I don’t have a lot to add, except to offer a few suggestions that perhaps may help the continuing discussion be a fruitful one.

One, let’s make sure we are all talking about the same thing. No one has trademarked the term “complementarian,” and I understand these labels can be quite fluid. But the best place to start by way of definition is the Danvers Statement. If we are all complementarians having this discussion, we should have some semblance of a definition of complementarianism. Historically (and I realize it’s not a long history), Danvers has provided a useful starting point. Complementarianism, as a definable “ism,” arose in response to a set of concerns (e.g., gender confusion, ambivalence about motherhood, physical abuse, women in unbiblical leadership roles, hermeneutical oddities) and a laid down a set of biblical affirmations (e.g., men and women are equal as divine image bearers, they have distinct roles, redemption reverses the curse of male and female sin, certain ministry roles are reserved for men, there are countless ministry opportunities in the world for both men and women). These concerns and affirmations are not the last word on complementarianism. But if we want to be sure we are talking about the same thing, they should be among the first words.

Two, I would drop the language of old and new. I’m not sure of the best phrase, but “new wave complementarianism” (or even a “new wave of complementarianism”) implies that there is an old school that’s grown stale. The phrase pushes the conversation into historical reconnaissance and leads much of the conversation to end in “Well, those aren’t the complementarians I know,” or “I think that’s what good complementarians have always said.”  Maybe we should call this an “intra-complementarian conversation.” Clunky and uninspiring I know, but it describes what I think everyone is trying to accomplish.

It seems to me the current conversation is mainly about two things: abuse and application. Where have complementarian principles been abused? How are complementarian principles best applied? Those are fair questions. There are black and white issues, but just as many gray ones (which is why Danvers is thick on principles and thin on specifics). We should be able to talk about the applications without assuming that everyone to the right of us is an authoritarian wacko and everyone to the left is a closet liberal.

And as for abuse, we should all be mindful of our own experiences. It’s easy to read our past into everyone else’s present. Those who have suffered through bad pastors or bad churches can assume their unique experiences are pretty much the norm. Conversely, those who haven’t been in hard-edged complementarian contexts can forget that others have. I realize, as a pastor in a mainline denomination, I write as one who has rarely had Christians to the right of me on this issue. Complementarianism was not taught in my college. It was a debated issue in my seminary. And it’s practically a dead issue in my denomination. I don’t see many abuses of complementarianism. I’m just thankful if someone will admit to liking John Piper.

Three, let’s be specific as possible. I’m glad to see this already happening in many posts. We ought to talk about particulars. Does Christianity have a manly feel? What can women do in public worship? How should we think about boys playing with dolls or wearing pink? Does complementarianism have anything to say about the right or wrong of women politicians? Should women be deacons? Can they teach men and women in a conference setting? Can women work outside the home? Can dads stay at home with the kids? Complementarians can disagree on all these questions, but that doesn’t mean the questions are unimportant or that we shouldn’t make our case in these matters (or respond to those who do). Most of these questions are more difficult than we imagine and require more nuance and more attention to definition and detail than can be captured in rants and tweets, or even in blogs.

Which leads to my final point: let’s realize what can and can’t be done well through blogging. The longer I blog the more I realize it’s only one medium for discourse and hardly the best one for every controversy. If we want to argue an exegetical point or debate a specific point of theology or application, blogging can be effective. Like most public forms of communication it works better with concrete issues, the kind everyone can see, understand, and respond to. Blogging is less effective when there are untold issues in the background, when there are frustrations, questions, or disagreements that concern specific people or institutions in our lives. This isn’t to say we can’t talk about these publicly. It’s simply to say that we can’t expect others to know what experiences we have privately.

Even though I used the word “conversation” earlier in this post, blogging isn’t really a conversation. In a conversation you have immediate back and forth. You can hear tones and (hopefully) see faces. I try my best whenever I write to remember that I’m interacting with real people, brothers and sisters with families and friends and hopes and dreams and hurts and fears–people just like me. But none of us can know all of that just by following the thread in a blog discussion. We are bound to respond mainly to ideas and arguments because that’s what the blogosphere can give us effectively. Person-to-person, heart-to-heart, situation-specific, listening-generated, empathetic counsel and mutual correction–the kind of caring conversation to be expected when meeting with your pastor or having a cup of coffee with a friend is a near impossibility through blogging.

All of which is to say, as the “conversation” continues, we would do well to realize that the most important discussions probably won’t happen online and the words that do get written on our screens are limited by the medium that carries them.

1. International Ministry Director – We are looking for an elder-qualified man to serve in this new, full-time, fully-funded position. The IMD will be hired to equip and encourage the church body to do the ministry of evangelism and discipleship with internationals. This will involve casting vision, training, and deploying both internationals and nationals from URC to fulfill the goal of reaching and discipling the nations in our backyard.

2. Associate Campus Ministry Director – We are looking for a mature, capable woman to serve in this full-time, fully-funded position. The ACMD works with the Campus Ministry Director in giving direction to our college ministry. A main focus of this position is evangelizing and discipling young women.

3. Pastoral Interns – Each year we have 2-3 pastoral interns with us from September-May, working about 15 hours per week. Applications may be submitted by any man over the age of 21 heading in the direction of pastoral ministry.

Moody Publishers developed one, which is free online.

You may also find this unauthorized study guide to be helpful. It’s quite in-depth and asks good questions directed at students (though it says the author of the book is Devin DeYoung).

Todd Billings, a fine Christan and excellent scholar who was recently installed in a new academic chair at Western Theological Seminary (RCA), is battling Multiple Myeloma. He is in the midst of recovery from a month in the hospital with a stem cell transplant; experiencing a lot of fatigue–only alert enough to read/write or see people beyond family a few hours a day. The longer term prayer request is for a long remission from the cancer after this transplant. Multiple Myeloma has no cure, and so doctors expect it to come back, and it’s harder to treat when it does.

Below is the most recent prayer request. Please join me in praying for Todd…

After struggling with a compromised immune system for a number of months, my doctor gave me a number of tests to find the problem. Eventually, it showed irregularities in my blood which indicated either a pre-cancerous malady that would give me a propensity toward cancer, or an active blood cancer. After more tests, I was diagnosed with an active cancer, Multiple Myeloma, on September 27, 2012. It had already caused some bone erosion (in my skull, arm, hip) and an elevated plasma level in my blood.

I received five rounds of chemotherapy from October of 2012 to January of 2013. Then, in February and March, I received a stem cell transplant–spending about a month in the hospital and a cancer lodge. Even after the high-dose chemotherapy given in the transplant process, the Multiple Myeloma is expected to return (the cancer has no cure). However, remission can last for years (sometimes many years) and patients can go off of most of the chemo drugs at that time. In addition, there is ongoing, vigorous medical research on Multiple Myeloma which may bring more and more effective treatments in the future.

In all of this, I continue to return to biblical truth expressed by Heidelberg Catechism Q and A 32: I am a Christian, which means that “by faith I am a member of Christ and so I share in his anointing” by the Holy Spirit. Since Christ is the one true prophet, “I am anointed to confess his name, to present myself to him as a living sacrifice of thanks.” Since Christ is the true priest, I enjoy a “free conscience” because of his atoning work, and I “present myself to him as a living sacrifice of thanks.” Since Christ is the true and victorious King, I strive “against sin and the devil in this life, and afterward to reign with Christ over all creation for eternity.” In this journey of discipleship, our only comfort in life and in death is that we belong, in body and soul, in life and in death, to Jesus Christ, our faithful Savior, and the Triune God made known in and through him. (Heidelberg Catechism, Q and A 1) Prayers are encouraged for the cancer to be effectively combated by the chemo treatments; for a long remission after transplant; and for Christ’s strength and peace to be with my family, especially my wife Rachel and my two young children.

We want to invite you to this time of fellowship, learning and growth with like-minded brothers and sisters. This year, we will be meeting June 17-18 at Peace Church, just south of Grand Rapids, MI. Visit our website to learn more and register.

The conference is small and geared for RCA pastors, leaders, and members, but like minded friends from other denominations are also welcome.

Theme: The Bible and Pastoral Ministry

Location: Peace Reformed Church, Middleville, MI

Dates: June 17-18, 2013

Price: $50 individual

KEYNOTE SPEAKER: Derek Thomas

Dr. Thomas joined the staff of First Presbyterian Church, Columbia, SC, in 2011, coming from Jackson, MS, where he was Chairman of the Theology Department at Reformed Theological Seminary and Minister of Teaching at First Presbyterian Church. A Welshman, he is a graduate of the University of Wales (Bc.S), Reformed Theological Seminary (M.Div), and University of Wales/Lampeter (Ph.D.) and was ordained in the Evangelical Church of Ireland, where he served Stranmillis Evangelical Presbyterian Church in Belfast for 17 years before moving to Mississippi. He remains the Distinguished Visiting Professor of Systematic and Historical Theology at RTS and is a well published author.

It would be difficult, if not impossible, to adequately express our gratitude to God for having led Carolyn and I finally to our “home” here at URC these past four years and me to the spiritual banquet table known as the board of elders. It was only yesterday, three years ago, that a couple of elders said to me–or was it a warning?–that the eldership would change my life and that I’d never be the same again. Truer words were never spoken to one who with awkward diligence has spent a lifetime staying in the background. By curious paradox these efforts at staying “small” end up producing people who, in this untested state of isolation, become too big–too big with fear, too big in self-reliance, too many glances at self and too few gazes upon Christ and His grace.

“You’re called to be faithful, not successful” were the scalpel sharp words of wisdom so graciously applied to my brooding heart by fellow elder Keith Widder a couple of years ago. Paul exhorted Timothy to “Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved” (2 Tim.2:15). He didn’t say, “Do your perfect…” I’m relieved at that, but both statements, by Keith and Paul, nonetheless point first to my utter impossibility to fulfill the task of elder, and my need for the gospel of grace to do anything that even slightly resembles Christ-likeness.

What have I learned these past three years? To be an elder implies the possession of at least a modicum of biblical wisdom and insight. And yet, what I learned seems to center in the most elementary of lessons. In John 15:5 Jesus plainly said “without me, you can do nothing.” In moments of insanity, I’ve recited–please tell me brothers that I’m not the only one here who has done this!–I’ve recited the words of the late and great mayor of New York City, Ed Koch, who roamed the streets of the city yelling at stray passerbyers, “Hey, how am I doin’? How am I doin’?”

In the glorious messiness of URC, Christ has had to remind me often that “without Me you can do nothing.” “People are messy” is no longer a cute book title. I no longer wonder or have a vague inkling of what I’m like; I now must say “thou art the man.” I’ve shed tears for others, I’ve shed tears for myself.

The eldership seems to not only encapsulate the gospel but to heighten it. As an elder you’re helpless, but with Him, all things are possible. It has stripped and overwhelmed me, and yet it has also alleviated my endless introspection–mmm, mostly—mmm, somewhat. There are better burdens in life than your own. There’s always that one sheep stuck in a hedge who needs a helping hand. There’s the young person who you know is watching, looking for signs of the living Christ within you. There are always prayers for others, prayers that always acknowledge that “without Me you can do nothing.”

When men express an interest in the eldership we all respond the same, don’t we? We’re measured, careful in our words. A serious joy descends upon us. We invite, but we know that a holy nakedness will occur if they join this “merry band of brothers.”

A then elder-to-be recently asked me how to prepare for the office. I simply replied that you’re never fully ready for the office. All we can do is to come as we are and see where God leads and how He will equip us. We’re never ready–and yet we will continue to invite men to be fools for Christ’s sake, to follow in His footsteps and to participate in the protection of His Bride. Is there any greater privilege and joy for the likes of us?

Thank you, dear brothers. Thank you for this spiritual home called URC. Thank you for the privilege of locking arms and hearts together for Christ’s sake.

It’s a privilege indeed to serve with men like Peeter and many others like him.

If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

It’s true in carpentry and true in theology. Way back in the 2000s when I was speaking at different venues about the emergent church, I remember thinking to myself, “I sure hope I’m not talking about this stuff ten years from now.” The desire was partly because I didn’t want their bad theology to be such a hot ticket a decade later, but it was also because I feared degenerating into the speaker who couldn’t talk about anything else. I didn’t want to be the Not Emergent guy for the rest of my life. I was desperate to avoid the scenario where the whole world for the next ten, twenty, or fifty years looked like an emergent nail just waiting for me to strike with my Not Emergent hammer.

I have no problem with people having a focus to their ministry, whether that’s abortion, ecclesiology, Christian hedonism, tithing, or racial reconciliation. In fact, God often does much good with single-minded stalwarts like Wilberforce on slavery. Likewise, I recognize that God may give certain people special discernment or passion for a particular topic, error, or initiative. And because of our context we may feel compelled to protect certain doctrines or promote certain endeavors. We need experts and advocates. The problem is not with having a special hammer. The problem is when we whack at everything like its our special nail and whack at everyone for not being just as zealous about our one issue.

What do I have in mind? No one in particular but lots of things in general. The Christian who blames everything on fundamentalism and relates every story to their upbringing where they had to wear long skirts and watch Lawrence Welk. The feminist who sees the oppression of woman in every tweet. The conservative who can only sound the alarm of cultural declension. The Presbyterian who relates everything to the regulative principle. The church critic who sees every weakness as an expression of Moralistic Therapeutic Deism. The gospel-loving saint who smells legalism in every exhortation against vice and in every celebration of virtue. The philosopher who has concluded that every problem boils down to epistemology or the one and the many or whatever. The academic who thinks everything that ails the church finds its roots in whatever he wrote for his dissertation. The revisionist who is confident that the church is all out of sorts because of Greek thinking, Constantine, or Old Princeton. The wounded soul who can’t see past his own hurts or makes it her life mission to rage against the machine. The liberal who can’t stop talking about tolerance and dialogue. The Sunday school teacher who finds a reason in every class to beat on Charles Finney. The peacemaker who sees every conflict as a third way waiting to happen.

Some of us have one main thing we want to say to the world. If that one thing is true, clear, and winsome, praise God. Say it again and again. But we shouldn’t say that same thing in every situation. And we shouldn’t stop with that one true thing. The Bible is a big book and God has placed us in a big world. There is much to celebrate, much to affirm, much to correct, much to enjoy, much to lament, and much to proclaim. There are a lot of nails sticking up that could use some pounding. So pound away. Just realize they don’t all call for the same hammer.

The Church, as a society, owes its origin to Christ:
it derives from Him its government and office-bearers;
it receives from Him its laws and constitution;
it draws from Him its spiritual influence and grace;
it accepts at His hand its ordinances and institutions;
it acts in His name, and is guided in its proceeding by His authority.

In the expression that the Lord Jesus Christ is the Head of the Church, and in the fact that He is the only source of Church, power, there is much more implied that that He is the founder of the Christian society. He is both its founder and its administrator,–being the ever present source of life and influence, of ordinance and blessing, or law and authority, of word and doctrine within the community. Through His Spirit, and His word, and His ordinances, alike of government and grace, Christ both originates and administers His Church upon earth.

Is it the spiritual life of the Christian Church that is inquired of in regard to its source and supply? Christ is the Head of the Church as the source of life, breathing that spiritual breath into the body at the first, and holding it in being ever since.

Is it the doctrine of the Church that is inquired after in regard to its origin and obligation? Christ is the Head of doctrine to His Church having been Himself the unerring Teacher of wisdom and truth since the beginning, and still continuing to instruct His people savingly in all Divine knowledge by His word and Spirit.

Is it the ordinances of the Church that you inquire about, in respect to their authority, and the blessing contained in them? Christ is the Head of the Church as to ordinances, having appointed them by His authority at first, and made them the channel of spiritual blessings to His people ever since.

Is it the Divine grace connected with word and ordinance that you inquire after? Christ is the Head of His Church as to grace, immediately imparting it as He wills through His appointed ordinances, or by means of His Spirit, and thereby making the Church a living and gracious power in the souls of its true members.

Is it the authority of the Church in its transactions and decisions that is inquired about; and is it asked whence has it this authority that it claims? Christ is the Head of His Church as to authority and government, speaking through its voice, and binding through its decisions, and making these His own, in so far as they are framed according to His mind and word.

In all that regards its life and doctrine, and ordinances, and grace, and authority; in short, in all that belongs to the Church as a peculiar society on earth, we recognise its Jus Divinum–the presence and the power of its Divine Head. All is derived from Him; and all emanates from Him as its source. Within the province of the Church, the Lord Jesus Christ is the only Teacher, Lawgiver, and Judge.

If doctrine is taught, it is taught because He has revealed it;

if ordinances are administered, they are administered in His name, and because they are His;

if government is established and exercised, it is through His appointment and authority;

if saving grace is dispensed, it is dispensed through the virtue and power of His Spirit;

if a blessing is communicated, it is because He blesses.

In the language of the Confession of Faith, “there is no other Head of the Church but the Lord Jesus Christ.” (The Church of Christ: Volume Two, 194-95)

It’s easy to find people who think work is good and leisure is bad (i.e., you rest to work). You can also find people who think leisure is good and work is bad (i.e., you work to rest). But according to the Bible both work and rest can be good if they are done to the glory of God. The Bible commends hard work (Prov. 6:6-11; Matt. 25:14-30; 1 Thess. 2:9; 4:11-12; 2 Thess. 3:10) and it also extols the virtue of rest (Ex. 20:8-11; Deut. 5:12-15; Ps. 127:2). Both have their place. The hard part is putting them in the right places.

Many of us are less busy than we think, but life feels con­stantly overwhelming because our days and weeks and years have no rhythm. One of the dangers of technology is that work and rest blend together in a confusing mush. We never quite leave work when we’re at home, so the next day we have a hard time getting back to work when we’re at work. We have no routine, no order to our days. We are never completely “on” and never totally “off.” So we dawdle on YouTube for twenty minutes at the office and then catch up on e-mails for forty minutes in front of the TV at home. Perhaps this arrangement works for some employers and may feel freeing for many employees. But over time most of us work less effectively, whether it’s in the home or out of the home, and find our work less enjoyable when there is no regular, concentrated, deliberate break.

Not long ago, the Wall Street Journal ran a fascinating article about four-time Olympian Bernard Lagat.47 A native of Kenya but now a US citizen, Lagat holds seven American track and field records, ranging from the 1,500 meters to the 5,000. According to the article, one of the secrets to his running is, actually, not running. After eleven months of intense training and competition, Lagat “puts his sneakers in the closet and pigs out for five weeks. No running. No sit-ups. He coaches his son’s soccer team and gains 8 pounds.” He’s taken this long break every fall since 1999. Lagat says “rest is a good thing” and calls the month of inactivity “pure bliss.” Even the best in the world need a break. In fact, they wouldn’t be the best without one. Idleness is not a mere indulgence or vice. It is necessary to getting anything done.

People like to say life is a marathon, not a sprint, but it’s actually more like a track workout. We run hard and then rest hard. We charge a hill and then chug some Gatorade. We do some stairs, then some 200s, and then a few 400s. In between, we rest. Without it, we’d never finish the workout. If we want to keep going, we have to learn how to stop. Just like the Isra­elites had in their calendar, we need downtime each day, and a respite each week, and seasons of refreshment throughout the year.

Which is why it’s so concerning that our lives are getting more and more rhythm-less. We don’t have healthy routines. We can’t keep our feasting and fasting apart. Evening and morning have lost their feel. Everything is blurred together. The faucet is a constant drip. Life becomes a malaise, until we can’t take any more and spiral into illness, burnout, or depres­sion. We can’t run incessantly and expect to run very well.