Rejoicing in Reformation Day

(This is a revision of a post from Oct. 31, 2012.)

Happy Reformation Day!

As evangelical Christians, we should rejoice in this day and what it represents. On Oct. 31, 1517, a Catholic monk named Martin Luther nailed his “95 Theses” to the church door in Wittenberg, Germany. That event helped set off the Reformation, which continued for decades and still affects us today. We will celebrate the 500th anniversary of this history-changing event next year, God willing.

That reform came at great cost to Luther and many others, and we continue to benefit from their sacrifice and the truths they recovered, stood for and proclaimed. The issues that produced the Protestant and evangelical movements remain important today.

The truths of the Reformation are often summarized as the five solas. That word, sola, means “only” or “alone.” The five are: Scripture alone; Christ alone; grace alone; faith alone, and the glory of God alone.

The use of the word “alone” is important. For instance, the Roman Catholic Church did not deny Scripture had authority; it said Scripture was not the sole final authority.

As we think about the Reformation ignited by Luther on this date 499 years ago, let us remind ourselves of these truths:

-- Scripture alone is our final authority, not Scripture plus an individual, council, church, tradition, experience or document.

-- Christ alone is our mediator with God, not Christ plus any human righteousness or accomplishment.

-- Grace alone is the way of salvation, not grace plus any human work or method.

-- Faith alone is the means of justification, not faith plus any human merit or infusion of Christ’s righteousness.

-- The glory of God alone is the purpose of life, not His glory plus that of any other.

As those saved by grace alone through faith alone because of Christ alone, may we hold onto these truths as we recognize our ongoing need for reformation in our own lives.

The evangelical election audit: Where is grace?

Two weeks from today, we will have a new president and a new Congress -- barring results that leave the election winners undetermined.

The pundits and many other Americans will likely be conducting postmortems already, and some of our fellow evangelical Christians may be providing similar examinations of our movement. There will be much for evangelicals to discuss, and lots of it will be painful.

Even before election day, here is the first of my observations as an evangelical about evangelicals and this presidential campaign:

Some of us have failed to extend grace to each other.

The division over Republican nominee Donald Trump has not always shown us at our best. Some on both sides have fallen short. The harshness in rhetoric toward others seemed to be more from the #NeverTrump band in the primaries. It appears to have switched to the Trump-supporting evangelicals since the GOP convention.

Passions still run high. Both sides are convinced of their positions. It is difficult in such situations not to lash out, convinced ours is the only possible way for a Christian to think.

But we can, and must, do better. We sin if we don't. Amid our disagreement over what to do in this election, we who were enemies of Christ before He made us His own should not treat one another as enemies. We are brothers and sisters through His blood. We may have a family disagreement, but we should give each other not only the benefit of the doubt but, as pastor/blogger Scotty Smith recently said, the benefit of grace.

It is not the unanimity of our votes but the love we have for one another that enables the world to see in the church what God is like (I John 4:11-12).

We have almost two weeks left. May we express our differences before Nov. 8 with the desire to understand and the devotion to love one another. And may we do so in every election hereafter.

The church and the police shootings of black men

Once again, the shooting deaths of black men by police -- available for all to see in videos online -- and ensuing protests against law enforcement have brought to the surface the longstanding divisiveness that marks black-white relations in the United States.

As the church of the Lord Jesus Christ, we are uniquely qualified to respond to this issue and promote both healing and unity. We should not miss this opportunity.

As His followers, we know a reality many others do not. We not only know from God's Word we -- and all other human beings -- are alike in being image bearers of God, but, as God's redeemed people, we also know we are united eternally to one another by the gospel of Jesus. Our paramount identity is in Him, not in anything else that characterizes us.

How should we respond to these ongoing shooting deaths of black men -- the latest being Terence Crutcher, Keith Scott and a man in El Cajon, Calif., who is so far unnamed? There are a number of ways we should respond, including seeking justice, but here are only four based on Rom. 12:

(1) We should lament their deaths, and we should lament with those who lament.

The taking of the life of any person made in God's image is a sobering act, especially when there is a question about whether it is done in self-defense. "[W]eep with those who weep," the apostle Paul wrote (Rom. 12:15). And as Southern Baptist, African-American pastor H.B. Charles has said, "The Bible exhorts us to weep with those who weep. It doesn't tell us to judge whether they should be weeping."

2. We should listen.

Paul wrote, "Do not be wise in your own estimation" (Rom. 12:16). Earlier in the verse, he instructed the Christians in Rome to "not be haughty in mind."

The perspectives on police shootings of African Americans can be vastly different between blacks and whites. We should not assume we have full knowledge. We should not presume our experience is normative. We should realize we likely have much to learn.

As white disciples of Jesus, we should recognize the experiences of our black brothers and sisters in this society can be starkly divergent from ours, especially in their interactions with police. We should ask them to share their perspectives. We should ask them to help us understand. We should be willing to have our judgments transformed.

3. We should love.

Our love for one another -- including across color and ethnic differences -- should be genuine. In Rom. 12:9, Paul calls for the church to love "without hypocrisy," then explains in the following verses what authentic love looks like:

-- Genuine love is holy. It hates evil, including racism at an individual or corporate level.

-- Genuine love is brotherly. It is like the love of family members for one another, because we are the eternal family of God.

-- Genuine love is honoring. It gives "preference to one another in honor," which means we lead the way in showing another's honor is more important than ours.

-- Genuine love is diligent. It does not delay in loving another but serves as our vocation, because it is.

-- Genuine love is trusting. It demonstrates faith in God, even while "persevering in tribulation."

-- Genuine love is serving. It humbly serves others as if their needs are ours.

4. We should leave revenge to God.

We should not seek to gain revenge -- against police or anyone else. Vengeance belongs only to God.

In not being "overcome with evil" (Rom. 12:21), we must not only avoid being overwhelmed by the evil of others, but as pastor John MacArthur says: "[W]e must not allow ourselves to be overcome by our own evil responses. Our own evil is infinitely more detrimental to us than is the evil done to us by others.”

As the church, may we live as a diverse community that resembles increasingly the humble, loving Lord who unites us.

Photo credit: Paul Taylor

'Bible-less Christianity' in America's churches

Kenneth Briggs, a longtime religion reporter and former religion editor of The New York Times, went on a two-year pilgrimage across America to track the Bible's status in public life. The result was his book The Invisible Bestseller: Searching for the Bible in America, which was released earlier this month.

He recently did an interview with Religion News Service in which he offered some insights that should be of interest to evangelical Christians. They certainly were to me. Here are the questions and answers that I consider particularly important, even foreboding, for those of us who count ourselves in the evangelical camp:

Q: In all your travels and all the the different places you went looking for the Bible, was there any place where you were expecting to see the Bible where it wasn’t?

A: In the mega-type churches – the churches that were really heavily loaded with the visual and the audio and the rest of the electronic stuff, the music – I was really stunned by what I saw as that alternative verson of Christianity being delivered through those means. I didn’t consider it biblical in the fullest sense. I thought it was highly stylized – the versions of Jesus, who Jesus was, being filtered through these videos – and, in some way, I found almost shocking in how they seemed to vary from the much fuller picture that exists in the New Testament. So I was surprised by that.

Q: You write in the book about the emergence of “Bible-less Christianity.” Can you talk about how you see that play out in American culture?

A: The background, of course, is that the Reformation gave at least a segment of Christians access to the Bible in a way that hadn’t happened before. Most of our history has been a rather Bible-less Christianity that was dictated or defined mostly by the hierarchical church, not by people who read the Bible. . . . We gained the freedom to approach it, and then in the current age, we have ceded that exploration to media, to entertainment forms, to prepackaged interpretations that are delivered in video, audio and pulpit forms so that there’s a substitute Bible that isn’t the Bible, per se, at the same time that people aren’t reading.

If it is true there is what Briggs describes as "Bible-less Christianity," we probably can expect Bible-less Christians. In essence, what his observation seems to indicate is: Bible-less churches are producing Bible-less Christianity and Bible-less Christians.

How can we expect Bible-less churches and Bible-less Christians to stand amidst the torrent of cultural pressure that is likely in the future to engulf all of us who claim the name of Jesus? Without Scripture, how will we have the solid foundation to fortify us? "Bible-less Christianity" is setting up many confessing saints for a disaster.

May God graciously grant a renewal in keeping with the church-transforming, world-changing Reformation of nearly 500 years ago. Fortunately, there are an increasing number of evangelical churches committed to basing their worship, preaching, teaching and the rest of church life on the Bible. That is the intention of Covenant Community Church. May we remain faithful by God's grace.

Photo from WELS net.

The church and the 2016 election

Americans will go to the polls two months from today. This will be the 17th presidential election in my lifetime, and none has seemed as vexing as this one.

Like most people, I have opinions on the election. I also have a plan for what I expect to do on Nov. 8. As a pastor, however, I don't believe there is any calling from God or wisdom in ministry that would lead me to believe I should endorse any candidate for any office. That would not be a wise use of the privilege God has given me in helping shepherd His people, and it could lead to the undermining of the gospel ministry that is most important to our church and me.

I don't believe, however, that means I should say nothing to the saints of Covenant Community Church in Fredericksburg, Va. My responsibility as a shepherd leads me to offer some thoughts on how we should think about this election. So what I say next is primarily for the people in our church, though I hope it will help others.

Here are three recommendations I offer:

1. Let's be honest with ourselves.

It seems to me evangelical Christians should acknowledge at least this: Neither of the major party nominees would be an acceptable option in a previous election in our lifetimes. The Democrats and Republicans have offered candidates who are deeply flawed in character and policy, if we can even discern what their ultimate policy will be. In addition, the Libertarian and Green parties have failed to offer evangelicals any meaningful encouragement in their nominees, especially when it comes to the issue of the sanctity of human life.

As a result, many evangelicals are dismayed about their choices. And they are expressing that dismay by voicing some unprecedented plans -- including not voting, writing in a name or voting for what they may describe as "the lesser of two evils" or maybe three or four. It seems many evangelicals have determined their vote will be based on whom they most strongly oppose. That's understandable. But before any of us go any further in publicly promoting a candidate, we should make sure we don't have blinders on regarding his or her faults -- faults that typically would disqualify a candidate in the eyes of many, if not most, evangelicals.

Let's be honest with ourselves.

2. Let's be sensitive to and gracious with one another.

I think I understand the dilemma many people will face when they enter the polling booth in November. My primary concern is how we handle the next two months, as well as those that follow the election. Will we think of the interests of others in the body of Christ and not just our own (Phil. 2:4)? Will we extend grace to our brothers and sisters who make different decisions than our own?

The name of Jesus, the integrity of the gospel message and the health of the church are far more important than who next fills the White House. It appears to me one of the most significant issues for white evangelicals in this election campaign is whether we will seek to look at it from the perspectives of our minority brothers and sisters. It appears some white evangelicals have made progress in recent years in learning from African-American saints about their experience. Yet, that progress might suffer a setback if white evangelicals aren't sensitive to their fellow saints regarding this election.

For instance, one major presidential candidate supports full abortion rights and government funding of abortion in a country in which black and Hispanic women have a disproportionately high number of abortions. The United States' population is 13 percent African American, but black women have 28 percent of the abortions. The American population is 18 percent Hispanic, but Hispanic women have 25 percent of the abortions. Another major nominee has retweeted during this campaign the messages of white supremacists and complained about a supposed inability to receive a fair trial from a judge with Mexican heritage.

Will white evangelicals decry the policies of the first candidate while ignoring the actions of the second? Will white evangelicals seek to understand how the latter candidate's rhetoric and actions affect black and Hispanic Americans, especially those who are their brothers and sisters?

Let's be sensitive to and gracious with those to whom we are united eternally through the blood of Jesus.

3. Let's be gospel aware with all others.

We should consider what our words -- often shared in social media -- and actions convey to those who are outside the family of God but are watching His children to see how they will live during this stressful time. Will our support of or opposition to a particular candidate reflect both the truth and grace of Christ? Will the way we express our support or opposition demonstrate our trust in the power of the gospel and the sovereignty of God?

For instance, what will the words and actions of evangelicals say to millennials and others about how we believe a society should treat the vulnerable, whether they are the unborn, the immigrant, the disabled, the ethnic minority or the religiously disenfranchised? How will we show we are concerned about both the policies and character of all candidates?

In all that we do, may we be aware of what the gospel effect on others might be. To gain a president of our choosing while losing the platform to share the gospel of Jesus would be a sorrowful tradeoff indeed.

May God graciously grant us humility, compassion and wisdom that the church of Jesus might come out of this time of testing more united than ever and more prepared than ever to be a faithful embassy of ambassadors for our one true King.

Photo by DonkeyHotey.

The church and the loss of truth

(I finished this post in the middle of last week but held it until now because of the shooting deaths of Alton Sterling, Philando Castile and five Dallas police officers. This piece is not about that tragic subject, but I hope it proves helpful at this time of trial in our country.)

Hopefully, we, as Christ's followers, celebrated our country's independence last week with eyes wide open. Any celebration of America's birthday should be accompanied by the recognition the health of the republic, the dignity of its people and the governing ability of its office-holders are imperiled. Among all the many reasons we have for mourning America's decline is the loss of truth.

In May, The New York Times Magazine reported how Ben Rhodes, the White House deputy national security advisor, successfully manufactured a narrative to sell the nuclear deal with Iran to mislead American lawmakers and citizens. Last Tuesday, FBI Director James Comey told the public what surely nearly everyone suspected was true after observing Hillary Clinton for 25 years in the spotlight -- the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee lied repeatedly about her handling of classified emails as secretary of State. Meanwhile, the other major party's presumptive nominee, Donald Trump, has offered little evidence he can be trusted -- especially when his campaign positions clash dramatically across time.

This deceit by American office-holders and politicians is not new. It just seems to be worse than before. Too many politicians and their supporters believe their positions and the power to enforce them are ultimate. Telling Americans the truth has little value. The result among the citizenry is cynicism and distrust. In this environment, what reason do we have to believe anything many of our leaders say? How will we recover the trust that is needed for this republic to survive and its citizens to thrive?

Into this void steps the church of Jesus. The loss of truth and trust in America underscores the reality of the church as a community of truth and trust.

As in other areas, the church should be a thriving counter-culture in a dying culture. While the reigning culture denigrates truth, the church is to honor, guard and promote truth. No matter the loss of truth in the country, truth must rule in the community of Christ. We have the truth -- centered in God's revelation of Himself in His written Word (John 17:17) and His living Word (John 14:6). We are to live like those who belong to the Truth and are controlled by the Truth.

As the church, we -- as individuals or a body -- are to:

-- Tell the truth, even when it is harmful to our reputations or difficult for our listeners.

-- Repent and ask for forgiveness when we fail to tell the truth, whether that means before an individual or a group.

-- Hold to, confess, preach and teach the truth, even when it conflicts with the culture's current thinking and might cost us greatly.

We can lovingly speak truth and live lives marked by truth. In doing so, we can provide an appealing aroma in a decaying culture. Undoubtedly, we will do it imperfectly. But in His perfections, God will graciously bring to our covenant community those in whom He has planted a desire for truth.

* -- Photo credit.

The Christian and the pledge of allegiance

Should a Christian pledge allegiance to the flag?

Our church discussed this issue in a corporate gathering last July 5. Since we again are nearing America's birthday and the patriotic celebrations that go with it, now seems like a good time to tackle the question.

Before I explain why I think it is appropriate for a Christian to pledge allegiance to the American flag, and why I have the freedom to do so, here is a point I believe to be the most important one I will make: This is not an issue Christians should divide over.

If your conscience does not give you the freedom to pledge allegiance to the flag, then you should not do so. We are Christians first, not Americans. No Christian should violate his or her conscience. A child of God may gain understanding in the future that frees that disciple to do something he or she previously did not sense the freedom to do. But until that time, it is best for a believer not to go against conscience.

If a Christian is convinced it is right to pledge allegiance to the flag, he or she should not criticize or be judgmental toward the brother or sister who does not. Neither should the disciple who conscientiously objects to making the pledge find fault with the one who freely participates in the act.

For me, the freedom to pledge allegiance to the flag is based on one primary reality that leads to a secondary consideration. For clarification, I am speaking of my practice as an individual American citizen who is also a citizen of a greater nation -- the kingdom of God. As a pastor, I would not lead the church to pledge allegiance to the flag corporately nor do I consider it appropriate to display the flag in a worship center.

As an individual, I say the pledge of allegiance because:

1. The pledge is relative. It is not absolute. It is not ultimate. When I place my hand on my heart, look at the flag and say the pledge, I realize it is not my primary allegiance. I like what David Mathis, executive editor with Desiring God and a pastor, wrote in a blog post three years ago on July 4: "If we are in Christ, joined to him by faith, all other pledges of allegiance have been relativized, whatever our nation of origin or naturalization." I recognize the pledge to the flag does not usurp my commitment to Jesus. When I say the pledge, I am acknowledging I have responsibilities as a citizen of the United States and I am grateful for the God-given privilege of experiencing the benefits of living in this country. But I am not saying the flag or this country is my Sovereign Lord. Only Jesus is my Lord.

No commitment we make in our lives matches or surpasses that to Christ. As Christians, we sometimes make pledges other than the one we make to the flag.

When a Christian takes the military oath or the oath of office to Congress, he or she makes a pledge, including these words: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same." A Christian can make that pledge of allegiance without compromising his or her allegiance to Jesus as Lord.

When a Christian makes a marriage vow, he or she is making a pledge that is relative in some sense. If a person threatens to divorce a Christian husband or wife unless the spouse recants his or her confession of Christ, the follower of Jesus is left with no option but to affirm allegiance to Him as Lord. In so doing, the Christian demonstrates the covenant with Christ overrules the covenant of marriage.

2. The pledge can be missional. Since I believe I am free to pledge allegiance to the flag, not to do so could hinder my opportunity to befriend, serve and evangelize my unbelieving family, friends and other neighbors. I am a follower of Christ who believes the Bible is authoritative in life and Jesus is the only way to God and eternal life. Those beliefs already separate me from the beliefs of many, if not most, Americans. I am not looking for questionable ways to separate myself from others and possible ministry to them. I don't want to set up unnecessary barriers to friendship with and evangelism of my fellow citizens.

(Since this issue came up within our church in a gathering of the whole fellowship last year, I am making a request of the parents of Covenant Community Church: If your children were present and heard various opinions expressed on this topic, I would like you to consider reading this post to them that they might be aware of their pastor's perspective. Thank you for considering my request.)

* -- Photo credit