Skip to content

Category: ministry

Published on Leave a comment on Discover Cor Deo

Peter Mead and Ron Frost are thrilled to invite you to “Discover Cor Deo.”  (And Mike Reeves reckons you should go too!)

Among other things Cor Deo runs a training programme in which a small group of men join the mentors for an intensive full-time programme of study and ministry.

  • The first part of the programme is part-time, from September to January, involving assigned reading and three one-day conferences (attendance not required for participants coming from overseas).
  • The team then comes together for the full-time programme from February to July

On Saturday the 3rd of July there is a great opportunity to find out more about Cor Deo, the vision, the programme, the mentors, the details!  Get a taste of what makes Cor Deo distinct and discover if Cor Deo is for you.  You can even meet Peter and Ron in the flesh!

When? Saturday the 3rd of July, 10:30-3:30 (lunch included)

Cost? No charge, but it would be helpful if you let us know you are coming so we can reserve your place

Where? We are holding this meeting in The American Church / Whitefield Memorial Church in Tottenham Court Road, central London

Please click here for the invitation with more complete information.  Go here to Cor Deo's website.

For what it's worth, I think this looks an incredible opportunity.  If you're in a position to consider a year of ministry training, no matter where you are in the world, I can't think of a better way of pursuing it.

.

Published on Leave a comment on Good news for the poor

Isaiah61

Social engagement or evangelism-only? 

.

What is the mission of the church?

 

Here are three factors that unnecessarily polarize the debate:

.

1) We think in terms of church programmes.  We frame the whole debate in terms of how many of our 15 scheduled hours of church-run activity must be devoted to helping the needy each week. 

.

2) We look for justification in the wrong theological doctrine.  One crowd stresses the doctrine of creation, the other the doctrine of salvation - and then we proceed as though these are separate agendas, separately addressed by the Lord.  We need to begin with a doctrine of God from which flows a single creation-salvation programme in the Gospel of the Son.  Here's a paper where I attempt to do this. 

From this approach I think it becomes obvious that evangelism simply is the mission of the church.  But it also means that social engagement does get worked out on the basis of and from within that proclaimed gospel.

.

3) Even though I'm a believer that "the mission of the church is evangelism" I submit that our side is probably most to blame for unnecessary polarization.  The sad fact is that many of the evangelism-only crowd are also middle-class-only.  We don't really believe that the Good News is for the poor.  (Which is not really a methodological problem - it's a spiritual and theological problem).

But the debate is not about who we should minister to!  We should all agree that we must minister to the poor.  And we can hardly deny that Jesus had a decided bias to the outsider!  The debate is about what form that ministry takes and what makes it Christian.  Well then let's have this debate while we all move onto the housing estates and with the love of Christ compelling us, let us all minister to the poor. You can knock on doors and lead off by addressing practical needs.  I'll knock on doors and lead off with Jesus.  I still think my way's much more faithful and I'll try to persuade you.  But I also reckon that you will end up gospelling some of your contacts.  And there's no doubt that I'll end up debt counselling many of mine. 

But let's at least make sure we've got the same mission field in mind.  Let's first be clear that we must reach the poor.  Then let's discuss how.

.

Published on Leave a comment on Here is a trustworthy saying…

Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners...  (1 Timothy 1:15)

It's a wonderful motto for gospel ministry.  Here is the heart of all Paul does.  But when he relates it, he can't help but add his autobiography '...of whom I am the worst.'

Some ministries are good on the first half of the verse.  That's absolutely crucial.  But in my experience, few ally this to the second half.

Does our Christian ministry seek to build the appearance of correctness, togetherness, superiority?  How much is dripping in repentance and broken-hearted humility?  Are we just trying to speak out of strength to poor sinners over there?  Or are we beggars showing other beggars where to find Bread?

Published on Leave a comment on Successful and troubled

Thinking and preaching through 1 Corinthians recently, it's so stark what a mixture the Corinthian church was. Successful and troubled.  Their congregation contains former male-prostitutes, idolaters, thieves, drunkards and swindlers (6:9-11).  What a work of grace to convert this lot from their dark past.  As this motley bunch meet together, called saints by the Father (1:2), in fellowship with the Son (1:9), a temple of the Holy Spirit (3:16), they lack no spiritual gift (1:7).  Paul always gives thanks for them (1:4).  And yet they are foolish, divided, litigious, permissive, immoral, selfish, drunken and unbelieving.  If your friend was moving to Corinth, would you recommend this church?

Well perhaps you wouldn't recommend moving to Corinth full stop.  Here's a sailor town full of all sailor town vices.  Here's an overwhelmingly pagan culture that not only has no Christian memory, but never had one to begin with.  Yet here Paul planted the gospel seed, Apollos watered it and God grew a church (3:6) right there in the midst of a culture about as unChristian as you could possibly imagine. 

But what a reflection of the gospel that Paul proclaimed to them.  Here are unwashed heathen who are now washed, sanctified and justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God (6:11).

In line with his gospel, Paul is able to address them as dearly loved brethren and to deliver stinging rebuke.  The Corinthians really are genuinely loved and they really are genuinely wrong, foolish and sinful.  And the intensity of this dual reality is increased by the very success of their church. 

I heard Tim Keller say in a 1 Corinthians sermon that we don't experience the degree of trouble they did because we're not as successful as they were.  It's the churches that really confront the culture and really grow in the midst of opposition that will produce these kinds of problems.  If we don't know these kinds of discipleship issues in our own churches it's probably because we're not reaching the people the Corinthians did and/or not growing  or seeking to grow like them.

Of course this made me think of our friend Mark Driscoll.  And how I need to be far more public in saying 'Thank God for Driscoll'.  And far more praiseworthy of the gospel ministry that seems to be happening through Mars Hill and Acts 29 . 

The gospel means we are simultaneously righteous and sinner.  And it means gospel communities and leaders can be critiqued and critiqued harshly (just read 1 Corinthians) without ever implying that they're not a gospel community.  No, because they're a gospel community there will be sin (just as there is deep and dark sin in me).  But there is also much to give thanks for and much to praise. 

I thank God for Mark's incredible gifts, his passion for Jesus, his gospel-focussed preaching and his mission-mindedness.  Which is quite a list!  I wish those things could be said of me with even a fraction of the same intensity. 

On the other hand I'm very uneasy about his macho-christology, his macho-manliness, and what I perceive to be a major lack of humility.  These things are problems.  I happen to think they really need pointing out and cautions raised, especially given his popularity. 

Now I know I have a whole bagful of my own problems.  In fact if I had a hundredth the gifting and a thousandth the success of Driscoll I'd be just as proud, probably much more so. 

But what I get a bit tired of is the all-or-nothing approach to Driscoll.  Either he's Satan himself, leading thousands astray, or he can do no wrong - any criticism justified immediately by his success or explained away as an understandable reaction to a wicked culture or liberal Christianity.  Paul never said to the Corinthians 'Yes you're getting drunk at communion, but I understand your missional context and great giftedness so I'll forget about it.' 

Please, let's believe the gospel.  We are simultaneously righteous and sinner.  Mars Hill can be successful and troubled.  Driscoll can be loved and critiqued.  And we don't have to collapse one into the other.

.

Published on Leave a comment on Dan Allender – The Psychology of a Pooped Pastor

The Wounded Heart is my favourite Dan Allender resource. (see previous post).  But here's one that's $95 cheaper (i.e. free).  A talk entitled The Psychology of a Pooped Pastor

His main point is that the problem is not Pooped Pastors but Pissed Pastors.  (By the way Mum, by pissed he means angry - it's an American thing). 

It's not underlying tiredness but underlying anger that's the problem.  Very interesting!

.

Published on Leave a comment on A theology of preaching – part 2

Go to theology network for the full paper on preaching.  I'll post it here in chunks.  Be great to talk about it if you want to comment.

The Speaking God

Let’s begin at the beginning.  Our God is the Speaking God.  The eternal life of Father, Son and Spirit has ever been an out-going, communicative life.  Because our God simply is Trinity there has never been such a thing as a God who then comes to speech.  Arius was wrong.  There is not a God who then has a Word.  God’s existence does not precede His expression.  Rather God’s expression, His Word, is eternally constitutive of His life.  God is always and eternally the Speaking God.  To encounter His Word is not to be obstructed or distanced from a divine reality behind His disclosure.  Rather to receive His Word is to be drawn into the depths of His eternal reality as the Speaking God.  Revelation, as the unfolding of God's own life in Word and Spirit, is not simply what He does.  It is who He is. 

From the overflow of this communicative life came creation.  Again, by His Word and through the Spirit, God brought all things into being (Genesis 1; Psalm 33:6; John 1:1-4).  The universe exists in correspondence to God's Word.  "God said... and it was."  This means that to be is to be an obedient hearer of the Word.  The universe is His congregation and, derivatively, His herald (Psalm 19:1-6). Humanity, as the pinnacle of creation, is supremely called to appropriate God’s revelation.  Our vocation, not simply as Christians but as creatures, is to receive the Word.  And in receiving the Word we participate in the life of the Speaking God. 

What is more, He comes to participate in our life.  In incarnation, the Word comes not simply to man or even just in man, but as man.  God’s revelation could not be louder or clearer.  The Word, Jesus Christ, reveals His Father through His words and actions (e.g. John 14:5-11).  Both these words and actions were committed to Him by the Father (e.g. John 5:19ff; 8:26,38; 10:37f; 15:15; 17:6,14).  These words were entrusted to the disciples and these actions were witnessed and remembered by them, all through the power of the Spirit (e.g John 16:12-15).  In the power of that same Spirit, these disciples proclaimed them to the world (e.g. John 20:21-23; Acts 1:8).  The world’s response to this witness is their response to Christ, and their response to Christ is their response to the Father (e.g. John 14:22-26). 

To put it another way, the Father Himself confronts us in the Person of His Son and the Son Himself confronts us in the Spirit-empowered words of His messengers (e.g. Matthew 10:40).  From Father to Son, from Son to His bride and so out into the world the Spirit carries divine revelation. 

Contemporary proclamation is not simply the remembrance of past events or the recitation of ancient words.  To proclaim this Word in the power of this Spirit is to stand in a stream of revelation which both preceded and produced the universe.  Our words witnessing the Word have their source and authority in the Speaking God who graciously includes us in His ongoing life of self-disclosure.

.

Published on Leave a comment on A theology of preaching – part 1

Go to theology network for my paper on preaching in full.  Here I'll post it in chunks.  Be good to talk about it if you want to comment... 

Introduction

It is often said that the real issue in preaching is not ‘How to?’ but ‘How can?’  How can a preacher stand before a congregation and dare to speak ‘In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit’?  The ‘How can?’ is by far the more pressing question.  And yet, in the textbooks, at the conferences and in preaching groups it seems the ‘How to?’ is the perennial concern.  Notes or full script?  Powerpoint or no?  Topical sermons or lectio continua?  These questions abound.  Even issues like ‘how to address the heart?’ or ‘how to preach wisdom literature?’ threaten to drown out proper theological reflection.  All the while the ‘How can?’ question stands above our practice demanding an answer. 

Our silence on this issue could simply reflect the pragmatic spirit of our age.  We want to know what ‘works’ so we can copy it.  But I suggest there is a deeper problem.  Fundamentally we have an impoverished theology of revelation which fails to appreciate what evangelicals from another age held dear – namely that God Himself addresses us in preaching. 

Consider this classic statement of reformed faith from the Second Helvetic Confession:

“The Preaching of the Word of God is the Word of God. Wherefore when this Word of God is now preached in the church by preachers lawfully called, we believe that the very Word of God is proclaimed and received by the faithful.”

Luther would agree:

“Tis a right excellent thing, that every honest pastor’s and preacher’s mouth is Christ’s mouth, and his word and forgiveness is Christ’s word and forgiveness… For the office is not the pastor’s or preacher’s but God’s; and the Word which he preacheth is likewise not the pastor’s and preacher’s but God’s.”

 Or consider this from John Calvin:

“When a man has climbed up into the pulpit… it is [so] that God may speak to us by the mouth of a man.”

The reformers viewed preaching as God’s own word proclaimed in His name, by His power and with His authority.  More to the point this is the bible’s own teaching, as we’ll see.  Proclamation of the word of Christ is not simply an explanation and application of the bible.  It is itself a divine encounter in which the Spirit again confronts the hearers with the omnipotent force of God’s own Word.

In the face of such an audacious claim, the ‘How to?’ must be put on hold.  This paper seeks a theology of revelation that is able to address the question ‘How can a preacher dare to speak the word of the LORD?’  What is the nature of divine revelation such that this is even possible?  Once we have we addressed this we will find that the ‘How to?’ has been decisively and much more faithfully shaped.

..

 

11

Published on 11 Comments on Does the gospel create homogenous personalities?

Here's a question Rich Owen asked me.  I've included my answer, but I thought it would be great to get your opinions too.  This is the question:

To what extent does the gospel require a homogenisation of personality?
 
I'm thinking about bearing with one another, rebuking one another, kindness... the hard edge of graciousness and integrity...  but gentleness etc. So as a simplistic example...
 
Person A is really very nice. Wouldn't say boo to a goose, tends to fall in line even if reservations are bubbling in the background - thinking very positively about others, perhaps naively, so is always looking for smooth and non confrontaional paths in dealing with people. It is not always obvious what they think about things because everything is tempered with caveats because they are gentle people in every way not seeking to offend.
 
Person B is also very nice but is very gritty, calls a spade a spade etc. Doesn't fall in line without having to be persuaded. Thinks very highly of others and so in love calls things pretty black and white - calls sin sin, points right at pride and invites others to be just as direct with them. They think positively about others, but analyse and challenge - likewise not seeking to offend - but knowing how pride works want to expose it directly.
 
These personality types are partly "considered" in that is what they want to be and think is best, but they also reflect how someone naturally is - some people are more gritty than others etc.
 
Anyway - that is my already unhelpfully stereotyped situation.
 
under those maxims of bearing with one another, etc should person B attempt to be more like person A so that person A hears them better? should person A be a bit more bullish so that there is more clarity and person B knows exactly where they are going?
 
does the gospel require these people to deny self in the sense that they are naturally fluffy or gritty, and as they move towards the other, modify personality to be more like each other... a homogenisation?

Here's my answer:

I wrote a series of posts on personality, idols, repentance, gifts, service, maturity etc here, here, here and here.  
 
Basically I think there are four elements to consider:
 
1) God-given temperament.  The triune God loves diversity.  When humans make ice we make ice cubes, when the Father makes ice He makes snowflakes and all that,
 
2) Idolatry which takes hold of our natural differences and creates idols that we serve and imitate (this is an all-pervasive part of 'personality').  For instance, the world, flesh and devil take hold of a person with an above average IQ to make them worship and serve their brain, or intelligence in general, or being right or knowledgeable or whatever. 
 
3) In Christ there is repentance for this idolatry which will mean acting against type.  2) means that a naturally sweet disposition will in some large part arise from flesh-dynamics that simply want to justify self, protect from relational pain, pursue some idol of 'niceness'.  Such a sweet person's repentance will involve assertiveness, standing up for truth etc while the bruque person's repentance will involve the reverse.
 
but also,
 
4) In Christ there is spiritual gifting which will very often redeem those God-given temperaments from 1).  The same Spirit through Whom I was made is the Spirit who gifts me in Christ.  He gifts me and gives me to the body of Christ in my distinctness to be a member of this diverse church.  
 
 
1) and 4) are the pre-redemption and post-redemption celebrations of diversity.  I think the last thing God wants is homogeneity.  The devil through the idolatry of 2) shoves us into some very bland temperamental boxes.  In this sense homogenisation is satanic.  Dan Allender talks about how a woman's flesh-dynamics lead her really only to three basic categories: good girl, party girl and tough girl.  There's a billion ways of being a woman if we live out our identity in Christ, there's only a few very narrow ones if we don't.
 
So yes broadly speaking I think repentance will look different for different people. (e.g. party girl should take responsibility, good girl should let go, tough girl should sweeten up.) But that's not because there's some 'average girl' in the middle that Christ is shepherding womankind towards!  Following Christ will mean expressing our God-given, Spirit-redeemed diversity not squishing us into some homogenous mould.  
 

Some follow-up questions to consider:

  • If the gospel doesn't create homogenous personalities then why do our churches, not to mention our ministry training bodies, churn them out?? 
  • Why is 'being nice' the bland medium that defines so much of our Christianity??
  • Is there space for confrontation in our homogenized churches?? 

 

.

Twitter widget by Rimon Habib - BuddyPress Expert Developer