RSSMix.com Mix ID 35884

Calvin quotes

michaelryanwalker@gmail.com (Michael R. Walker) — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 20:15:40 -0500

Here are a few quotes from Calvin's Institutes that I selected for inclusion in a church magazine to reflect the basic posture of Calvin's piety, oriented as it is toward magnifying the glory of God and subordinating self-concern. Unfortunately these don't convey the Christological centered-ness of his piety, but they convey where Christ leads us by the Spirit:

"We are consecrated and dedicated to God in order that we may thereafter think, speak, meditate, and do, nothing except to his glory."

"We are not our own: let not our reason nor our will, therefore, sway our plans and deeds. We are not our own: let us therefore not set it as our goal to seek what is expedient for us according to the flesh. We are not our own: in so far as we can, let us therefore forget ourselves and all that is ours. Conversely, we are God's: let us therefore live for him and die for him. We are God's: let his wisdom and will therefore rule all our actions. We are God's: let all the parts of our life accordingly strive toward him as our only lawful goal."

"We ought to we seek not the things that are ours but those which are of the Lord's will and will serve to advance his glory. This is also evidence of great progress: that, almost forgetful of ourselves, surely subordinating our self-concern, we try faithfully to devote our zeal to God and his commandments. For when Scripture bids us leave off self-concern, it not only erases from our minds the yearning to possess, the desire for power, and the favor of men, but it also uproots ambition and all craving for human glory and other more secret plagues. Accordingly, the Christian must surely be so disposed and minded that he feels within himself it is with God he has to deal throughout his life. In this way, as he will refer all he has to God's decision and judgment, so will he refer his whole intention of mind scrupulously to Him. For he who has learned to look to God in all things that he must do, at the same time avoids all vain thoughts. This, then, is that denial of self which Christ enjoins with such great earnestness upon his disciples at the outset of their service."

Christian Doctrine is necessary for human flourishing

michaelryanwalker@gmail.com (Michael R. Walker) — Mon, 8 Jun 2009 02:21:29 -0500

"Christian doctrine is necessary for human flourishing: only doctrine shows us who we are, why we are here, and what we are to do. The stereotype of doctrine as dry and dusty cuts a flimsy caricature next to the real thing, which is brave and bracing. Doctrine deals with energies and events that are as real and powerful as anything known in chemistry or physics, energies and events that can turn the world we know upside down, energies and events into which we are grafted as participants with speaking and acting parts."

- Kevin Vanhoozer, "Introduction" to The Drama of Doctrine: A Canonical-Linguistic Approach to Christian Theology (WJK, 2005).

An Appropriate Pride: Obama's Inauguration, National Self-Focus and Global Crises

michaelryanwalker@gmail.com (Michael R. Walker) — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 16:18:04 -0600

Comparing news coverage among U.S. and foreign media outlets is often cause for embarrassment (if you're from the U.S.), but the typically celebrity-obsessed and self-focused content generated by the American media has seemed appropriate on the occasion of Obama's inauguration to the office of President of the United States.

I'll begin with a few images.

Building Neighborhood Relationships: Lent in the Living Room

michaelryanwalker@gmail.com (Michael R. Walker) — Sun, 18 Jan 2009 13:41:02 -0600

One of the greatest needs of the church in North America is to develop deeper relationships with our neighbors -- in the usual sense of "neighbors," as in those who live near to us. We often live private lives and don't even know that the other Christians in our neighborhood are Christians, since denominationalism has resulted in two Christian families next door to each other worshiping and fellowshiping with different congregations. So, it's tough to build Christian fellowship that will impact one another -- and impact those who are not yet believers -- right where we live.

In an age when the "unchurched" are less and less likely to "go to church" looking for spiritual nourishment, it's important that we be pro-active and bring it to them where they live. To that end, one idea some churches are exploring is called "Lent in the Living Room." It's a special initiative, for a special time of the "church year," to encourage the members of our congregation to host small groups in their homes. Hopefully, this will catalyze the development of new and deeper relationships that will continue well beyond the season of Lent.

If you're interested, check out how my own congregation, Highland Park Presbyterian Church in Dallas, TX, is exploring this way of building "neighborhood relationships" this year. It may give you some ideas for what could work in your own congregation, too.

Bonhoeffer: The Church Confesses, Christ Builds

michaelryanwalker@gmail.com (Michael R. Walker) — Sun, 21 Dec 2008 02:19:10 -0600

From a 1933 sermon based on Peter's confession at Caesarea Philipi (Mt. 16:13-18):

"But it is not we who should build, but he who will build. No human hands builds the church, but Christ alone. Whoever thinks he can build the church is already destroying it. For what he is building is a temple for idols, without knowing or wishing it.

"We shall confess -- he shall build. We shall preach -- he shall build. We shall pray to him -- he shall build. We do not know his plan. We do not see whether he builds or tears down. It may be that the times, which by human standards are times of collapse, are for him the times of great building. It may be that the times, which by human standards are times of great success, are for him times to tear down. It is a great comfort that Christ gives to his church: confess, preach, and bear witness to me. I alone will build as it pleases me. Don't give me orders. Do your job -- then you have done enough. You are all right. Don't seek out reasons and opinions. Don't keep judging. Don't keep checking again and again to see if you are secure. Church, remain a church! But, you, church -- confess, confess, confess! You have only one Lord -- Christ alone. By his grace alone you live. Christ builds."

Taken from Dietrich Bonhoeffer's Christmas Sermons, ed. and trans. Edwin Robinson (Zondervan, 2005).

A Faith's Dwindling Following

michaelryanwalker@gmail.com (Michael R. Walker) — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 23:52:05 -0500

George Will had a nice piece in the Washington Post today about mainline denominations, the Episcopal Church's experience in particular: "A Faith's Dwindling Following." I take that back. It wasn't 'nice.' But it was honest. The last paragraph captures the bottom line quite well:

"The Episcopal Church once was America's upper crust at prayer. Today it is 'progressive' politics cloaked -- very thinly -- in piety. Episcopalians' discontents tell a cautionary tale for political as well as religious associations. As the church's doctrines have become more elastic, the church has contracted. It celebrates an 'inclusiveness' that includes fewer and fewer members."

Is the Financial Crisis of the U.S. Divine Retribution?: Providence in a Global Economy

michaelryanwalker@gmail.com (Michael R. Walker) — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 21:49:45 -0500

In the U.S., investors are panicking, polls say the average working person believes we may be headed for another Great Depression, and those close to or in retirement are scrambling to stabilize the future of their fixed income in order to continue making ends meet. Yet the woes of the U.S. economy appear to be good news to some of the "enemies" of the U.S. In the Middle East, many appear to view the troubles of the U.S. economy as the latest in a series of events they describe as divine retribution. According to the Financial Times, "Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati, an influential hardline figure in Iran, has described the crisis as a punishment. 'As Americans are happy to see problems in Iran we are happy to see the US economy disturbed and problems extended to Europe,' he said recently. 'They see the results of their vicious acts and God is punishing them.'"

Ecclesiology and the Cartesian Turn

michaelryanwalker@gmail.com (Michael R. Walker) — Mon, 22 Sep 2008 04:39:28 -0500

Janos Pasztor offers a packed summary of some of the ecclesiological consequences of the so-called "Cartesian turn" - the rise of the anthropological starting point -- and often endpoint -- in the pursuit of knowledge that became dominant among philosophers in the 18th century and has characterize "Modern" thought):

"Theology itself was very considerably influenced by this development. It was a 180-degree turn: it began losing its theocentric character and became more and more anthropocentric. For these kinds of theologies it was not God who would come to man addressing him in his life-giving Word, but man would make attempts to approach God by means of an intellectual enterprise. A late twentieth-century representative of this trend of thought says: 'God is the object of my consciousness which I perceive in so far as I perceive something, that is I allot him a place within the framework of a sign-system, in order to be able to talk to others about this matter.' Consequently, the church is the people, who, by virtue of having accepted the common sign-system, are seeking common answers to the meaning of existence.

"These trends of thought, however respectable they might have been otherwise, have rejected most of the things the Reformers stood for. The divine Logos, the eternal Son, 'true God from true God, begotten not made, of one Being with the Father,' became the Logos of the philosophers, a principle and idea, or a set of thoughts. As Blaise Pascal put it, here one has to deal with the God of the philosophers instead of the God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Jesus Christ. Instead of listening obedience to the Word of God, one meets the rule of reason in rationalism; instead of the freedom of God's liberated children, one gets the freedom of the individual thinker in liberailsm. These ideas had a devastating effect on the field of Christology. They brought about what has been termed by Hungarian theologians, a Unitarian theology in everything but name."

"...the church is nothing but one of the many human organizations dealing with issues like religion and morals."

"....For people with that kind of idea, catholicity meant 'as opposed to confessional catholicity...the universal kingdom of spirit, but something other than the Holy Spirit,' if it meant anything at all."

Janos Pasztor, "The Catholicity of Reformed Theology," Toward the Future of Reformed Theology (Eerdmans, 1999), p. 29.

What Way Ahead? Part Two: Initiating the Case for Realignment

michaelryanwalker@gmail.com (Michael R. Walker) — Sat, 20 Sep 2008 12:39:17 -0500

In the first article of this series I outlined three options that traditional Christians have taken and might take now as we face the challenges of life today in the Presbyterian Church (USA). The three options were the long-term approach of renewalists, to defect in place, or to leave the denomination. I suggested none of the three options presented a hopeful future for the unity and witness of the PC(USA), nor would they help unify evangelicals, nor do they anticipate the impending challenge of relations with the Ecumenical Church. In this piece, I will outline the basics of a fourth option, which has been dubbed a reshaping of the PC(USA) or a realignment within the denomination. It is this fourth option that holds the most promise for responsibly facing the theological and institutional challenges before us.

As a reminder, the approach I am taking in this series may strike some as backwards: outlining practical approaches first, followed by more in depth engagement of theological and historical rationales. This approach is by design and request. To begin outlining the nature of and need for a realignment within the PC(USA), I will begin looking at some of the deeper issues involved below.

Christians and Cremation

michaelryanwalker@gmail.com (Michael R. Walker) — Thu, 4 Sep 2008 11:52:12 -0500

Richard Mouw offered some brief and helpful thoughts on cremation on his blog, and it's resurrected some of my own recent wrestlings with this issue.

I think there are good arguments for and against the practice of cremation from a Christian perspective. I worry less about whether cremation poses any obstacles for Gods power to resurrect the dead, and more about how the practice can impact our attitude toward the physicality of life in the present. We do tend to treat our bodies as objects apart from ourselves, rather than part of our-selves. Pressing issues in bioethics offer plenty of good examples, and in the evangelical community it tends to be part and parcel of the larger world-denying rather than world-engaging spirituality. If ultimately, God's plan is to redeem our bodies and indeed all creation, how should that impact the way we treat our own bodies and the creation now? (Gilbert Meilaender has an interesting article on this issue, and he touches on cremation, in the February 2007 issue of Touchstone, called Broken Bodies Redeemed.)

Benedict XVI: Christian faith is personal encounter, not moralism

michaelryanwalker@gmail.com (Michael R. Walker) — Thu, 4 Sep 2008 11:16:42 -0500

In an address to a group at the Vatican yesterday, Benedict XVI, while reflecting on Paul's conversion, noted that Christianity "is not a new philosophy or a new form of morality. We are only Christians if we encounter Christ, even if He does not reveal Himself to us as clearly and irresistibly as he did to Paul in making him the Apostle of the Gentiles. We can also encounter Christ in reading Holy Scripture, in prayer, and in the liturgical life of the Church - touch Christ's heart and feel that Christ touches ours. And it is only in this personal relationship with Christ, in this meeting with the Risen One, that we are truly Christian."

Though in some ways this is an unremarkable statement of mere Christianity, I think this succinct statement is a nice contradiction of the impression one can get of the Pope from American media. The composite picture of the Pope gleaned from mainstream media can make it seem as though he thinks of Christianity first and foremost as a set of moral restrictions.

There are a few reasons why the media focuses on the Pope's comments on the conflict between mainstream Christian ethics and western libertarian morals. Obviously such comments seem newsworthy because they speak into the "culture war." And the continuity of basic Christian ethics across the Protestant-Catholic divide has, of course, been one basis for recent rapproachment between evangelical Protestants and Catholics. On that score, see the nice editorial from Richard Mouw in the New York Times, written during the Pope's visit to the U.S. last Spring.

The audio of the Pope's brief comments yesterday can be heard here.

What Way Ahead? Part One: Three Options

michaelryanwalker@gmail.com (Michael R. Walker) — Fri, 22 Aug 2008 01:00:00 -0500

For conservative Christians in the PC(USA), facing major challenges is nothing new. But the challenges we are accustomed to facing took on new proportions at the 218th General Assembly.

Though the technical implications of the Assemblys decisions on sexuality remain unclear, the number and consistent character of those decisions speak with a clear voice. When the misguided statement on interfaith relations is added to the mix, not to mention the embarrassing lack of attention to Christian faith exhibited in the discussions leading up to these decisions, this GA has successfully pulled back the veil, so to speak, enabling us to see more clearly the situation weve been facing for quite some time.

Recovering the Wounded: Healing a Church in Exile

michaelryanwalker@gmail.com (Michael R. Walker) — Thu, 7 Aug 2008 05:09:05 -0500

Psalm 147:2: "The Lord builds up Jerusalem; he gathers the outcasts of Israel."

Commenting on this verse, Calvin expreses confidence that God would ultimately restore the Church from the ruinous state that formed so much of Calvin's own life:

"In calling God the former and architect of the Church, his object is to make us aware that by his power it remains in a firm condition, or is restored when in ruins. Hence he infers that it is in his power and arbitrament to gather those who have been dispersed. Here the Psalmist would comfort those miserable exiles who had been scattered in various quarters, with the hope of being recovered from their dispersion, as God had not adopted them without a definite purpose into one body. As he had ordered his temple and altar to be erected at Jerusalem, and had fixed his seat there, the Psalmist would encourage the Jews who were exiles from their native country, to entertain good hope of a return, intimating that it was no less properly Gods work to raise up his Church when ruined and fallen down, than to found it at first. It was not, therefore, the Psalmists object directly to celebrate the free mercy of God in the first institution of the Church, but to argue from its original, that God would not suffer his Church altogether to fall, having once founded it with the design of preserving it for ever; for he forsakes not the work of his own hands.

This comfort ought to be improved by ourselves at the present period, when we see the Church on every side so miserably rent asunder, leading us to hope that all the elect who have been adjoined to Christs body, will be gathered unto the unity of the faith, although now scattered like members torn from one another, and that the mutilated body of the Church, which is daily distracted, will be restored to its entireness; for God will not suffer his work to fail.

In the following verse he insists upon the same truth, the figure suggesting that though the Church labor under, and be oppressed by many diseases, God will speedily and easily recover it from all its wounds. The same truth, therefore, is evidently conveyed, under a different form of expression that the Church, though it may not always be in a flourishing condition, is ever safe and secure, and that God will miraculously heal it, as though it were a diseased body."

William Abraham on the Unity of the Church

michaelryanwalker@gmail.com (Michael R. Walker) — Tue, 5 Aug 2008 00:02:59 -0500

Some notes from William Abraham's article in Nicene Christianity: The Future for a New Ecumenism, where his task is to reflect on the phrase of the creed about the church as "one, holy, catholic and apostolic."

A few introductory quotes on the challenge of ecclesiology in the modern era:

"Ecclesiology is one area in theology where there is enormous temptation to think in abstract and utterly unrealistic terms. We find it difficult to think historically, concretely, and realistically" (p. 178).

"We need a theological vision of the church that does three things. It allows us to acknowledge reality as we find it empirically in teh church as it is and as we can predict it will be in the future. It provides a narrative of the divisions and chaos in the history of the church. And it acts as a norm that can deepen our experience, call us to accountability, and evoke a straining toward renewal and revitailzation at a crucial juncture in our history" (p. 179).

Abraham's brief sketch of such a theological vision of the church begins by describing the church as the work of the Holy Spirit in manifesting the reign of God in the world. He then focuses on what, then, is the referent in the creed's confession of "one, holy, catholic and apostolic church." What did the Holy Spirit establish at Pentecost? He stresses that it must be read as referring to "a historical people with definite institutional continuity and history from one generation to the next." This was the experience of the church in its first centuries of existence (assuming, we should note, that we do not consider the great variety of groups it is now easy to identify as heretical on the basis of the creed). Thus, he rightly finds abstract definitions of the church that allow for the variety of Christian divisions that exist today unacceptable, whether they appeal to the "invisible church" or the Reformation "marks of the church" as applied at the congregational level.

How then can we identify the church the church today? He doesn't really answer this question, for it is basically unanswerable if the creed is indeed referring to "a historical people with definite institutional continuity," given the divided condition of the church since the division of East and West and much more so since the Reformation.

In the end, Abraham's desire is to lift up the creed's descriptive phrase about the church as a norm after which we should all strive in our present divided condition. We cannot rest in our divisions or come up with clever ways to legitimize them. At the same time we can't simply say various denominations are not works of the Spirit. His solution to this is to suggest, along the lines of Ephraim Radner's proposal (in The End of the Church) that the church is in a similar situation as the divided kingdom of Israel: God was not working in and through them as he had, not in fullness, but nor had he withdrawn himself altogether. In the church today, God is "remaining faithful to his covenant and continuing to pour out his Holy Spirit," but "has withdrawn the fullness of his blessing, waiting patiently until we repent of our manifold sins and disorders" (p. 186).

Among his practical proposals for striving toward the creed's description of the church are the necessity of recovering "the full canonical heritage of the church of the first millennium before the split between East and West," and that "we must find a way to relativize our varied epistemological commitments" (that he thinks have often come as a result of confusing the canon with epistemological criterion, a misuse of the canon and an improper exaltation of epistemology in the life of the church that has catalyzed and continued to justify many Christian divisions).

Who Really Cares About Christian Unity?

michaelryanwalker@gmail.com (Michael R. Walker) — Sun, 3 Aug 2008 21:26:47 -0500

In a January 2001 article in First Things, entitled "Who Really Cares About Christianity Unity?", Bruce Marshall reflects on the divided nature of the (western) Church today, in dialogue with key aspects of Ephraim Radner's argument in his The End of the Church. His overall point: the Church at this point can expect its own death, which it has asked for, mostly by persisting willfully in disunity, by not having a common eucharistic life and by preferring its own division to meaningful (eucharistic) reunion. This the Church has done for a variety of reasons, though he pins much of the blame on the convenience of separation as the result of one-upsmanship and as a catalyst for more successful sheep-stealing, clearly not laudable reasons for persisting in division.

The Church is made one and receives life through the eucharist, but when we think we're celebrating the eucharist in our persistently divided churches, our "sectarian eucharists" result in eating and drinking judgment against ourselves (1 Cor. 11:26-29). Hence, if we are united to Christ at all, we are united in his death through baptism, which is still a (truncated) source of unity across denominations. Being united in Christ's death but not in his life means together (in our disunity) we can expect death.

The Lord will bring about resurrection in the Church after its death, but what we can expect on our own horizon is demise. And no particular group can escape this judgment. Just as the remnant in divided Israel was sent into Exile along with the rest, so too will those seeking genuine Christian unity today be subject to the Church's death. And just as a remnant returned to the Land of Promise to rebuild, so too will God raise up a future generation at some point to reveal the glory of Christ's resurrection.

Both Radner and Marshall undercut the theological justification for the Reformation. While admitting the Church can also suffer death by abandoning the truth, Marshall then states that one cannot "accept disunity" to preserve the truth, because one cannot pit the Gospel against the Church, for such would be to say "we have Christ's command to dismember his own body--the same body that, as the New Testament teaches, Christ does not despise, but nourishes, care for, and loves unto death (cf. Ephesians 5:29).

Radner and Marshall ilft up Jansenism as an example of how to both pursue the truth and insist on maintaining ecclesial unity in the face of church powers that deny the truth. Of course, Jansenism was unable to survive. And so the conclusion: better to die while seeking "to commit the destiny of the Church and the cause of the gospel to God alone" than to die by dividing the Church. Of course, this whole framework seems to presume that a united body that celebrates something it calls the eucharist cannot cease to be Christ's Body, hence to divide such a body is always to divide the Body of Christ.

Marshall was Lutheran in 2001. He has since entered the Roman Catholic Church.

Eugene Peterson on the Personal Character of Following Jesus

michaelryanwalker@gmail.com (Michael R. Walker) — Sun, 8 Jun 2008 21:22:47 -0500

The intro to Peterson's latest book, The Jesus Way, functions like a good summary of a main theme in almost all of Peterson's writings, including those directed to pastors. He titles the intro "The Purification of Means" (via Maritain), the means, that is, of following Jesus. From the opening paragraphs:

"The ways Jesus goes about loving and saving the world are personal: nothing disembodied, nothing abstract, nothing impersonal. Incarnate, flesh and blood, relational, particular, local. The ways employed in our North American culture are conspicuously impersonal: programs, organizations, techniques, general guidelines, information detached from place. In matters of ways and means, the vocabulary of numbers is preferred over names, ideologies crowd out ideas, the gray fog of abstraction absorbs the sharp particularities of the recognizable face and the familiar street...We cannot use impersonal means to do or say a personal thing - and the gospel is personal or it is nothing....If any of the means we use to follow Jesus are extraneous to who we are in Jesus - detached 'things' or role 'models' - they detract from the end of following Jesus" (pp. 1-2).

Barth on evangelical soteriology and ecclesiology

michaelryanwalker@gmail.com (Michael R. Walker) — Sun, 8 Jun 2008 21:00:24 -0500

When setting out his approach to expounding the doctrine of reconciliation in Church Dogmatics IV.I , Barth laments what he sees as a clear shift in Post-Reformation Protestant theology (both scholasticism and pietism) toward the direct application of salvation to individuals by faith without reference to the church, which then is relegated to the status of the means for individual salvation:

"It was an intolerable truncation of the Christian message when the older Protestantism steered the whole doctrine of the atonement - and with it, the whole of theology - into the cul de sac of the question of the individual experience of grace, which is always an anxious one when taken in isolation, the question of individual conversion by it and to it, and of its presuppositions and consequences. The almost inevitable result was that the great concepts of justification and sanctification came more and more to be understood and filled out psychologically and biographically, and the doctrine of the Church seemed to be of value only as a description of the means of salvation and grace indispensable to this individual and personal process of salvation....
....Certainly the question of the subjective apprehension of atonement by the individual man is absolutely indispensable. And it belongs properly to the concluding section of the doctrine of reconciliation - yet not in the first place, but in the second...." (Dogmatics IV.I, Bromiley trans., section 58.4).

For Such a Time as This

michaelryanwalker@gmail.com (Michael R. Walker) — Wed, 2 Feb 2005 00:00:00 -0600

The following is the text of an address I gave at a special PFR worship service on Feb. 2 at Clear Lake Presbyterian Church in Houston, TX.

What a challenging time and place to be a believer. Biblical and theological illiteracy at seemingly record highs, widespread suspicion of ecclesial structures and institutions, increasing knowledge of institutional corruption and mismanagement. All these characterize the period. Some believers think they can live within the current system; some think they must break away from it, not because they want to start a new church, but because they think the institution theyre leaving isnt a church at all. There are debates about age old moral standards and church practices. Things that were once taken for granted are now called into question. Some religious sects, identifying themselves as Christian, seem to be further distancing themselves from historic Christianity and gravitating more and more to extremism, even engaging in acts of civil disobedience and violence. Some believers in this age refuse to be engaged in the world because they are sure that world events point to the imminent coming of Christ and the end of the world. Heresy trials become commonplace. Essential tenets of the faith have become all but unidentifiable, even among theological allies. New communication technology develops at break neck speed, allowing people a voice they had never previously had, and theological disputes become popular affairs. This is a world yearning for and needing the Gospel, yet many believers are caught up in theological debates rather than cross cultural mission for the sake of the world. All this, and the constant threat and fear of Muslim aggression from the Arab world. What a time to be a believer.

Some of you undoubtedly think Im referring to the present. Im not.

Im speaking about the 16th century. Indeed, the founders of our Reformed tradition lived in a time not unlike our own. It was a time when the Church faced unique challenges and had to press on in light of an incredibly uncertain future. It was a challenging context to be a Christian, to be the Church. If you asked me to choose any period I wanted to live in as a believer, it probably wouldnt have been this one. On top of all the theological, spiritual and cultural challenges, disease and death ran rampid, and many of the civil liberties that we as members of Western Liberal Democratic Society have come to expect were simply unimaginable in the 16th Century. Its not a time Id choose to be a believer in, or choose to try to raise my family in. And yet, the ironic thing is that as a Church historian its a time period that I cant get my mind off of.

I must confess: I love the 16th century. Most of my spiritual and theological heroes lived in that time period. Many of the ideas that have come to inform my faith, and to ground our own Reformed tradition, emerged from this century. Bold innovations came from this century, innovations that still shape the life and practice of our own Churches. A new piety of the Word emerged, which led scholars to translate the Bible into the language of the people, as the Church experimented with new technologies like the printing press. And while Protestants were focused on Europe alone, Jesuit missionaries like Matteo Ricci were finding creative ways to translate the Bible and the faith into the thought patterns of Southeast Asia. Some of the most creative missionary work in the history of the Church happened in this century.

I am reminded of that famous quote about 18th century France: It was the best of times, it was the worst of timesit was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair, we had everything before us, we had nothing before us Most of us dont like ambiguity. Most of us prefer times and places and situations where the issues that face us are clear, simple and unambiguous. But truth be told, most historical times and places are as complicated as 18th century France, or 16th Europe during the Reformation. Most of the times and places that Gods people have been called to live in are exceedingly ambiguous. They are times full of both light and darkness, truth and falsehood, promise and peril.

Its interesting to note that the Chinese character for Crisis is a combination of the characters for danger and opportunity. In times of crisis, one of the dangers is that the crisis in question will be understood in one-sided terms: emphasizing either the danger, or the opportunity. Make no mistake, the Presbyterian Church USA is in crisis. And there are such voices in our denomination that want to oversimplify that crisis. There are those who look at our denomination and only see opportunity. They tell us that if one or two more changes are made all will be well. They say the denominations critics, especially the more conservative ones, are reactionary, part of some grand right wing conspiracy to destabilize the institution. Wherever they look around, all they see is boundless potential. There are others that look at our denomination and see nothing but danger. There are those who would tell us that nothing is well, that all is lost, that there are no signs of Gods redemptive presence in the PCUSA, that Gods glory has left the temple, never to return. Both sets of voices tell us a story, but neither set tell us the true story. Both tell compelling stories. Both garner lots of attention. Neither really help a Church in crisis.

A Church in crisis has to realize that it is called to a time and a place ridden with danger. There are real dangers facing Mainline denominations like the PCUSA. Theres the danger of heresy. Theres the danger of apostasy. Theres the danger that in our efforts to be inclusive we might affirm all manner of ungodliness and untruth. Theres a danger that in our desire to be politically correct, we might make decisions that are politically nave and uninformed, as can be seen by our denominations recent debacles in the Middle East. Theres the danger that in our desire to be relevant to the culture, well preach a Gospel that is captive to the culture, failing to offer the healing power of the Gospel. Theres the danger that our denominations cultural influence of yesteryear will lead to delusional beliefs that we somehow are still at the center of the cultures concerns. Theres the danger that in our desire to be diverse, we will honor and embrace ideas and theologies that do not lift high the cross of Jesus Christ. Friends, brothers and sisters in Christ, make no mistake, there is danger.

There is danger, but there is more than just danger. There is also opportunity. Theres the opportunity, within the constraints of the biblical witness, to develop new theologies that can speak the Gospel to our postmodern context in new and creative ways. Theres the opportunity to embody the sort of racial, ethnic and cultural diversity that we see in the New Testament, all to the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. Theres the opportunity to offer a prophetic witness to our culture, one that is consistently pro-life, calling truth to power, defending the widow and the orphan, seeking to be about the politics of Jesus, defending the concerns of the least, the last and the lost. Theres an opportunity to speak the age-old truths of the Gospel in an ever-changing world. Theres the opportunity to be the missional church, to be an alternative community that shows how radical the Gospel is. Theres an opportunity to show radical love and acceptance to gays and lesbians, all the while calling them to repentance and newness of life. Theres the opportunity to support the work of the Gospel in the Global South, the place where the Gospel is taking root in new and promising ways. Theres the opportunity to share the Good News of the Gospel with those who have never had a personal encounter with the Lord Jesus, many of whom sit in the pews of our own congregations. Friends, brothers and sisters in Christ, make no mistake, there is opportunity.

The Princess Esther was told: Do not think that in the kings palace you will escape any more than all the other Jews. For if you keep silence at such at time as this, relief and deliverance will rise for the Jews from another quarter, but you and your fathers family will perish. Who knows? Perhaps you have come to royal dignity for just such a time as this. Many see the PCUSA as a problem to be overcome. But what if being Presbyterian means being presented with the opportunity to be Christian in some powerful, prophetic and unique ways. What if, despite all the challenges and complexities being the PCUSA involves, we have been called to be Gods people for such a time as this. What if the PCUSA has a distinctive witness that God wants to it to offer? I believe it does, which is why Im called and committed to stay in this denomination and work for its renewal.

Of course, some of our friends disagree. Some say the PCUSA has had its day. Some suggest evangelicals should leave, seeking greener pastures. But where would we go? Could we go to a new place, full of opportunity, but bereft of danger? Im afraid not. I think wed just find ourselves with a different set of dangers and opportunities. Make no mistake: Luther and Calvin did not leave the church; they were asked to leave, and they were asked to leave an institution that was no longer recognizable as the church. The Gospel of Jesus Christ proclaimed by evangelicals like Luther and Calvin was declared anathema accursed, and if our understanding of the Gospel and its implications for human sexuality is declared anathema, and we are asked to leave, then we will face a harsh reality as they did. But that day has not come and we must maintain our resolve to work zealously for reform in our denomination at every level so that it never does.

There will always be dangers and opportunities facing Gods people. Its part of being a believer in a time of crisis, the sort of crisis that characterizes most periods in history. Perhaps we have been called for such a time as this, like that Jewish princess Esther. Perhaps there is a witness that, like Esther, only we can give. Perhaps there is a job that we, like Esther, have been given that only we can do.

In its more than 15 years of existence, the Lord has blessed Presbyterians for Renewal. The Lord has given us the privilege of ministering in the midst of crisis, of being an instrument of clarity amidst the ambiguity, of stability amidst danger. The clearly evangelical and passionate voice of PFR helped me to take the step of faith into the PCUSA, not having grown up in the church at all. There are many youth growing up outside the church today, and we will continue to reach out to them and to engage them with the power of the Gospel [PFR Youth]. We will continue to network our women leaders, encouraging and resourcing them as they answer Gods calling on their lives [Network of Presbyterian Women in Leadership]. Our Wee Kirk Ministry is expanding with plans to reach whole new regions with conferences that nurture leaders of our smaller churches. The spiritual lives of PCUSA congregants are being revived and nourished by our Congregational Renewal Ministry, by the curricula being published by PFR, and by our Christian Life Ministry. And our Issues Ministry is providing sound advice on matters of pressing concern to the whole church, aiming to set out solid biblical arguments and to tell the stories of the transforming power of the Holy Spirit. And being a long-time seminarian myself, I have a particular fondness for our seminary ministry. In the last year we have seen the birth of the first PFR seminary chapter at Princeton Seminary, a group whose ministry will help our denomination have the well-trained evangelical pastors it so desperately needs.

Board members and friends of PFR, the Lord has called us to this ministry, he has blessed us in this new day, and we are poised to answer his call with the resources and energy that only he can provide. God is using your investment of time, money, and energy to bring renewal to his church, to bring the hope of the Gospel to those who are lost, and to bring strength to weary believers.

The opportunities and the dangers will remain with us. But we can be assured that we are not the first to have faced these, and we will not be the last. Whatever age and however much ambiguity, the Lord is faithful, his calling is sure, his Gospel is freedom. We as PFR rest in Gods faithfulness, we are responding to his calling, and we live boldly in his freedom. As the PCUSA struggles, and as North America becomes a mission field, PFRs ministries are needed now more than ever. Because of Gods mercy, our ministries have a long reach in the church, and our voice is unique: it is Reformed and evangelical, and it is unitive. It is my prayer and hope that the Lord will continue to bless PFR, so that we might not only continue our ministries but expand them, that the PCUSA might be renewed in head and members.

It is a privilege to be your new Executive Director. May God continue to bless Presbyterians For Renewal and the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.).

Touchstones For Renewal

michaelryanwalker@gmail.com (Michael R. Walker) — Tue, 14 Dec 2004 00:00:00 -0600

Note: This article was written while I was the Executive Director of Presbyterians For Renewal.

As a way of introducing myself and the work I hope to do with PFR, I would like to offer the following touchstones for renewal, some reflections on the way forward for PFR and for our denomination.

As Presbyterians and as PFR, we have a big task ahead of us. As the PC(USA) continues to wrestle with its own identity, PFR will remain committed to fostering a Reformed and evangelical vision for the renewal of the church. As Executive Director of PFR, I will commit my energy to implementing that vision, that the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) may honor God more purely and proclaim the Gospel of Jesus Christ more boldly.

Renewal is the continual, transforming work of the Holy Spirit

For many years PFR has engaged the church with the following mission: As followers of Jesus Christ, seeking to conform our lives and beliefs to the Word of God, our mission is to participate in Gods renewing, transforming work in the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). Because renewal is the work of the Holy Spirit, we participate in Gods renewal of the church, which is an ongoing process of transformation, necessary in every age of the churchs life. The Holy Spirit renews the church at every level: individual, congregational, connectional, and global. Because the Holy Spirit is the ultimate source of our renewal, rather than our own energy or wisdom, we are called to pray for and be instruments of the Spirits work in our midst!

Renewal at the local level

Our connectional identity and the comprehensive nature of the Spirits work lead us to engage in renewal efforts at both the congregational and the national levels. The individual congregation is the mission center of the Spirits activity, for it is here that the Gospel of Jesus Christ takes root in the lives of Christians. Responding to the Gospel proclaimed from the pulpit and made visible in the sacraments, congregations strive to be faithful to the Gospel, witnessing to its power in their own communities. Even so, as the last several decades have made clear, our congregations face tough challenges today, and PFR is committed to facing these challenges without wavering.

One challenge we continue to face is the need to support the theological and spiritual development of our pastors and elders, indeed of all our members. Today, even many evangelical congregations struggle to integrate biblical preaching, our confessional heritage, God-honoring pastoral care, and faithful church-growth strategies into ministry at the local level. As we look to the future and respond to the spiritual and educational needs of the church, PFR will continue to be a strong presence of renewal in the church through its Issues Ministry, Curriculum, Network of Presbyterian Women in Leadership, Seminary Ministry, as well as our Wee Kirk and Christian Life conferences and Congregational Renewals. We have seen many hopeful signs! To give but one example, this year we have witnessed a growing Presbyterians For Renewal student movement at Princeton Theological Seminary, which promises to send the church future leaders who are prepared to proclaim the Gospel with passion and integrity. By addressing the needs of our seminarians and young pastors, and by tapping the creative and bright evangelical minds in our church, I believe we can foster the renewal of mainline evangelical theology that is so important for every aspect of our churchs life. PFR seeks to be a critical instrument in bringing this renewal to fruition, by preparing and distributing reliable materials through our publications, our website, and other forms of popular media.

Another challenge we face is the fact that many evangelical pastors and congregations feel isolated in their own presbyteries. In such circumstances, it is extremely difficult for them to see beyond their intense local struggles into a brighter future for their presbytery and for our denomination as a whole. PFR wants to collaborate with these pastors and congregations, helping them to network for mutual support and to cultivate strategic thinking within their presbyteries. PFR will continue to expand its base of local chapters, fostering grassroots energy for the renewal of our member congregations and their respective presbyteries. Supporting strategic planning in many presbyteries will also be important as we look forward to a future where the General Assembly will be focused on working with numerous overtures that seek to implement an evangelical vision for the denomination.

We find a further local challenge in the fact that our congregations continue to reflect the racial/ethnic and economic divisions found in the wider culture. To faithfully live out the Gospel, we must strive against this part of our history and prepare for a more diverse future. Nurturing an evangelical multiculturalism in the church is a particularly pressing need in our age, and PFR is committed to addressing this need with vigor. On this important matter we need to be constantly reminded that right doctrine and right living can never be separated. We will seek to raise up minority leaders, increase awareness, listen to our congregations struggles, and offer creative, practical paradigms for the way forward.

Renewal at the national level

Of course, some of the most pressing issues facing the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) today involve decisions made at the national level, both in the General Assembly and in the denominational offices in Louisville. Debates over ordination standards, abortion, social witness policy, the Washington office, ecumenical relationships, institutional structures, enforcing the Constitutionthe list could go onhave preoccupied the national conversation, usually to the detriment of the concerns of local congregations. One of my goals as Executive Director will be to give PFRs national voice greater prominence, becoming more proactive in our political advocacy. I will work hard to get out in front of the issues, thinking well beyond defensive measures, presenting a strong, irenic evangelical voice in the denomination. In addition to building relationships, we will invest in publications, conferences, videos, and creative forms of commissioner education, covering various pressing issues of evangelical concern.

Because ideas can change the world, it is heartening to note that as a widely respected yet distinctively evangelical voice, PFR is well positioned to be a clearinghouse for confessional, creative theological thinking. We will be working on the concerns of our younger pastors, such as the deeply felt conflict between a high view of the connectional church on the one hand, and distrust of the institution on the other. We will offer a faithful and concrete approach to homosexual practice and the debate over ordination standards. And we will strive to help the church evangelize an increasingly post-Christian, pluralistic society.

A word about PFRs role in the struggle over ordination standards is in order here. PFR has a good track record of working for broad-based renewal, rather than being defined by one issue. I am convinced this approach is the right one. Having said that, PFR will make a concentrated effort in the coming years to maintain biblical ordination standards, including G-6.0106b, while partnering with other groups in the Presbyterian Renewal Network. The next year and a half leading up to the Assembly in Birmingham promises to be a crucial time, and we will be making the case for biblical and unitive standards, offering guidance to commissioners before we gather in Birmingham. If biblical ordination standards are maintained at the next Assembly, I am hopeful that the following two years can be more positive years of evangelical hope for our future, hope to be made concrete in overtures and forward-looking policy initiatives that may de-center the ordination issue. If we can fill these years with multicultural leadership and a global vision, a broad-based coalition could then move our denomination forward, witnessing to Jesus Christ by engaging the culture without conforming to it.

Renewal is future oriented and globally conceived

As a Reformed evangelical, I am convinced that looking forward and trusting the Spirits strength is a mandate for evangelicals. Because the Holy Spirit sanctifies us, moving us forward in our pursuit of holiness, we must be the true progressives, those making progress in the way we engage the culture and conform ourselves to the character of Christ. No culture since the Falland no church for that matterhas ever been beyond the need for repentance and transformation. In other words, our vision for the church is not to return to a glorious past or to defend the status quo. Evangelical renewal is not conservative in this sense; it is future oriented.

For instance, when PFR defends our churchs present standards that are biblical, we do so as part of our interest in moving forward in our proclamation of the Gospel. Fighting the battle over ordination standards is one part of a broader effort to offer a positive vision for renewal. Now and in the future, our wider concerns for Assembly action may include:

1) more effective allocation of funds as well as altering our bureaucratic structure, so that our national structure follows the concerns of our congregations rather than the reverse;

2) improving our efforts in global missions to bring the Gospel to unreached people groups;

3) developing reciprocal relationships with churches in the Global South, where we learn from them how to better contextualize the Gospel, which will help us be more effective in our own new church developments;

4) developing a program for training pastors to be missionary-evangelists in our own increasingly secular context;

5) having a more consistently pro-life ethic;

6) taking a hard look at the curricula of our denominational seminaries and the programs widely endorsed to train our pastors; and

7) exploring how our confessional heritage can play a more significant role in our identity as a church and in the education of our pastors. In the coming years, PFR will explore these and other issues, working through our governing bodies to effect positive change for the future.

Finally, today more than ever, our vision for the renewal of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) must embrace a global perspective. The Holy Spirit is working all over the world, and a global consciousness will lead us to consider the Spirits movement in our brothers and sisters of evangelical faith in various cultures and locales. A global consciousness will encourage us, as we participate not just in a struggling American denomination but in the 21st century explosion of the Christian faith in the southern hemisphere. How can we learn from these non-Western churches? A global perspective will also alert us to changing demographic patterns: are we prepared for the influx of evangelical, non-white immigrants to the United States? How can we invest in the leadership of racial and ethnic minorities who in many ways represent the future of American Christianity? Evangelicalism is truly global and multicultural; our evangelical voice in the PC(USA) should be as well.

Obviously, this vision for the church cannot be accomplished by a few individuals or a small team. We must unite our passions, offering ourselves to be transformed by the Spirit at the local level. I am eager to partner with you in the ministry of the Gospel! Please feel free to contact me with your questions, concerns, or to share how the Spirit has been at work in your congregations life or in your participation in a PFR event. Soli Deo Gloria!