threat of CDM - 'safeguarding' or de-frocking clergy - was definitely there, evidenced in letters that were sent to the clergy. If that isn't dictatorial, I don't know what is".

I entirely share Daniel's anguish.  I left the church I had been attending for eight years as a consequence of that original missive, because I understood that mere men had done something they had no authority to do - the termination of Christian ministry. 

The question I still find unresolved today is why is it that none of the local or national ministers I know felt as I did - why didn't they respond like Daniel, but entirely complied with the requirements made and continued to do so right throughout the events of the last two years? Why was nothing done, nothing said, beyond a few conversations, to hear and take on board the concerns of those who were voicing that such approaches were wrong?

There's something even more dreadful, however, in Daniel's candour. The Anglican churches in my region have behaved as if the terrible requirements of March 2020 are irrelevant - that the 'church' can merely move on from all of this as if nothing has happened of any relevance and thereby, just like Welby's latest letter, detach itself from any significant role or ramifications caused by the rupture - but the wounds are there!

Do they really think that God is going to just overlook such actions and the compounding of this evidenced in this present, pervasive neglect of those broken by the behaviour of such bodies?

What troubles me so deeply is there is not even a thought amongst the many in respect to suggesting some manner of repentance in regards to this - 'you merely misunderstood what we we doing', appears to be the general line about to be held by those in authority.

In America this week, Douglas Wilson noted that there are those "Reformed Evangelical" ministers who have begun blaming those who left their churches during the crisis as being, at the very least, 'wrong' to have done so, because their 'political' stance was challenged. Wilson notes, correctly, that this wasn't the core issue for such 'leavers' - it was the Gospel; the very nature of truth provided by God. "The authority of scripture is measured, not by an affirmation that someone believes in that authority, but is demonstrated by your submission to and your obedience to it" - you demonstrate your view of what is authoritative, in other words, by what you do.

If you submit to decrees and edicts which order the closure of your church, the severance of your church body, the silencing of your ministers, then you are showing to all that you believe that there are powers which have more validity in what you say and do as a Christian than the requirements of scripture.

The response to this is, 'but the opening of Romans 13 says', and we are then presented with an exposition that requires submission to evil, but the faithful church has always argued that this is not so - the response to evil is to reject it, especially if and when such seeks to diminish the authority of God in relation to the service of the church and the administration of the message of the gospel.

The lesson of the last two years is not learned at all - the gaping wound is very real and has not begun to heal, and there is no escape from the consequences of this - the conforming church will continue to be the toy of the state, and the world will look on with the sting of such a reality clearly evident in their gaze.

Some of us will continue to speak up.

Some of us will continue to seek to draw lost ones into the everlasting kingdom, but for so, so many, that gathering will have to proceed without any reference to what was once deemed to be a 'local' church, whatever its denominational stripe.

Perhaps this will allow a new more refined, less socially conformed, expression of the faith to be seeded.

Let us hope this can be.

R E F O R M A T I O N

"One is not righteous who 'does' much, but the one who, without work, believes much in Christ. The Law says 'do', and it is never done. God's grace says 'believe in this', and everything IS done".  Martin Luther.

The Lord sets apart 'the godly' (Psalm 4:2 & 3), but we need to pause right there. We assume that term is probably derived from the word for 'God'... but 'chasid' comes from another source - 'chesed', a Hebrew ocean of a term which seeks to express the unfathomable depths of love, fidelity and mercy. The 'chasid' are actually the recipients of 'chesed' - they are beloved - that is why they are set apart... they are simply and wondrously blessed.

That's not the end of the significance of this. The chasidim are those who sing - their receipt of such mercy causes them to extol and delight in the one who has given them  such beauty, and this reciprocity brings joy and the genuine richness of life.

Christianity is about just this.

Christ comes, full of such grace and truth to us, and gives Himself for us, and we become the beneficiaries of the splendour, that we might be adopted into the beloved.

May this be the good care that enriches this day!

(With many thanks to Chad Bird).

 

Calamity

 "Men do not know their time - like a fish caught in a net, or an animal in a snare, so is the evil that falls suddenly upon them". Ecclesiastes 9:12.

The evil that men do is at its worse when what it does, supposedly, is in the name of what is 'good'. So much of what is now beginning to unfold concerning the various policies and requirements of the past two years unveils that behind all the rhetoric of 'doing what was best' for others, there was a clear program of abuse and manipulation, still being so wickedly expressed in the 'official actions' now taking place on the streets of places like France, New Zealand and Canada.

Watching a human chain put in place on a major crossing into America yesterday as those placing their bodies between the police and the truckers loudly said the Lord's Prayer spoke volumes about the nature of the humanity at the core of this vital action. The world has indeed witnessed something astonishing in these past few weeks, and yet, the majority of Christian groups remain not only silent, but actively avoiding any proper support for these everyday men and women seeking to restore freedom to their normal lives.

Stultified by their warped allegiance to a miss-application of the opening of Romans 13, these church groups have done something far worse than remain silent or 'neutral' in this lengthening struggle - they have actively supported a regime which is intent on the execution of truth and the end of the proclamation of the image of God.

The depth of the wickedness involved in this process is shocking - a deliberate series of actions which have intended to abuse the church's message in regards to the God-given autonomy of people in respect to their identity and value, evidenced in every facet of the official 'social controls' deemed necessary for 'health' purposes.

Further enquiry into Megan Basham's astonishing piece last week has unveiled just how deliberate and evil this scheme was amongst Christians, and, just like prior times when such abuse has steered entire movements into diabolical error, this current marriage of church and state has killed the church's cardinal role into a broken and needy society at the very moment when it was most required.

As Rod Dreher notes in his own analysis of the Basham revelations, the disclosure "shows how we can allow ourselves to be used and deceived by those we place in authority... whatever your belief, if you rely on the particular role of certain authority figures, you are likely to discover you have made a very terrible mistake. Such 'grit' runs very deep in such institutions". Christians, he notes, are supposed to do much better than this because of the very clear message that scripture gives us, but the terrible truth here is that so many have, on this occasion, as with others, clearly, naively assumed that they just accept the rules from 'on high' as the Christian thing to do and thereby not engage with the truth - the depths and imperatives this crisis has produced - nor 'test' for themselves what has been the truth behind the guise of 'necessary' public policy.

It shows that the church has learned nothing amidst this storm. The few voices that have sought to speak out have been marginalised and ostracised by the general consensus, and are now excluded from the mainstream denominational expressions, which continue to remain silent yet vehemently holding on to their arrogant stance - there is no repentance here.

The brightness of what is good and necessary has now moved elsewhere. Ottawa has shown that, and that is why its radiant message of 'good will to all' has been the infection that has danced out across the world. People have been wanting - needing something that brings better health than the crushing weight of social incarceration, and it has now broken out outside of churches that merely added their voices to the call for such terrible chains.

The days ahead will be marked with struggle. The church in general will remain 'closed' in all but name. God will work elsewhere, as history shows.

Christ calls us to go out with good news, to gather in joy, to live richly together. May that be the beauty we see arise amidst these troubled days.

The Council of Fools

"Our choices are these: Either we can play the game and enjoy the honor that comes from being players in the political arena, or we can become fools for Christ. Either we will ignore the silent screams of the unborn so that we might be heard, or we will identify with the suffering and speak for those who are silenced. In short, either we will speak for the least of these, or we will continue to sell our souls for a mess of political pottage.” R.C. Sproul Jr.

“For the simple are killed by their turning away (from truth), and the complacency of fools destroys them.” Proverbs 1:32.

So, finally, the truth is out, and it's bleak for evangelicalism. Megan Basham has released a startling piece in the Daily Wire this week regarding how the Government in America used evangelicalism as a vehicle to actively promote Covid-related policy in a highly assertive manner.

Just as UK Christians were hounded by the like of Justin Welby to adhere to all the Government requirements, Francis Collins was continually wheeled out in a 'Christian' context as an "authoritative" source in respect to what church-goers needed to heed by various evangelical and reformed leaders as the correct course to take in respect to obeying lockdowns, wearing masks ('life-savers', according to Collins), and readily accepting MRNA treatments as the sound course to recovery.

Churches and individual believers who raised concerns or refused to adhere to such actions for various reasons, many of which were soundly Gospel-driven, were deemed by Collins and others to be conveying the "Ugly" side of Christianity, openly deemed to be promoting a 'conspiratorial' approach that was defined as erroneous.

What is astonishing about this, as Basham shows, is that Collins is no friend of key Gospel truth itself. In his work leading the NIH, he has actively been involved in projects that have engaged in the harvesting of organs from aborted children (one project was funded to the tune of three million dollars) and has vocally applauded the 'celebration' of "Gender Transition" activities, speaking of those engaged in such as to be honoured as brave.

In his numerous appearances within Christian churches and events during the pandemic, he promoted a manner of behaviour and 'restraint' as necessary for the faith which is in clear conflict with the imperative of the Gospel, but the most dreadful aspect of this theological 'leveraging' is the manner that it has been welcomed and transmitted as essential by the mainstream evangelical leadership itself, ostracising many believers who have seen such an approach and behaviour as highly unbiblical.

The reality is that all these manner of restrictions were a process that left the nature of the faith in the mainstream devoid of any Gospel vitality in a day of trouble, when it was vitally needed. 

There can be little doubt that the dreadful consequences of this will be felt for many decades to come.

Postscript.

Dr Tom Godfellow has published a superb piece today on the UK side of this trouble. Also now available is an excellent examination of this issue in the latest Irreverend podcast, which includes a highly insightful interview with Lord Frost.

W o n d e r

 The home we all want, and so deeply need. Gorgeous truth from Chad Bird as threaded throughout the scripture.