The Other Adams Chronicles

Ascension Day

2011-06-02T17:28:00.000-05:00

Ascension Day Sunday sermon--preached at Covenant CRC in Appleton, WI in 2010.

The Ascended King

Acts 1:1-11

Turn with me in your Bibles to the first chapter of Acts. Acts is the first book after the gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. In just a few moments, I’ll be reading from verses 1 through 11. You may wish to keep your Bibles open to that passage as we work through it.

I. Introduction

Ascension Day was this past Thursday. Did you notice?

It seems like Ascension Day isn’t a very big deal any more in our church communities. When I was a kid, every church in my small Iowa hometown had Ascension Day services on Thursday evening. My junior high teachers didn’t give us homework, since they figured we’d be in church that night. I don’t remember those services being all that well attended, though. Ascension Day took a back seat to Maundy Thursday, Good Friday, and Easter. And nowadays, Ascension Day seems to take a back seat even to things like the National Day of Prayer, Memorial Day, and preparations for the end of the school year.

I heard a story recently about an Ascension Day service to remember—it took place at an Episcopal seminary. The plan was to have a very solemn ceremony for Ascension Day, with deans, faculty, and seminarians all suitably dressed in robes and clouds of incense.

At the end of the service, the entire group of worshipers filed outside of the church to sing an ascension hymn. Unknown to the worshipers, an enterprising student had prepared a surprise ending. He had taken a large, nearly life-sized Christmas figure—the hollow, plastic, painted kind that some churches and people place in manger scenes—and he had stuffed it with fireworks and some kind of rocket.

As the procession of solemn clergy in their majestic robes marched into the courtyard, the student lit the fuse. This sent the statue shooting into the sky through a cloud of smoke and sparks. Unfortunately, the rocket wasn’t meant to carry a payload like this, so it quickly ended up out of control, buzzing the panicking worshippers, and then doing a nose dive onto the roof of a nearby dorm. There, the “Ascension Rocket” sputtered and died.

The dean of the seminary wasn’t impressed with the student's defense that he was simply trying to dramatize the reality of the ascension. In fact, by turning the ascension into a humorous demonstration with rockets and fireworks, the student was in some ways doing the same thing modern Christians have been doing for years by ignoring or minimizing Ascension Day. He was turning the ascension into a kind of humorous story from a pre-modern society that couldn’t conceive of people moving through the air.

It hasn’t always been this way. In the early church Ascension Day was just as important as Easter and far more important that Christmas. Just 200 years ago, Ascension Day was still almost as big as Christmas. You got the day off and everyone went to church.

I don’t think it’s a coincidence that Ascension Day has almost disappeared while Christmas has gotten so important. During the last several centuries, we have been narrowing the role of religion to something small and private and small, relevant only in certain parts of our lives.

At Christmas, God gets very small. On Ascension Day, Jesus gets very big. At Christmas, a great God in heaven comes down to earth and enters humanity. On Ascension Day a frail human being goes up to heaven to sit at the right hand of God.

But that's why we should celebrate the ascension. Christ is now ruling with power from heaven over the whole Kingdom of God. The power of the Kingdom has been given to a King who once lived on earth as a human. And God’s rule and his daily care and providing for us are focused in the Lordship of Jesus the Messiah.

This isn’t something you’ll always hear, even in Christian churches. For too many Christians, Jesus is more like a friend. He is a personal Savior whose throne is on your heart. Jesus is kept down here and remains quite small.

For other Christians, Jesus is just a teacher, and the Kingdom of God is just the good things we do—our good deeds and our Christian institutions.

In both cases Jesus is domesticated, like some old, toothless lion lying around in a cage in a zoo. And Christians who serve this domesticated Jesus don’t feel much need to celebrate the ascension.

But Ascension Day should have powerful meaning for us. Christ’s ascension means he is now ruling with power over the whole Kingdom of God. It means that the power and authority of God throughout all time and space has now been invested in the lordship of Jesus Christ. The Kingdom of God is here, now. Jesus is in charge. And we are accountable to him. And we know what he expects of us as his Kingdom servants.

So let’s read together the account of Christ’s ascension from Acts 1, verses 1 through 11.

In my former book, Theophilus, I wrote about all that Jesus began to do and to teach until the day he was taken up to heaven, after giving instructions through the Holy Spirit to the apostles he had chosen. After his suffering, he showed himself to these men and gave many convincing proofs that he was alive. He appeared to them over a period of forty days and spoke about the kingdom of God. On one occasion, while he was eating with them, he gave them this command: "Do not leave Jerusalem, but wait for the gift my Father promised, which you have heard me speak about. For John baptized with water, but in a few days you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit."

So when they met together, they asked him, "Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?"

He said to them: "It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority. But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth."

After he said this, he was taken up before their very eyes, and a cloud hid him from their sight.

They were looking intently up into the sky as he was going, when suddenly two men dressed in white stood beside them. "Men of Galilee," they said, "why do you stand here looking into the sky? This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven."

II. He…spoke about the Kingdom of God

You probably know that the book of Acts was written by Luke, the gentile doctor who also wrote the gospel of Luke. He begins this book by telling us about his previous book, saying “In my former book, Theophilus, I wrote about all that Jesus began to do and to teach.” And, if we read further, we see that Acts is a really a continuation of Luke. Luke is about what Jesus began to do; Acts is about what Jesus continues to do through the Holy Spirit.

Now, some of you might object to this phrasing. “Wait a minute,” you might say. “Christ’s work is complete! In fact, didn’t Jesus himself, just before his dying breath on the cross, say ‘It is finished’?”

This is a valid question. How do we reconcile, “It is finished” with Luke’s statement in verse one about, “all that Jesus began to do and teach”? Is there a contradiction here?

Of course, there’s no contradiction. Luke was a doctor, so perhaps a good way to show the relationship between these two phrases is to use an illustration from medicine. It is one thing to create a medicine, to put together the ingredients needed to give it its power to heal. It is a whole other thing to administer that medicine.

Christ’s work was completed on the cross in that what he did was enough—it was sufficient. By dying, he paid the penalty for our sin. He didn’t need to do anything more to make us right before God, to restore our relationship with God, to bring God’s creation back to the way things ought to be.

But the work of administering the medicine of Christ’s work—that work was not, and is not, yet fully complete. The sinless life of Jesus, and His atoning death, formed a perfect and complete medicine for a sin-soaked world. There was no need to add to it. But it still needed to be given. And so after the resurrection, the work of administering this medicine begins.

And we see in verse three of our text how this medicine is administered—through the over-arching rule of the Kingdom of God.

Now, Christ’s teaching about the Kingdom was nothing new. The Kingdom of God is the central theme of all Scripture. Genesis begins with the creation of the Kingdom and human rebellion against it. The rest of the Bible tells how God restores the kingdom, and through Christ defeats Satan and reconstructs His kingdom, restoring His original purpose for the creation.

The good news Christ preached here on earth was the gospel of the kingdom of God. Hear what Matthew said in chapter 4 of his book: “Jesus went throughout Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, preaching the good news of the kingdom, and healing every disease and sickness among the people.”

And the theme of the Kingdom of God continues all through the book of Acts. At the end of Acts we see Paul preaching the message of the kingdom: “For two whole years Paul stayed there in his own rented house and welcomed all who came to see him. Boldly and without hindrance he preached the kingdom of God and taught about the Lord Jesus Christ.”

Even later, the last book in the Bible celebrates the everlasting establishment of the Kingdom: “The seventh angel sounded his trumpet, and there were loud voices in heaven, which said: ‘The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ, and he will reign for ever and ever.’”

Christ, through his work, has ushered in the kingdom of God, fulfilling the promises of the Old Testament, and accomplished everything God intended for humankind in the original creation. Now, the medicine of redemption created by Jesus through his death and resurrection is ready to be administered to the entire world through the work of the Kingdom of God. And before he ascends into heaven, symbolizing his ascension to the throne of the Kingdom of God, Christ takes the time to, once again, speak about the Kingdom of God.

III. Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?

Unfortunately, even at this late date, Jesus’s disciples don’t seem to understand what he was talking about. In verse six the disciples ask him “Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?”

These words show that the disciples were still clinging to the hope of some kind of earthly kingdom, maybe the restoration of an earthly theocratic kingdom like that led by David and Solomon a thousand years before. In some ways, the disciples’ cluelessness is stunning. Just looking back at the gospel of Luke, Jesus mentions the Kingdom of God in his teachings forty times. John Calvin, in his Institutes, joked that “there are as many errors in this question as words.”

Even in Christ’s final days on earth, spent reinforcing his teachings about the kingdom of God, the disciples don’t get it. Even having experienced Christ’s death and resurrection, the disciples misunderstand not only Christ’s mission and work, but the nature of their own mission. They were looking for something political, something visible. They wanted something they could taste, see, and touch.

To be fair to the disciples, this same misunderstanding, this same cluelessness, has been shared by Christians over the 20 centuries since the ascension. Gregory Boyd, in his book The Myth of a Christian Nation, says that “the history of the church has been…a history of believers refusing to trust the way of the crucified Nazarene and instead giving in to the very temptation he resisted.” The church’s history, he says, “is a history of people who too often identified the Kingdom of God with a ‘Christian’ version of the kingdom of the world.”

Christ doesn’t criticize the disciples for the misunderstanding so obvious in their question. Instead, in his gracious teaching manner, he directly answers the question, but does so in a way they couldn’t have expected. The disciples are thinking about a piece of land on the Mediterranean, but Christ has a view far beyond what could be seen, felt, or tasted. The scope of Christ’s Kingdom is the entire universe.

Look how Jesus responds in verses 7 and 8 to the disciples’ question. He first tells them that it is not for them to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority. Then, he answers their question more directly.

The word “but” at the beginning of verse 8 is important. It points to the contrast between Christ’s answer and the disciples’ expectations. The disciples were still thinking way too small. They asked a question that showed their thinking was limited to a single nation on a small piece of land. Christ answers them with a kingdom that, even though it starts in Jerusalem, expands to Judea and Samaria, and then to the ends of the earth.

Imagine how the disciples must have responded as they heard Jesus’ answer. A kingdom beginning in Jerusalem? Sure, that was to be expected, given what the prophets had said about the Messiah’s kingdom. You can almost hear the disciples nod approvingly. Then, Christ adds “all Judea” and then “Samaria.” Maybe now some of the disciples are beginning to see the truth. Christ, who is still acting as the good Shepherd right up to his last minutes on earth, is helping them see a kingdom that is not of this world.

But the disciples could probably still see the kingdom reaching Judea and Samaria since these regions were nearby. They were within the boundaries of earthly kingdom ruled by David and Solomon.

But then Christ blows away any expectations the disciples could have had about the nature and scope of Christ’s kingdom by setting down his final kingdom boundary marker: “to the ends of the earth.” By doing so, Jesus is hearkening all the way back to God’s covenant with Abraham. Remember the promise to Abraham that through him all the nations would be blessed? Welcome to Christ’s Kingdom, the fulfillment of that promise.

Luke describes the last teachings of Christ to his disciples in Luke 24. There he quotes Jesus as teaching that “repentance and forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.” And here in verse 8 of our text, Christ speaks not just of every nation, but of the very “ends of the earth.”

In doing this, Jesus reaches back even further, to Genesis—to God’s command to Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden to fill the entire earth with bearers of the image of God. When we Christians together, as the church, are witnesses of Christ’s Kingdom to the ends of the earth, we fulfill that mandate to fill the earth.

In many ways, Acts 1:8 is the key to the rest of the book of Acts. The rest of the book follows this path from Jerusalem to Judea to Samaria, and then “to the ends of the earth.” In Acts 2, ten days after the Ascension, on Pentecost, the church is born in Jerusalem. Before the book of Acts ends, Paul is in Rome, perhaps not quite the end of the earth. And eventually he may have preached in Spain, the western edge of the known world.

But don’t miss the fact that this path, from Jerusalem to the end of the earth, is not just the path of some of Jesus’s followers in bringing news about the resurrection to people who didn’t know about it yet. No, this path is the path of kingdom expansion. Throughout Acts, Luke interjects notes about the spread of the word and the constant addition of numbers of believers to the church. These notes demonstrate for us the expansion of Christ’s kingdom from Jerusalem to the very ends of the earth.

Of course, when Jesus refers to the ends of the earth, he is not just setting down a geographical limit to the Kingdom of God. He is saying that the Kingdom is meant to be expanded to every square inch of God’s creation.

And creation doesn’t just mean physical reality. Every structure and pattern of society, all the possibilities of culture, all the relationships of our personal lives, are a part of Christ’s kingdom. Sports, art, manufacturing, government, the family, business and commerce, friendship—all of these are as much part of creation as lakes and plants and stars.

Unfortunately, just as some limit the Kingdom of God by equating it with a particular place, others limit the Kingdom of God by trying to say it only impacts what they call the “spiritual” or the “sacred.”

Just moments ago, I mentioned Greg Boyd’s book, The Myth of a Christian Nation. It is a good book, and he makes excellent points about what the Kingdom of God ought to look like. Like I mentioned, Boyd recognizes that some Christians limit God’s kingdom to a particular time and place. Unfortunately, though his theology of the Kingdom of God is also far too limited.

Boyd’s view, based on the teachings of Martin Luther, is often called “two-kingdom theology.” This view is unfortunately becoming more popular in certain segments of the Reformed world. In this view, there are two kingdoms of God. One, the kingdom of God’s left hand, is a secular kingdom in which God rules only by law. The other, the kingdom of his right hand, is sacred and God rules it by his word and Spirit. The sacred kingdom focuses only on sacred things like the sacraments and preaching the Word. In this view, the two kingdoms cannot mix.

John Calvin had a very different view. He recognized a special role for the sacred—the preaching of the Word and the sacraments, which are the only things that can point us to the truth of salvation. But Calvin also understood that the rest of creation, what some see as secular, is inseparably wrapped together with the sacred in the Kingdom of God. To Calvin, all of creation falls under the Kingdom of God. There is no left-hand kingdom. There is only the ever-expanding Kingdom of God, led by Christ, and its opponent—the Kingdom of this world, led by the devil. This view takes seriously verse 8—nothing is to be given up to the devil’s kingdom. Rather, Christ is extending his kingly reign and banishing the devil from every part of Creation.

The Kingdom is not limited, either by geography or by dividing the sacred and the secular. The Kingdom of God isn’t just about the salvation of a few people or just the reign of God in the hearts of his people. As theologian Anthony Hoekema, writes, “It means nothing less that the reign of God over his entire created universe.”

The story begun in Acts 1 is of Christ’s expansion of his kingdom from heaven by His witnesses, the church, through the Holy Spirit. Christ’s answer to his clueless disciples was a rebuke. It was a rejection not only of the physical land notion held by his disciples, but a rejection of any limitation to the scope of the Kingdom

IV. Why do you stand here looking into the sky?

Now, let’s turn to the end of our text this morning. In verse 9 we see Jesus “taken up before their very eyes” and a cloud hiding him from the sight of the disciples. Shocked, the disciples stand there gawking. Then two men dressed all in white—maybe angels or other heavenly messengers—appear. “Why do you stand here looking into the sky?” they ask. “This same Jesus...will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven.”

What the heavenly messengers are saying is clear. “Why are you still here? Jesus is coming back. You know that. He told you that. But you’ve got work to do. Work that the Lord gave you. Kingdom work. Get your heads out of the clouds and get to work!”

The messengers direct the disciples back to present earthly reality. They know who Jesus is. They know what the Kingdom is. They even know who they are—eleven people “with a very bad track record…eleven very human beings.” These 11 people, who failed Jesus in Gethsemane, who were clueless about the Kingdom of God, now know that they are Kingdom citizens. Their calling is to be standing up for and spreading the news of the kingdom in Jerusalem, then in Judea and Samaria, and then on to the very ends of the earth.

This is an unbelievable calling! A calling well beyond the capacity of these eleven guys without much of a record of stepping up. And it is a calling to each one of us as well. But it’s not some sadistic challenge at which we are destined to fail. No, this calling is linked to a promise, the promise of the Holy Spirit.

The promise of the Holy Spirit was for the disciples, and it was for us. It means that the Spirit will give us the power we need for the tasks that lie ahead of us in proclaiming and expanding the Kingdom. It’s not some physical power, like the disciples must have dreamed of before they fully understood the Kingdom. Rather, the power of the Holy Spirit is the power given to otherwise useless people to step up, to fulfill our responsibilities as Kingdom citizens. We have been given the power to work toward the final coming of Christ’s kingdom.

Of course there are still mysteries about just what the Ascension means for us. We know that while the Kingdom of God is here, it is yet to be revealed in its full glory. That won’t happen until Christ returns. And somehow, the things we do on this earth will have an impact even then. We can be tempted to gaze up into heaven like the disciples, trying to figure things out, trying to make sense of heaven from the perspective of the earth, trying to make sense of eternity from inside the boundaries of time. But the messengers warn us to get on with it.

This means that we must live content with the knowledge and hope that there is more going on than we are privy to. That even when things seem to be going badly, when the Kingdom of the world crashes in on us, when hope seems beyond our grasp; it’s all right, because Christ is in charge, he is reigning over the entire universe, and we know he is good and he loves us.

There is much beyond our view, but nothing is beyond the view of the King of Heaven. And we know enough to be secure and comforted. And because of that, there is no need to stand staring at the sky. Instead, we can move forward in hope and faith, as Christ’s hands, announcing and ushering in the expanding Kingdom of God.

V. Conclusion

Today is Ascension Sunday. It’s a big day—the day when we celebrate Jesus, who made himself very small at Christmas, getting very big. Christ, who humbled himself by putting on the flesh of a human, is now ruling with power over the whole Kingdom of God.

Jesus taught that the kingdom of Jesus is like a little mustard seed. It starts out small and weak, just as newborn Jesus was small and weak on Christmas. But the Kingdom is powerful now, and will be even more powerful someday. The ascension proclaimed the Lordship of Christ over the universe and promised the final consummation of the Kingdom of God, when sin will be put away for good and death will be no more.

In the Ascension, we see Jesus set free from the limits of flesh, limitations he took on for our sake. We see Christ rising in power to rule over the entire universe, not just certain times and places, not just certain aspects of the world.

And through the Ascension we see that Christ has arisen so that the story of redemption and the expansion of the Kingdom of God may continue. Because of the ascension, and the gift of the Holy Spirit that followed, the story of redemption and the Kingdom can continue through people like you and me as we are helped by the Holy Spirit. Christ’s ascension means he is now ruling with power over the whole Kingdom of God.

Amen.

A great summary of American religious belief

2011-03-22T14:09:00.000-05:00

On CRC-Voices, an email discussion group, there have been some interesting discussions lately: how do you witness to a member of the Baha'i faith; is Rob Bell a universalist; is universalism heresy? In the course of that discussion, Paul VanderKlay (who has an excellent blog here), wrote the following summary of the religious belief of most Americans, regardless of what label they put on their religion.

Moralistic, therapeutic deism if the functional religion of most Americans whatever religious affiliation they express on a survey.

1. A god exists who created and orders the world and watches over life on earth.

2. God wants people to be good, nice and fair to each other, as taught in the Bible and by most world religions.

3. The central goal of life is to be happy and to feel good about oneself.

4. God is not involved in my life except when I need God to resolve a problem.

5. Good people go to heaven when they die.

Paul adds the following warning:

You will get into trouble with most church people if you start challenging these, especially number 3.

It couldn't have been said better.

Yes, we're the church together

2010-11-15T00:14:00.003-06:00

I preached this sermon October 31 at my home church, Calvin CRC in Sheboygan, WI. Unlike two years ago, I did not get into trouble for my "liberal politics."

Oh, and special thanks to Cathy Smith. You can read some of her bloggings here. Something she wrote in a discussion on the CRC Voices list serve really made up the heart of my final point. When I read her comments, I knew I could never say it better than she did. After the service, a man in church I highly respect came up to me and said "I really appreciated the sermon--especially the part Cathy wrote." Thanks, Cathy!

“We Are the Church Together”

1 Corinthians 1:1-9

Q&A 54, Heidelberg Catechism

Article XXVII, Belgic Confession

In just a moment, we are going to read together from the first chapter of 1 Corinthians. Go ahead and turn to it, if you’d like. 1 Corinthians is in the New Testament. First come the gospels: Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Then come the books of Acts and Romans, and then 1 Corinthians.

Also, there are outlines available. If you would like one, raise your hand, and one of the ushers will bring you one. It might be useful to have one within reach. I printed Question and Answer 54 from the catechism there, and in just a moment I’ll be asking you to read along with me.

I. Introduction—“I am the Church…”

Old songs stick with you a long time, don’t they? No matter how old you are, you can probably remember songs you sang as a kid. Some of them are simple nursery rhymes like “Twinkle, Twinkle, Little Star” or “Jack and Jill Went up the Hill.” If you grew up in the church you certainly remember songs like “Jesus Loves Me” or “This is the Day.”

Back in my grade school days, after church all the kids would head down to the church basement. We could pick up juice and a cookie on the way, but we all gathered together in a big room to sing.

The whole church was invited—singing time was held between the church service and Sunday school. While the junior high and high school kids thought they were too cool to join in, many adults would join us. Often there were more adults than kids! Together we would sing Sunday school songs like “Fishers of Men,” “Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow,” and “Do, Lord,” often doing the motions along with the singing. Once we were done, we would move our chairs, the adults would move around the movable classroom dividers, and we’d head to our Sunday school lessons.

One song I especially remember singing was called “I am the Church.” Maybe you know it. It was pretty simple. The chorus went like this—

“I am the church,

You are the church,

We are the church together.

All who follow Jesus,

All around the world,

Yes, we’re the church together.”

I’ll admit that one reason I especially remember this song is that it was one of my little brother’s favorites. He loved to sing it, but he couldn’t pronounce “church.” When he said it, it sounded like “tutch.” My other brother and I used to tease him by copying the way he sang it: “I am da tutch, you are da tutch…”

I thought of that song again this week. In our morning services Pastor Rob has been going through the Apostle’s Creed, that ancient statement of Christian belief recited every week in churches around the globe. Pastor Rob asked me to continue the series, and this week, we are up to “I believe in the holy catholic church.” So of course when I thought about what I might say about the church, the first thing that popped in my head was “I am da tutch, you are da tutch…”

And as simple as the song is, it contains a timeless truth. The first verse of the song says:

“The church is not a building,

the church is not a steeple,

the church is not a resting place,

the church is a people.”

To this day, I remember learning a lot about the church while singing that song. But it wasn’t just the words that taught me about the church. It was watching the people singing along. It was people like the crotchety lady who always helped in the kitchen and made sure we kids didn’t take more than one cookie; people like the elderly man who cried when he told us his son had left the faith and become a Buddhist; and people like the minister, who always had time for us kids and always let one of us join him at the exit to the sanctuary as he greeted the congregation after the service.

I’ve been a member of quite a few churches since then. But I first learned about the church from those saints who gathered every Sunday on High Mountain Road.

This morning, we’re going to look at another church—the church in Corinth. Paul wrote his first letter to the Corinthians in response to problems in that church. In some parts of the letter he can be pretty critical of the church folks in Corinth. But at the very beginning, he expresses his thankfulness for them and reminds them of what a blessing it is to be part of the church. Hear the word of the Lord—through Paul—in the first nine verses of 1 Corinthians:

“Paul, called to be an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, and our brother Sosthenes,

To the church of God in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus and called to be holy, together with all those everywhere who call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ—their Lord and ours:

Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

I always thank God for you because of his grace given you in Christ Jesus. For in him you have been enriched in every way—in all your speaking and in all your knowledge—because our testimony about Christ was confirmed in you.

Therefore you do not lack any spiritual gift as you eagerly wait for our Lord Jesus Christ to be revealed. He will keep you strong to the end, so that you will be blameless on the day of our Lord Jesus Christ. God, who has called you into fellowship with his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, is faithful.

Now pull out your outlines. On the top is question and answer 54 from the Catechism. I will read the question, and I ask that you read the answer together in response.

“Q. What do you believe concerning "the holy catholic church"?

A. I believe that the Son of God through his Spirit and Word, out of the entire human race, from the beginning of the world to its end, gathers, protects, and preserves for himself a community chosen for eternal life and united in true faith.

And of this community I am and always will be a living member.”

The catechism, like the Apostle’s Creed, speaks of the church as “the holy catholic church.” Some other creeds, such as the Nicene Creed, add another word, the “holy catholic and apostolic Church.” This morning, let’s look at the church through each of those descriptive words: “holy,” “catholic,” and “apostolic.”

II. Holy

So first, “holy.” What does it mean to be holy?

To be holy means to be set apart for a special purpose. Usually, that being set apart means being dedicated to the service of God. It means exactly the same thing as “sacred” or “sanctified.”

In fact, when Paul wrote to the church in Corinth and told them in verse two that they were “sanctified in Christ Jesus and called to be holy,” he was telling them that they were called to be saints. The actual word he used that we translate as holy was “saints.” Holy, saints—either way Paul is saying that the church has been made holy and set aside.

But of course the church isn’t holy by itself. It isn’t set aside solely to be different from other organizations, or to be just a little better than the rest. Paul says it right there in verse two. The church is sanctified in Christ Jesus.

That means that there is nothing about the church by itself that is good. We are only made holy, set apart, because of Jesus Christ. The whole reason for the church is Jesus himself.

As much as I appreciate John Calvin, I am not a big fan of the name of our church. I don’t like the idea of a church being named after a mere human being, even one who had such an impact on history. There is only one person who deserves to have a church named after him, and that is Jesus Christ. It is his gift of grace that allows the church to continue and prosper.

Paul thanks God for the church in verse 4, saying he thanks God “because of his grace given you in Christ Jesus.” And it is through Jesus that the church has been enriched in every way—in all our speaking and in all our knowledge. And it is because of Jesus that we are able to be called into fellowship with him.

And because of the grace of Jesus, because we can now fellowship with him and become one with him, the church receives some wonderful promises. Paul talks about these in verses 7 and 8 of the text. First, we do not lack any spiritual gift. Within the church, God has given every gift, every talent the church needs.

And not only that, but Jesus has promised to keep us strong to the end of time. No matter the challenges the church faces, whether from fights within the church or from attacks from the outside, God will provide the gifts and talents needed to stand strong, and he will give us the strength needed to gain the victory.

But being holy, being sanctified in Jesus Christ, doesn’t simply mean that we can sit back, assured that we have been set apart from the world around us, simply waiting for Christ to return. Rather, we have been set aside for a purpose. We are called as a church to respond to God’s grace to us. And that call is to be Christ’s agents, his hands in a hurting world. The church has been called to serve the world, spreading Christ’s grace to everyone who needs it.

That means making sure that everyone has the opportunity to hear the message of salvation. For a few of us, that may mean something as radical as moving thousands of miles across the ocean to translate the Bible into a language spoken by a few thousand folks in Papua New Guinea, or studying macroeconomic systems and designing the best possible ways to encourage economic development in the third world.

For many more of us it means witnessing to our neighbors and the others nearby who need to hear what Christ has done for you. It means living with less so we can share our abundance those who need it. It means walking alongside and mentoring people in jail or with addictions, or who didn’t have the same advantages as we did. And it means encouraging our leaders to take seriously our responsibility to the needy and weak in our society.

Being made holy, being set apart, doesn’t give us as a church license to simply hang out in our beautiful buildings and wait for Christ to return. It doesn’t give the church permission to ignore the masses in decay in hopes that they’ll just go away. It means being set apart to do the work Jesus began 2000 years ago—to continue the work of proclaiming the kingdom of God, of healing the sick and feeding the hungry. It is for the work of Christ that the church has been set apart, sanctified in Jesus, and called to be holy.

III. Catholic

Besides being called holy, we as a church are called a catholic church. Another word for catholic is “universal,” and some Christians, because of concern about confusion, sometimes substitute the word universal. And that is fair, since the word catholic simply means universal in extent, involving everyone. We are united in faith with all Christians, everywhere and in all times and places.

Paul recognizes the catholic nature of the church in verse 2 of our text. He addresses his letter both specifically and generally. Specifically, he addressed the church of God in Corinth. More generally, though, he also addresses his letter to “all those everywhere who call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ—their Lord and ours.”

The catechism writers focused on the catholic or universal nature of the church when they said that God gathers, protects, and preserves a community “out of the entire human race, from the beginning of the world to its end….”

Maybe today we are a little more aware than we used to be that the church is made up of people from the entire human race, regardless of the country we live in or our ethnic background. When my kids were younger, we sometime used the books You Can Change the World for our family devotions. You may have seen the books in our church library. They are the kid version of the “Operation World” series, in which we American Christians are encouraged to pray for Christians and people groups all over the world. They are an excellent resource, and I encourage you to check out the kids’ version for your kids and grandkids, as well as “Operation World” for your own devotions.

But even though we are more aware that we are united in faith with a church gathered by God out of the entire human race, I wonder how well we live that out in our everyday lives. Let me give an example. While the numbers from the 2010 census are not finalized, 2009 estimates suggest that the City of Sheboygan is now about 3% African-American, 8% Asian, and 10% of Hispanic origin. Yet our congregation doesn’t reflect those numbers. Few do. Why not?

This topic was raised in the last few months in our denominational magazine, The Banner. Maybe some of you read it. In September, someone wrote an editorial asking “Is Separation Always Sin?” The writer of the article was Timothy Palmer, a North American missionary working in Nigeria. He agreed that it is beautiful when Christians from different ethnic groups worship together. But, he raised some concerns about the Belhar Confession, a new confession being considered by our church.

The Belhar condemns any “forced separation on the grounds of race and color.” That part is a no-brainer—there can be no doubt by any Bible believing Christian that the old system of apartheid in South Africa was abhorrent to God. The practice of redlining certain neighborhoods in Chicago to try to prevent African-Americans from moving in was the work of the devil.

But the Belhar also seems to reject any separation based on race or ethnicity and claims that any separation between peoples and groups is sin. Palmer isn’t so sure. He argued that there are sometimes valid reasons for people to worship separately.

One reason often cited is the language barrier. In a church like ours that places the Word of God at the center of worship, it would be hard to justify allowing people to go through an entire service not understanding what is going on.

But as someone recently noted in a letter in response to Palmer’s editorial, most churches are fairly quick to add a sign language interpreter when two or three people need it. But not many churches interpret their services into other languages unless a high percentage of the church needs it. While doing so might not be convenient, he argued that it needs to be done for the sake of hospitality.

He then asked an important question. Are we, as a church, striving to reflect the fact that God has drawn his church from every nation by whatever means possible? Or are we just trying to justify our cultural comfort zones or ethnic preferences?

Obviously, the answer to that question is complicated. We can’t settle it easily. But perhaps we should work to make our church better reflect the diversity of our community. After all, we confess that we are united in faith with a church gathered out of the entire human race.

Of course, the church is even bigger than all three dimensions of the globe. The catechism says that God gathers, protects, and preserves a community “out of the entire human race, from the beginning of the world to its end” that is “chosen for eternal life and united in true faith.”

Another one of our confessions says even more about this. Article 27 of the Belgic Confession reminds us that the “church has existed from the beginning of the world and will last until the end, as appears from the fact that Christ is eternal King who cannot be without subjects.” It goes on to remind us that “this holy church is preserved by God against the rage of the whole world, even though for a time it may appear very small in the eyes of men—as though it were snuffed out.” And it gives the example of the “very dangerous time of Ahab,” when “the Lord preserved for himself seven thousand men who did not bend their knees to Baal.”

This reminder should give us hope in God’s grace to his church. No matter how tough things seem, God will preserve and protect his church. There will always be followers of Christ. While it may be true that the church in the West—in Europe and North America—is declining, maybe even fading away, God will preserve and protect his church. And because we are united to Christ in faith through his grace, we know we are and always will be a member of that church. We are and always will be united to a church drawn out of the entire human race, from the beginning of the world to the end, a universal church, a holy catholic church.

IV. Apostolic

Just briefly, I want to touch on one more aspect of the church. I mentioned before that many of our creeds, including the oldest one, the Nicene Creed, describe the church as holy, catholic and apostolic. While it is good to be reminded, we probably know to some extent what it means that the church is holy and what it means that the church is catholic, or universal. But what about that last word—what does it mean that the church is apostolic?

In our text this morning, Paul starts out by identifying himself as “called to be an apostle of Christ Jesus.” We often refer to Paul as an apostle.

The word apostle means someone who is sent out. It actually comes from the same root word as postal—the postal service is a group of people who are sent out to deliver messages to a large geographical area. Apostles are kind of like postal carriers—they are sent out to deliver a message.

But the message of the apostles was not just a bit of news from a cousin in Jerusalem being sent to a distant relative in Corinth. The message of the apostles was the gospel of Jesus Christ—the message of grace and salvation and sanctification, of being made holy, through Christ. It is what Paul in verse 6 calls “our testimony about Christ,” a testimony that was confirmed in the lives of the people who make up the church, both in Corinth, and everywhere around the world.

The twelve apostles were sent by Jesus to be witnesses, to preach the gospel of grace that Jesus had given them. All of them had personally met Jesus—all but Paul by being his disciple before his death and all including Paul seeing him after his death and resurrection. Each of the twelve was personally called by Jesus to follow him and commissioned to be preachers of the gospel of grace that Jesus personally taught them.

As personal witnesses of the gospel, they became the foundation of the church—the holy, catholic, and apostolic church. We see this in Ephesians 2:20. There, Paul speaks of the church as being “built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone.”

When we confess that the church is apostolic, we are saying that it is founded on the gospel of grace to which the apostles were eyewitnesses. And we are confessing that the churches to which we belong today are directly descended from the churches we see in the book of Acts, the churches formed by the apostles. The Gospel Jesus gave to His apostles to preach to the churches is the same Gospel we preach today.

The Gospel calls us to serve Jesus in His church, just as Jesus called His first apostles. And when we preach the Gospel of the apostles, we are assured that we will not “lack any spiritual gift” as we eagerly await Christ’s final return as King. And we are assured that he will keep his church strong to the end, because the God of the gospel of grace is faithful. We are part of a church that is holy, catholic, and apostolic.

V. Grace!

Yet, somehow, even though we confess that we are part of a church that is holy, catholic, and apostolic, we sure don’t act like it, do we? We argue about minor things, like style of music, and become angry over something designed to glorify God. Instead of extending grace to each other, we pass judgment on each other over little things like the exact timing of the creation or who to vote for. Sometimes church seems more like the description that writer Annie Dillard gave in her book of essays, Teaching a Stone to Talk. This is how she described one of her experiences:

“Week after week I was moved by . . . The terrible singing I so loved, the fatigued Bible readings, The lagging emptiness and dilution of the liturgy, The horrifying vacuity of the sermon, and by the fog of dreary senselessness pervading the whole, which existed alongside, and probably caused, the wonder of the fact that we came; we returned; we showed up; week after week we went through with it.”

But notice, even with the pervasive imperfection of her church, Annie Dillard kept showing up.

I mentioned earlier, that even though Paul starts 1 Corinthians on a positive note, thanking God for his gift of the church in Corinth, he moves quickly to criticism. In verse 10 he starts a section decrying divisions in the church. Later on he deals with reports of sexual immorality within the church at Corinth, lawsuits among church members, and divisive debates over propriety in worship and whether Christians can eat food that had been offered to idols. And yet Paul returns at the end of the letter to his initial theme—his love and thankfulness for the church, and his desire to visit them again, hopefully for more than just a short visit.

The church is imperfect. After all, it is made up of imperfect people, people who have received God’s grace, but are still working out the gift of grace in their own lives.

Sometimes people are thrown off by that imperfection. I had a secretary who for many years refused to join the church because of all the hypocrites. It seems that whenever something bad happens within the church, the naysayers are there attacking the church. And look at the divisions within the church—there are thousands of separate denominations, each seeming to claim that they have the right understanding of Scripture. Our own denomination was born out of schism, and has suffered two major schisms in the last 85 years or so. We all seem to think we have a corner on the market on knowing what God wants. And in doing so, we forget about grace.

So as a church, we need to remember the beginning of Paul’s letter to that oh-so-imperfect church in Corinth, a church not so different from our local congregation, or from the church as a whole. We need to remember that we have been sanctified in Christ Jesus and called to be holy. We need to thank God for the grace given us in Christ Jesus, and rely wholly on it.

I have a friend named Cathy—a friend I’ve never met in person, but a friend indeed. Cathy is a former teacher and a writer. She writes for Christian Courier magazine and maintains a blog of her writing. Recently, in a discussion about some of the divisions in the church, Cathy said something that really sums up what we need to do as a church in the face of our divisions, our sins, and our imperfections.

She said:

“We have to go back again and again to what Christ did for us. It's not our "understanding" or "obedience" that brings us hope, but being cleansed and reborn in Christ…. If I am completely wrong about my interpretation of Genesis or my take on [women in church office], praise the Lord, I still belong to my faithful Savior, Jesus Christ. I'm trusting in his work. The confused peasants in the Middle Ages who worshipped bits of wood allegedly imported from Golgotha, if they believed in the Lord, still belonged. My descendants, who may inhabit purification pods and live digital lives in environmentally-safe cocoons, if they believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, will belong. It's that smaller than a mustard seed spark of faith that matters, not our understanding, nor our obedience…. We will disagree about that stuff, but we can still love one another in the Lord and try to be conciliatory, patient and gentle with one another… If a church… focus[es] on Christ’s sufficiency, daily and weekly, we can allow each other a lot of working room and space for our humble attempts at understanding and obedience.”

VI. Conclusion

We started with one song this morning—“I am the church, you are the church, we are the church together.” I want to finish with another song, one of my very favorite hymns—“The Church’s One Foundation.” We’re not singing it this morning, because it is one of the hymns we’ll be singing tonight over at First Church. I hope you’ll join us there tonight, as we celebrate the anniversary of the Protestant Reformation together with Christians from several other congregations. It will be an excellent opportunity to celebrate God’s faithfulness and grace toward his church.

But back to “The Church’s One Foundation.” The title says it all, doesn’t it? The church’s one foundation isn’t agreement on a set of specific doctrines. We aren’t sanctified in Christ because we know more doctrine than the guys down the street or because we are the most obedient to God’s law or because we are more faithful to a particular human interpretation of Scripture.

Rather, “the church’s one foundation is Jesus Christ, her Lord.” “With his own blood he bought her, and for her life he died.”

Amen

Christian Education

2010-07-21T16:28:00.002-05:00

Given some recent discussions I've been having on Christian education, I thought I would post this sermon. I gave the sermon in August 2005.

A Case for Christian Schools
Psalm 145:1-7

I. Introduction

Have you seen those bumper stickers that say “Drive Carefully, Schools Are Open”? Well, this week marks the beginning of the school year. I know Sheboygan Christian starts on Wednesday, and the local public schools start Thursday.

The beginning of the school year seems like the perfect time to talk to you about one of my passions, something that has been a key component of nearly every part of my life: Christian education, and Christian schools in particular.

Those of you who know me know that I come from a family of teachers. My father left his career as an engineer to become a science teacher at a Christian high school and then a professor and now an administrator at a Christian college.

While my brothers and I were young, my mother went to college at night, and later part-time while we were in school so she could become a Christian school teacher. After about ten years teaching elementary students, she became an education professor at the same college where my dad is and now runs the graduate education program there.

And it doesn’t stop there—my brother taught for a number of years, my uncle is a Christian school principal, and three cousins are teaching or have taught in the last year at Christian schools as far away as Central America. Two more cousins plan to become Christian school teachers. And last, but certainly not least, my dear wife Kimberly is a teacher, having taught sixth graders for six years before spending the last ten years teaching our children at home and volunteering at school.

I am not a teacher by trade, but I am a product of a Christian education. For seventeen years I attended Christian schools, starting with my kindergarten year at North 4th Street Christian School in Prospect Park, New Jersey, all the way to my senior year at Dordt College in Iowa.

Those years served me well, and one of my dreams is that someday there will be a Reformed Christian law school so that students will have an opportunity I did not—the opportunity to study law in the light of Scripture and the Reformed world-and-life view.

I am absolutely convinced that Christian day schools are one of the best tools that God has given us to help us teach our children and pass on God’s word and will for our lives to them.

I am proud of the fact that our denomination has historically supported Christian schools, and I am proud of the support that all of you give so that all of the children of this church can receive a Christian education, regardless of their ability to pay. I am thrilled that last year, during the first year of our Christian Education program we collected more than enough to pay the tuition of the children who participate in the program. I think it is wonderful that the money to support the program comes from such a variety of people in the church—not just parents, but also people with no children or very young children, elderly people, people who spent years struggling to put their own kids through Christian school without a program like this, even people who have children in Christian schools, but who have chosen for one reason or another not to participate in the program.

Tonight I want to talk about Christian schools—I want to remind you of why they are important, to point out some of the misconceptions we have about Christian schools, to point out what our Christian schools ought to look like, and to encourage you as a body to continue your support for Christian education.

II. Why Christian schools?

A. They are an excellent tool for passing the knowledge of God from
generation to generation

The Psalm I read as our text this evening is a psalm of praise. “I will exalt you, my God and my King,” says the psalmist. “I will praise your name for ever and ever.” But the Psalmist knows that God is so wonderful, so praiseworthy, that it isn’t enough for just one person, or just one generation to praise Him. In verse four he proclaims that “One generation will commend your works to another; they will tell of your mighty acts.” Not just that, but they will “tell of the power of [God’s] awesome works” and “they will celebrate [His] abundant goodness and joyfully sing of [His] righteousness.”

I can’t think of a better tool for one generation commending God’s works, His power, His goodness, His justice, His love to the next generation than Christian schools, schools where the Lord God is at the center of every part of the day and every activity, schools where teachers, parents, staff members, and volunteers are as excited as the psalmist about passing on to the young their praise and love for God.

I think it is only natural for those of us who have the Holy Spirit working in us to want to pass on the love of the Lord to others. That’s why we engage in outreach. That’s why we reach out to the poor and needy in our community. And that’s why we teach children about God.

God also specifically commands that we pass on our knowledge to future generations. In Deuteronomy 4:9, after God’s miraculous work in leading Israel out of Egypt, God, through His servant Moses, commands his people to “be careful and watch yourselves closely so that you do not forget the things our eyes have seen or let them slip from your heart as long as you. Teach them to your children and to their children after them.”

Later, in Deuteronomy 6:7-9, God commands his people to impress the law and commandments of God on their children. “Talk about them when you sit at home and when you walk along the road, when you lie down and when you get up,” he says. “Tie them as symbols on our hands and bind them on your foreheads. Write them on the doorframes of your houses and on your gates.” In other words, God’s law and commands must be an integral part of every single thing we do, of every moment of every day.

We can only be assured that God’s laws are in front of our children while they are learning if we make sure they are in a place that explicitly teaches them that God loves them, that God has a plan for them, and that God expects a response of obedience from them. I can’t think of a better place to be assured of this during the school day but in a Christian school.

B. To teach our children from a Christian perspective

Another reason for Christian schools is to teach our children from a Christian perspective.

I’m going to start with a bold statement: There is no such thing as neutrality. Maybe some of you sports fans can relate. Have you ever watched a game between two teams to which you have no connection? If you’re like me, you still end up rooting for one team or another. Just a few weeks ago I took my family up to Minneapolis to watch a Twins-Red Sox game. We don’t have any connection to either team—we went there because my alma mater was holding an alumni gathering at the game. Both teams are in a different league than the team I root for, the Milwaukee Brewers, so it really made no difference to me who won. But I can tell you that all five of us ended up rooting hard for one team or the other.

Another example that shows neutrality is nothing but a myth is the news media. On a national level we have conservative organizations claiming that the media is biased toward Democrats because so many journalists tend to vote Democratic. On the other hand you have Fox News Network claiming to be fair and balanced while practically acting as a mouthpiece for the current administration. We see this on the local level—consider the vast differences in the way the Sheboygan Press covers city government compared to WHBL. Sometimes you’d think the reporters from those two organizations aren’t even covering the same meetings.

Neutrality is a myth. It’s a myth not because we have a human tendency to pick sides, but because the world is divided into two sides: the side that is for God and the side that is against Him. We call this the “antithesis.”

The antithesis means that there is no middle ground, no neutrality between God and the devil. This idea isn’t all that foreign to us—we often hear it expressed in popular music. Folk-rock singer Bob Dylan sang, “You gotta serve somebody. Well, it may be the devil or it may be the Lord, but you’re gonna have to serve somebody.” Ten years later, the band Rush sang, “You can choose a ready guide in some celestial voice. If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice.” Neutrality is not an option. Even if you think you are neutral, you have come down on one side or another.

An understanding of the antithesis certainly isn’t limited to musicians. The Reformed philosopher Cornelius Van Til wrote often about the antithesis and about the myth of neutrality. He said that the antithesis “is between those for whom the final center of reference in knowledge lies in man, and those for whom the final center of reference for knowledge lies in God, as this God speaks in Scripture.”

Despite the writings of people as disparate as Bob Dylan and Cornelius Van Til, the common wisdom today is that neutrality is possible. Our public school system is based on that belief. Our Supreme Court struggles mightily, but in vain, to make consistent decisions about religion in education, prayers in public schools, statues of the Ten Commandments in courthouses, confident that it is possible for the state to be completely neutral.

In education, this belief in the possibility of neutrality presents itself as a conviction that we can present learning to children in such a way that they themselves can choose what values to believe and apply to what they are learning.

If we accept that our children, perhaps with input from their families, communities or churches, have the ability to receive neutral information—objective facts—and then choose for themselves the direction in which to take those facts, we have turned individuals, or at least human reason, into the final judge of truth. We end up with the dominant worldview today, one that says that humans can decide on their own what is truth.

The Christian writer Greg Bahnsen describes the way many people think today this way: “The experts may differ; it is up to every man finally to decide for himself. This is proper; the sanctity of the human person must not be violated. Ask any man to accept anything on pure authority, the sort of authority that the Bible claims for itself, and you are virtually asking him to deny his manhood. You are then asking him to be irrational and therefore to deny him the use of the powers that constitute his personality.”

As Christians, we do accept on pure authority the rule of God over everything in Creation. We accept that He is at the center of every single activity—he is the reason, the be-all and end-all of our existence. To accept that an individual, or mankind, gets to decide what is rational, what is authoritative, is to deny the centrality of God. Such a way of looking at the world is hardly neutral—it is clearly opposed to God.

If we accept that God is at the center of everything we do, then we must desire for our children to learn in a setting where God is acknowledged as the center of all, where He is recognized as the King of Creation, the Master of Math, the Sovereign of Science, the Ruler of Reading. We want our children to be taught in a setting where the teachers proclaim with Abraham Kuyper that Christ is Lord of “every square inch.”

C. Christian schools are a commitment that is covenantal, communal, and
intergenerational

You probably know that the Synod of the Christian Reformed Church has spent the last several years studying Christian education and developing a response to those who say that our denomination’s traditional support for Christian schools needs to be reconsidered. One of the parts of that report that I really appreciated was a section that affirmed that Christian schools are a “covenantal, communal, and intergenerational commitment.” Now that is quite a mouthful, but it is packed with meaning.

When we talk about the covenant, we are talking about the basic relationship between God and us. God promised to be our God, to restore us from our sin and brokenness, and to allow us to live in perfect relationship with Him. But these promises from God come with an expectation that, through the working of the Holy Spirit in us, we will respond in gratitude to God. Part of that response of gratitude involves declaring God’s wondrous works and righteousness from generation to generation.

We see some of what God expects from us in relation to the children He entrusted to us in His Word—I’ve already mentioned the passage in Deuteronomy where God commands us to impress God’s commandments on our children. In Proverbs 22:6 we are taught to “train a child in the way he should go,” with the promise that “when he is old he will not turn from it.” And in the New Testament, in Ephesians 6:4, fathers (and mothers, too) are instructed to bring their children up “in the training and instruction of the Lord.” God expects us to pass on what we know about Him to our children, to future generations, so they too may live always to glorify Him. In this way, then, Christian schools are a part of a commitment to God based on the covenant of grace.

When we say that Christian schools are communal, we acknowledge that God has placed us in a community, a community where each member has responsibilities to each other. The core principles of Christian Schools International, the parent organization for the three Christian schools we support here at Calvin, reflect that mutual, communal responsibility. One of the principles by which CSI is run puts it beautifully: “Because God's covenant embraces not only parents and their children but also the entire Christian community to which they belong, and because Christian education contributes directly to the advancement of God's kingdom, it is the obligation not only of parents but of the entire Christian community to establish and maintain Christian schools, to pray for them, work for them, and give generously to their support.”

Hilary Clinton took a lot of guff for the title of her book “It Takes a Village to Raise a Child.” But if by “village” we mean the community of believers, that is exactly what we teach when in our baptism ceremonies we ask the congregation to promise to “receive these children in love, pray for them, help instruct them in the faith, and encourage and sustain them in the fellowship of believers.”

Last spring I had an an experience with the community of believers helping me teach one of my children. One of my boys was apparently making a habit of being a bit reckless on his bicycle while crossing Geele Avenue to get to or from school. My kids are obviously of an age where Kim or I cannot be with them every minute, and we didn’t know that this was a problem. Well, one morning my son pulled out into traffic about the time Butch Katt happened to be driving in the area. A few minutes later I got a call at work from Butch. I remember him saying something like “If you think I’m sticking my nose where it doesn’t belong just tell me to shut up, but…” and then he proceeded to tell me what he had seen. I did not tell Butch to shut up—I was glad he told me what had happened so Kim and I could take the steps to ensure that this didn’t happen again. I appreciated the call, because he was doing just what he and all of you promised when that child of mine was baptized in this very room. Yes, God gives primary responsibility to the parents, but God also wants all of us to be that village, the community of believers, that helps the parents to raise their child.

Christian schools are an extension of that community. They are not the church, they are not the family, they are another institution created to assist families in raising their children so that the church can continue with its task for years to come. They are a community commitment.

Schools are also an intergenerational commitment. As I mentioned before, in Psalm 145 the psalmist writes about one generation passing on to another all the wonderful things they know about about God—his mighty acts, glorious splendor, and abundant goodness. By their very nature, Christian schools are a way for one generation to teach the next about God. Whether you are have children or not, whether you are seventeen or seventy, God wants you proclaiming his goodness and works to the next generations. One way you can do that is by supporting the schools that are teaching children about their Lord and Savior.

III. What Christian schools are NOT, and what they ought to be

I’ve spent a lot of time building a case for Christian schools as a tool for doing God’s will, as a way to teach the generations in a way that acknowledges God is at the center. I want to take a few minutes to look at some misconceptions or problems people have with Christian schools and contrast those misconceptions with what Christian schools ought to look like.

A.

1. They are not perfect

Christian schools are not perfect. I sometimes hear criticism because Christian schools are imperfect, or the people associated with them, including the students, are imperfect. Often the implication is that we are just a bunch of hypocrites, acting like we are better than the folks associated with other schools, when we are really not. In northwest Iowa, a lot of us Christian school kids were used to being called “Post Toasties” by the public school kids in the area, because in their mind we felt we were “a little better than the rest.”

There is no doubt that Christian schools are affected by sin, just like all of creation. I know my schoolmates and I were certainly far from perfect. I remember one particular incident in high school where my father, frustrated with my behavior, asked me why he was bothering to send me to a Christian school, if I was going to behave in a way that gave no evidence of it having an impact on me. I know some of you have had bad experiences as students, volunteers, or employees in Christian schools, even in our schools right here in Sheboygan.

Sin is real. It pollutes all of creation, all of our institutions, every single person in the world. As Q&A 114 of the Heidelberg Catechism reminds us, in this life even the holiest have only a small beginning of obedience. And that means Christian schools are no more immune from the ravages of sin than any other part of the world.

It is easy to point at the faults in our schools, declare them imperfect and full of hypocrites, and walk away. But to do so is just as hypocritical, for each and every one of us is also stained by sin, unable to do what’s right on our own. Even more, such action denies that God is powerful enough to use our imperfect, frail human institutions for powerful purposes. Finally, by doing so we ignore the working of the Holy Spirit, sanctifying believers who are doing what they can to follow God’s leading.

If the Holy Spirit has the power to change lives destroyed by sin and use them for God’s purposes, think how much more the Spirit can work through an institution like our schools, made up of many imperfect people who are day-by-day, hour-by-hour being sanctified by the Holy Spirit.
Given our imperfection, we should strive to make Christian schools agents of the Holy Spirit’s work of sanctification.

2. They ought to be agents of the Holy Spirit’s work of sanctification

Christian schools should be agents of the Holy Spirit. They can become that in several of ways. First and foremost, of course, is by teaching children that they are sinners in need of God’s forgiveness. Children who are never confronted with the fact that they are sinners will never understand their need for salvation. The teachers and mentors at the school must confess to the children our own weakness and tendency to sin and our deep desire to be made clean by the Spirit. We must help children see that they are sinners who desperately need God. We need to share with children the pain we feel when sin touches our lives and the joy we feel when we see evidence of God transforming lives right in our very midst.

Besides teaching children of their sin, Christian schools must point children to Jesus Christ as both the example of perfection and the only way to forgiveness. Children must learn that salvation belongs to our God, that Jesus Christ came to this earth as both God and human to bear our sins and conquer death, and that we are now free of sin and death, free to live in relationship with our God, free to live the in the way that God meant for us to live.

Finally, Christian schools must be places where our children are free to express their gratitude to God for our salvation. They must be places where children can see and celebrate Holy Spirit’s work every day in making us more and more like Christ, places of training to live lives of service to our exalted King. Father God, let loose your Holy Spirit in our schools and among our children.

B.

1. They are not merely shelter from a hostile and sinful world

Another common misperception about Christian schools, one held by many supporters of Christian schools, is that they are mere shelter from the world. Some see Christian schools as primarily designed to keep kids sheltered, away from the evil in the world. There’s no doubt there is evil in today’s world that affects the lives of kids. We can’t avoid seeing it on TV or reading about it in the paper. So it can be very tempting to think of Christian schools as simply a safe haven, a shelter from the bad influences around us.

While I am glad that my kids are at least somewhat sheltered, we deceive ourselves if we think that just sending them to Christian schools will keep them from the influence of sin. More than that, I am convinced that we sell our schools short if we consider them a modern day version of an abbey or monastery, a place to separate from the world.

If our children don’t learn about the sin in the world from Christian teachers, will they recognize it when they confront it after they graduate? If they aren’t presented with the reality of the antithesis, the battle between right and wrong, will they be willing to confront evil when they see it as adults? If they haven’t been exposed to the philosophies that dominate the world today, will they be able to challenge those philosophies when they intrude into their lives in the future? Christian schools should protect and nurture, but they should also engage with the world. Instead of being like an abbey or monastery, Christian schools should be like boot camps for soldiers of the cross, preparing students for battle as God’s soldiers.

2. They ought to be boot camps for training as kingdom servants

Islam has been in the news a lot recently. One of the news items has been about the madrassahs; religious schools in places like Pakistan where, it is alleged, students are prepared for life as terrorists. It is clear that while some madrassahs might be hotbeds of terrorism, their common thread is that the leaders believe education ought to be based on the Koran, that Allah ought to be at the core of all learning, and that secular ways of thinking are considered dangerous and wrong. Students in the madrassahs are taught that Islamic principles should govern every single area of life, not just those areas that people consider spiritual.

Other than the fact that we worship God, not Allah, and that our standard for living is the Bible, not the Koran, how are the madrassahs any different than Christian schools? Certainly our students will not be learning terror techniques and won’t be trained to use guns in a physical holy war against other religions, but that is because our God is a God of peace. In all other respects there are clear parallels between the madrassahs and Christian schools. Education in Christian schools is based on a truth that uses the Bible as its measuring stick. God is at the core of every bit of learning. And students are taught that there is no separation between the sacred and the secular. Instead they are taught a Christian view of the world that will affect every moment of every day, whether they grow up to be doctors, truck drivers, day car providers, artists, or small owners.

If we use the military imagery we often see in the Bible, it is easy to imagine Christian schools as boot camps, preparing students for the battles they will face. If our schools are simply shelters from those battles, our children won’t be prepared for the battle against evil, and they are much more likely to be killed or injured once they are thrown into the battle. It would be as if they spent all their time training by hiding in a bomb shelter or a refugee camp, rather than in training for the job they have to do.

When soldiers train, they are often exposed to conditions similar to those they will face in battle, just in a more controlled setting. That’s how our schools should see themselves as well. Children are not ready yet for the battle they will face as Christians, but they must be exposed to the things they will face in a controlled way that will teach them how to face the attack of the enemy, how to become effective soldiers of the cross, members of God’s army of peace and justice.

C.

1. They are not exclusively for believers and their children

One other misperception I see about Christian schools is that they take away from our work of outreach, because Christian schools are exclusively for believers.

Most of you probably get The Banner, the magazine sent out to every member of the Christian Reformed Church. In the issue I received this week, there are two short articles by families who had to choose between Christian schools and public schools. One chose Christian schools and one chose public schools. The family that chose public schools, the Hoogenbooms, said this about their decision: “We had accepted a call to begin a church that would connect with people far from God and help them find hope and eternal life in Christ. We became convinced that to do this effectively we had to fully intersect our lives with the community of people we were called to reach. We soon realized that all our new neighbors were involved in the local public school. They spent time and built relationships in the school community. We realized that if we were going to build relationships and establish credibility with them, we needed to be part of that setting as well.”

This thought process is not unique among Christians. I have spoken to a number of people with an intense desire to reach the lost who have said essentially the same thing. A few years ago, my 11th and 12th grade Sunday school class discussed the case of a Calvin College professor who lost his job because he felt led to live and minister in the inner city, so he transferred his kids to the neighborhood public school because he felt he could not truly interact with his new neighbors if his kids were in an expensive Christian school outside of the neighborhood while his neighbors did not have that option.

I will admit that this argument makes some sense to me. It makes sense because it is hard to deny that, at least in the traditional Christian school setting, we can and have become isolated from the lost in our community, out of touch with the people who most desperately need someone to be the Holy Spirit’s tool for bringing them in relationship with God.

It is my contention, however, that this problem isn’t something structural, something that just automatically happens because we have Christian schools. Instead, this is a weakness in our vision for Christian education, a weakness we need to eliminate.

I have yet to find a separation in the God’s commands between God’s command to subdue and rule the earth, the task our Christian schools are preparing our children to fulfill, and His command to make disciples of all nations. If we take seriously God’s desire for lost people and his command that we be his agents to reconcile the lost, then our schools must recognize that they too must not only train children to become evangelists, they must participate in the work of evangelism. In other words, Christian schools ought to be a key component of the church’s mission, which includes evangelism.

2. They ought to be a key component of the church’s mission,
including evangelism

First, there is no division between God’s command to proclaim his works from generation to generation and His command to go into all the world, making disciples, baptizing them, and teaching them. They are essentially the very same task, perhaps with a slightly different audience. One job should not take away from the other—instead we should make sure that they complement each other.

Second, to claim that Christian schools somehow prevent us from doing evangelism is to denigrate the whole idea of learning from a Christian perspective. God has given those of us in communities with Christian schools a unique gift. Perhaps more so than other Christians, Reformed folks who have supported Christian education have produced great scholars and thinkers who have had an important impact on the ways Christians think, and on the world in general. But we can’t hide that gift of God under a bushel. Instead, we must share this great legacy with everyone, so as many people as possible may benefit.

Finally, there is evidence that considering Christian schools as a partner in the church’s work in outreach is successful. Rev. David Snapper, a Christian Reformed pastor in in Washington state has done research that shows that Christian Reformed church plants are more successful when there are Christian schools nearby. And many of you, like me, know that Christian schools can be an important part of encouraging people to become followers of Christ. You almost certainly know of people who were either not Christians, or brand new in their Christian walk when they first encountered Christian schools. I have talked to several people who say that their connection with a Christian school and the community that surrounds it was the primary way the Holy Spirit reached out and grabbed them. Certainly the church played a role, but schools are a tool the Holy Spirit can and will use.

So instead of seeing Christian schools as an obstacle to doing outreach, let’s see them as fellow partners with the church in evangelism. This may mean some changes in how we handle things at some of our schools, but that cost is so little to pay in comparison to the wondrous riches of salvation God has given us, and that He now wants us to share with others.

V. How can we support our Christian schools?

A. Pray

So how can we support Christian schools as they strive to teach generation after generation about the wondrous works and unsurpassable wisdom of our God? First we should pray. Pray for the students who are learning what it means to be a servant of God in every part of their life. Pray for the teachers who have such a responsibility to care for and teach their children. Pray for the parents who entrust their students into the care of the school. Pray for the volunteers who help enhance the mission of the school. Pray for the staff who ensure that the school runs smoothly every day. Prayy for the board members who set the policies and standards for how the school will be run. Pray for the administrators who oversee every part of the school. We cannot pray too much.

In fact, I am going to ask each and every one of you take a few minutes on Wednesday morning, the first day of school, to pray specifically for the upcoming school year, for the Christian schools we support, and for the students who are back in basic training again for another year. Please pray also for the public schools, and our wonderful Christian teachers there who also treat their work as a mission from God.

B. Support them financially

The second thing you can do to support the local Christian schools is to support them financially. Christian education does not come cheap. Our congregation has promised to pay more than $185,000 in tuition for the students from Calvin who are a part of the Christian Education Fund. Many of you who didn’t have the benefit of such a program scrimped and saved to get your kids through Christian schools in the past, and many still do the same today to meet the commitment they have made to keep the fund going. I already mentioned that I am proud of you have done to make sure the children from this church have the opportunity to attend a Christian school, regardless of their financial situation. Thank you for your financial commitment to Christian education.

And maybe we can do more. The principal of one of our local Christian schools told me about a family who wants desperately to have their children in Christian schools. The children are daily affected by the sin around them, and the parent desperately wants her kids to go through the basic training a Christian school can provide, but they simply cannot afford it. Instead, the parent made the wrenching choice of choosing to have one child in Christian school for as long as money was available while sending the other to public schools. This is not a matter of setting priorities; this family is definitely sacrificing just to send one child to Christian schools. Wouldn’t it be wonderful, this principal asked me, if we could find several people willing to “adopt” this family, making sure their dream of a Christian education for both of their children can become a reality.

Another person asked me whether there could be some way of expanding our Christian Education Fund, perhaps in concert with several other churches, to include churches where there may be a desire to have many of their children in Christian schools, but the financial realities make this unlikely. The committee who oversees Calvin’s Christian Education Fund will be discussing this concept in the future, once our own program is clearly on strong footing on a long-term basis. But think how such a move would not only increase the number of kids getting basic training as soldiers in God’s army, but it would also send a message to the world that churches can work together as the body of Christ towards a common goal.

C. Promote the Christian schools.

Third, promote them to your neighbors. Talk up the schools we support in the community. Do this with everyone, not just people you know are Christians, because you never know what may come of such a conversation. People may come to Christian schools for many different reasons—a perception of better academics, hopes of keeping kids out of bad situations in their old school, favorable parent-teacher ratios. But in the end, whatever the reason they initially have for being in Christian schools, if those students end up answering God’s call in their lives, living lives of servants, then the schools will have been successful.

D. Share your gifts

Finally, share your gifts with them. Volunteer, if you are able. Talk to a teacher about how he or she might use you at school. Or participate in fundraisers, in outside events. Another way to share your gifts is to take some of the burden off of the parents, so they can remain involved in other aspects of God’s community, including the church. A friend of mine, Rev. Steve Zwart, commented in a sermon here at Calvin that it seems like parents become so involved in school activities that they abandon church activities. Don’t let that happen—there is no reason why you cannot be useful to the school before or after you have children there. Get involved with telling of God’s power, his authority, his mercy, from generation to generation.

Christian schools are a wonderful gift from God. This week, as the kids go back to school, let us thank God for this gift. Let us tell from generation to generation the power of our God, His perfect righteousness, and the salvation He has given us through His Son, Jesus.

Amen.

The Benefits of Baptism

2010-07-19T15:59:00.002-05:00

I've been remiss in updating this blog. More and more I am using Facebook and Google Buzz to pass on interesting links and posts from other bloggers. I will continue to post occasional sermons and other writings of my own here. In the near future, I will likely delete some of the posts here and re-post them to Buzz, leaving only my own writing on this blog.

Anyway, here is a sermon I recently preached on baptism.

The Benefits of Baptism
Acts 2:36-47

I. Introduction

Lately I have been thinking about baptism. Baptisms are among the highlights of the church year for me—it’s fun to watch the proud parents bring their precious child in front of church to be baptized. I always like to make a bet with myself as to which parent will hold the baby during the baptism. And of course it is always interesting to see how the baby will respond to water being poured on his or her head.

My 11th and 12th grade Sunday school students went through the Belgic Confession this year, so we spent a day talking about baptism. I reminded Katie Otte and Kathryn Andringa that as four year-olds, they sang at my son Micah’s baptism—they had forgotten. We enjoyed comparing notes on the way baptisms are done at different churches and by different pastors. We talked about the quantity of water Pastor Rob uses, and how Pastor Alsum used to walk the babies around the congregation. One of my students told me that her little brother thought that Pastor Alsum was dancing with the baby as he moved around the sanctuary.

Baptisms are often a wonderful and enjoyable time, not just for the parents, but for the entire church community. Of course, not all Christians do things the same way. Many Christians don’t baptize their children. Instead, they practice “believer baptism,” waiting until that child expresses a faith in Jesus Christ before baptism can happen. Some Christians argue about the proper form of baptism—should we sprinkle? Should we pour? Should we immerse?

This morning, I will be focusing mostly on the baptism of infants. While we do baptize believing adults if they were not baptized as children, the normal pattern here at Calvin is that of parents bringing their infants to be baptized.

I won’t spend much time this morning on why we practice infant baptism in this church. I’m convinced that what we believe about baptism has a huge impact on a large part of our Christian life—how we raise and teach our children, how we respond to sin, how we can have confidence in our being saved. And so I think it is very important that we baptize our children. But other than a few passing notes, I am not going to focus on why we baptize infants.

Rather, what I really want to focus on are the benefits of baptism. Because baptism is a gift from God that benefits his people. You’ll find that on the top of your outlines. Baptism is a gift from God that benefits his people.

And so, let’s turn in our Bibles to the book of Acts, chapter 2.

The second chapter of Acts is one of the most climactic sections of the Bible. The Holy Spirit has just been released to work in the hearts of every believer, and Peter is preaching the gospel to a crowd of thousands of people from all over the world. And just before our text begins at verse 36, Peter is explaining the work of Jesus Christ, teaching about his death and resurrection, and confirming that Jesus was the promised Messiah, come to save his people. So listen, then, to the word of God from Acts chapter two, verses 36 through 47, which starts with Paul’s summary of his words to the crowd in Jerusalem:

Read text.

Next, turn with me in the back of the gray songbooks to page 890. Starting on page 890 you’ll find a summary of what we believe about baptism. I am going to read through all of the questions and answers there about baptism. I encourage you to follow along. Again, that is beginning on page 890.

Read catechism Q&A 69-74.

II. Baptism is a gift from God that benefits His people.

Baptism is a gift from God that benefits His people. It is God’s gift to those he loves, and because of the gift of baptism, we actually receive some benefits.

In the next few minutes I am going to point out some of those benefits. But before I do, I want to point out one benefit that we do not automatically receive from being baptized. Being baptized does not automatically mean we are saved.

The writers of the catechism we just read point that out when they ask “Does this outward washing with water itself wash away sins?” The answer, of course, is “No, only Jesus Christ's blood and the Holy Spirit cleanse us from all sins.”

I talked about this a couple of weeks ago at night when I told the story about one of my kids seeing a McDonald’s sign in the middle of nowhere. He thought the sign was the actual McDonald’s, and was disappointed when we had to explain that the actual restaurant was still 20 minutes down the road at the next exit. Baptism is a sign of the washing away of sins that believers receive through the blood of Christ and the work of the Spirit uniting us to Christ. It signifies an important promise, a promise on which we can rely if we respond to the call to repent and believe. But it is only a sign. And yet, it is a sign that comes with benefits. So let’s look at the benefits that we do receive because of baptism.

A. The benefit of being in a community

The first is the benefit of being in a community.

Lots of great stuff happens during a baptism ceremony. But for me the highlight always comes right before the actual baptism. Here at Calvin, we start out all baptisms with some teaching about baptism. Then after a prayer, the pastor asks the parents to confirm their belief in Christ and their promise to raise their children in the faith.

Then comes one more part, a part I look forward to every time. While the parents hold their child, the entire congregation stands and promises the parents to “receive the child in love, pray for him or her, help instruct him or her in the faith, and encourage and sustain him or her in the fellowship of believers.”

Do you ever think about what you’re doing when you repeat those words? We are welcoming that child into a community of believers. This month we welcomed Eleanor Vander Laan and Levi Arentsen into that community. We promised them and their parents that we would love them and pray for them. We promised to help instruct them and encourage and sustain them as fellow believers.

And when we make that promise, we are not just doing that for ourselves. Someday Eleanor and Levi will grow up. There’s a good chance they will leave us and move to another community. But wherever they go, there will be a community of believers praying for them, loving them, and encouraging them.

When we stood up and made those promises to Eleanor and to Levi, we made those promises not just for ourselves, but on behalf of all Christians. Because when Levi and Eleanor were baptized, they didn’t just become part of Calvin Church. They didn’t even just become members of the Christian Reformed Church in North America. No, they were baptized into the church universal, a community of believers that spans time and space.

Being part of the community of believers is no small thing. It is an important benefit of our baptism. Notice in our text this morning how right after he describes 3,000 new Christians being baptized on Pentecost, the writer of Acts jumps right into six verses about the fellowship of believers. He describes how they dedicated themselves to the breaking of bread, how they continued to meet together, how they shared what they had and broke bread in each other’s homes. Baptism marks us as members of a community, of a fellowship, of a family. And an important benefit of being baptized is the benefit of being in that community.

There are a lot of reasons why being a part of a community of believers is such a great benefit of baptism. We see some of them in our text and in the next several chapters of Acts. Being together with fellow believers nurtures and grows our faith. It gives us an opportunity to devote ourselves to the teachings of Scripture, to study them, to pray together, and grow in faith together. This is especially important for children—that’s why we offer Sunday school and children’s church and youth groups It is also why we put such a high priority on Christian schools.

Being part of a community also helps develop the spiritual gifts God has given us. Later on in Acts we see other Christians also developing their gifts—gifts of hospitality, of leadership, of discernment, of compassion. We can see this in our own church as well. A great benefit of being in a community of believers is the opportunity to develop our spiritual gifts and become even more effective servants of Christ.

A community also provides us the benefit of examples to follow. Paul, in his first letter to the Thessalonians describes a chain reaction of examples at Thessalonica. “You became imitators of us and of the Lord...” he says, “and so you became a model to all the believers in Macedonia and Achaia.” A community gives us people who become examples to us and help spur us to growth.

And a community gives us brothers and sisters who can support us when things are difficult, who can encourage us when our faith seems weak, who can discipline us when we stray, and who can share in our joy when we are blessed.

When we are baptized, we become part of a community of believers—a community of believers who nurture us in our faith, who help us to develop our gifts, who provide examples of Christian living, and who become our brothers and sisters in Christ. What a wonderful benefit of baptism! But there’s more.

B. The benefit of a reminder

Beyond the benefit of being in a community, baptism also gives us the benefit of a reminder. This reminder is one reason why we do baptisms as part of our church service, in front of the family and community. That ceremony of baptism gives us the benefit of a reminder—a reminder of our sin, a reminder of our redemption, and a reminder of the gratitude we owe God.

1. of our sin

First, a reminder of our sin. Notice that at the beginning of our text this morning, right after Peter has laid out the gospel, the writer of Acts tells us that “When the people heard this, they were cut to the heart.” Maybe you find that a strange reaction. Peter has just told the crowd that Jesus Christ, who had been crucified, had been made both Lord and Christ. You’d think people would be excited, cheering, shouting “Long live the King!” But instead, their reaction was to be cut to the heart, and to ask what they should do.

But those who heard the gospel message realized that what had happened was that this conquering King had paid the price for their sins. They were full of sin, unable to do anything to save themselves. And being confronted with Jesus as King only served to contrast their own unworthiness, their own failure to live according to the covenant that God had still fulfilled.

One of the reasons we baptize the infants of believers is to symbolize that very truth—that we are no different than those infants. I know that their parents are convinced that Eleanor and Levi are the brightest, most intelligent babies that ever existed. But no matter how bright and intelligent, they had no idea what was going on when Pastor Rob poured water on their heads. Eleanor was so surprised she spit her pacifier into the baptismal font! Eleanor and Levi did nothing to plan their baptisms. They took no part in deciding when the ceremony would be held or how the service would play out. They couldn’t do it. They’re not capable of deciding those things.

In the same way, we were all incapable of causing our salvation. There was nothing we could do on our own to be saved. It all had to be planned by someone else, performed by someone else, because of our sin. And so, when we watch a baptism, performed on a little baby who has no idea what is happening, we are reminded of our sin.

2. of our redemption

Thankfully, there is more to remember than just our sin. Baptism is also a reminder of our redemption. Baptism reminds us of our redemption. It tells us that our baptism in the name of Jesus Christ, as Peter says in verse 38, is for the forgiveness of our sins. And because our sins are forgiven, we are saved.

Water is a powerful symbol throughout Scripture. It can be used to symbolize washing and cleaning, but it can also be a symbol for burying things, such as when things are thrown into the depths of the sea. And things can also float on water, and water sometimes symbolizes being brought up from the depths, rising to the top.

Baptism uses water to symbolize all of these things. The water of baptism certainly is a sign of the washing away of our sins by the blood of Jesus Christ. Paul’s letter to Titus talks of baptism that way when it says that God “saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit.” The catechism puts it beautifully, saying that “Christ instituted this outward washing and with it gave the promise that, as surely as water washes away the dirt from the body, so certainly his blood and his Spirit wash away my soul’s impurity, in other words, all my sins.” Our sins are washed away by the blood of Christ. The water of baptism gives us a picture of that washing away.

The water of baptism also symbolizes the fact that our sins have been buried with Christ. Romans 6:4 says that “we were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.” In other words, our sins are gone. They have been sent down to the depths of the sea, so that we can live lives unburdened by them.

And the water of baptism also shows us that while our sins remain buried, we have been raised with Christ. Colossians 2:12 says that we were “buried [with Christ] in baptism and raised with him through [our] faith in the power of God, who raised [Christ] from the dead.” And because we’ve been raised with Christ, we are renewed, set apart by the Holy Spirit and united with Christ “so that more and more [we] become dead to sin and increasingly live a holy and blameless life.”

The water of baptism is a reminder to us, a reminder of our salvation.

3. of the gratitude we owe God

Finally, baptism gives us the benefit of a reminder of the gratitude we owe God.

If you grew up in a Reformed church, you probably studied the Heidelberg Catechism. In one of your first lessons, you probably learned about the “the three S’s”—sin, salvation, and service. If you are under 40 or so, you might have learned instead about “misery, deliverance, and gratitude.”

However you learned it, though, it is clear that knowing our sin and misery, combined with understanding our salvation and deliverance from sin, leads to gratitude. It leads to a desire to be God’s servant. When we are washed of our sins and our old self dies away and is buried under the depths, the result is the coming-to-life of the new self. Baptism reinforces in us a “wholehearted joy in God through Christ and a delight to do every kind of good as God wants us to.”

We are reminded of this gratitude, this wholehearted joy and delight to do what God wants when we see a baptism. Baptisms should be times of joy, not just because we see a new member of the community of believers, but because we are given a reminder of our gratitude. This reminder can give us even more impetus to go out and live as servants of Christ’s Kingdom, working by the Spirit in us to transform this world in preparation for the next. Baptism gives us the benefit of a reminder of the gratitude we owe God.

C. The benefit of assurance

Finally, baptism gives us the benefit of assurance. Because of baptism, we can be assured of being a part of the family of God and of eternal life. This is the benefit of assurance.

The Catechism tells us that God gave us the symbol of baptism, not just to teach us that our sins have been washed away, but also because “he wants to assure us…that the washing away of our sins spiritually is as real as physical washing with water.”

It is important to see how much the writers of Scripture tie together baptism and assurance of salvation. In verse 38 of our text this morning, Peter says “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.” He doesn’t say, “You might receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.” He doesn’t say, “There is a good chance you will receive the Holy Spirit.” He says “you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.” Peter is telling his listeners that if they repent and are baptized, they will be united with Christ—in his death, in his resurrection, and in his glory. United with Christ, we are assured of life with God.

We see this close connection between baptism and assurance elsewhere in Scripture. In Romans 6, Paul asks “Don’t you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?” All of us who were baptized. He then says, “We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.”

Again, in Galatians, Paul writes that “all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ.” All of us.

It is because of this assurance, I think, that our confessions clearly state that “Godly parents ought not to doubt the election and salvation of their children whom God calls out of this life in infancy.” It isn’t baptism itself that saves. It is being chosen by God to be part of his covenant of grace that saves us. The children of believers are holy because “of the gracious covenant in which they, together with their parents, are included.” Because children are included in the covenant, they are saved, even if they don’t survive long enough to receive baptism, the symbol of their being saved.

Now, again, I want to stress that baptism, while it can give us the benefit and comfort of assurance, does not automatically make us a Christian. But it does give us hope, even for those who seem to turn their backs on their baptism. We must always live in hope—in hope that God keeps his promises, in hope that the Spirit never stops working in the hearts of those whom God has chosen, in hope that the hound of heaven never fails.

And for those of us who believe, baptism should give us assurance. Baptism is a sign of a promise. And God keeps his promises. Baptism gives us the benefit of assurance.

III. Conclusion

I hope we have many, many more baptisms in this church over the next few years. I hope you look forward to baptisms as much as I do. Because baptism is a gift from God that benefits his people.

Baptism gives us the benefit of a community of believers. It reminds us not only of our sin, but of our salvation and of our gratitude. And it provides the benefit of God’s promise, God’s assurance.

Baptisms are a sign of a promise. A promise that Peter reminds us is “for you, and your children and for all who are far off—for all whom the Lord our God will call.”

Amen.

Life in Comics | First Things

2010-05-19T09:09:00.000-05:00

Life in Comics First Things

There is so much in this post on First Things. Common grace, a pro-life moment, criticism of self-conscious Christianity. Take a look.

'Lost' opportunity — Yakima Valley churches embrace entertainment and pop culture | Yakima Herald-Republic Online

2010-04-20T16:30:00.000-05:00

'Lost' opportunity — Yakima Valley churches embrace entertainment and pop culture Yakima Herald-Republic Online

This interesting article quotes my "cousin-in-law," Shane. It is worth a read.

Sermon Series--Sermon #4

2009-11-13T11:19:00.003-06:00

This is number 4 in the series. I actually originally preached a version of this one in the spring at Covenant CRC in Appleton, and then re-worked it for the series this summer.

Big Words of the Faith:
Providence
Psalm 104

I. Introduction—Miracles & Providence

This morning we are finishing up a series on the “big words of the faith.” If you were here, you’ll remember that we started with “predestination,” then covered the “covenant,” and the “justification.” This week, our big word of the faith is “providence.”

In a few moments we are going to read not only from our scripture text, which is Psalm 104, but also from the Heidelberg Catechism. While I introduce the topic, you might want to turn to Psalm 104 in your Bibles. And I would ask that you turn also in the back of your Psalter Hymnals to page 871. That’s Lord’s Day 10 of the Catechism. In a few minutes we are going to read the questions and answers there together.

I’ve been thinking a lot about miracles lately. What are miracles? What are they exactly, and do they still exist today? Or are they something that only existed during certain times in history?

Some of that thinking about miracles stems from things that have been going on in my own life in the last year or so. Most of you know about my parents’ car accident almost a year-and-a-half ago. At the time, a lot of people said it was a miracle that they survived. And while healing has not been complete, others rightfully talk about their recovery as being miraculous.

Then, a few months ago, the Wednesday night study group here at church took a look at a video by Lee Strobel. Some of you may have heard of Lee Strobel—he wrote the book “A Case for Christ.”

In that video, Strobel hosted a debate between an atheist and a Christian theologian about the existence of God. The theologian cited the resurrection as proof of the truth of Christianity. He pointed to historical sources other than the Bible—as well as the Bible itself—as evidence that the resurrection actually occurred.

The atheist couldn’t accept the truth of the resurrection, since doing so would require him to believe in miracles. He defined miracles as events that violate natural laws. In his view, natural laws just simply cannot be broken. When people think of miracles, according to this atheist, the things they are thinking of can always be explained by some kind of natural law. According to him, people only call things miracles because they’re ignorant of how the natural world actually works.

After watching the video, our discussion turned immediately to the atheist’s definition of miracles. One person took the view that the atheist was at least correct in his definition of miracles. She said miracles are events that can’t be explained by natural law. But, she said, miracles are therefore proof that God exists. After all, only a being greater than the entire universe could violate the laws of the universe. This being, she said, is God. And since he created the universe and he created the laws that govern it, any evidence of something beyond the laws of nature is evidence of this Creator-God.

However, she said that a lot of things that we call miracles aren’t really miracles. My parents’ surviving their car accident would not really be a miracle, since it can be explained without resorting to the supernatural. Or the recovery of a cancer patient from a seemingly incurable condition would not be miraculous according to her definition, since it can be explained using our knowledge of natural laws.

In fact, she argued that miracles no longer exist—they don’t happen anymore. She said they ended at the end of the apostolic age. This view, while not universal, is actually quite a common one among theologians, and it is probably a majority view among Reformed theologians.

Now, I’m the kind of person who enjoys a good debate. So, even though I hadn’t fully formed an opinion on the issue, I decided I would take the opposite side. And I argued first of all that some of the events that are described in the Bible, and called miracles in the Bible, might possibly have natural explanations. It could be that the ancient observers just didn’t understand the science behind what was happening. Some of the events that are described as miracles in the Bible probably didn’t break any kind of natural laws.

I also argued that there are plenty of stories that people tell in this day and age of events that really are unexplainable by natural laws. I retold a story that I had heard from my campus pastor when I was at Dordt College.

He told of missionaries whose jeep had broken down in a dangerous area where bandits often preyed on people. These missionaries didn’t know much about vehicle repair, so they finally just gave up, laid hands on the jeep, and prayed for healing for the jeep. Lo and behold, it started up, and they were able to get where they needed to go. They drove the rest of the way home and took the jeep in to a mechanic. The mechanic, after he heard the story, just kind of shook his head and said it has to be a miracle—there is no way you could have driven this vehicle the way that it is.

So, we had a good debate about this and we ended up agreeing that it was an interesting debate but probably not one around which our faith revolves. But after this mini-debate, my interest was piqued—I wanted to know more. And so I spent time reading more about miracles in the Bible and studying what some theologians have said about miracles.

As I continued studying miracles, though, I became more and more aware of something else—God’s providence—the almighty and ever-present power by which he upholds and rules everything. No matter how you define a miracle, no matter whether you say something is a miracle or just a surprising turn of events, there can’t be any doubt that God is involved. An event may or may not be a miracle, but it is evidence of God’s providence.

And so this morning, our focus is on providence. The definition of providence is on your outline: Providence is the almighty and ever-present power by which God upholds and rules everything. God upholds and rules everything.

Turn with me to our text, Psalm 104. Psalm 104 is a hymn that focuses on God’s great act of creating the entire universe. It actually reflects the teaching of Genesis 1. It even seems to parallel it in many ways, as we’ll see. However, it takes that teaching, and then it applies it in a way that reflects on God’s providence, the way that God upholds and rules his creation.

So hear the word of the Lord from Psalm 104:

“ Praise the LORD, O my soul.
O LORD my God, you are very great;
you are clothed with splendor and majesty.

He wraps himself in light as with a garment;
he stretches out the heavens like a tent

and lays the beams of his upper chambers on their waters.
He makes the clouds his chariot
and rides on the wings of the wind.

He makes winds his messengers,
flames of fire his servants.

He set the earth on its foundations;
it can never be moved.

You covered it with the deep as with a garment;
the waters stood above the mountains.

But at your rebuke the waters fled,
at the sound of your thunder they took to flight;

they flowed over the mountains,
they went down into the valleys,
to the place you assigned for them.

You set a boundary they cannot cross;
never again will they cover the earth.

He makes springs pour water into the ravines;
it flows between the mountains.

They give water to all the beasts of the field;
the wild donkeys quench their thirst.

The birds of the air nest by the waters;
they sing among the branches.

He waters the mountains from his upper chambers;
the earth is satisfied by the fruit of his work.

He makes grass grow for the cattle,
and plants for man to cultivate—
bringing forth food from the earth:

wine that gladdens the heart of man,
oil to make his face shine,
and bread that sustains his heart.

The trees of the LORD are well watered,
the cedars of Lebanon that he planted.

There the birds make their nests;
the stork has its home in the pine trees.

The high mountains belong to the wild goats;
the crags are a refuge for the coneys.

The moon marks off the seasons,
and the sun knows when to go down.

You bring darkness, it becomes night,
and all the beasts of the forest prowl.

The lions roar for their prey
and seek their food from God.

The sun rises, and they steal away;
they return and lie down in their dens.

Then man goes out to his work,
to his labor until evening.

How many are your works, O LORD!
In wisdom you made them all;
the earth is full of your creatures.

There is the sea, vast and spacious,
teeming with creatures beyond number—
living things both large and small.

There the ships go to and fro,
and the leviathan, which you formed to frolic there.

These all look to you
to give them their food at the proper time.

When you give it to them,
they gather it up;
when you open your hand,
they are satisfied with good things.

When you hide your face,
they are terrified;
when you take away their breath,
they die and return to the dust.

When you send your Spirit,
they are created,
and you renew the face of the earth.

May the glory of the LORD endure forever;
may the LORD rejoice in his works-

he who looks at the earth, and it trembles,
who touches the mountains, and they smoke.

I will sing to the LORD all my life;
I will sing praise to my God as long as I live.

May my meditation be pleasing to him,
as I rejoice in the LORD.

But may sinners vanish from the earth
and the wicked be no more.
Praise the LORD, O my soul.
Praise the LORD.

Now, turn with me to Lord’s Day 10. As I mentioned, you can find it on page 871 in the back of the gray-colored songbooks. There are two questions and two answers there. I’d like to read this responsively. I’ll read the questions, and then you read the answers.

Q. What do you understand
by the providence of God?

A. Providence is
the almighty and ever present power of God
by which he upholds, as with his hand,
heaven
and earth
and all creatures,
and so rules them that
leaf and blade,
rain and drought,
fruitful and lean years,
food and drink,
health and sickness,
prosperity and poverty-
all things, in fact, come to us
not by chance
but from his fatherly hand.

Q. How does the knowledge
of God's creation and providence
help us?

A. We can be patient when things go against us,
thankful when things go well,
and for the future we can have
good confidence in our faithful God and Father
that nothing will separate us from his love.
All creatures are so completely in his hand
that without his will
they can neither move nor be moved.

This morning, as we focus on God’s providence, I want you to notice three attributes of God that give us a picture of his providence. These three attributes are pointed out both by the Psalmist and by the writers of the Catechism: First, God is the Creator of the universe. Second, he is the Sustainer of everything he’s created. Finally, he is the Ruler over every square inch of His creation.

II. God is the Creator of the Universe

So first, God is the Creator of the universe. As I mentioned Psalm 104 not only teaches us that God created the universe, but it also uses the framework of Genesis 1—the days of creation—to teach us that God is the Creator of the universe.

In that Genesis framework, on the first day, God created light. And right at the beginning of our text, the first half of verse 2 we see the Psalmist proclaiming that God “wraps himself in light, as with a garment.”

On the second day, God created the expanse between the waters, separating sky and water. And the Psalmist reflects this, starting at the second half of verse two: “He stretches out the heavens like a tent and lays the beams of his upper chamber on their waters.”

The pattern continues—we know that on the third day God created dry land as well as the plants that cover it. The psalmist reflects this as well. In verses 5-13 he describes how land and water are distinct, and how the waters “went down to the valleys to the place assigned for them.” Not only that, but the waters are placed by God so that the beasts of the field and the birds of the air have everything they need, and “the earth is satisfied by the fruit of his work.”

In verses 14-18, the Psalmist describes not only how God created plants and trees, but in how doing so, God supplies for the needs of His creatures: grass for the cattle and food for the humans, even a home for the birds. And it’s not just our needs, “the bread that sustains our heart” that God supplies, but it is also our enjoyment—“the wine that gladdens the heart of man,” and “oil to make his face shine.”

The fourth day of creation is reflected in verses 19-24, which speak of the sun, moon and stars as timekeepers for both animals and man.

In verses 25 and 26, the Psalmist speaks of the creatures of the sea, which Genesis 1 says were created on the fifth day.

And the sixth day, during which God created the animals and humans, is reflected in verses 21-24 and also verses 27-30. In those verses the Psalmist stresses their dependence on God for everything that they need.

We may not fully understand exactly how God created the universe, but as Christians, we can have no doubt but that he did. He created everything out of nothing. He formed things that depend wholly upon him for their existence, but yet are distinct from him. That means God is transcendent over His creation. As the transcendent Creator, he is not in creation, nor is he bound by it. God is the Creator of the universe.

III. God is the Sustainer of Everything He has Created

So let’s take a look at the next attribute of God the psalmist points out. God is the Sustainer of everything he has created. He is the Sustainer of everything he has created.

We just said that God is transcendent over His creation—he is not in creation, nor is he bound by it. Because God is transcendent, there can be no doubt that, however we define them, miracles can occur.

We may or may not believe that God uses miracles in present times, but as believers in a Creator-God, we agree that miracles are possible. For God is above His creation. If he created out of nothing, there is no reason He can’t, if He desires, work in that creation in any way that He sees fit.

And He did. Many of the miracles that are recorded in Scripture are essential to our Christian faith—miracles like Jesus’ incarnation and his resurrection from the dead. If we deny miracles entirely, then we deny Jesus Christ, the heart of our faith. And whether or not we believe that God uses miracles in the present time, we have to agree that miracles are possible. Miracles can occur.

But of course, since He created the universe, and the natural laws that we see at work throughout creation, there’s no reason why God can’t choose to work primarily through those laws.

Our Presbyterian brothers and sisters refer to the laws of nature in their confessions as “second causes.” And by this they mean that while God is the first cause of everything, He created the laws of nature as the second cause for sustaining his creation. The Westminster Confession of Faith teaches that “while God ordinarily makes use of these second causes, He is always free to work without, above, and against them at his pleasure.”

So, as we see in our text this morning, God not only created the universe, he also sustains it. He is the Sustainer of everything he has created. One commentator wrote “in creation God exercised his divine power to cause the world to be. In providence, he continues to exercise that same power to sustain creation, to involve himself in all events, and to direct all things to their appointed ends.” He is our sustainer.

I find that concept amazing—we have a God who involves Himself in all of the events of our lives. Now, not everyone in the world agrees with this idea. In fact, I suspect that a lot of people in the world today think of God in a very different kind of way.

Like Thomas Jefferson many see God as kind of a divine watchmaker—he created this complex and incredible universe; he even created laws by which the universe will continue to exist on its own without any need for God’s intervention. Just like a well-crafted watch that can keep time for many, many years without any need for repairs or adjustments. But they believe, then, that God, having created this incredibly intricate creation, simply sits back, no longer involving himself in the inner workings of the thing that he has made.
This is not the God that is presented in Psalm 104. Much of the psalm is written in the present tense, and it is not just about what God did before as Creator, but it is also about God as sustainer.

Look at verses 27-30 again. The Psalmist tells us that God’s creatures look to him “to give them their food at the proper time.” And when God gives it to them, “they gather it up,” and “they are satisfied with good things.” But, when God takes away their breath, “they die and return to the dust.”

The rest of Scripture confirms this view of God as actively involved in His creation. Even Jesus points this out, teaching us not to worry, but pointing us to look at the birds of the air: “They do not sow or reap or store away in barns. And yet, your heavenly father feeds them.”

John Calvin said it this way in his “Institutes of the Christian Religion”: “The providence we mean is not one by which the deity, sitting idly in heaven, looks on at what is taking place in the world; but one by which he, as it were, holds the helms and over-rules all events.”

In other words, God is not an absentee God. He is very involved. He is very much in control. And he governs us, not just with his power, but by his on-going decrees. Nothing is left to chance. Nothing is left to fortune. God’s providence consists in his actions every day.

And what this means is that God is actively involved in everything. The universe isn’t being upheld simply by a set of natural laws that God set in motion before simply sitting back. Rather, the universe is actively sustained by God’s providence. He is the Sustainer of everything he has created.

So when we speak of miracles, I think we shouldn’t speak of them as being exceptions to the natural law. Because it’s not the natural law that keeps things going anyway—it is God. A lot of times we use the term miracle to describe examples of extraordinary providence, more than to describe the ordinary things that happen every day. But even so, there are times when even the timing and placement of very ordinary events may also be described as miraculous.

As John Calvin says it: “Single events are so regulated by God, and all events proceed by his determinate counsel that nothing happens fortuitously.”

Thus, it is improper to simply describe miracles as some kind of supernatural breakthrough by God into the world. If we think of miracles that way, we improperly divide God and the world into competing forces, at odds with each other, which they are not.

Gordon Spykman, in his book “Reformational Theology,” puts it this way: “In his wonder working power, God does not withdraw his providential care or bypass it. The will of God, revealed in such awesome signs and wonders, resides in the very power of his word itself. There is nothing arbitrary or capricious about them. From our perspective they may appear as surprising or unexpected—extraordinary interventions of God’s hand in history. For God, however, miracles are not miracles as we perceive them. They are rather the outworkings of his will in other ways—ways that to us appear unusual and exceptional, but ways which are consistently at God’s command.”

God is not only the creator of the universe, but He is also the sustainer. And that means He is involved daily in every detail of what he created. Whether it is making grass grow for the cattle or bringing forth wine that gladdens the heart of man, or providing safety for the ships of commerce that go to and fro on the vast and spacious sea. God is the Sustainer of everything he has created.

IV. God is the Ruler over every square inch of His creation

There is one other attribute of God that I want you to see. God is also the Ruler over every square inch of His creation. He is the Ruler over every square inch of His creation.

This means that not only does God actively provide for his creatures, but he also rules over them, over the places they live, over the things that they created for themselves, over every square inch of creation.

One of my very favorite sayings is Abraham Kuyper’s famous quote: “In the total expanse of human life, there is not a single square inch of which the Christ, who alone is sovereign, does not declare ‘That is mine.’” In other words, God not only sustains, but he rules over all of his creation. He alone sets the laws by which we have no choice but to abide, and He alone sets the standards according to which he demands that we live our life. He controls the physical creation in which we live.

But when we say that God rules over the universe, we can’t just limit his rule to nature. God controls the affairs of the nations. In Psalm 66 we learn that he “rules forever by his power; his eyes watch the nations—let not the rebellious rise up against Him.”

And God is not just concerned only with humans in general, or nations and powers, but he is also concerned with individuals, our lot in life and our outward success and failures. The apostle Paul recognized this in his own life when, in his letter to Galatians, he said that “God, who set me apart from birth, and called me by His grace, was pleased to reveal His Son in me so that I may preach Him among the Gentiles.”

And because God is concerned with individuals, part of his active providence is the protection of the righteous and the exposure and punishment of the wicked. Paul, in Romans, reminds us that “in all things God works for the good of those who love Him, who’ve been called according to his purposes.” The Psalmist tells us that “on the wicked he will rain fiery coals and burning sulfur; a scorching wind will be their lot.”

It is true that evil still exists in our world. We are not always immune from the ravages of sin. But as the old song goes, “This is my Father’s world, O let me ne’er forget, that though the wrong seems oft so strong, God is the ruler yet.” And as God’s people, no matter how often the wrong seems so strong, we can have confidence that God will rescue his people from the power of evil—if not now, then when Christ returns. God is the Ruler over every square inch of His creation. “The Lord is King, let the heavens ring, God reigns let the earth be glad.”

V. Conclusion

So what does this mean for us? If God is the creator, the sustainer, and the ruler of every square inch of creation, even our own lives, how do we respond?

I don’t think we can put it any better than the way the Catechism puts it in Answer 28: “We can be patient when things go against us, thankful when things go well, and for the future we can have good confidence in our faithful God and father that nothing will separate us from his love.”

Patience, thankfulness, and confidence. These ought to be the hallmarks of the life of a believer. Be patient, knowing that God is actively at work and will provide what we need. Be thankful, both for how he has provided for us in the past, but also for those areas where we can see him working at this very moment. And be confident that all things work for the good of those who love him.

As I was preparing this sermon, I read something on the web that summed up what I wanted to say better than anything I could come up with myself. Much as tried writing my own conclusion, I kept coming back to this. So, I want to read this to you. It comes from the blog of Kevin De Young, who is a pastor in Michigan and an author of several excellent books. He describes something that happened late one night during a short vacation that he took with his family. This is what he says:

“Around about four in the morning…our three year old fell out of bed, which prompted our one year old to wake up and cry like she was being dropped off at the nursery.

So my wife took a turn. Then around about 5:00 AM I took a turn. While I was hunkering down in the bathroom trying not to disturb the rest of the [family], with my precious little girl munching on Cracklin’ Oat Bran before the crack of dawn, I started meandering through my complimentary copy of USA Today. The news for Monday morning was grim. Lead story: Americans are becoming less religious. Bottom of page 1: pastor shot during church service… Later: stocks may take more than 25 years to recover their losses, once they bottom out that is. For some reason the full page spread on Dancing with the Stars just pushed me over the edge. How can so much be going wrong in the world?

I put my little one to bed and gave her two pacifiers and, with mom literally in the dark, a baggie of Cracklin Oat Bran just in case. As I lay in bed, my mind was mulling over all the bad news I had just read. Is our country really going down the [toilet]? Are churches even safe anymore? Will the American church soon be persecuted? Why does anyone care about Dancing with the Stars?

Then I remembered my beloved catechism… ‘What do you understand by the providence of God?’ ‘Providence is the almighty and ever present power of God by which he upholds, as with his hand, heaven and earth and all creatures, and so rules them that lead and blade, rain and drought, fruitful and lean years, food and drink, health and sickness, prosperity and poverty—all things, in fact, come to us not by chance but from his fatherly hand.’ I thought to myself, you know, that’s right. Praise God that’s right! God upholds the world with his hand and rules over us so that recessions and declensions, murders and mayhem, presidents and prime ministers, kids sleeping and kids rolling off their beds, the tragedies of life and the banalities—all things, in fact, come to us not by chance but from his fatherly hand. God's seen this mess before. He sent it. He'll see us through us.

Around about 6:00 AM I fell back asleep, deeply grateful for the Heidelberg Catechism, the providence of God, and Cracklin’ Oat Bran.”

It is my prayer as well, just as Pastor De Young said, that in the midst of whatever difficulties you might be facing in life, you will have the patience to persevere, the thankfulness to know what God has done, and confidence in God’s good providence for us.

Amen.

Sermon Series--Sermon #3

2009-11-13T11:15:00.003-06:00

I had planned on posting all four sermons in my series this summer, but never got around to it. Here is sermon #3...

Big Words of the Faith: Justification
Romans 4

I. Introduction

Good morning.

I have an outline available again this morning. If you don’t have one, raise your hand. There are several people around who will make sure you get one.

If you have been here the past several weeks, you know that we are in the midst of studying some of the “big words of the faith.” Don’t worry, it’s perfectly OK to join us in the middle. This sermon series isn’t like the TV show “Lost.” You don’t have to watch from the very beginning to understand what in the world is going on.

Two weeks ago, we started by looking at the word “predestination.” Last week, our word was “covenant.” This week, our big word of the faith is “justification.”

Justification just might be the biggest of these big words. Martin Luther called justification “the cornerstone of Christianity.” More recently, the Christian author J.I. Packer said that any church that has forgotten about justification by faith can scarcely be called a Christian church.

So, turn with me to the book of Romans, chapter 4. Romans is the first letter in the New Testament, after the gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, and the book of Acts. If you are using a pew Bible, you should find our passage on page 1751.

Paul spends two-and-a-half chapters in this book on this big word of the faith, justification. Starting at verse 21 of Chapter 3 and going all the way to the end of Chapter 5, Paul lays out his argument that salvation is available to everyone, Jew or Gentile, in the same way. In these chapters he tells us that every Christian is justified by grace through faith—apart from works, apart from the law, and apart from one’s status as a Jew. Romans 4 is the centerpiece of that argument, and he focuses on the example of Abraham to make his point.

So follow along as I read from Romans 4. And keep your Bible open—after spending a little time defining justification, we will work verse by verse through the chapter to understand what Paul wants us to understand about this big word of the faith.

The word of the Lord from Romans 4:

ROMANS 4

II. What is justification?

So what is this big word of the faith—a word so important that without it we can hardly call ourselves Christian? What is justification?

Let’s start by defining it. Louis Berkhof, a 20th century theologian defined justification as “that legal act of God by which He declares the sinner righteous on the basis of the perfect righteousness of Jesus Christ.” “That legal act of God by which He declares the sinner righteous on the basis of the perfect righteousness of Jesus Christ.”

Justification is the process by which the perfect life of Jesus—his active obedience and sinlessness—is credited to us. This happens, despite our sinfulness, because Jesus agreed to fulfill the condition in God’s promise that we obey him. It isn’t our obedience that counts, since we can’t obey; it is Christ’s obedience on our behalf.

Our legal standing before God has changed. Instead of being outside of the covenant, condemned to death and eternal separation from God, we are instead declared righteous. We can stand before God and claim the benefits of his covenant—his promise that we can live forever in loving fellowship with God.

Some Christians confuse justification, this one-time declaration of righteousness, with the gradual process of sanctification—the process of becoming more and more like Christ. Justification is a single act, not an ongoing process. We have been declared righteous once and for all because Jesus has taken on our sins and given us his perfection. We aren’t justified before God because we become more and more holy through the Spirit’s work. No, we are able to become more and more holy because we have been justified, declared righteous before God.

So now, let’s take a look at Romans 4.

III. Justification comes by grace

Paul wants his readers to know that justification comes by grace. God’s people are not justified by our works. We don’t stand in a right relationship with God because of the law. And the Jews cannot say that they are justified simply by virtue of being Jewish. It is only by grace, through faith, that anyone is justified.

A. Not by works

Paul starts proving that justification is by grace, by showing that justification is not by works. To do that, he points to Abraham. In verse 1, Paul asks: “What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather, discovered in this matter?”

Many Jews in Paul’s day believed that Abraham was justified because of his own righteousness. They looked back at Abraham as being as close to perfect as any human could be. But Paul points out that if Abraham was justified by his good works, then he’d be able to boast in his good works, even before God.

But even the Jewish rabbis of Paul’s day who believed that Abraham was justified by his good works understood that the very idea of a sinner boasting before God is an absurdity. Listen to how Paul puts it in verse 2: “If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about—but not before God.”

Paul writes this to show us the impossibility of claiming to have right standing before God because of our own obedience. Earlier in chapter 3 of Romans, Paul quoted Psalm 14 to show that “There is no one righteous, not even one.” Not even Abraham.

Next, in verse three, Paul points us back to Genesis 15:6. “What does the Scripture say?” Paul asks. “‘Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.’”

This verse from Genesis flies in the face of the view that Abraham was justified by his works. There is no mention of any good works of Abraham in this verse. In fact, nowhere in Genesis 15 does it suggest that Abraham did anything to earn justification. “Abraham believed God.” That’s all. And that belief “was credited to him as righteousness.” Credited as a gift, not as something he had coming to him.

Paul expounds on this in verses 4 and 5. “Now when a man works, his wages are not credited to him as a gift, but as an obligation. However, to the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness.”

Abraham did not earn justification by his works. Nor do we. Justification is a gift. Our faith is credited to us as righteousness, even though that very faith comes as a gift from God. This is even clearer on this in Ephesians 2:8, where Paul proclaims: “For it is by grace that you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God…”

In verses 6-8, Paul points out that David, another hero of the faith, agrees that justification comes by faith, not by works. Starting at verse 6: “David says the same thing when he speaks of the blessedness of the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works.” Paul then quotes Psalm 32. “Blessed are they whose transgressions are forgiven, whose sins are covered. Blessed is the man whose sin the Lord will never count against him.”

In English, we use the word “count” in that last sentence: “Blessed is the man whose sin the Lord will never count against him.” But in Greek, the word “count” is the exact same word that Paul uses in verse five for “credited” when he says of the faithful Christian “his faith is credited as righteousness.” Paul reiterates for us that our faith is credited as a gift, not as something we are owed. Justification is not by works.

B. Not by status

Paul next turns to the argument that justification is limited to the Jews, because of their special status as God’s people. Justification is not by status.

Listen to what Paul says in verses 9 and 10: He starts by asking “Is this blessedness only for the circumcised, or also for the uncircumcised?” Paul then goes on to recap his discussion of justification as being credited as a gift, not as something earned. “We have been saying that Abraham's faith was credited to him as righteousness.”

Then he asks “Under what circumstances was it credited? Was it after he was circumcised, or before? It was not after, but before!”

What Paul is doing is refuting the argument that justification is only for the Jews, those who possessed the sign and the seal of God’s covenant—circumcision.

All we have to do is read through Genesis to we see that while Abraham believes God’s promise in Genesis 15, it takes at least 13 years, and maybe more, until we get to Genesis 17 where Abraham is circumcised. Abraham’s justification came far before he received the sign and seal of God’s promise.

Since Abraham was not circumcised when he was justified, Paul says, Abraham is really the spiritual father of all of us, Jew and Greek. In verse 11 Paul says, “[Abraham] is the father of all who believe but have not been circumcised, in order that righteousness might be credited to them.” And this leads to verse 12. “And he is also the father of the circumcised who not only are circumcised but who also walk in the footsteps of the faith that our father Abraham had before he was circumcised.” In other words, we cannot be justified simply by our status. We are justified by grace, and only through the gracious gift of faith.

C. Not by law

In just a moment, Paul is going to turn to a discussion of faith, and its role in our justification. But he makes one last point to show that justification is by grace. Because justification does not come to us by works, it also cannot come to us by the law. Justification is not by law.

Listen to what Paul says in verses 13-15. “It was not through law that Abraham and his offspring received the promise that he would be heir of the world, but through the righteousness that comes by faith. For if those who live by law are heirs, faith has no value and the promise is worthless, because law brings wrath. And where there is no law there is no transgression.”

If justification were dependent on our obedience to law, there would be no need for faith. We could be justified solely by our own act of obeying the law, regardless of whether we actually believed. And of course, we already know that we can’t obey the law anyway—Paul has already shown us that. It is only our faith, given as a free gift, that provides us a way to be justified before God.

We cannot stand before God and be declared righteous before His throne because of anything about ourselves. “For it is by grace that you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God…” Justification is by grace alone.

D. Justification comes through faith

So, having shown that justification is by grace alone, Paul, in the next section of our text, shows the importance of faith. Justification comes through faith.

Here is what Paul says in verse 16. “Therefore, the promise comes by faith, so that it may be by grace and may be guaranteed to all Abraham’s offspring—not only to those who are of the law but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham. He is the father of us all.”

To some extent, Paul is just reiterating what he explained already. When we are justified through faith, this is by grace, since faith is a gift. But not only that, since we receive this gift by faith—the deep-rooted assurance that God has acted on our behalf, as opposed to our doing anything ourselves—this gift is available to all who have faith, whether Jew or Gentile. After all, God made Abraham “a father of many nations.” And he gives “life to the dead and calls things that are not as though they were.”

God gives life to the dead. He showed this in the new life that came from the dead womb of Sarah. He showed this by giving Isaac’s life back in Genesis 22, when Abraham offered him to God as a sacrifice. And he shows this in the life of Jesus Christ, who though he died, was resurrected. What’s more, God also gave life to us. We were once dead in our sins. But now, because of the faith we receive by grace, we are made alive with Christ.

That new life begins with our being regenerated, being born again and receiving a new heart. With that new heart in us we are converted, able to repent of our sins and have faith in Jesus Christ and his saving work for us. And through that faith, we are justified—our legal standing before God is changed. Instead of being outside of the covenant, condemned to death, we can stand before God able to claim the benefits of the covenant—eternal life in fellowship with our loving God.

IV. What this means for us

We are justified—God has declared us righteous solely on the basis of the perfect righteousness of Jesus Christ. And that righteousness is a gift of grace, a gift we receive through faith.

So what does this mean for us? What are the implications of justification by grace through faith? Let’s look at three. First, because of this gift we can have faith “against all hope.” Second, that sure assurance must lead us to give all of the glory to God. And finally, justification points us back to Christ, the author and perfecter of our faith.

A. We can have faith “against all hope.”

So, first, we can have faith “against all hope.” Paul talks about Abraham having this kind of faith in verses 18-20: “Against all hope, Abraham in hope believed and so became the father of many nations, just as it had been said to him, ‘So shall your offspring be.’ Without weakening in his faith, he faced the fact that his body was as good as dead—since he was about a hundred years old—and that Sarah's womb was also dead. Yet he did not waver through unbelief regarding the promise of God, but was strengthened in his faith...”

Humanly speaking, Abraham’s faith in God’s promise was against all hope. Who could believe that Sarah would bear him a child at age 90? Certainly, Abraham’s faith was strong, but that strength didn’t come from within himself. It came because of who he believed in. All that mattered was the object of Abraham’s faith, the God who freely gives righteousness to sinners who believe his words.

We have faith in the same God as Abraham. And that means we, too, can have faith “against all hope.” As one commentator noted, “faith is not a blind leap in the dark, contrary to all reason and common sense.” Rather, our faith looks forward with the same kind of hope that Abraham had. We know that God is faithful; we know that God “gives life to the dead and calls things that are not as though they were.”

We are heirs of God’s promise, so not even death can lay claim to us. We look forward to the day when God will raise our bodies from the dead on the day of resurrection, and we will be able to live in perfect relationship with our God for all eternity. We have faith, against any human hope, that we will live forever, free from the bonds of death.

B. Our faith must lead us to give all glory to God.

And because we have this faith “against all hope,” our faith must lead us to give all glory to God.

Look again at verses 20 and 21 of our text. “Yet he did not waver through unbelief regarding the promise of God, but was strengthened in his faith and gave glory to God, being fully persuaded that God had power to do what he had promised.”

Giving glory to God is a hallmark of faith. God created the world as a way of showing his glory. He graciously promised us eternal life with him as a way of showing his glory. And, despite our sin, he has provided a way for us to be made right with Him, to be declared righteous despite our sin. This also he does for his glory. Having been declared righteous before God, it should be our desire to give all the glory to God, to display his greatness in everything we do. Our faith must lead us to give all glory to God.

C. Our faith points us back to the cross of Christ

Finally, our faith points us back to the cross of Christ. If we truly believe that we have been justified, we cannot help but focus on the cross of Christ, on the sacrifice he made for us, and the perfect righteousness that he has given to us.

Even if you are not a baseball fan, you’ve certainly heard of Barry Bonds. On August 7, 2007, Bonds hit home run number 756, the home run that broke Hank Aaron’s record. Most of the talk about the record, though, is whether it really should count, because Bonds is alleged to have used steroids. Many sports buffs say if his name goes in the record book it should be accompanied by an asterisk. The asterisk means the record is tainted. In fact, the man who bought the ball that Bonds hit to set the record branded it with an asterisk before donating it to the baseball Hall of Fame.

Scripture talks about a different kind of record book—the Book of Life. The name of each believer is recorded in this record book. With all the sins we have committed, you’d think that each of us should have an asterisk by our name in this record book. But because we of Jesus Christ’s perfect life on this earth and his redeeming work on the cross, there is no asterisk by our names.

God has done all he promised. As Paul tells us in the last verses of our text, “The words ‘it was credited to him’ were written not for [Abraham] alone, but also for us, to whom God will credit righteousness—for us who believe in him who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead. He was delivered over to death for our sins and was raised to life for our justification.”

Jesus was delivered over to death for our sins, and was raised to life for our justification. Our faith convinces us of that. Our faith points us back to the cross of Christ.

VI. Conclusion

Justification is “that legal act of God by which He declares the sinner righteous on the basis of the perfect righteousness of Jesus Christ.” We are justified by grace, completely undeserved. And justification comes to us through the gift of faith, faith that allows us to claim the benefits of being declared righteous.

Because of our justification, we, like Abraham, can have a faith against all hope that we will live eternally with our glorious God. And that faith leads us to ascribe all of the glory and to turn our eyes toward the cross of our anointed King, Jesus Christ, who is the reason for our faith.

Amen.

Important Court Decision Impacting Christian Schools

2009-09-02T12:10:00.003-05:00

Coulee Catholic Schools vs. LIRC (2009 WI 88)

On July 21, the Wisconsin Supreme Court issued an important decision relating to the freedom Christian schools (and other faith-based institutions) have under the U.S. and Wisconsin Constitutions.

The Facts of the Case:

Wendy Ostlund began teaching at St. Patrick’s Elementary School in Onalaska in 1974. St. Patrick's is a member school of Coulee Catholic Schools, a cooperative effort between area Catholic schools to share resources, streamline administration, and unify curriculum. CCS is owned, operated, and subject to the authority of the Diocese of La Crosse, Wisconsin, and is therefore an entity of the Catholic Church. The Catholic school is considered a ministry of the Roman Catholic Church. The church considers the foundation of the whole educational enterprise in a Catholic school to be Jesus Christ. The Catholic school aims at a Christian concept of life centered on Jesus Christ. Teachers are believed to be essential to this ministry.

Ostlund’s school day was pretty typical for a teacher in a Christian school. She began the day with prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance. She taught reading, science, social studies, math, and handwriting. Other teachers taught computers, art, P.E., and music.

The final period of the day was religion, which she taught on her own three days per week. A priest or deacon accompanied Ostlund on the fourth day. On the fifth, there was a school-wide Mass. During religion class, Ostlund taught the Catholic faith. She was often the first person to teach the children certain Catholic prayers. She taught basic Catholic doctrine, and specific worship practices like the Stations of the Cross. Ostlund also helped her students celebrate school-wide religious holidays.

Approximately every fourth week, Ostlund was responsible for helping to plan the Friday Mass with her class. When planning Mass, Ostlund was in charge of choosing appropriate readings from the Bible. She was also responsible for the petitions that would be read and prayed during Mass. These she would either choose from a liturgy guide, or at times, write herself. Ostlund also participated in various aspects of the Mass, including reading responsorial psalms and carrying the bread and wine.

Each year, Ostlund was required to sign an employment contract, which provided:

“The Employee agrees to faithfully and conscientiously perform any and all
duties of the position(s) for which he/she is hired and all other duties as
directed by the Employer including, but not limited to . . . comply with the
requirements of the Diocese of La Crosse and the State of Wisconsin regarding
the educational preparation of teachers.”

It also provided:

“The Employee as a teacher in a Catholic educational system agrees that as a
condition of employment he/she will support and exemplify in conduct both
Catholic doctrine and morality. He/She must be consistent in expression and
example, with the teaching and practice of the Catholic faith and shall not
teach, advocate, encourage or counsel beliefs or practices contrary to the
Catholic faith.”

The CCS Faculty and Staff Handbook included written rules, regulations, and policies adopted by the Diocese of La Crosse and approved by its Bishop. These policies required teachers to comply with certain standards. A preamble to these standards stated in pertinent part:

“The primary mission of the Catholic Church is to continue the mission of Jesus: PROCLAIMING THE KINGDOM OF GOD. Central to this mission is the teaching of the Word of God. This ministry of the Word is given expression in the education efforts of the Church.
It is the goal of the five dioceses in the state of Wisconsin to promote and support a comprehensive educational ministry. The ministry extends to people of all ages: adults, youth and children.
Following their long tradition of service to the people of Wisconsin,
Catholic elementary and secondary schools and religious education programs continue to be an essential part of the educational ministry of the Church.
By virtue of their ministry, personnel in Catholic education are role models
for other adults, youth and children. Therefore, they are called to be
well-informed in Catholic teachings and committed to a Catholic way of life.”

The standards themselves contain several requirements for teachers. Notably, elementary school teachers of religion were required to have both basic and advanced certifications in religion, which Ostlund acquired and maintained. Both the basic and advanced certifications involved yearly continuing education sessions where Ostlund was instructed on how to teach Catholic principles and doctrine. Teachers were also required be certified by the Department of Public Instruction. Ostlund was actually not a licensed teacher—she was working to obtain her teaching license, however, as that was a fairly recent requirement for CCS elementary school teachers.

While the standards required teachers of religion to be Catholics, as a matter of practice CCS did not actually require elementary school to be members of the Catholic Church. Ostlund’s job description set forth six main areas of responsibility: providing a religious Atmosphere, teaching responsibilities, supervisory responsibilities, professional duties, grade level responsibilities, and compliance with the school and diocesan policies. The “religious atmosphere” component required her to provide a good Christian model and example; encourage spiritual growth in students by developing inner discipline, character, morals, and values; and provide leadership in living and celebrating life and liturgies. Her professional duties required her to, among other things, earn and maintain religious certification.

As part of her yearly evaluation, Ostlund and a supervisor commented on various aspects of her job performance. The court found some of Ostlund’s comments relevant here. In her 1997 job evaluation, Ostlund stated: “When I teach prayer or religion class, attend or prepare liturgy or talk about morals and values, I know that I am dealing with things that are not found in a public school.” With regard to her teaching technique, Ostlund commented “I am able to incorporate Catholic values into all of the subjects that I teach.” In her 2001 job evaluation, she commented: “I encourage spiritual growth during religion class as well as throughout the day.” In her 2002 evaluation, Ostlund stated: “I have taught religion daily and prepared liturgies, which are well thought out and appropriate for first graders.” Ostlund’s evaluator stated that Ostlund “prepares students for participation in liturgies and prayer services celebrated during the school year.”

In the spring of 2002, CCS closed one of its elementary schools due to low enrollment. This required the school system to lay off several teachers. On March 27, 2002, Ostlund received a letter from the president of CCS stating that, due to the staff reductions, Ostlund would not be offered a contract for the 2002-03 school year. She was one of ten teachers not to receive contract extensions from CCS. Ostlund was age 53 when she was terminated, and was replaced with a 35-year-old teacher who was certified to teach elementary school.

Following her termination, Ostlund filed an age discrimination complaint with the Equal Rights Division of the Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development. She alleged that CCS terminated her because of her age in violation of the Fair Employment Act. The Equal Rights Officer did not find probable cause to believe that CCS violated the law when it terminated Ostlund. She then appealed the initial determination and received a formal administrative hearing with the Equal Rights Division to address her claim. CCS moved to dismiss the complaint, arguing that the Equal Rights Division had no jurisdiction because Ostlund’s position was “ministerial,” meaning that acting on the complaint would infringe upon CCS’s First Amendment rights.

The Equal Rights Division Administrative Law Judge concluded that Ostlund’s position was not ministerial. He concluded that while Ostlund did engage in religiously-related activities, her primary duty was to instruct her students in a core of secular disciplines. Therefore, he dismissed CCS’s motion and ordered a hearing to determine whether there was probable cause that CCS violated the Fair Employment Act when it terminated Ostlund.

CCS appealed the Equal Rights Division ruling to the State of Wisconsin Labor and Industry Review Commission for administrative review. LIRC determined that because the ALJ’s decision was not a “final order,” so it could not hear the appeal until after the probable cause hearing. CCS then sought review in the La Crosse County Circuit Court. The circuit court ruled that any investigation of the discrimination claim would have to wait until LIRC made a decision on whether Ostlund’s position was ministerial or not.

The matter was then sent back to LIRC, which issued a decision agreeing with the ALJ that Ostlund’s primary duty as a first-grade teacher was to instruct her students in a core of secular disciplines. Teaching religion four times a week, leading prayers, referring to religious symbols, incorporating religious themes into classes, preparing liturgy, and supervising liturgy did not constitute Ostlund’s primary duty, according to LIRC. Therefore, the discrimination hearing should be held. CCS sought review of that decision in La Crosse County Circuit Court.

The circuit court agreed with LIRC that, despite Ostlund teaching religion, participating in religious activities with students, and using religious examples in her lessons, her primary duty was to teach secular subject matters to her students. Hence, the circuit court held that she was not a ministerial employee, and that Ostlund’s age discrimination claim could proceed. CCS appealed and the court of appeals upheld the circuit court decision. Therefore, she appealed to the Wisconsin Supreme Court.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court Decision:

The Supreme Court started by noting that the U.S. Supreme Court has stated that the right to practice one’s religion according to the dictates of conscience is fundamental to our system of government. It noted that our nation’s founders recognized and enshrined this right in our in the Constitution. Roughly 60 years later, Wisconsinites saw fit to include more specific and more extensive protections for religious liberty in our state constitution.

On appeal, Ostlund also referred to the First Amendment. She asserted that the Establishment Clause provided the principles for this case, and that the real question was whether the Fair Employment Act creates excessive government entanglement with religion. She argued that giving religious employers an exemption from non-discrimination laws encroaches upon the Establishment Clause’s prohibition against furthering religion. The court, however, stated that U.S. Supreme Court case law and common sense lead to a different conclusion—that it is the Free Exercise Clause, and not the Establishment Clause, that is implicated in this case. Granting churches and religious organizations control over the selection of their leaders does not implicate the establishment of religion or the favoring of one religion over another.

According to the court, the state has a strong interest in eradicating discrimination, but the job of the courts is to distinguish minor or “incidental” burdens on free exercise in eradicating discrimination from burdens where the inroad on religious liberty is too substantial to be permissible. In doing so, courts have described what they call the “ministerial exception.” In 1985, the U.S. Supreme Court proposed a test for deciding when a position should be considered ministerial. An employee is ministerial, it said, if his or her “primary duties consist of teaching, spreading the faith, church governance, supervision of a religious order, or supervision or participation in religious ritual and worship.” This inquiry requires a court to determine whether a position is important to the spiritual and pastoral mission of the church. This test for has been called the “primary duties test.”

The court noted a problem with this test: what the word “primary” means. Some courts have taken a quantitative approach, looking, for example, at the amount of time spent on particular subjects deemed “secular” versus subjects deemed “religious.” This was the approach taken by Ostlund, the ALJ, LIRC, the circuit court, and the court of appeals.

The court determined what they termed a better way to view the ministerial exception—the “functional approach.” This perspective focuses more on whether a position is important to the spiritual and pastoral mission of the church. The primary concern here is the function of the employee, not only the enumerated tasks themselves. The court held that the quantitative approach minimizes or privatizes religion by calling a faith-centered social studies class, for example, “secular” because it does not specifically involve worship and prayer. A functional analysis, the court said, involves less intrusion into the affairs of religious organizations, envisages a more limited role for courts in determining whether activities or positions are religious, and avoids reducing the significance of a position to a rote formula. In short, the court said, a functional analysis is truer to the First Amendment’s protection of religious freedom.

The court then set out two steps for performing a functional analysis. First is to determine whether the organization, in both statement and practice, has a fundamentally religious mission. Any inquiry would be highly fact-sensitive. The court noted that “it could be that one religiously-affiliated organization committed to feeding the homeless has only a nominal tie to religion, while another religiously-affiliated organization committed to feeding the homeless has a religiously infused mission involving teaching, evangelism, and worship. Similarly, one religious school may have some affiliation with a church but not attempt to ground the teaching and life of the school in the religious faith, while another similarly situated school may be committed to life and learning grounded in a religious worldview.”

The second step in the analysis is to determine how important or closely linked the employee’s work is to the fundamental mission of that organization. This again would be highly fact-specific. Relevant evidence could include hiring criteria, the job application, the employment contract, actual job duties, performance evaluations, and the understanding or characterization of a position by the organization. Quintessentially religious tasks like teaching, evangelizing, church governance, supervision of a religious order, and overseeing, leading, or participating in religious rituals, worship, and/or worship services are not the only evidence considered, but would show a close link and importance to an organization’s religious mission.

A functional analysis of the ministerial exception makes sense, the court noted, because, though it departs in form from the analysis used by many other courts, it gets to the real heart of the ministerial exception, which is preventing the state from intruding into the mission of religious organizations or houses of worship. The state surely has a strong interest in ensuring fair employment opportunities regardless of age, race, and other such factors. Nonetheless, the Wisconsin legislature oversteps its constitutional authority when its otherwise laudable efforts at fairness interfere with the hiring and firing of employees who are important and closely linked to the religious mission of a religious organization. Such actions impermissibly intrude upon the organization’s exercise of religious liberty.

The court also looked at the Wisconsin Constitution in making its decision. This is important for two reasons—first, it makes an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court nearly impossible. Second, it signals the court’s growing willingness to interpret the state constitution more restrictively than the U.S. Constitution. This is important in many contexts, and is not a so-called liberal/conservative issue. Those called “liberals” might appreciate a more stringent interpretation of what constitutes illegal search and seizure or the right against self-incrimination, while so-called “conservatives” might appreciate more stringent interpretations of the Free Exercise clause or various constitutional provisions related to commerce.
Article I, Section 18 of the Wisconsin Constitution provides as follows:

“The right of every person to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of
conscience shall never be infringed; nor shall any person be compelled to
attend, erect or support any place of worship, or to maintain any ministry,
without consent; nor shall any control of, or interference with, the rights of
conscience be permitted, or any preference be given by law to any religious
establishments or modes of worship; nor shall any money be drawn from the
treasury for the benefit of religious societies, or religious or theological
seminaries.”

According to the court, the Wisconsin Constitution uses the strongest possible language in the protection of the right of freedom of conscience. While this section serves the same purposes as the Establishment Clause and Free Exercise Clause of the U.S. Constitution, these provisions are not the same. The protections and prohibitions in the Wisconsin Constitution are far more specific. And with regard to the rights of conscience, this clause contains extremely strong language, providing expansive protections for religious liberty. Thus, the court held, Wisconsin courts are not limited to current First Amendment jurisprudence when interpreting our own constitutional protections for religious liberty; rather, they are required to give effect to the more explicit guarantees set forth in our state constitution.

When faced with a claim that a state law violates an individual or organization’s freedom of conscience, courts generally apply the compelling state interest/least restrictive alternative test. Under this test, the religious organization has to prove that it has a sincerely held religious belief, and that such belief is burdened by the application of the state law at issue. If it does so, then the burden shifts to the state to prove that the law is based upon a compelling state interest that cannot be served by a less restrictive alternative.

This analysis, the court said, is appropriate in most circumstances regarding laws burdening the rights of conscience, but not in this case. This is because the law at issue in this case is not merely a burden on an individual’s or organization’s religious beliefs. Rather, it is an effort by the state to intrude into the hiring and firing decisions of a religious organization. The Wisconsin Constitution acts as a perpetual bar to the state from the infringement, control, or interference with the rights of conscience. The state simply has no authority to control or interfere with the selection of spiritual leaders of a religious organization with a religious mission. The court compared the Wisconsin provision to the 13th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which bans slavery. It would be inconceivable to conclude that slavery can exist in the United States as long as the state has a compelling interest. The text is clear—slavery is not allowed. In the same way, the state cannot or interfere with the selection of spiritual leaders of a religious organization.

The court noted that they do not mean to suggest that anything interfering with a religious organization is totally prohibited. General laws related to building licensing, taxes, social security, and the like are normally acceptable. Similarly, employment discrimination laws applying to employees who are not in positions that are important and closely linked to the religious mission of a religious organization also do not rise to the level of control or interference with the free exercise of religion. But the state may not interfere with the hiring or firing decisions of religious organizations with a religious mission with respect to employees who are important and closely linked to that mission. These employees are “ministerial,” and when applied to ministerial employees, laws like the Fair Employment Act constitute an impermissible effort to control or interfere with the organization’s rights of conscience in violation of the Wisconsin Constitution.

In applying the law to Ostlund, the court noted that LIRC had found that the textbooks used by Ostlund were not religious and that, except for a Christmas unit, her instruction in social studies was not primarily religious. However, Ostlund testified that she incorporated religious examples and values into everything she taught. The court noted that whether or not her teaching of social studies was primarily religious is more a legal judgment than a factual finding. Similarly, it noted that LIRC found as a fact that “religious related activities did not constitute [Ostlund’s] primary duty. The court rejected that finding of fact, saying it was a legal judgment. While it may be that the majority of her duties were teaching “secular” subjects, the court said, it does not follow that her primary duties were secular for purposes of determining whether the ministerial exception applies. These issues were important, because the Supreme Court is generally bound to the factual findings of lower courts, but can make independent determinations on legal judgments. It is somewhat unusual for an appeals court to reject a finding of fact as actually being a legal judgment wrapped in the cloths of a factual finding. However, the Supreme Court her made a point of doing so.

The court then followed the law it had set forth to determine that Ostlund’s position was important and closely linked to the religious mission of a religious organization.

It first looked at the nature of Coulee Catholic Schools and St. Patrick’s Elementary. The court noted that CCS has a religious mission and substantially practices it. CCS is an entity committed to marshalling the resources and expertise of the Catholic schools in the Diocese of La Crosse. CCS is an entity of the Catholic Church itself, subject to the authority of the Bishop of La Crosse, who himself approved certain CCS rules and policies. It is committed to a distinctly Catholic education aimed at a “Christian concept of life.” The preamble to the CCS Faculty and Staff Handbook explicitly stated that Catholic school education is an essential part of the Catholic Church’s efforts to live out its mission to proclaim the kingdom of God. Consistent with this mission, Catholic elementary and secondary schools are called educational ministry. CCS is committed to an education rooted in the Gospel of Jesus Christ that celebrates the development of Gospel faith and identity through sacrament and service. It aims to be a worship-filled educational environment with a faith-centered approach to learning. It is beyond dispute, then, that CCS has a religious mission. The court also held that the actual practice of Ostlund’s school substantially affirmed that CCS gives life to the words of its mission. Teachers made efforts to integrate Catholic values into various aspects of the curricula. This included integrating theological and moral principles into each subject, as well as use of religious examples and symbols that would not be found in a public school. Students were taught the Catholic faith in a daily religion class, and celebrated Mass weekly. The students also prayed at points throughout the day and celebrated religious holidays. Teachers were required to teach, support, and exemplify Catholic doctrine and morality, and they were to help foster spiritual growth among their students. In short, CCS member schools are not just public schools with a few supplemental religious extras. CCS was explicitly and intentionally faith-centered, and the record supports that CCS tried to live out its mission.

The second step in the court’s inquiry was an examination of Ostlund’s position itself and the degree to which it is important and closely linked to CCS's mission. As a first-grade teacher at St. Patrick’s Elementary School, one of the CCS schools, it was obvious to the court that Ostlund’s role was of high importance and closely linked to the mission of the school----the inculcation of a Christ-centered concept of life. Ostlund led prayer with her students, incorporated religious examples, symbols, and stories into other subjects, and helped celebrate school-wide celebrations of religious holidays. Significantly, Ostlund was a catechist for four days per week; that is, she taught Catholic doctrine and practice to her students. Ostlund also took her students to Mass each week, sometimes planning Bible readings and writing prayers for worship services. Ostlund was important and closely linked to the religious mission of CCS with regard to her first-grade students. Ostlund was required to obtain basic and advanced certifications in religious instruction. This means she was required to and did receive ongoing training and instruction on how to teach the Catholic faith to her students. She further agreed to model and support Catholic teaching. In her job description, which also served as the template for her performance evaluation, her first responsibility was to maintain a religious atmosphere, which required her to provide a good Christian model and example, encourage spiritual growth in students, and provide leadership in living and celebrating life and liturgies. Ostlund acknowledged her efforts to incorporate Catholic values and encourage spiritual growth throughout the day, not just in religion class. Ostlund’s position as a first-grade teacher was important and closely linked to the religiously-infused mission of the school. In particular, her specific obligations to contribute to worship services and teach Catholic doctrine to her students point to her significance in the religious mission of the school. Ostlund was required to perform quintessentially religious tasks as a central part of her job, and her role was an essential part of the Catholic Church's educational ministry to its youth. In sum, Ostlund was not simply a public school teacher with an added obligation to teach religion. She was an important instrument in a faith-based organization's efforts to pass on its faith to the next generation. The state and federal constitutions do not permit the state to interfere with employment decisions regarding teachers, like Ostlund, who are important and closely linked to the religious mission of CCS.

The court addressed two counterarguments. First, the lower courts were particularly affected by the fact that Ostlund was not required to be Catholic. It may seem, at first blush, counterintuitive to call a position ministerial when the person occupying it is not required to be a member of the faith she is ministering. But this ignores the fact that Ostlund was still required to engage in Catholic worship, model Catholic living, and impart Catholic teaching. Thus, though it may be that she was not required to be Catholic, she was required to live, embody, and teach Catholicism in her role as a teacher consistent with the mission of the school.

Previous courts also pointed to the secular teaching materials as important. But as discussed above, Ostlund testified that she made efforts to integrate Catholicism into all her subjects. The fact that she used a secular social studies book does not mean that the social studies class was “secular.” Ostlund used religious examples and brought Catholic teaching into all of her subjects.
The court specifically noted that in their holding in this case, they were not giving a blanket exception to all religious school teachers. Future cases along these lines will be very fact-sensitive. But the state has no constitutional authority to regulate the hiring and firing decisions of CCS for this first-grade teaching position.

Thus, the decision by the court of appeals was reversed.

This decision was not unanimous. Justice Crooks wrote a dissenting opinion, which was joined by Chief Justice Abrahamson and Justice Bradley, making it a 4-3 decision. (In fact, many commentators have noted that the result of the decision was likely completely decided by the 2008 Supreme Court election, in which Justice Gableman, who wrote the majority opinion) defeated former Justice Butler.

The dissent argued that the majority altered the “primary duties” test as it had been understood by Wisconsin courts and a significant majority of other jurisdictions. The dissent also argued that the majority’s sweeping language and analysis will have far-reaching consequences and jeopardizes long-standing decisions under the Establishment Clause of the United States Constitution, as well as under the “benefits clause” and “compelled support clause” contained in Article I, Section 18 of the Wisconsin Constitution. In fact, the dissent specifically noted that the majority conclusion that CCS infuses its secular subjects with religion effectively extends a free pass to religious schools to discriminate against their lay employees and threatens the continued viability of the Milwaukee school choice program. If the majority is correct in its conclusions, the dissent says, it can no longer be maintained that benefits flowing from the Milwaukee school choice program do not have the primary effect of advancing religion.

Sermon Series--Sermon #2

2009-07-22T15:17:00.002-05:00

Big Words of the Faith:
The Covenant of Grace
Hebrews 8:10-12

I. Introduction

If you were here last week, you know that this summer we are celebrating the 500th anniversary of the birth of John Calvin. This morning, during our fellowship time after the service, please stay for a little while and join us for some birthday cake in celebration.

Besides cake, we are also celebrating God’s work through John Calvin by taking a look at some of the “Big Words of the Faith.” Last week we looked at predestination. That can be a pretty controversial and heavy topic—I’m glad to see some of you who were here last week came back. This week’s topic is probably not quite as controversial, at least right now.

There are outlines for you once again this morning. If you don’t have one already, raise your hand and someone will make sure you get one.

This week, we are looking at the word “covenant.” This is a pretty commonly used word, especially in Reformed churches like ours.

Many of you probably know of many reformed churches all over North America with the word “Covenant” in their name. I have had the opportunity to preach on numerous occasions at Covenant CRC up in Appleton. I made profession of faith, and Kim and I were married, at Covenant CRC in Sioux Center, Iowa. It is a common name.

Another context in which we see the word covenant is in relation to children. Many churches provide assistance to encourage and help parents to send their children to Christian schools. Those programs are often known as “Covenant Promise” or “Covenant Education” funds.

We also use the word covenant during baptisms and professions of faith. We refer to the babies we present for baptism as covenant children. We proclaim that baptism is a sign that they are a part of the covenant of grace. And when those children reach an age at which they are assured of the promises of the covenant and want to take on its responsibilities, they make profession of faith.

So this morning, let’s look together at this word—“covenant.” What is a covenant? How is the idea of the covenant an important part of what we believe as Christians? And what does the covenant mean to us?

Our text this morning comes from the book of Hebrews, chapter 8, verses 10-12. Hebrews is near the end of the Bible—after 1&2 Timothy, Titus and Philemon, but before James, 1&2 Peter, and 1, 2, &3 John.

This text is actually part of a much larger section of Hebrews dealing with the covenant. In fact, I think the key truth of the book of Hebrews is the unchanging nature of God’s covenant of grace and its fulfillment in Jesus Christ.

One other thing to know about our text this morning is that it is actually a quote. Starting with the end of verse 8, and continuing to the end of verse 12, the writer of Hebrews is quoting the prophet Jeremiah. When you get a chance, take a look at Jeremiah 31:31-34. You will see that those verses are quoted exactly here in Hebrews 8.

So hear the word of the Lord from Hebrews chapter 8, verses 10-12:

This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel
after that time, declares the Lord.
I will put my laws in their minds
and write them on their hearts.
I will be their God,
and they will be my people.
No longer will a man teach his neighbor,
or a man his brother, saying, 'Know the Lord,'
because they will all know me,
from the least of them to the greatest.
For I will forgive their wickedness
and will remember their sins no more.

Prayer

II. What is a Covenant?

Right at the beginning of our text comes the big word we are studying this morning—“covenant.” Before going further, let’s define exactly what a covenant is.

In its most general sense, a covenant is a solemn promise made by one party to another to engage in or refrain from a certain action.

A covenant is different from a contract. In a contract, two or more parties make promises to each other, and each is bound by the contract. Each side has an obligation to the other. If one or the other doesn’t follow through on the obligation, then the contract is broken, and the penalties written into the contract will be applied against the one who broke the contract.

In a covenant, only one party is bound by the promise. The one making the covenant might declare that promise will only be kept if those benefiting from the covenant do certain things. But if they don’t do those things, they aren’t necessarily violating of the covenant. They’re just choosing not to receive the benefits of the promise made in the covenant. They won’t receive any benefit from the agreement.

This definition of covenant is a key to understanding the covenant of grace. The covenant of grace is a solemn promise made by God to grant salvation and eternal life to mankind—so long as we believe and obey.

III. Covenant History—God’s story

This morning our focus is on the covenant of grace—that solemn promise of God to grant salvation and eternal life to us if we believe and obey.

To fully understand the meaning of the covenant of grace, though, we should understand “covenant history.” “Covenant history” is the story of God’s relationship with his people. “Covenant history” is really “God’s story” as God has revealed it in his Word. And it includes two other covenants of which God is or has been a part. These covenants have a tremendous impact on how we understand the covenant of grace today.

A. The Covenant of Works

The first act in God’s story was creation. As the very first words of the Bible say, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” God created everything from nothing by His powerful word.

The high point of creation was when God created humans. Genesis 1:26 tells us that God created us as the pinnacle of His creation by making us in his own image, “crowned with glory and honor.” Then, Genesis 2 tells us that God made a covenant with Adam, the first human.

That first covenant is usually called the “covenant of works.” Some call it the “covenant of creation” because it was started at creation. Others call it the “covenant of life” because it was intended to give man not only earthly life, but heavenly life. In the covenant of works, God promised life to Adam and his descendants, so long as he obeyed God perfectly

God created us, so we naturally owed God our love and obedience. He didn’t need to enter into a covenant to create that obligation. And He owed us nothing in return for that love and obedience. Yet God willingly entered into the covenant of works. In doing so, he gave us a gift of grace, binding Himself to give life to humans. The only condition in that covenant was the obedience that Adam, and all his descendants, already owed to God. So while we call this first covenant “the covenant of works,” we see God’s grace to us from the very beginning.

In the covenant of works, God arranged it so that Adam would represent the entire human race. If Adam had fulfilled the conditions of the covenant, then all of his descendants would have lived forever with God in eternal blessedness. Remember, though, this was a covenant, not a contract. Adam could not earn salvation by obeying. Rather, his obedience was simply the condition for remaining within the covenant.

Unfortunately, even though he was capable of following God’s will, Adam broke the terms of the covenant of works. As a result, he was no longer under the covenant’s protection and promise. Since he could no longer claim the promise of life with God, he instead had only death—complete spiritual and physical death and separation from God

And since Adam represented us all, every one of us is incapable of receiving life under the covenant of works. Because of Adam’s sin, we all entered into the bondage of sin and death.

At this point, the story would have ended if it were not for God’s grace and mercy. But because of the covenant of grace, the story did not end!

B. The Covenant of Redemption

In Ephesians 2, the apostle reminds us of the misery we have because of being outside of the covenant of works. But then, in verse four, Paul uses two very small but very powerful words—“But God.” “But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ.”

At the very moment of Adam’s fall, God began to show his infinite mercy by withholding immediate physical death. And then he showed his amazing grace, announcing a new covenant: the covenant of grace. In that new covenant, God promised to send another to redeem fallen humanity from their plight.

Before getting too much further into the covenant of grace, there is one other covenant you should know about—the covenant of redemption. This is an agreement God the Son made with God the Father. In the covenant of redemption, the Son agreed to take on our obligations under the original covenant of works.

I am not going to spend a great deal of time on the covenant of redemption this week. We will talk about it more next week, God willing, when our “big word of the faith” is “justification.” Suffice it to say that the covenant of redemption is a key to the covenant of grace. Had there been no covenant of redemption, there could have been no covenant of grace with sinful humans. The covenant of redemption makes the covenant of grace possible.

C. The Covenant of Grace

We see the covenant of grace first in Genesis 3:15, when God tells the devil in the garden “I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel.” The rest of Scripture, from this point on, is the story of God revealing his covenant of grace.

Since the fall of man into sin, there has only been one covenant, the covenant of grace. True, the way the covenant was administered has changed. The covenant became wider through time, starting out just with small families, like the families of Noah and Abraham. It widened at the time of Moses to include the entire nation of Israel. And it now covers a church that Revelation 5:9 tells us is made up of people “from every tribe and language and people and nation.” In the Old Testament the covenant was administered through types and shadows, such as sacrifices, the priesthood, and the temple. But those types and shadows all pointed to the promise of the covenant of grace, salvation through Jesus Christ.

So what exactly is the covenant of grace? The Westminster Confession describes it this way: “…the Lord was pleased to make a second [covenant], commonly called the covenant of grace; wherein he freely offered unto sinners life and salvation by Jesus Christ, requiring of them faith in him that they may be saved, and promising to give unto all those that are ordained unto eternal life, his Holy Spirit, to make them willing and able to believe.”

In other words, the covenant of grace is God’s promise that his chosen people will receive the benefits of the original covenant of works—eternal life with God—despite our sin. We receive those benefits through the work of Jesus Christ, who freely took on and fulfilled our obligations under the original covenant. All we have to do receive these benefits is to have faith that we are saved. And not only that, as part of the covenant of grace, God promises to give those covered by this covenant the desire and the ability to believe.

The covenant of grace is indeed a covenant, not a contract. It is a solemn promise made by God, promising to grant salvation and eternal life to sinful humans. And there is a condition to that promise—the promise of salvation and eternal life covers us only so long as we believe in Christ and obey him as our King. But God also gives his chosen people the means by which we can fulfill that condition.

Under the covenant of works Adam could not earn salvation by obeying. Rather his obedience was required simply as the condition for remaining within the protections of the covenant.

In the same way, we cannot earn the salvation and eternal life won for us by Christ by believing in and obeying Jesus. Rather, our belief and obedience is simply the condition for remaining within the covenant of grace. And, thanks to God, He has given us the means to fulfill that condition through the Holy Spirit.

The most exciting part of the covenant of grace for us will be its consummation. The covenant of grace will reach its fullest expression when Christ returns to give the world second birth, when his people will be transformed into the likeness of Christ, and when all things will be restored to the way they were meant to be. That will be the time of the New Heaven and New Earth, when we will receive in full the blessing of God’s covenant promise to live in eternal blessedness with our Creator God.

The Bible, at its core is “covenant history.” It is the story of God’s relationship with his creation, especially us humans. And the covenant story comes to a head in the saving work of Jesus Christ. Through this covenant story, not only do we learn of how we can live in a glorious relationship with our Father, but we see God’s glory revealed through his work in all of history.

IV. What the Covenant means to us

The covenant of grace is God’s promise that his chosen people will receive the benefits of the original covenant of works—eternal life with God—despite our sin. Let’s take a look, through our text, at what it means for us humans to be within that covenant of grace.

A. God is a sovereign provider

Take a look at the last part of verse 10 of our text. There it says “I will be their God and they will be my people.” If there is one way to sum up the covenant promise of God to us his people, it is just that—he will be our God, and we will be his people.

This little phrase packs a lot of meaning in just a few words. We can sum it up, though, by saying that God is a sovereign provider. He is a sovereign provider.

Listen to what the catechism says in Lord’s Day 9. There the writers say that “the eternal Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who out of nothing created heaven and earth and everything in them, who still upholds and rules them by his eternal counsel and providence is my God and Father because of Christ his Son.” Do you see the covenant there—God promises to be our God, and he does this through Jesus Christ.

The catechism goes on to tell us what it means for us that he is our God. “I do not doubt that he will provide whatever I need for body and soul, and he will turn to my good whatever adversity he sends me in this sad world.” He will provide whatever I need. He will turn to my good every adversity. What a promise!

In two weeks, we are going spend the entire service focusing on God’s providence, so I won’t go much deeper today. But in that covenant promise of God to be our God and that we will be his people, we have a promise that God is a sovereign provider.

B. God demands obedience from us

But not only is God a sovereign provider, he also demands obedience from us. God demands obedience from us. Jump back to the middle of verse 10. Listen to another promise from God’s covenant with us: “I will put my laws in their minds and write them on their hearts.”

We have already noted that while we cannot earn salvation, God can withdraw the promises of the covenant from those who do not meet its stipulations. One of those stipulations is obedience. God demands obedience from us—even though we cannot be saved by following the law, God still demands that we obey his law.

Sometimes Christians misunderstand why we obey the law. We see our good deeds as a way of earning God’s favor. Or we point to our empty deeds as proof of our righteousness before God while ignoring the darkness of our hearts. Or we do our good deeds as a way of convince others of our goodness.

The apostle Paul dealt with this tendency when he criticized the Galatians at the beginning of chapter 3 of his letter to them. There he says “You foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? Before your very eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed as crucified. I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by observing the law, or by believing what you heard? Are you so foolish? After beginning with the Spirit, are you now trying to attain your goal by human effort?” Obviously, we don’t obey to earn God’s favor or the favor of others.

But on the other end, some Christians have a tendency just to forget the law. We’re already saved, after all. Why bother trying to obey the law if it gets us nowhere? We can rely solely on God’s grace.

John responds to that idea in 1 John 3:4-10, where he says “Everyone who sins breaks the law; in fact, sin is lawlessness. But you know that he appeared so that he might take away our sins. And in him is no sin. No one who lives in him keeps on sinning. No one who continues to sin has either seen him or known him.”

Jesus Christ not only took on the punishment for our sin, but he lived a perfect life so that perfection could be imputed to us. And as a result we are grafted into the family of God, becoming one with the Son and he one with us. If we are becoming one with the Son, it follows that we will become more and more like him. And since the Son was perfect, following the law perfectly, it follows that we also will become more and more perfect, following the law of God.

At Mount Sinai, God wrote us his laws. Now, says our text, he writes them on our hearts. He gives us an understanding to know and to believe his law; he gives us the memory to retain it; he gives us the heart to love it and the conscience to recognize it; and he gives us the courage to profess it and the power to put it into practice.

Yes, it is true that we will not be perfectly obedient. Sin does that to us, but the Holy Spirit working in our hearts leads us to be more and more like Christ. And that means we are obedient to God’s law, just as he demands. We can only do this because of Christ’s work on our behalf and the Spirit’s power in our hearts. But God demands obedience from us. And it is through our obedience that we can see that we are members of the covenant, covered by the eternal promise of God.

C. God will judge those outside the covenant

Because God demands obedience, and because not all have been elected by God to receive salvation, there are some who remain outside the covenant of grace. God will judge those outside the covenant.

We talked in depth about this last week. Not everyone is covered by God’s covenant of grace. As humans, we are all subject to death, because our sin means we didn’t keep the stipulations of the original covenant, the covenant of works. But God in his grace provides a new covenant. That covenant doesn’t cover all of humanity—just those who believe and obey. The disobedient and the unbelievers have still received a measure of grace from God—they live on earth for a while, and many of them enjoy temporarily the blessings God bestows upon his creation.

But in the end, those outside of the covenant die. They are judged for their sin and suffer an eternal death, permanently separated from God and his blessings. God will judge those outside the covenant.

D. God will bless those who are faithful

Finally, God will bless those who are faithful. Listen to the last two verses of our text. “No longer will a man teach his neighbor, or a man his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ because they will all know me, from the least of them to the greatest. For I will forgive their wickedness and will remember their sins no more.”

When we were outside of the covenant because of our sin, we were subject to death. But because God grants us the faith by which we can take on His covenant promises, God blesses us.

God blesses those who are faithful. We receive the comfort that comes from knowing that we belong to our faithful Savior. We receive the washing away of our sins by Christ’s precious blood. We are set free from slavery to sin. We are assured that the Father is actively caring for us, providing everything we need and ensuring that even the bad things of this world will be worked out for our benefit. We receive the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in our lives. We receive the assurance of forgiveness that comes from recognizing the Spirit at work in us. And we receive eternal life in the new heavens and the new earth, where we will praise God together in joy forever. God will bless those who are faithful.

V. Conclusion

God’s story is the story of the covenant of grace—the solemn promise made by God to grant salvation and eternal life to mankind so long as we believe and obey.

Because of the covenant of grace, we can have comfort. We can turn from our fears because we recognize God’s mercy. One writer put it this way: “He has remembered his covenant, the oath that he swore to our father Abraham, and he has delivered us through the Redeemer, our Lord Jesus Christ, so that we might serve him without fear, in holiness and righteousness before him all our days.”

Serve him without fear, in holiness and righteousness. If God is for us, who can be against us? When you are filled with fear, remember the promises of God in Christ Jesus.

Sometimes we turn the big words of the faith into abstract doctrines, with little application to our day to day lives. But the covenant of grace is not just an abstract doctrine. It is the guarantee of your relationship with God. It is the reason that you may serve him without fear.

In Jesus Christ, God makes good on his promise that he will be our God and we will be his people. God could not allow his covenant to fail. He even sent his Son to become a man and die rather than break his covenant. The Lord is faithful, his covenant endures forever.

Amen.

How God and Science Mix

2009-07-22T15:12:00.001-05:00

This post on First Things is worth a read. The key sentences, I thought were these:

Scientists are atheists in the lab, said Krauss, and so it is only logical that they should be atheists everywhere. This is a logical argument, yes, and also quite popular, but it is based on a conception of God that is alien to Jewish and Christian tradition. For Haldane and Krauss, religion is about miracles, and miracles are about magic and the irrational, and therefore belief in God stands in opposition to the world revealed by science, a world intelligible by reason and governed by law.For Jews and Christians, however, pitting God and the laws of nature against each other in this way is an absurd mistake; for it is the very lawfulness of nature that points to a divine Lawgiver. In the Bible, God gives laws not only to the people of Israel, but to the cosmos itself, as in Jeremiah 33:25, where he declares his fidelity to Israel in these terms: “When I have no covenant with day and night, and have given no laws to heaven and earth, then too will I reject the descendants of Jacob and of my servant David.”

Sermon Series--Sermon #1

2009-07-12T15:10:00.004-05:00

Big Words of the Faith:

Predestination

Ephesians 1:3-14

I. Series Introduction

A. John Calvin

This week people around the world celebrated the life of an important man who influenced the lives of people all over the world. No, I am not talking about Michael Jackson. Friday was the 500^th birthday of John Calvin.

Jean Cauvin, as he was known at birth, was born on July 10, 1509 in northern France. Training first to become a priest, he switched to the study of law as a teenager. It was during his law studies that he experienced a sudden religious conversion that caused him to break from the Roman Catholic Church. He spent most of his career leading the church in Geneva, Switzerland.

Calvin is best known for his many writings, the most famous of which is probably Institutes of the Christian Religion. His writing and preaching form the basis of Calvinism, a branch of theology taught in thousands of Reformed and Presbyterian churches around the world, including our own. Most historians agree that Calvin’s importance was not limited just to the church and theology, but that his ideas contributed to the rise of major ideas of modern Western thought.

After our service this morning we will celebrate John Calvin’s 500^th birthday with birthday cake in the lobby. Please feel free to stay and join us for cake and fellowship immediately after church.

B. Big Words of the Faith

Birthday cake is nice, but I wanted to do something more to celebrate God’s work through John Calvin. This morning, we are beginning a four-week sermon series on the “Big Words of the Faith.” For the next four weeks, I will be focusing on four different “big words” that we often use in this church and in the Reformed tradition. This week we will look at “predestination.” In the next several weeks we will study “the covenant,” “justification,” and “providence.”

For many of you, these words are a part of the very fiber of your being. Some of your earliest memories of the church involve sermons or Sunday school lessons on these terms, and those sermons and lessons form part of the base upon which the Holy Spirit has built your faith.

For others, those memories may not be quite as positive—perhaps you took these lessons for granted, or never quite understood them. Or, perhaps, some of you associate these words with dry doctrines taught repetitively and with little connection to your day-to-day life.

Others of you may have grown up in other religious traditions, or with no religious traditions, and these words often seem to you like code words that mark the user as an “insider,” but reinforce your feeling of being an “outsider.”

So this morning, and in the next few weeks, my goal is to take a fresh look at these “big words” of the faith. For some of you, I hope these next few weeks will be an enjoyable review of some of your most cherished beliefs. For others, perhaps during the next few weeks you will gain a new or increased appreciation of how these words shape our faith as we work it out every day. And for others, maybe the next few weeks will shed a little light on the beliefs we hold dear and will encourage you to think of yourself as the ultimate insider—one of God’s truly loved children, saved through his glorious plan of salvation.

II. Topic Introduction

Our focus this morning is “predestination.” This doctrine can be very difficult for many Christians to understand and accept. We commonly use the word “predestination” to mean God’s decision, made before the world existed, to save certain people, but not others. Predestination means that God has chosen some people for salvation and eternal life, while others are condemned to judgment.

This morning, I am going to focus mostly on the positive side of predestination—that God chose some to be saved. This positive side of predestination is also called election. The people God chose are the “elect” who become like Christ. There is a negative side to predestination—those who are ultimately condemned to judgment. This side of predestination is called reprobation. Those God does not choose to be saved are the “reprobate.”

Pastor Mark Driscoll of Mars Hill Church in Seattle says that when a lot of people think of doctrine of predestination, they think of the old children’s game “Duck, Duck, Goose.” But this is not the sweet game our three and four year olds might be playing right now. Instead it becomes a game of “Duck, Duck, Damned,” where God picks some people to be saved and others to fry in hell.

Obviously, God’s decision to choose some, but not others, is far more serious than a children’s game. The Bible’s teaching on the issue is very important, because it affects the way we understand so many other parts of the Bible’s teachings. So this morning, I’d like to make four points about the doctrine of predestination. First, the doctrine of predestination is Biblical. Second, it is a key to God’s plan of salvation. Third, the doctrine of predestination shows God’s glory. And finally, the doctrine of predestination can give us comfort.

Turn with me, if you would, to Paul’s letter to the Ephesians. If you are using a pew Bible, you can find the passage on page 1817. In just a moment, I will be reading from chapter 1 of Ephesians, starting at verse 3, and ending with verse 14.

Paul, the writer of this letter, is known for writing long sentences. His sentences wouldn’t pass muster with the English teachers among us. In the Bible translation in our pews, the translators turned the 12 verses of our text into eight sentences. In a version I often use at home, the English Standard Version, there are only five sentences in those 12 verses. But in the original Greek, Paul wrote the entire passage as one single sentence. I think that as he wrote it, he may have become so caught up in God’s glory that he forgot to divide his thoughts into sentences. As we read the passage, perhaps you can pick up some of Paul’s exuberance and join him in praising God.

Hear the word of God from Ephesians, chapter 1, verses 3 through 14:

Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in the heavenly realms with every spiritual blessing in Christ. For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love he predestined us to be adopted as his sons through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will—to the praise of his glorious grace, which he has freely given us in the One he loves. In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God's grace that he lavished on us with all wisdom and understanding. And he made known to us the mystery of his will according to his good pleasure, which he purposed in Christ, to be put into effect when the times will have reached their fulfillment—to bring all things in heaven and on earth together under one head, even Christ. In him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will, in order that we, who were the first to hope in Christ, might be for the praise of his glory. And you also were included in Christ when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation. Having believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God's possession—to the praise of his glory.

III. The Doctrine of Predestination is Biblical

“It’s just not fair!”

My student had a pained look on her face. OK, that’s not so uncommon, but this look wasn’t just put on.

I asked what she thought was so unfair. It turned out that she was upset by my statement that only those people who God chooses are saved. “It’s so random,” she complained.

My student’s complaint is not at all uncommon. I remember one evening last fall, when my son Micah out of the blue informed me that the Bible says that people have free will. I wasn’t sure what he meant by this, or even why he brought it up, so I pressed him on what he meant.

I asked him why he brought up the topic. He thought a few seconds and then said he wanted an explanation of how it works that we have free choice but God already knows what we’re going to do. Micah enjoys playing basketball, so I asked him if he was talking about things like choosing whether to pull up and take a jump shot or drive for the layup, or if he was talking about whether we can choose to follow God. “Both,” he said.

Well, I tried to give an explanation he would understand. I told him that we do have free choice. So we are able to choose between a jumper and a lay-up. But I told him I also wanted him to understand that when it comes to choosing God or being chosen by him, we can’t choose God. In fact, on our own, we can only choose to hate God.

He didn’t like this answer. “How can that be?” he asked. “WE choose.” “No,” I said. “God chooses us. It might feel like we choose, I suppose, since the Holy Spirit is working in our hearts, but we don't choose.”

I told him that when it talks about our salvation, the Bible uses the word “predestined.” This means that God has already decided in advance who is saved and who is not. I explained the history of the Canons of Dort, which I described to him as “a big meeting 400 years ago of lots of Christians in Holland who met to discuss free will and predestination. I told him that these Christians decided that the Bible teaches that we are unable to choose to follow God by ourselves because we are too full of sin to make that decision on our own. I also told him that our church follows that decision from 400 years ago.

I think many of us have had similar experiences. Predestination is a hard teaching to accept. But the doctrine of predestination is Biblical. The word appears twice in our text. In verse 5 it says that “In love [God] predestined us to be adopted as his sons through Jesus Christ.” In verse 11, Paul says that in Christ “we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will.”

We also see the word “predestination” in four other New Testament passages. In two passages, Acts 4:28 and 1 Corinthians 2:7, the word refers to God’s determining the events of world history ahead of time. But like the use of the word in our text this morning, the other two uses of the word refer to God’s decision, before the world began, about the destiny of individual people.

Take a look at Romans 8:29-30, where Paul writes “For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified.”

While Jesus didn’t use the word predestination in his teachings, we can see the concept in his words. For example, in Matthew 22:14, Jesus says that “…many are called, but few are chosen.” And in John 15:16, Jesus says “You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit and that your fruit should abide, so that whatever you ask the Father in my name, he may give it to you.”

When we look at Scripture, it is difficult to simply deny that the Bible teaches some form of predestination. The doctrine of predestination is biblical. But there is some difference of opinion over how exactly God predestined some to eternal life and others to eternal death.

Most Christians who say they don’t believe in predestination, but rather on the free will of humans to choose, don’t actually deny the word “predestination.” Rather, they simply take a different view of predestination than most Reformed folks. For example, many churches today teach that predestination is based on God’s “foreknowledge.”

To them, foreknowledge means that God knew before the world began that certain people would freely choose Christ as their Savior once they heard the gospel message. Because God knew that they would choose Christ, God predestined them to salvation.

In this view, “foreknowledge” is just God’s knowing what individuals will choose of their own free will. However, I would argue that those who hold this view misunderstand the meaning of the word “foreknowledge.”

Listen again to Romans 8:29: “For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers.” God’s “foreknowing” didn’t come first, before his making his choice. No, God’s foreknowledge is directly connected to what he does—choosing who will be redeemed.

Every time the Greek word we usually translate as “foreknowledge” appears, it is always directly connected to his active choice to save certain people.

We see this, for example, in Acts 2:23, where Peter teaches the Jews on Pentecost that Jesus “was handed over to you by God’s set purpose and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross.”

God’s foreknowledge is always directly connected to his act of predestination. His foreknowledge doesn’t cause him to predestine some to be saved. Rather, his foreknowledge is part of his act of choosing.

Now, I’m not going to condemn those who hold to the other view. But, I am convinced that the better interpretation of what the Bible says is the one that says that God chooses us, we can’t choose him.

The doctrine of predestination is biblical. And as such, it is a key part of God’s plan of salvation. An understanding that God chooses us in love helps us to better understand how God works out his salvation in each of us who he has chosen for eternal life.

IV. The Doctrine of Predestination is a Key to God’s Plan of Redemption

So let’s move on to see how the doctrine of predestination is a key to God’s plan for saving us, his plan of redemption.

A. Our need for redemption

Before we can understand God’s plan to save us, we need to know about our need to be saved. This can be a tough bite to chew, especially nowadays. Do you remember Stuart Smalley? Senator Al Franken, before he went into politics, played Stuart Smalley on Saturday Night Live. Smalley’s catch phrase was “I’m good enough, I’m smart enough, and dog-gone it, people like me.”

We all laughed when he said this, because we recognized the spirit of our age in this ridiculous character. We all want to believe that we are good enough, we are smart enough, and people like us. But the Bible is clear that this just isn’t the case.

As Genesis 6:5 says, “The LORD saw how great man’s wickedness on the earth had become, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil all the time.”

B. God’s plan of redemption

Fortunately for us, God already had a plan in place—his glorious plan of redemption, a plan to predestine certain people for salvation from among the ranks of the sinful. It is that plan about which Paul is bursting forth in praise in our text this morning.

That plan starts with God making a choice to save us! Because we have been predestined to be God’s chosen, we can hear Jesus’ gospel call to repent and be saved. And once we hear that call, the Holy Spirit works within us to give us a new heart, a heart that leads us to faith and repentance.

If you look close, you might be able to see an interesting pattern in our text this morning. Verses 3-6 tell us that if we are Christians, it’s because the Father has chosen us. God “has blessed us in the heavenly realms with every spiritual blessing,” and “he chose us in him before the creation of the world.” Verses 5 and 6 tell us that “In love [God] predestined us to be adopted as his sons,” and that this is a gift of grace that God has “freely given us.” If we are Christians, it is because the Father has chosen us.

Look next at verses 7-12. They tell us that if we are Christians, it’s because the Son has redeemed us. Paul tells us that “we have redemption in [Christ’s] blood.” Verses 9 and 10 say that God’s will for those he desired to save came to be through Christ’s work. Christ came to earth calling us to faith and repentance, then dying so we could be saved. If we are Christians, it’s because the Son has redeemed us.

Finally, look at verses 13 and 14. If we are Christians, it’s because the Spirit has sealed us. “Having believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance.” The Holy Spirit’s work in us, giving us a new heart, guarantees us that we are made right before God and are adopted into his family as God’s children. If we are Christians, it’s because the Spirit has sealed us.

Now, while the doctrine of predestination is a key to God’s plan of redemption, we have to admit that we don’t understand fully how this plan works. But what we do know is that the doctrine of predestination is a key to God’s plan of redemption. And not only that, God’s choice is based on His will for His glory.

V. The Doctrine of Predestination Shows God’s Glory

The doctrine of predestination shows God’s glory.

Look again at verses 11 and 12 of our text. “In him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will, in order that we, who were the first to hope in Christ, might be for the praise of his glory.”

If we were to sum up the whole point of Paul’s words in our text this morning in two words, those words would be “God’s glory!” Paul’s emphasis throughout is on the glory of God as it is revealed in our salvation. He says in verse 6 that the plan of the Father to save us from sin has as its ultimate goal “the praise of his glorious grace.” In verse 12, the work of Christ in bringing about our salvation ends in “the praise of His glory.” And in verse 14, Paul says that the Holy Spirit is given to us as a guarantee of our salvation “to the praise of His glory.”

If we made any contribution toward our own salvation, we would be gaining praise for ourselves. We would no longer be boasting that we are saved because the Father has chosen us, the Son has redeemed us, and the Spirit has sealed us. Paul spoke directly against this idea in Galatians 6:14, when he said “May I never boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world.”

There is no room in God’s plan either for our own work or our own glory. When salvation is complete, the only thing we can say is “Praise to the Lord, the Almighty.” And that is exactly what Paul is saying in our text. The doctrine of predestination shows God’s glory.

VI. The Doctrine of Predestination Can Give Us Comfort

Finally, the doctrine of predestination can give us comfort. Earlier, I mentioned the discussion I had with my son Micah last fall. I thought about why he might be so upset. A friend suggested that Micah’s questions were a response to a growing conviction that he is one of God’s children. And that reminded me of that student from years ago, the one with pained look on her face who fretted that God’s choosing some to be saved and not others seemed so random.

In a way, predestination is random, at least to us humans. Our minds can’t fathom why God would choose some and not others. We know all humans are sinful and deserve punishment and death. We recognize that Jesus Christ’s willingness to bear the punishment and death we deserved is an incomprehensible act of undeserved mercy. We can even say, as I did to my Sunday School student, that God works according to a good and merciful plan, but a plan we do not completely understand. Yet God’s decision to save some and allow others to remain in their sin still bothers us.

Another student in that class made a wise statement: maybe we ought to simply praise God for the salvation He’s given us and not worry about who is elect and who is reprobate. That student was absolutely right—God is God, and He does what He does to bring honor and glory to His name. We bring more glory to God by living lives of gratitude for his merciful acts than by dwelling on figuring out the details of how He decided to whom He would give His greatest gift.

But once we made that point in class, it became apparent that there was more going on in head of the girl with the pained look. She looked directly at me and asked “But what if you believe in God and do good, but it turns out you weren’t one of the ones chosen?” It was then that I realized that this was more than just the standard teenage complaint about “fairness.” This was a crisis of faith. And that’s when it struck me that if we truly understand predestination, then even the cold, dark truth of total depravity, that we are so helplessly lost in sin that without God that we can do nothing righteous, even that can bring us comfort.

If our sin is truly so pervasive that we humans are totally unable to turn to God and do what is right and pleasing in his eyes, then the only way we can be saved is by something superhuman—by God.

If we recognize in ourselves a faith and belief in God, even if that faith seems weak, and regularly challenged, then that faith had to have come from God. If we recognize in ourselves a desire to do what is right in God’s eyes, even if that desire is often accompanied by temptations to do otherwise, then that desire had to have come from God. And if God, as we confess, is almighty and all-powerful, then the very fact that He is working in our lives ought to persuade us that He has extended His mercy to us and we can rely on that mercy. Once we recognize that God has chosen us, we can rest assured that that choosing is for all eternity

The fact that God chooses us, that we belong to him, can be disconcerting to us humans, who like to think that we remain in control. But that choosing, that assurance that we belong to God, gives us comfort that we belong “body and soul, in life and in death, to our faithful Savior Jesus Christ.”

At the end of the class we read Q&A 1 from the Catechism. The pained look didn’t completely disappear from the student’s face. But I am convinced that God had provided a measure of comfort to one of his chosen.

VII. Conclusion

Predestination, the teaching that God alone chooses those who are saved in Christ, is hard for us humans to swallow. It rubs against our grain to realize that we are so full of sin that, left to our own devices, we would always choose rebellion and death. But if we understand this teaching, we have the key to a deep understanding of God’s plan of salvation. If we understand this teaching, we can experience true comfort in Christ. And if we understand this teaching, we will understand the immense greatness of God’s glory.

Amen.

Dordt students help professor with physical therapy

2009-05-27T16:34:00.001-05:00

This is a neat article about how students at Dordt College are helping my dad recover from his injuries...

Dordt students help professor with physical therapy

Shared via AddThis

Are the Japanese playing a whole different game?

2009-03-13T11:50:00.005-05:00

The Japanese have a different approach to baseball than we do. Maybe its a whole different game. From Baseball Prospectus:

Nippon Prospectus
World Yakyu Classic
by Mike Plugh

For everyone else in the 2009 World Baseball Classic, the sport is baseball. Not so for the group of professionals from Japan, dubbed by their marketing machine as "Samurai Japan." For this group of assorted MLB and NPB players, the sport is yakyu. In English, that translates literally to "field ball," and it highlights the single most important difference between the American sport that we've known and loved all our lives, and the Japanese version grown out of American missionary education in the late-19th century and continued ritualistically through the present day. The tools are the same, the field looks the same, and the rules are essentially the same, but the baseball ideology, to borrow a politically charged term, is radically different.

I direct you to the bottom of the eighth inning of the Pool A title game between Japan and arch-rival Korea. In case you were sleeping during these East Asian opening-round affairs, the Japanese had administered a 14-2 drubbing of the Koreans in their earlier Round Two qualifying contest, only to find themselves in the midst of a terrific pitching duel, down 1-0 in the bottom of the inning.

Ichiro Suzuki, in his inimitable way, slapped a ball through the infield to give the Japanese club a one-out baserunner, and hopes of a game-tying rally at the very least. Up to the plate came the second-slot hitter, Hiroyuki Nakajima, a 26-year-old shortstop for the NPB champion Seibu Lions, who hits for average, understands how to get on base—a rare trait in a Japanese ballplayer—and has some pop in his bat (a .331/.410/.527 line in 2008). He clearly offers a range of skills that a manager, down a single run late in an important ballgame, might put to use.

Yomiuri

Giants and "Samurai Japan" manager Tatsunori Hara then made a managerial decision that left me scratching my head: he followed the yakyu way, and had Nakajima lay down a sacrifice bunt with one out already on the board. This left everything up to the outstanding young talent Norichika Aoki, who promptly ended the inning on a weak grounder to the pitcher. The Baseball Prospectus audience already knows the numerous ways in which this tactical decision is wrong, and I don't really need to spell it out, but I'm going to anyway because it will make me feel better. A player with a 40 percent-plus chance of reaching base was asked to sacrifice with one out and Ichiro Suzuki on first. The same Ichiro who stole 65 bases for the Seattle Mariners in 2008 at a 91 percent success rate. The game ended at 1-0; Team Japan was humiliated at the hands of the Korean club.

The morning news covered the WBC game extensively the next day. I flipped from channel to channel to see if anyone dared criticize Hara for his bone-headed managerial move. I knew that they wouldn't, and I heard precisely what I expected to hear, for I've had the conversation a thousand times with a thousand different Japanese fans. They always say the same thing. "This is not baseball. This is yakyu." If you care to read more about this maddening philosophical approach to our national pastime, I suggest you dig into the BP archives and check out my piece on

bunting in Japan. Sure enough, antiquated announcer after over-the-hill announcer almost acknowledged the idiocy of the strategy, proceeding to explain that this was not, in fact, baseball we were talking about, but yakyu. The only indication of annoyance at this wasteful and counterproductive ideology was the fuming exit interview given by a defeated Ichiro Suzuki, who offered a veiled swipe at the decision to bunt, but nothing more.

As we enter the more meaningful rounds of the WBC, you'll undoubtedly watch as the Japanese team employs its yakyu sensibilities in game situations that will seem puzzling and often go against the established science of the sport. Remember that you are not watching baseball. You will be watching yakyu. It's also important to remember that while the Japanese like to boast that yakyu won the inaugural World Baseball Classic, the truth is that the club out-pitched, out-slugged and out-hit each of its opponents, rarely relying on yakyu methods at all. Should we see more of Hara's handiwork in upcoming games, however, it will be interesting to see if "Samurai Japan" will be able to advance beyond its pool.

"New" Calvinism one of the top ideas of the near future

2009-03-13T11:11:00.002-05:00

Here is a blog piece by Eugene Cho regarding this TIME article. Mark Driscoll also discusses this here.

Interesting and hopeful, although I hope this doesn't turn out to be just another fad.

The Economy and Abortion

2009-03-12T16:55:00.002-05:00

This post is a reminder that we who are pro-life need to do what we can to support organizations that women who are led to believe that their only choice is an abortion.

On a related note, a friend on a church-related list serve mentioned that helping pro-life counseling centers purchase ultrasound machines is an excellent way to help change minds on abortion.

Making adultery a tort

2009-03-12T16:36:00.002-05:00

An interesting post here at the Volokh conspiracy responding to this post at "The Corner" on National Review Online.

The statute clearly is designed to protect marriage. A knee-jerk reaction would be to support this. But ideas have consequences, and Volokh points out some of those consequences. We always need to think of the consequences when trying to change behavior, especially through legal or governmental action.

Dutch Baseball

2009-03-12T14:51:00.002-05:00

I saw two articles yesterday about the Dutch baseball team pulling off not one, but two major upsets of the Dominican Republic. I thought some of the (few) who look at this blog might be interested. It's from yesterday--we now know that the Netherlands will face Venezuela in the next round. If they win, they will face the winner of the USA-Puerto Rico match. If they lose, they move to an elimination game against the loser of the USA-Puerto Rico match.

First, from http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20090311&content_id=3964290&vkey=news_mlb&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb&partnerId=rss_mlb

Dutch treat highlights a Classic night
By Doug Miller / MLB.com

Ongelofelijk.

It's the only word that describes what the baseball team from The Netherlands accomplished Tuesday at the World Baseball Classic, and if you didn't know that it was Dutch for incredible or unbelievable or miraculous, well, you've just learned the second thing about this country that you might not forget anytime soon.

With their beyond-dramatic 2-1 victory comeback in 11 innings over the Dominican Republic on Tuesday, their second win over a prohibitive tournament favorite, the unheralded Dutchmen have advanced to the second round on the heels of two of the biggest upsets in international baseball history.

"It's hard to put into words what just happened," Netherlands manager Rod Delmonico said after watching his team score two runs in the bottom of the 11th to upend the stunned Dominicans on Tuesday.

"Our guys have played with heart the last three days. I've never been a part of a team with as much passion as this team has. I am very, very proud of our players."

The Dutch team, a rag-tag collection of unproven Minor Leaguers and aging former Major Leaguers, twice defeated a team packed with Major League stars including David Ortiz, Jose Reyes, Pedro Martinez, Robinson Cano, Hanley Ramirez, Miguel Tejada, Jose Guillen and Carlos Marmol.

Now The Netherlands will take on undefeated Puerto Rico for the Pool D title tonight before moving on to Round 2 in Miami next week.

And oh yeah, there were two other World Baseball Classic games Tuesday, both with results that could go a long way toward deciding who takes the championship trophy out of Dodger Stadium on March 23.

Veneuzela's potent offense came to life against Italy, hitting four home runs in one inning to pull away to a 10-1 victory that knocked the Italians out of the tournament. Venezuela advances to the second round after a rematch today against the 2-0 U.S. team.

"I think that's one big point for us," said catcher Ramon Hernandez, who homered in the fifth along with Bobby Abreu, Miguel Cabrera and Jose Lopez.

"The last (Classic), we (didn't) hit well. So now, at least, all the hitters, it's a good sign (that) they all would come (much) more prepared. And now that we know when we go to Miami we're going to face a pretty good team, or pretty good pitching, so that's a good sign, that everybody is trying to get the best baseball."

And in Mexico City, the Cubans came through to beat a gritty, talented Australian team, by a score of 5-4, punching their ticket to Round 2 at PETCO Park in San Diego while letting Australia and Mexico battle it out in an elimination game today.

"There is no small enemy here, and Australia is definitely an enemy," Cuban manager Higinio Velez said. "In 2004, we both fought for that gold medal in the Olympics. ... Their players are professional. They are very powerful and have improved with the relief pitching and the great pitchers. It's not a surprise."

But there are plenty more surprises in store for the World Baseball Classic over the next two weeks, and as we move forward to what's shaping up to be a wonderful Wednesday, here comes yet another day of international pool-hopping:

POOL B: MEXICO CITY Home team Mexico was routed by Australia in its first matchup at Foro Sol Stadium and came back with a win over South Africa. Now the Mexicans can get the sweetest revenge on the team from Down Under by beating them in the elimination game set for 10 p.m. ET. "The rivalry doesn't matter, and it would be fun to play them again," Mexico's first baseman, Adrian Gonzalez, said. "We know we can beat them, but it really doesn't matter."

POOL C: TORONTO The beast in the Venezuelan bats was finally unleashed, and it can't really be that surprising when a lineup features big leaguers Cabrera, Magglio Ordonez, Abreu, Carlos Guillen, Lopez and Hernandez. Today, the Venezuelans will get their rematch against the American team at Rogers Centre at 6:30 p.m. ET to see who wins the pool. "They beat us last time," Carlos Guillen said of the U.S. "We'll try to play a hard nine innings [today]. You never know what's going to happen in baseball."

POOL D: SAN JUAN That has certainly been true in this pool, the site of the remarkable double-Dutch feat and astonishingly quick Dominican exit. Today at 5:30 p.m. ET, the Netherlands will meet Puerto Rico to determine the winner of the pool, but as Delmonico said while basking in the glow of Tuesday's monumental win, maybe the result of that game won't be the most important thing on the Dutch team's mind heading into Round 2. "I know for me it's going to be hard to go to sleep just from the excitement of all of this," Delmonico said. "We'll get up in the morning and tee it up tomorrow and see what we can do. We've got our hands full, but the good thing about it is we're both going to Miami."

Sixteen teams will officially be down to eight by the end of Wednesday as the stakes get higher and the baseball gets more intense.

And that's what makes the World Baseball Classic one ongelofelijk event.

Doug Miller is reporter for MLB.com. This story was not subject to the approval of Major League Baseball or its clubs.

Next, from http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20090311&content_id=3964952&vkey=news_mlb&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb&partnerId=rss_mlb

Who are these guys? Meet the Dutch
World getting familiar with players from The Netherlands
By Doug Miller / MLB.com

Astute baseball fans remember Randall Simon, they've heard of Sidney Ponson, and they might even know about Gene Kingsale's seven-year stint in the Major Leagues that ended in 2003.

But even the most serious ball geeks have to shake their seamheads at the rest of the roster of The Netherlands team that has turned this World Baseball Classic on its head by eliminating the star-studded Dominican Republic team.

Just who are these guys?

Well, they're managed by Rod Delmonico, a longtime American college coach, and their pitching coach is Bert Blyleven, the Dutch-born curveball and clubhouse-prank artist who won 287 Major League games over a 22-year career and now serves as a popular TV broadcaster for the Minnesota Twins.

But in poring over the profiles of the players who have stunned the world over the past three days, one realizes that the Dutch team features an intriguing mixture of young, unproven talent currently toiling in the Minor Leagues or in Europe plus a salty core of veterans who know a thing or two about baseball's long road of hard knocks.

"What you've got to understand is these guys have played together in Curacao and Holland for a long time," Delmonico said.

"We've got guys who have played together for 10 years. They care about each other and pull for one another. They actually love one another."

Here's a brief Who's Who of some of the key cogs of this surprising Netherlands second-round team:

Ponson, P: The burly 32-year-old Aruba native, who won 17 Major League games in 2003, is a free agent looking for a big-league job for 2009. He might have a better chance at employment after showing new-found maturity while being a leader of this club.

Simon, 1B: He hasn't played in the Majors since 2006, but the Curacao native played in the bigs for parts of eight seasons and had a career year for the Detroit Tigers in 2002, when he batted .301 with 19 home runs and 82 RBIs.

Kingsale, OF: Another Aruban, Kingsale played for four Major League teams from 1996-2003, mostly as a reserve outfielder. He logged a career-high 219 at-bats in 2002 with the San Diego Padres and Seattle Mariners and batted .283 overall with nine stolen bases.

Dennis Neuman, P: He's 19 years old and spent part of last summer as a reliever on Boston's Single-A Lowell club. Neuman, who is from Curacao, was signed as an undrafted free agent in October 2006 and appeared in eight games for Lowell last year, going 2-0 with a 7.20 ERA and striking out 12 men in 15 innings.

Rob Cordemans, P: Dutch native Cordemans pitched in four straight Olympic Games for The Netherlands (1996, 2000, 2004, 2008) and has been the best pitcher in Hoofdklasse, the Dutch professional league, for years. Cordemans also pitched for his home country in the inaugural World Baseball Classic in 2006. The right-hander is 34 years old.

Leon Boyd, P: Boyd, the 25-year-old closer, is a starter in Hoofdklasse for the Neptunus club. He was born in Canada but has Dutch heritage from his mother, Wilma, who met his father, Sean, when Sean was playing hockey in Holland in the 1970s.

Tom Stuifbergen, P: Holland-born Stuifbergen, 20, was signed by the Minnesota Twins as an undrafted free agent in August 2006 and made his professional debut last year for the Twins' Gulf Coast League rookie team. He appeared in seven games as a reliever and struck out nine batters in 12 1/3 innings, limiting hitters to a .140 batting average and compiling a 2.19 ERA.

Rick VandenHurk, P: Born in The Netherlands, the 6-foot-5 right-hander is still considered a Florida Marlins prospect. He made 17 starts for the Marlins in 2007 after making the jump from Double-A and got the win in the 2007 All-Star Futures Game. He made four big-league starts in 2008.

Juan Carlos Sulbaran, P: Sulbaran, a Curacao native, turned 19 last November, a few months after being selected by the Cincinnati Reds in the 30th round of the 2008 First-Year Player Draft. The right-hander received a $500,000 signing bonus, a record for a 30th-round draftee. Sulbaran played high school baseball in Florida and went 11-0 with a 1.40 ERA for a state championship team in 2007.

Kenley Jansen, C: The 21-year-old catcher from Curacao played in 2008 for the Single-A Great Lakes Loons of the Midwest League, an affiliate of the Los Angeles Dodgers, who signed Jansen as an undrafted free agent in 2004. Jansen batted .227 in 2008 but hit nine homers and drove in 27 runs in 247 at-bats over 79 games.

Yurendell de Caster, IF: The man who won Tuesday night's game over the Dominican Republic with an RBI single in the 11th inning has been a Minor League utility man since signing with Tampa Bay in 1996. Now 29, Curacao native de Caster signed a Minor League deal with the Detroit Tigers in February. He played for the Washington Nationals' Double-A and Triple-A clubs in 2008.

Gregory Halman, OF: Netherlands native Halman, 21, was named the Seattle Mariners' Minor League Player of the Year in 2008 after hitting .272 with 95 runs scored, 29 doubles, five triples, 29 home runs, 83 RBIs and 31 stolen bases in 128 games combined between Single-A High Desert and Double-A West Tennessee. Halman, who was signed by Seattle as an undrafted free agent in June 2004, was rated the No. 13 prospect in the California League by Baseball America.

Doug Miller is reporter for MLB.com. This story was not subject to the approval of Major League Baseball or its clubs.

Why Do They Hate US?

2009-03-11T10:17:00.001-05:00

This is definitely worth a read. A clip:

"Whether it’s our entertainment-saturated “worship” services, our celebrity cults or our mad obsession with worldly success, we love for others to see what “God is doing in our lives.” Of course, Jesus had plenty to say about this, and the essence of it is that when your piety is public, then there is almost certainly a lack of serious, life-transforming, private obedience and discipleship."

Campolo on how Darwinism is dangerous, but not for the reasons you might think

2009-03-11T09:42:00.001-05:00

An excellent piece here from Tony Campolo. The best paragraph:

"Those creationists who fear Darwin because his theories contradict their literal Biblical belief that creation occurred in six 24-hour days, do not get at the real dangers of Darwinism. They do not realise that an explanation of the development of biological organisms over eons of time really does not pose the great threat to the dignity of our humanity that they suppose. Instead, they, along with the rest of us, should really fear the ethical implications of Darwinism."

Reformation by Calvin

2009-03-06T10:51:00.002-06:00

This is funny. It comes from here.

Soccer is Not Ruining America

2009-03-05T09:57:00.002-06:00

Immediately following is a letter I sent in response to this post in First Things by Professor Stephen H. Webb of Wabash College. I have reprinted the post in its entirety below. He says he is serious, so I took him seriously (or at least as seriously as I could!)

Enjoy!

******************************************************

From: Chuck Adams
Date: Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 9:43 AM
Subject: How Soccer is Ruining America: A Jeremiad
To: First Things

Prof. Webb may be an expert on religion an philosophy, but he clearly is ignorant when it comes to soccer.

In the interest of establishing some common ground, though, one "bridge-building" comment." I agree that the sport Prof. Webb sees has some deficiencies. Suburban parents and wimpy soccer league commissioners have done the sport serious damage by trying to turn it into a safe non-contact sport where every player gets equal time.

But the sport Prof. Webb is seeing and decrying is not soccer. It bears as much resemblance to real soccer as "two-hand touch" does to American football (what I call "throwball," to prevent confusion with the real football.)

Perhaps Prof. Webb should spend some time in the stands in Toronto during an MLS match, or at the next US-Mexico World Cup qualifier, or just about any game in Latin America, or even
watching one of the "grind-em-out" grudge matches played by my local Christian high school against one of their much larger rivals, and he will see that soccer is not safe, undemanding, or European.

Yes, it (like baseball) is much more about teamwork than football or basketball, where one star can carry the team on his back. But I submit that encouraging a team-oriented sport like soccer can help us regain the social capital we've lost in this country. Is it any surprise that the decline of baseball and the rise of throwball has come at the same time as the decline of American civic engagement?

Chuck Adams
Soccer fan
Sheboygan, WI

******************************************************************

How Soccer is Ruining America: A Jeremiad
By Stephen H. Webb

Thursday, March 5, 2009, 12:00 AM
Soccer is running America into the ground, and there is very little anyone can do about it. Social critics have long observed that we live in a therapeutic society that treats young people as if they can do no wrong. Every kid is a winner, and nobody is ever left behind, no matter how many times they watch the ball going the other way. Whether the dumbing down of America or soccer came first is hard to say, but soccer is clearly an important means by which American energy, drive, and competitiveness is being undermined to the point of no return.

What other game, to put it bluntly, is so boring to watch? (Bowling and golf come to mind, but the sound of crashing pins and the sight of the well-attired strolling on perfectly kept greens are at least inherently pleasurable activities.) The linear, two-dimensional action of soccer is like the rocking of a boat but without any storm and while the boat has not even left the dock. Think of two posses pursuing their prey in opposite directions without any bullets in their guns. Soccer is the fluoridation of the American sporting scene.

For those who think I jest, let me put forth four points, which is more points than most fans will see in a week of games—and more points than most soccer players have scored since their pee-wee days.

1) Any sport that limits you to using your feet, with the occasional bang of the head, has something very wrong with it. Indeed, soccer is a liberal’s dream of tragedy: It creates an egalitarian playing field by rigorously enforcing a uniform disability. Anthropologists commonly define man according to his use of hands. We have the thumb, an opposable digit that God gave us to distinguish us from animals that walk on all fours. The thumb lets us do things like throw baseballs and fold our hands in prayer. We can even talk with our hands. Have you ever seen a deaf person trying to talk with their feet? When you are really angry and acting like an animal, you kick out with your feet. Only fools punch a wall with their hands. The Iraqi who threw his shoes at President Bush was following his primordial instincts. Showing someone your feet, or sticking your shoes in someone’s face, is the ultimate sign of disrespect. Do kids ever say, “Trick or Treat, smell my hands”? Did Jesus wash his disciples’ hands at the Last Supper? No, hands are divine (they are one of the body parts most frequently attributed to God), while feet are in need of redemption. In all the portraits of God’s wrath, never once is he pictured as wanting to step on us or kick us; he does not stoop that low.

2) Sporting should be about breaking kids down before you start building them up. Take baseball, for example. When I was a kid, baseball was the most popular sport precisely because it was so demanding. Even its language was intimidating, with bases, bats, strikes, and outs. Striding up to the plate gave each of us a chance to act like we were starring in a Western movie, and tapping the bat to the plate gave us our first experience with inventing self-indulgent personal rituals. The boy chosen to be the pitcher was inevitably the first kid on the team to reach puberty, and he threw a hard ball right at you.

Thus, you had to face the fear of disfigurement as well as the statistical probability of striking out. The spectacle of your failure was so public that it was like having all of your friends invited to your home to watch your dad forcing you to eat your vegetables. We also spent a lot of time in the outfield chanting, “Hey batter batter!” as if we were Buddhist monks on steroids. Our chanting was compensatory behavior, a way of making the time go by, which is surely why at soccer games today it is the parents who do all of the yelling.

3) Everyone knows that soccer is a foreign invasion, but few people know exactly what is wrong with that. More than having to do with its origin, soccer is a European sport because it is all about death and despair. Americans would never invent a sport where the better you get the less you score. Even the way most games end, in sudden death, suggests something of an old-fashioned duel. How could anyone enjoy a game where so much energy results in so little advantage, and which typically ends with a penalty kick out, as if it is the audience that needs to be put out of its misery. Shootouts are such an anticlimax to the game and are so unpredictable that the teams might as well flip a coin to see who wins—indeed, they might as well flip the coin before the game, and not play at all.

4) And then there is the question of gender. I know my daughter will kick me when she reads this, but soccer is a game for girls. Girls are too smart to waste an entire day playing baseball, and they do not have the bloodlust for football. Soccer penalizes shoving and burns countless calories, and the margins of victory are almost always too narrow to afford any gloating. As a display of nearly death-defying stamina, soccer mimics the paradigmatic feminine experience of childbirth more than the masculine business of destroying your opponent with insurmountable power.

Let me conclude on a note of despair appropriate to my topic. There is no way to run away from soccer, if only because it is a sport all about running. It is as relentless as it is easy, and it is as tiring to play as it is tedious to watch. The real tragedy is that soccer is a foreign invasion, but it is not a plot to overthrow America. For those inclined toward paranoia, it would be easy to blame soccer’s success on the political left, which, after all, worked for years to bring European decadence and despair to America. The left tried to make existentialism, Marxism, post-structuralism, and deconstructionism fashionable in order to weaken the clarity, pragmatism, and drive of American culture. What the left could not accomplish through these intellectual fads, one might suspect, they are trying to accomplish through sport.

Yet this suspicion would be mistaken. Soccer is of foreign origin, that is certainly true, but its promotion and implementation are thoroughly domestic. Soccer is a self-inflicted wound. Americans have nobody to blame but themselves. Conservative suburban families, the backbone of America, have turned to soccer in droves. Baseball is too intimidating, football too brutal, and basketball takes too much time to develop the required skills. American parents in the past several decades are overworked and exhausted, but their children are overweight and neglected. Soccer is the perfect antidote to television and video games. It forces kids to run and run, and everyone can play their role, no matter how minor or irrelevant to the game. Soccer and relevision [sic] are the peanut butter and jelly of parenting.

I should know. I am an overworked teacher, with books to read and books to write, and before I put in a video for the kids to watch while I work in the evenings, they need to have spent some of their energy. Otherwise, they want to play with me! Last year all three of my kids were on three different soccer teams at the same time. My daughter is on a traveling team, and she is quite good. I had to sign a form that said, among other things, I would not do anything embarrassing to her or the team during the game. I told the coach I could not sign it. She was perplexed and worried. “Why not,” she asked? “Are you one of those parents who yells at their kids? “Not at all,” I replied, “I read books on the sidelines during the game, and this embarrasses my daughter to no end.” That is my one way of protesting the rise of this pitiful sport. Nonetheless, I must say that my kids and I come home from a soccer game a very happy family.

Stephen H. Webb is a professor of religion and philosophy at Wabash
College. His recent books include American Providence and Taking
Religion to School.

Sports and the law intersect

2009-03-04T22:27:00.002-06:00

This post from SCOTUS Blog is interesting on a number of grounds: First, just the issue of whether to treat a sports league with franchises as a single entity. (By the way, soccer is not involved because MLS has a different structure than the NFL, MLB, or the NBA.) Second, it reminds us of the special legal status of major league baseball in the US. Third, the writers included soccer as a major U.S. sport. (As well they should--MLS, even with their mistakes, is as major as the NHL.)

Why we don't all speak Dutch: Language extinction and language survival

2009-03-02T15:01:00.000-06:00

Those of you who are Dutch or who live in Dutch areas may find this link very interesting. It was linked to here, where there is some interesting discussion.

By the way, I have lived not only in Dutch areas like Sioux County, Iowa, but when I was a kid I lived near the area where the "Jackson whites" (many of them don't like that terminology, by the way) live.

The Monday Evening Club: Why we don't all speak Dutch: Language extinction and language survival