Props: Table/desk and chair, pen and paper. Telephone would be good but could be mimed in.

Character: Smitten man (S.M.)

Plot and Setting: S.M. is in a room with a table and chair, trying to compose a love poem to his (girlfriend, fiancee, wife – adjust as desired). When he starts the poem is quite sappy. As he works things keep interrupting him and cause him to change his mind about his poem. By the time he is through what he has is a serious poem about God’s love.

*enter, scribbling on a clipboard while mumbling*: To my dearest love. My love for you is like… is like… is like…

*walks to side, looking out real or imagined window*: Look at the view out that window. What a wonderful day. A day that makes the heart grow light. *deep breath* Ahh, fresh air with roses and love is in the air. Love! Roses! That’s it! *scribbles* To my dearest love. My love for you is like a bed of roses. *looks up* Whew! Finally a start to my poem. My sugar plum will turn to mush when she reads this expression of my adoration!

*cocks his head, listening to something*: What is that noise? *goes to window* No! Cats! Get out of the flowers! *takes off shoe and throws it* Get out of the rose bed! Oh no. The roses are ruined! My love for you is like a pile of vegetation destroyed by cats in battle? *makes expressive motion of scratching out the poem*

*sits at table, head in hands, frustrated*: My love for you is like… My love for you is like… My love for you is like the giant California redwoods / Lasting the ages with strength displayed / Mixing grace with beauty, faithfulness with strength. / My love is…

*phone rings, S.M. exasperated*: The phone! No! Just when I’m on a role!

*answers phone*: Hello? Mom? Mother, slow down. What? Mother, wait! What did you just see on the news? Massive wildfires in northern California? The redwoods have all been destroyed? Government declares it a disaster area? Oh no! *hangs up*

S.M.: My love for you is like a pile of charred ash blowing in the wind. *vigorous scratching motion* My love for you is like the rays of the sun / Shining strong and vibrant / Casting beautiful shimmers across the sky.

*phone rings*: Who is calling now? Hello? Oh, hi sis. No, what about the sun? A strong flare coming that could damage satellites? *sigh* Okay, thanks sis. Bye. *hangs up*

S.M.: To my dearest love. My love for you is like the rays of the sun / scattering pieces of broken satellites across the universe. *vigorous scratching*

*stands and paces about*: Maybe this is why love gets such a bad reputation. *looks lost in thought then reacts to something he hears* Well there’s the sound of the church bells. Five o’clock. Just one hour until I have to meet my love and still nothing to give her!

*sits at desk*: My love is like… My love is like… Man, I love that song the church bells are playing. Amazing grace. Good song. Now God’s love, there’s something that cats or fire or stars can’t destroy.

*looks thoughtful, starts scribbling, jumps up*

My dearest love,

My love is like the love of Christ,
Who spread his arms upon the tree.

His love unmixed with fear of fail,
But sure and fast and free.

His body pierced, his blood shed out,
And all for love of thee, of me.

Nothing can take us from his hand,
Nothing his love remove.

And by his grace, his grace alone,
Such is my love for thee.

Richard Baxter in The Reformed Pastor on irreverent preaching that seeks to entertain:

Of all preaching in the world, (that speaks not stark lies) I hate that preaching which tends to make the hearers laugh, or to move their minds with tickling levity, and affect them as stage-plays used to do, instead of affecting them with a holy reverence of the name of God.

Pages 119-120.

In 2006 a movie came out that quickly became popular among Christians. Facing the Giants tells the story of an unbelieving football coach who struggles with a losing team and a bad marriage. Along the way he is saved and through changes in his life his marriage is renewed and his football team goes on to be undefeated.

The undertone of this movie is that if you are saved everything in your life will get better. You will be happier, your wife will get pregnant, your football team will win.

I was reminded of this when reading the recent edition of our state Baptist newspaper. Below is a snippet:

When the East Prairie Eagles defeated archrival Charleston 46-21 on Oct. 17, it was their first victory in Charleston in a half-century. The first words East Prairies coach Jason Aycock heard were from his pastor, Jon Archie, who yelled, “This is exactly what happens when your coach gets saved.”

The Bible makes no promises about a person’s physical success once he is saved. Salvation secures a relationship with God, forgiveness of sin, a regenerated life, and hope that transcends the grave. Nowhere are we promised that salvation will bring happy marriages or winning teams.

Granted, once a person is saved they may well begin to live their own lives better and so sew seed for a better relationship with others. But it always comes across as distasteful, unbiblical, and even deceptive when some claim that being a Christian will bring success in all areas of life. These are not just the name-it-and-claim-it folks. Facing the Giants was popular among many Evangelicals across the board even though what it offered was a more subtle form of prosperity theology.

If you want a successful life, serve Christ. Follow him faithfully. Measure success by how well you have yielded to him, living in the example of his Son. If physical success follows, praise the Lord! That is a cause for rejoicing, but it is not a promise. Winning football teams is not exactly what happens when your coach gets saved.

As if I didn’t struggle enough with the weight of preaching, the Pyro folks have to go make it worse. Be sure to check out Dan Phillips’ post Carpe Diem.

This may be the only time they’ve been in a church, about to hear someone who claims to believe the Word, the Gospel. Maybe they’re there because a friend or relative has prayed for them for months, for years, for decades. Finally, they’re in a (professedly) Christian church, intending to listen to whatever a (professedly) Christian preacher is about to say. It is literally a critical moment, a moment of crisis, of judgment. Angels attend! The Triune God is there! Endless ages will reverbrate with the impact of what happens next. These people are accountable, you are accountable. All eyes are on you.

The NY Times has a piece examining Evangelical growth during times of economic distress. I really wish they had chosen some different church leaders to interview. Give it a read and see if some of the marketspeak doesn’t make you cringe. An example:

But why the evangelical churches seem to thrive especially in hard times is a Rorschach test of perspective.

For some evangelicals, the answer is obvious. ”We have the greatest product on earth,” said the Rev. Steve Tomlinson, senior pastor of the Shelter Rock Church.

Truth is, in hard times people’s distractions and illusions begin to fail. We are so good at ignoring what lies in front of us. But when hard times hit it becomes harder to ignore truth and people begin to realize the only thing they can turn to is what they should have turned to all along. I pray, though, that churches would be bold enough and faithful enough to offer the full gospel and not watered down marketspeak. Jesus is not a product to give a try for 60 days. He is Creator and Lord who demands faithfulness.

One of the reasons Christians defend traditional views of marriage is that marriage paints for us a picture of Christ and his church – the union of the bride with the bridegroom. God’s organization of marriage is such that the way the husband and wife interact paints a picture of the way God interacts with his church. Mixing gender roles distorts that picture. Redefining marriage destroys it entirely.

But this is not a post about marriage, it’s a post about taking care of widows and orphans. People have rightly criticized evangelicals for focusing too much on things like homosexuality and too little on things like feeding the hungry. I would argue – though the example of my life is woefully inadequate to back up this argument – that we should devote as much time defending the oppressed, visiting prisoners, and taking care of widows and orphans as we spend trying to preserve biblical institutions in society. Both present a picture of God, a reflection of God’s grace to the world.

Consider who you are, how miserable your state, how hopeless and in need of the absolute, free grace of another to bring you salvation. And then Christ came. He transformed you, brought you to himself, cleansed every sin, and brought you into his eternal kingdom.

The question then is, what are you doing in your life that presents to the world what Christ did for you? This, I think, is one reason it is so important for us to help those in need. There are other very good reasons to do such things (God said to, that pretty much settles the argument) but one motivation for Christians is we know every time we feed the hungry or clothe the poor, showing concern for the physical as well as spiritual well being of another human being, we reflect God in the world, shining his light through our good deeds

Let’s not mistake church attendance for helping people in need. Throwing money in the offering plate is also not enough. The Father of the fatherless, the protector of widows, wants us to show his true character to the world. How are you displaying his mercy and grace and generosity to those who are in desperate need of your help?

While hunting for more info on Charles Finney (blame it on these guys) I turned to Christianity and Western Thought, vol 2, by Steve Wilkens and Alan Padgett. I came across the following, talking about various revivalist movements such as that by Finney. These words could easily be applied to movements of our own day:

These and numerous other groups often grew out of a conviction that existing denominations, doctrines, and practices stifled Christian vitality. Though not always explicitly stated, the twin concerns that drove these movements are faith in individual judgment (or stated in the negative, distrust of institutions) and a belief that the past stands in the way of the future.

While often envious of the massive appeal of such movements, the guardians of tradition pointed to dangers inherent in revivalism. First, these movements placed heavy emphasis on the experiential aspects of faith. Therefore, church practices such as catechetical instruction, reliance on an educated pastorate and the sacraments were downplayed, redefined, or eliminated. Doctrine, creed and confession were given little attention. Second, such movements led to a proliferation of new sects. To the traditionalists, sectarianism was one of the major problems faced by the church universal and was the natural outcome of abandoning practices and doctrines that formerly provided some level of unity. A third danger was individualism, in which a person’s private experience of the divine became the grid through which religious doctrine and practice was judged, rather than the other way around.

(pp 247-248)

Why do we involve children in church? What is our motivation behind giving children various roles in the worship and life of the church? I have in mind things such as children’s choir or plays like the Christmas pageants that usually involve mostly children.

One thing that tends to bother me is that it seems many churches involve children for the Aww factor. Children are cute and children do funny things. Many times children are involved mostly to warm the hearts of the adults of the congregation. This is not a bad thing but it should not be a primary motivation.

What should our motivation be for involving children in church? Instruction, teaching, and growth in Christ. The value of a children’s program should not be determined by whether or not it leads children to do cute or fun things but whether or not it helps them grow in the knowledge of God. Do the Christmas pageants and the children’s choirs but do them with the primary interest of helping the children grow. Put the kids in front of the adults but do it to help them experience the richness of life in the church. Perhaps even have them do some less visible but greatly valuable things – visit nursing homes; see older people in their homes; write letters to missionaries, etc. Maybe even put them in front of people to demonstrate their knowledge of hard things, such as having them learn and recite one of the many catechisms out there.

May your children’s ministry be completely filled with a desire to glorify God by leading children deeper into a knowledge of him. May your children’s ministry be protected from the temptation to simply provide warm moments for adults and fun moments for kids.

I have finally finished reading Doug Pagitt’s book A Christianity Worth Believing. I’m not yet ready with a review, I haven’t even decided what form it will take. I profoundly disagree with Pagitt on just about every issue he addresses – and he addresses a lot – so my normal approach to reviewing would be a little difficult. But I wanted to throw out one observation from my reading.

The ideas Pagitt frequently argues against are a distortion of biblical Christianity. His foe is also my foe. He presents those ideas as representing traditional Christianity but I would argue that it is not. There are, however, people who believe and promote the kinds of things he argues against. Many of those people may well be in our own churches. Not all of the notions Pagitt opposes are distortions of the truth but enough of them are to make me concerned about the ideas and thinking people are carrying away from our churches.

Doctrine matters. Theology matters. Solid biblical teaching really matters. It matters because many people are left with half notions and hints at the truth but have not been guided in understanding the whole council of God. They have bits and pieces of the truth but, to paraphrase Sen. John Edwards, 99% of the truth is still not the truth. In the case of theology, 99% right would be outstanding. But many people are walking around with 25% or so of biblical truth. The result is the kinds of distorted theology Pagitt describes as traditional Christianity.

Much of this is the responsibility of the individual. People are accountable for how they study and learn about God. But churches do bear a large measure of responsibility. Churches cannot be content to teach shallow doctrine or half notions. All of Scripture must be presented to the church and it must be presented with clarity and depth. Take people deep into the word and there give them a solid foundation for their thinking. Only then will they be able to distinguish between the voice of our good shepherd and the voice of the thief who comes to steal, kill, and destroy.

Church leaders, what kind of people are you raising up your church members to be? Members, what are you doing to help other Christians grow in their faith and knowledge of Christ?

John Piper has a great post called Test Revival With Doctrine. The occasion for the post is the ridiculous “revival” in Lakeland, FL. How are we to judge such things? By holding them up to sounds biblical doctrine and teaching. We need doctrine in our churches otherwise people will not know how to judge whether a thing is good or bad.

Here is Piper:

Our test for every Lakeland that comes along should first be doctrinal and expositional. Is this awakening carried along by a “love for the truth” and a passion to hear the whole counsel of God proclaimed?