grace-over-race-january-february-2008

THE “CATHOLIC CHURCH” ❘ CROSSING THE ETHNIC LINE ❘ ADOPTION IN GOD’S FAMILY

MODERN REFORMATION

GRACE OVER RACE

VOLUME

17, NUMBER 1, JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2008, $6.00

MODERN REFORMATION Editor-in-Chief Michael S. Horton Executive Editor Eric Landry Managing Editor Patricia Anders Department Editors Mollie Z. Hemingway, Between the Times William Edgar, Borrowed Capital Starr Meade, Big Thoughts for Little Minds MR Editors, Required Reading Diana Frazier, Reviews Michael Horton, Final Thoughts Staff | Editors Ann Henderson Hart, Staff Writer Alyson S. Platt, Copy Editor Lori A. Cook, Layout and Design Ben Conarroe, Proofreader Contributing Scholars Peter D. Anders S. M. Baugh Gerald Bray Jerry Bridges D. A. Carson Bryan Chapell R. Scott Clark Marva Dawn Mark Dever J. Ligon Duncan Adam S. Francisco W. Robert Godfrey T. David Gordon Donald A. Hagner Gillis Harp D. G. Hart Paul Helm Hywel R. Jones Ken Jones Peter Jones Richard Lints Korey Maas Keith Mathison Donald G. Matzat John Muether John Nunes Craig Parton John Piper Kim Riddlebarger Rod Rosenbladt Philip G. Ryken R. C. Sproul A. Craig Troxel Carl Trueman David VanDrunen Gene E. Veith William Willimon Todd Wilken Paul F. M. Zahl Modern Reformation © 2008 All rights reserved.

For more information, call or write us at: Modern Reformation 1725 Bear Valley Pkwy.

Escondido, CA 92027 (800) 890-7556 info@modernreformation.org www.modernreformation.org

TABLE OF CONTENTS january/february

2008

|

volume

17

n u m ber

1

Grace over Race 16 Grace, Race, and Catholicity What do we mean by “one holy, catholic” church? What does this mean in an era of division along ethnic, political, socioeconomic, and generational lines?

by Michael Horton Plus: When Grace Conquers Race

24 Corporate Christian Mergers How do we deal with the problem of ethnicity in the church? Is there a way of affirming our unique differences while also achieving unity? The author finds the answer in Ephesians 2.

by Thabiti Anyabwile

30 A Journey on the Margins Asians too have suffered alienation in a culture different from their own. Do multigenerational Korean immigrants fit in with American mainline churches or must they go their separate way?

by Julius J. Kim

35 The Hispanic Challenge How does someone within a culture dominated by Roman Catholicism and charismatic movements understand the Reformation? The author explains how he teaches his Hispanic church the doctrines of grace.

by C. A. Sandoval

38 Grace, Race, and Families How is transracial adoption for the sake of the gospel akin to our own adoption

by God the Father as his children?

by Justin Taylor

12 In Season Meditations on reading, preaching, and using Scripture.

PHOTO COMPOSITE BY LORI COOK

ISSN-1076-7169

S UBSCRIPTION I NFORMATION US US Student Canada Europe Other

1 YR 1 YR 1 YR 1 YR 1 YR

$29 $22 $35 $52 $59

2 YR $52 2 YR $63 2 YR $94 2 YR $107

Keeping Time page 2 | Letters page 3 | Between the Times page 4 Borrowed Capital page 8 | Big Thoughts for Little Minds page 10 Interview page 43 | Required Reading page 47 | Reviews page 48 | Final Thoughts page 56

J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 0 8 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 3

IN THIS ISSUE

From Selma to Golgotha Nearly 150 years after the emancipation of Southern slaves and just 50 years after the beginning of the Civil Rights era, race still captures our attention: in the summer of 2007, the case of the so-called “Jena Six” in an old battleground—Selma, Alabama—was played out in the blogosphere, newspaper headlines, and nightly news. Such “old” news has probably been replayed in a dozen ways in as many situations since. This year marks the fortieth anniversary of the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., and the forty-fifth year of his landmark book, Why We Can’t Wait. The institutional church, meanwhile, has not been an innocent bystander to a culture’s sin. All too often the church has been complicit in the actual subjugation, explicit segregation, and implicit bigotry that American minorities have had to bear: church gun clubs using pictures of Union generals, even President Lincoln, as targets; and pastors being run out of churches for allowing the possibility of a mixed race marriage. Sadly these examples are none too rare even in our confessional communions.

It is to the issue of confession that we turn first with Reformed theologian and Editor-in-Chief Michael Horton’s contribution to this issue. Paired with Dr. Horton’s is an article (originally preached as a sermon) by Baptist pastor Thabiti Anyabwile. His article, “Corporate Christian Mergers,” shows how Paul’s apostolic instruction in Ephesians 2 is a necessary development of the central narrative of Scripture: the reconciliation of God to his creatures.

As long as we keep our discussion of grace and race at this level, very few people are challenged or even encouraged to pursue the sort of reconciliation that is made real by the gospel. To help bring this issue down to earth, we’re looking at three different ways grace and race meet. First, in the lives of minority ministers: Presbyterian seminary professor Julius Kim examines the unique pressures felt by bicultural ministers as they seek to navigate a careful passage through expectations of their traditional and new cultures; Justin Taylor, an editor at Crossway and a popular blogger, paints a picture of God’s kingdom work through his narrative on transracial adoption; and Presbyterian pastor Chris Sandoval talks about the difficulty of translating the basic insights of the Reformation into language and concepts Hispanics can understand and appreciate.

Also in this issue is a personal conversation between Michael Horton and Ken Jones, pastor of Greater Union Baptist Church in Compton, California, and co-host of the White Horse Inn radio program. What brought these two friends together and what sustains their friendship and partnership in pursuit of a modern reformation? You won’t want to skip the transcript of this broadcast interview!

As has been our custom for the last several years, the first issue of each new publication year includes a few changes.

First, we want to draw your attention to a new feature, “In Season: meditations on reading, preaching, and using Scripture.” Each issue of 2008 will include a special “In Season” article. You’ll also notice that our “Family Matters” column, written by educator Starr Meade, has moved to the front of the magazine and become “Big Thoughts for Little Minds.” Starr’s new column will help you teach important theological concepts to the children in your life. Our apologetics column has been refurbished: editor William Edgar is showing us how our culture’s borrowed capital provides an opportunity for Christians to testify of God and his gospel. After several years, our news column, “Between the Times,” has returned under the able oversight of journalist Mollie Z. Hemingway. And we’ve turned the back page of the magazine over to the pen of our editor-in-chief Michael Horton with a few “Final Thoughts.”

Thanks for starting the New Year with us. If you’d like a friend or colleague to join in the conversation, send them to our website where they can sign up for a free trial subscription (which includes 30 days of access to our internet archives).

You won’t want to miss the rest of the issues we have planned this year.

Eric Landry P.S. As this issue was being developed, the folks over at Nine Marks Ministries hosted a symposium on race, which included some of the same names you’re reading in these pages. The work of the symposium is now online at www.9marks.org and we’d encourage you to refer to it as you make your way through this issue.

4 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M A T I O N . O R G

NEXT ISSUES: March/April 2008: The New Atheism May/June 2008: The New Spiritualities

LETTERS your

Betty Bevan’s article in the November/December 2007 issue made me think again about something that most Christians don’t ever think about when facing a move to a different city, one in which they have a choice. We never consider what the church situation is in the city/town we are considering. We consider everything else except that.

For us Christians who have undergone major reformations in our thinking, no longer can we think that just any church will do, as Betty and her husband sadly have found out.

Linda Horton Moore, Oklahoma

I noticed that the new atheism is coming up as a focus topic. I regret that I need to warn that popular "Christian" responses to it are often theologically and scientifically unsound. In particular, Intelligent Design and creation science are best regarded as heresies that invoke dishonest science in support of their theological errors. Dawkins et al are by and large correct when they talk about science, though they incorrectly claim that their philosophical errors are also science. Both Dawkins and Intelligent Design claim that evidence for God ought to be found in the physical creation. In reality, Westminster Confession of Faith chapter 1 points rightly—special revelation is where we find out about God, making us then able to appreciate his handiwork behind all things, not just those that may seem difficult to explain scientifically. The theological quality of ID is evidenced by the prominent role of Jonathan Wells, ordained in the Unification Church. Both creation science and ID frequently claim that one must accept their views to be a real Christian, thus running into the same error as the Galatian Judaizers.

Both also tend to false science.

Numerous examples exist of new species being formed, for example, yet many ID advocates claim it is impossible. (For that matter, Behe accepts extensive evolution, implicitly identifying most popular ID as wrong.)

Of course, there are ample grounds for criticism of the new atheism. Dawkins' evidence for atheism and reasoning are as bad as his bicycling, which frequently gets him nearly run over; but the claims of antievolutionism are equally in violation of the 9th commandment, the many directives to do good work, etc.

Dr. David Campbell Department of Biological Sciences Biodiversity and Systematics University of Alabama Tuscaloosa, Alabama

I was very encouraged and strengthened by your recent issue on faith. However, I found that I still struggle with particular Scriptures that seem to go against the idea of "Faith Alone." So, in writing this, I hope that you might take the time to answer this for me. Particularly, my problem arises over passages like James 2:17-26. Here, James outright says that a person is justified by works, and not just by faith. I understand that there are a whole host of passages, such as Romans 5:1, which state that we are justified by faith; but how might passages like the one in James be reconciled to a "Faith Alone" theology? Along with that, how might Acts 2:38, which seems to state certain deeds that precede forgiveness, be reconciled? Thank you for your time.

Nathan Skipper via email

thoughts

a n d

ou rs

Editor’s Reply According to most Protestant exegetes, James' concern is for a "useless" faith that has no validating works, which attest to faith's authenticity. Thus, James uses the story of Abraham's later life, after a life of imperfect faith, to show how faith was proven to exist, not how faith was first developed. Acts 2:38 does not lay out certain deeds that we must do before receiving forgiveness.

The Spirit, Peter tells us in 2:38, is a "gift," not a wage to be earned. Peter then ties the Spirit's work of conversion (summarized with the terms "repentance and faith") to baptism, the physical sign and seal of that reality. Later, in Acts 5:31, Peter reminds us that the resurrected Jesus must give his enemies the change of heart that leads to forgiveness.

Modern Reformation Letters to the Editor 1725 Bear Valley Parkway Escondido CA 92027 760.741.1045 fax Letters@modernreformation.org Letters under 200 words are more likely to be printed than longer letters. Letters may be edited for content and length.

J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 0 8 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 5

BETWEEN THE TIMES t he

g oo d ,

t h e

ba d ,

and

the

ugly

in

church

news

Episcopals, Lutherans, Methodists year’s convention before it is finalallowing vast freedoms in the form in Bible Battles ized. A choice about which and manner of ministry,” Duncan Episcopal province to join told the convention. bishops, given will be made Across Christian denominations, an ultimatum after that vote. controversies revolving around

by Anglican priBishop Duncan homosexuality are swirling: whether mates to state explained the to ordain gay clergy; whether to recclearly that they voters’ sentiognize gay unions; and whether to would stop conment, saying the permit gay clergy to engage in sexusecrating openculture of the al relations outside of marriage. But ly gay bishops wider Episcopal each denomination is wrestling with and bar official Church is theolarger questions of whether Scripture blessings of logically innovais to be interpreted according to culsame-sex coutive, secularly tural whims. ples, crafted a attuned, and ready In August, the Evangelical Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori careful stateto sue or depose Lutheran Church in America adoptment just prior to their Sept. 30 to obtain its way. ed a measure urging its bishops “to deadline. They agreed, essentially, “By contrast, there is the culture refrain from or demonstrate to think twice before consecrating of the Episcopal Diocese of restraint” in disciplining those who any additional gay bishops; and Pittsburgh: Scripturally centered, violate its celibacy requirement for they said they would not approve critiquing the secular agenda, gay clergy. By November, the new an official prayer service for blessing among the fastest and few growing bishop of the Chicago Metropolitan gay couples. dioceses of the Episcopal Church, Synod, Wayne Miller, was faced with An advisory panel to Archbishop relative to the population decline… his first test case. Jen Rude, the of Canterbury Rowan Williams said the Episcopal bishops had met the primates’ requirements. Dissident Anglicans in the United States weren’t as impressed.

“I believe that all the world, whether they be Muslim, Christian, or By early November, the Episcopal any other religion, prays to the same God. That’s what I believe.”

Diocese of Pittsburgh joined dioceses — President George W. Bush in an in San Joaquin, Calif., and Quincy, Oct. 4, 2007, interview with Al Arabiya Ill., in granting preliminary approval to leave the denomination and align with an Anglican province in anoth“Is God keeping you from going to church?” er yet to be determined. Pittsburgh — The tag line of the Unitarian Universalists’ fall 2007 laity voted 118-58 and clergy voted ad campaign, its first since 1961, running in TIME magazine 109-24 to join another province and allow like-minded parishes outside “If you want to connect with young teenage boys and drag them into their territory to join them. Two days prior to the vote, Presiding Bishop church, free alcohol and pornographic movies would do it.”

Katharine Jefferts Schori threatened — James Tonkowich, president of the Institute on Religion and Bishop Robert Duncan that he Democracy, responding to evangelical churches’ use of the would be removed from office if the violent video game Halo 3 to lure boys to church action took place. Duncan’s brief reply to Jefferts Schori began with “This effort to put a clerical collar on Dr. Kevorkian only makes Martin Luther’s famous words, “Here I stand. I can do no other. I will assisted suicide creepier.” neither compromise the faith once — Tim Rosales of Californians Against Assisted Suicide and for all delivered to the saints, nor after physician-assisted suicide advocates, including will I abandon the sheep who electUnited Church of Christ clergy, announced the launch ed me to protect them.” The resoluof a “ministry” to help people kill themselves tion must be approved again at next

Notable Quotables

6 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N . O R G

BETWEEN THE TIMES the

daughter and granddaughter of ELCA pastors, was ordained Nov. 17 at Resurrection Lutheran Church in Lake View, Ill. A lesbian, she refused to promise to obey her church’s rule.

Miller’s predecessor, the Rev. Paul Landahl, routinely flouted his denomination’s rule. In other synods, however, bishops have brought charges against gay pastors in relationships.

The Judicial Council of the United Methodist Church ruled the Rev. Drew Phoenix could remain a pastor of St. John’s Church of Baltimore, a congregation of about 40 members.

Phoenix underwent sexual reassignment in his 40s. He was formerly known as the Rev. Ann Gordon.

“For me, now it’s very much about being embodied, my spirit is in a body now,” Phoenix told Religion News Service. As a female, he said, “my spirit was just, like, homeless.”

Baltimore-Washington Bishop John Schol reappointed Phoenix on the grounds that his denomination’s Book of Discipline doesn’t mention transgendered pastors. The book does bar gays and lesbians from serving as clergy if they are not celibate. In May, UMC bishops decided to keep a policy that describes homosexual activity as “incompatible with Christian teaching.” Conservative Methodists have indicated they will seek a ban on transgendered pastors at their April General Conference. Conservatives tried unsuccessfully to ban transsexual pastors at the church’s previous conference in 2004.

“Most church people instinctively recognize there are problems with the church affirming a gender change, but haven’t really thought through all the implications,” said Mark Tooley of UMAction. ■

Confession Makes a Comeback Last summer, the Lutheran ChurchMissouri Synod overwhelmingly (690-31) passed a resolution to

good,

the

b ad,

encourage greater use of individual confession and absolution. In February of last year, Pope Benedict instructed priests to make confession their top priority. The Washington diocese ran ads on the radio, on billboards and on buses during Lent encouraging parishioners to return to the rite.

Catholic priests are hearing confessions at malls around the country.

Confession is so hot right now that even less sacramentally minded Protestants are getting into the act.

Of course, they’re making sure to make confession less intimidating.

Congregants are told to write down their sins and then shred the paper or paint their sins on rocks, which they throw into a pile. Even these methods are preferable to the single hottest trend in confession: online repentance.

Sites such as IveScrewedUp.com and MySecret.tv replace the pastor and priest with the masses: confessions are published online for all to see. The pastor of the Flamingo Road Church, which runs the former site, says the goal is to help people learn from their mistakes. Most of these self-help online confession sites leave penitents shouting into the ether, uncertain of who is reading their confession.

The industry catering to the guilt ridden is growing every day, with millions of confessions logged so far. The trend has even moved to YouTube.

XXX Church, a Christian ministry, posts videos on YouTube of men and women confessing addictions to porn.

To some extent there’s nothing new with the public airing of private sins—daytime talk shows anyone?

But the growing market for confessions proves how much sin eats away at individuals’ consciences. The most troubling aspect is determining where, when, and how forgiveness comes into play. Does the confessing individual forgive himself? Does the community forgive? Where’s the absolution? ■

and

the

ugly

in

chu r ch

n ew s

By the Numbers 52 percent of Americans who say Mormons are Christian, according to the Pew Research Center on Religion and Public Life. Just over 30 percent said they were not.

14 percent of Americans who describe themselves as evangelical, according to a national Gallup survey, even though one in three report belonging to denominations that theologians consider evangelical. Top choices for self-description: “Biblebelieving” (20.5 percent) and “born-again” (18.6 percent).

25 percent of American women who have read The PurposeDriven Life. Almost one in five of both sexes have read at least one of the Left Behind apocalyptic fiction novels.

19 percent of Americans able to name freedom of religion as one of the rights guaranteed by the First Amendment, according to a First Amendment Center survey.

68 percent of people aged 13-24 who agree with the statement, “I follow my own religious and spiritual beliefs, but I think that other religious beliefs could be true as well,” according to an Associated Press and MTV survey.

John 3:16 Most cited verse on the Web, according to TopVerses.com.

The survey of 37 million Bible references ranks the most cited verses as well as books (Ephesians) and chapters (2 Peter 1). $190 How much scalpers got for $10 tickets to Joel Osteen’s Chicago worship tour, according to the Chicago Sun-Times.

J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 0 8 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 7

BETWEEN THE TIMES t he

g oo d ,

t h e

ba d ,

and

the

ugly

Mormons Under a Microscope In a sign that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is being taken seriously by the wider academic world, Claremont Graduate University Mitt Romney hired prominent Mormon historian Richard Lyman Bushman to fill its new professorship in Mormon studies.

Bushman, professor emeritus of early American history at Columbia University, is a devout Mormon who authored Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling, a biography of the religion’s founder. Utah State University was the first secular institution to offer a Mormon studies program, beginning last fall.

Much of the interest in Mormonism has been fueled by former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney’s bid to be the Republican presidential nominee. A quarter of Americans—Democrat, Republican, or independent—report that they would be less likely to vote for a Mormon presidential candidate.

Among white Republican evangelical Protestants, 36 percent say the same. Media outlets are seizing on the tension to run stories about Mormonism.

Still, Romney is running a strong campaign and is expected to perform well in states holding early primaries.

With the threat posed by former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani—a proponent of abortion and gay rights—many evangelicals are trying to reconcile their belief that presidents should be Christian with their beliefs about Mormonism.

Southern Baptist Seminary President Albert Mohler says the greatest danger of electing a Mormon as president is drawing attention to the

8 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N . O R G

in

church

news

church and giving it credibility.

Political pundits have called on Romney to address how his faith would influence his leadership (á la JFK’s 1960 speech to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association on his Catholicism).

Just over half of Americans say Mormons are Christian, with 31 percent saying they are not, according to a September poll by the Pew Research Center on Religion and Public Life. Southern Baptist Convention leader Richard Land said the fairest and most charitable way to describe Mormonism is to call it neither Christian nor a cult.

“I consider it the fourth Abrahamic religion, Judaism being the first, Christianity the second, Islam the third and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints being the fourth,” he said in an interview with Bloomberg.

Into this fray, LDS leaders have launched a public relations offensive to claim their religion as Christian.

Speakers at the 177th Semiannual LDS General Conference in Salt Lake City hammered the point that Mormonism is not only Christian, it is the truest form of Christianity.

“If one says we are not Christians because we do not hold a 4th or 5th Century view of the Godhead, then what of those first [Christians], many of whom were eye-witnesses of the living Christ, who did not hold such a view either?” asked Apostle Jeffrey R. Holland before 21,000 Mormons gathered in Salt Lake City’s giant conference center.

A single word change to the introduction to the Book of Mormon has serious implications for what Mormons believe about the ancestry of American Indians.

Mormons believe the Christian church was lost in a period called the Great Apostasy after the death of the apostles. Prophet Joseph Smith restored the church in the nineteeth century in part by translating gold

plates he found in upstate New York into English as the Book of Mormon.

That account tells the story of lost tribes of Israel living in the New World. One tribe splintered into two groups known as the Nephites and the Lamanites. An introduction to the book written in 1981 by Apostle Bruce McConkie articulated the frequently taught belief that “after thousands of years, all were destroyed except the Lamanites, and they are the principal ancestors of the American Indians.” DNA testing of thousands of Indians failed to support the Mormon claim. The new version says the Lamanites are only “among” the ancestors of American Indians. ■

BETWEEN THE TIMES the

News Briefs Televangelists Investigated Sen. Charles Grassley, the top Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, is investigating six powerhouse prosperity-gospel televangelists to determine whether they are complying with federal tax laws. He sent letters to Benny Hinn, the fantastically named Creflo Dollar, Joyce Meyer, Randy and Paula White, Kenneth and Gloria Copeland, and Bishop Eddie Long.

The televangelists, all of whom are Pentecostal, are known for their earthly wealth.

The Copelands received $2.1 million in gifts from friends and parishioners for Kenneth’s recent birthday. Grassley’s letters ask for detailed accounting from each ministry. For instance, Meyer, who runs a $124-million-a-year ministry, was asked to explain her expense account (which includes extravagant clothing and cosmetic surgery), information on any overseas bank accounts and deposits made outside the U.S., and the taxexempt purposes of items purchased for her headquarters such as a $23,000 marble-topped commode, a $30,000 conference table, and an $11,219 French clock.

The organizations are not legally required to respond. Some First Amendment scholars say the government doesn’t have the right to dictate how churches spend money.

Christian Image in the Tank A decade ago, an overwhelming majority of non-Christians were favorably disposed toward Christianity’s role in society. That image is on the decline, with just 16 percent of non-Christians between the ages of 16 and 29 having a good impression of the religion according to the Barna Group. Just 3 percent of the same

good,

the

b ad,

group has favorable views of evangelicals. Significant majorities of young people rate American Christianity as judgmental, hypocritical, old-fashioned, and too involved in politics. Even among young Christians, half said they also view Christianity as judgmental, hypocritical, and too political.

Archbishop of Canterbury: Rethink Abortion People are insufficiently troubled about terminating pregnancies, Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams wrote in an article for the Observer. Published on the fortieth anniversary of the act that legalized the procedure, Williams said people need to think harder about the consequences of their actions.

“Recent discussion on making it simpler for women to administer abortion-inducing drugs at home underlines the growing belief that abortion is essentially a matter of individual decision and not the kind of major moral choice that should involve a sharing of perspective and judgment,” he wrote.

“Something has happened to our assumptions about the life of the unborn child.”

and

the

ugly

in

chu r ch

n ew s

tiating with presbyteries to keep all or some of their property.

The congregation of Peters Creek Presbyterian near Pittsburgh voted 207-26 in early November to join the Evangelical Presbyterian Church without approval from their PC(USA) Presbytery. The vote likely means civil courts will decide who owns the church property, but the Rev. L. Rus Howard said civil courts would be more fair than the presbytery.

Dogs in Mass A Roman Catholic priest in Baltimore was removed by his archbishop for a variety of offenses including officiating a funeral Mass with an Episcopal priest. Rev. Ray Martin, who had led Catholic Community of South Baltimore, was ordered to resign and sign a statement apologizing for bringing scandal to the church. In addition to permitting the female priest to read the gospel at the funeral, he had not shown up for a baptism, allowed dogs in the sanctuary, and and in violation of church policy hired a maintenance man with a criminal background. Reports differed on whether Martin offered the priest communion.

Presbyterian Departures In the past year, more than two dozen congregations have voted to leave the Presbyterian Church (USA), requested to be dismissed, or have sought to be declared owner of their property. The churches are part of the New Wineskins Association of Churches, a group of 160 congregations that believes the PC(USA) teaches incorrectly about biblical authority and salvation through Christ alone.

Church law says that property belongs to the denomination, but many departing congregations are fighting to keep their church buildings. Some congregations are nego-

J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 0 8 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 9

BORROWED CAPITAL cul t ura l

a p o l o getics

Not by Bread Alone

T

he frontline issue during the Cold War years was power, particularly economic

Some of this is fatuous, as in the crystals and tarot power. Which would win: the planned economy of Communism or the free mar- cards of the New Age; but some of it gropes deeply ket (“liberal”) economy of the West? As we well know, the year 1989 saw an after something beyond economics. No one better extraordinary turnaround. Even the most optimistic anarepresents this yearning for absolutes than Václav Havel, lysts were not ready for the astonishing sea change that the remarkable former president of Czechoslovakia (now occurred: the Soviet satellite countries—including the Czech Republic). His devastating critique of Hungary, Poland, Czechoslovakia, and then Russia itself— Communism was followed by a no less trenchant attack forsook Communism and began to espouse democracy. No on materialism. In his 1999 acceptance speech for the symbol was more dramatic—except perhaps the Berlin Open Society Prize, awarded by the Central European Wall—than Lenin’s statue in Moscow being toppled, hamUniversity, Havel stated: mered to pieces by a jubilant crew of demolishers.

So it seemed at the time that the liberal economic philosIt has been our absolutely basic historical experience ophy would win, and that we had arrived at what Francis that, in the long run, the only thing that can be truly Fukuyama called the “end of history.” He was not suggestsuccessful and meaningful politically must first and ing that the new heavens and new earth had arrived, but foremost—that is, before it has taken any political only (only?) that the whole world would soon be embracing form at all—be a proper and adequate response to the democracy. Indeed, today, things are a lot better. Having visfundamental moral dilemmas of the time, or an ited Hungary and other central European countries, I can expression of respect for the imperatives of the moral tell you that a great dark cloud has been lifted. order bequeathed to us by our culture. It is a very Except two things making it painfully obvious that we clear understanding that the only kind of politics that are far from the end of history…. truly makes sense is one that is guided by conscience.1 (1) Some horrific surprises shocked the West into the realization that not everyone on the planet wants democTo be sure, he never seems to go beyond this thirst for the racy and a free-market economy. The most arresting one historic values of the West, but it’s a great beginning. All for Americans and their friends was 9/11; but many othsuch spiritual hunger is certainly limited. But it is real. ers, before and after, intruded on the fond hope of progress Christian apologetics should seize the moment. Even toward any universal acceptance of Western values. The the negative examples of religious resurgence cited above fact is most of these have a religious character to them. carry with them something positive. Those who are attackAmong the names that could be given many such events ing the West with such violence are not envious people is, “the revenge of God.” The global resurgence of religionnor are they backwards. I see many of them as engaging in with-violence is now so obvious that even the most coma wide-ranging revolt against secular modernity.2 More placent pundits are waking up to it. From the fatwa issued than that is involved of course. Using airplanes full of against Salmon Rushdie to the “honor killings” among human beings to blow up buildings and kill thousands is Muslim families in Britain and Pakistan, to forbidding the simply raw evil. But the reason for attacking centers of headscarf on a schoolgirl in France, we are constantly world trade and for blowing up subways and commuter trains includes the symbols represented. The vision of a reminded that people are profoundly driven by religion. secular world where economic man will triumph is unac(2) Even in more peaceful times and places there is conceptable to Islam—and it should be unacceptable to siderable spiritual thirst. In much of western Europe, the Christians as well! trend is toward “believing with belonging.” That is, people So many journalists and pundits are still surprised and want some kind of transcendent reality, as long as it does shocked by these tactics. When the Ayatollah Khomeini trinot come with too many restraints, either doctrinal or umphed over the Shah of Iran and effected an Islamic revinstitutional. We hear of antagonism toward “organized olution, few in the U.S. State Department understood. religion” accompanied by an admiration for “spirituality.”

1 0 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M A T I O N . O R G

Instead, they were puzzled that a country seemingly on its way to becoming modern and fully developed should take such a “step backwards.” One reason these events are such a surprise is that the Western concept of religion does not square with reality. Liberal political theorists believe religion at its best should be private. When it is not and “mixes” with politics, then it inherently causes wars and conflicts. In one narrative, the “Peace of Westphalia” of 1648 brought an end to the wars of religion and gave birth to the modern secular state, a concept that would save us from the kind of confusion that blends religion and statecraft.

Yet biblically this is simply not true. The Bible looks at religion not as some sort of special drive that needs to be tamed, but as the most basic component of our identity.

Our “passionate vitality,” as Bruce Waltke describes the image of God, is not a problem unless, of course, it goes in the wrong direction. When rightly oriented, the religious impulse places confidence in the only absolute capable of fulfilling and guiding the human race: the Lord God, Creator of the universe. Mixing religion with statecraft is not only desirable but inevitable. It all depends on how you do it. When God is recognized, then the state cannot claim more authority than it rightfully ought to have, though it does have a legitimate claim to rule us and promote justice (Rom. 13).

What we need then is to affirm the spiritual hunger without accepting the method of violence, and even such an affirmation is not a blanket endorsement—because it merely recognizes that “man shall not live by bread alone.”

We know that telling the whole story means adding the rest of the saying, “but by every word from the mouth of God” (Deut. 8:3; Matt. 4:4). Still, the hunger is real enough. It is a sign of God’s common grace. It is this hunger that the Lord uses to draw people to himself. They who hunger are living on borrowed capital. They can live and move and have their being only because God directs their lives. They live in set places. “God did this so that men would seek after him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from each one of us” (Acts 17:27). God’s patience gives them more time. Soon the capital will be used up, but while they enjoy it may we be busy proclaiming the good news.

Speaking Of…

L

et everyone regulate his conduct...by the golden rule of doing to others as in similar circumstances we would have them do to us, and the path of duty will be clear before him.

—William Wilberforce (1833)

F

ourscore and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.

—Abraham Lincoln (1863)

I

have no color prejudices nor caste prejudices nor creed prejudices. All I care to know is that a man is a human being, and that is enough for me; he can’t be any worse.

—Mark Twain (1835-1910)

C

hristian men, under the pressure of their race antipathy, desert the fundamental law of the Church of the Living God, that in Christ Jesus, there cannot be Greek and Jew, circumcision and uncircumcision, barbarian, Scythian, bondman, freeman….An ecclesiastical body which proclaims itself the champion of the exclusively spiritual functions of the Church demands, as the price of reconciliation with a sister body [the Northern Presbyterian Church with the Southern Presbyterian Church following the Civil War], the reorganization of the whole church organism on the lines of political and social cleavage…. What does it argue but the awakening of race antipathy on their part also; but the sharp answering edge of the other side of the cleft which the wedge that is being so ruthlessly driven into the body politic is opening wider every day? Love answers to love, and hate soon gives its reply back to hate….What will be before us when the seed so unsparingly sowing begins to bear a plumed harvest also in this state?

William Edgar is professor of apologetics at Westminster Theological Seminary (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania).

WORKS CITED 1 “Address by Václav Havel, president of the Czech Republic in acceptance of ‘Open Society’ Prize” (Budapest: June 24, 1999). Online at http://old.hrad.cz/president/ Havel/speeches/1999/2406_uk.html.

2 I am not alone in this view. See for example, Scott M. Thomas, The Global Resurgence of Religion and the Transformation of International Relations: The Struggle for the Soul of the Twenty-First Century (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005), p. 39.

—Benjamin B. Warfield (1888)

T

o live anywhere in the world today and be against equality because of race or color is like living in Alaska and being against snow.

—William Faulkner (1897-1962)

J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 0 8 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 11

BIG THOUGHTS FOR LITTLE MINDS r e sou rces

fo r

homes

Teaching the Whole Counsel of God to Our Children

B

irth, death, issues of crime, justice, and war—certain weighty subjects we post-

Jesus prayed, “I thank you, Father, Lord of heavpone explaining to children. It just seems logical to wait until a child’s intel- en and earth, that you have hidden these things lectual capacities have developed a bit before asking her to make sense of such from the wise and understanding and revealed things. This same kind of thinking often limits what we them to little children; yes, Father, for such was your grateach children in the realm of spiritual truth. We teach cious will” (Luke 10:21). God calls us to teach all of his them Bible stories (a most worthwhile exercise) and seek truth to all of his people. We do so in the confidence that to develop their character (also a worthy pursuit), but we he himself will impart the understanding an individual feel that more abstract doctrinal truth must wait until they needs at his or her particular place of spiritual growth. are older. Nonsense, I say, and that for several reasons.

A third reason for teaching doctrine as our children Most importantly, church and parents are called by God grow up, rather than after they have grown up, is because to teach. All that God has revealed about himself in his failure to teach sound doctrine results in children learning Word must be faithfully passed on in our teaching. If you unsound doctrine. If our Bible teaching consists of Bible sit under the preaching of a faithful pastor, he takes as his stories only, then Abraham, Moses, and Paul join the ranks motto the Apostle Paul’s claim to the Ephesian elders, “I of our other literary friends—Paul Bunyan, Cinderella, or did not shrink from declaring to you the whole counsel of Charlotte (the one with the web). They become heroes for God” (Acts 20:27). There is no biblical reason to assume the children to imitate rather than recipients of God’s grathat children should be excluded from hearing what God cious covenant promises. We must teach doctrine if the has made known about himself. Quite the contrary. stories are to carry the meaning God gave to them when Moses told God’s people, “The things that are revealed he included them in Scripture. Or, if our teaching is mostbelong to us and to our children forever” (Deut. 29:29). ly moral in nature—how to behave and which Bible charAsaph devotes the large opening portion of Psalm 78 to the acters to imitate—we teach a works-righteousness that process of passing on God’s truth. He specifically mentions runs counter to the gospel. The deliberate, systematic the “dark sayings” he had heard from his father, and cominstruction of our children in sound biblical doctrine gives mits himself to telling those things to the coming generaan accurate, defining framework for the Bible stories we tion (Ps. 78:2-4). One of the most helpful books I know tell and the morals we seek to inculcate. that deals with teaching doctrine to children is Charles So we can and we should give substantive teaching in Spurgeon’s, “Come Ye Children,” A Book for Parents and doctrine to our children, both at home and in the church.

Teachers on the Christian Training of Children. In it, this But how? The triune nature of God, propitiation and sub“Prince of Preachers” writes: “I do hold that there is no stitutionary atonement, God’s sovereignty in salvation— doctrine of the word of God which a child, if he be capahow can we communicate these things so that children ble of salvation, is not capable of receiving. I would have can grasp them? To teach Christian doctrine to children, children taught all the great doctrines of truth that they we must maintain a careful balance between high expecmay in their after days hold fast by them.” tations and sympathetic concessions. Both will be needed.

A second reason that we do not need to fear teaching On the one hand, since children will rise no higher than our children doctrine while they are still young is because our expectations, we must keep high these expectations they never will be so intellectually mature that it will all for their behavior and their mental abilities. On the other make perfect sense to them. After all, this is theology hand, since they are children, created by God to differ from we’re talking about—the study of the infinite, inscrutable adults, we must be willing to accommodate ourselves to God. When it comes to understanding God, the most briltheir needs when we teach. liant mind ever created is in the bottom level of nursery We live in an age that expects very little of children. school. God, in his grace, reveals truth to minds of whatToday’s young adolescents find themselves completely bafever age, when his people faithfully proclaim his Word. As fled by a book like Treasure Island, written several genera-

1 2 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M A T I O N . O R G

In 2008, the “Family Matters” column has become “Big Thoughts for Little Sunday school classroom, and in the worship service Minds,” where we hope to help in this area of teaching that communicates to children our anticipation that doctrine to children. Beginning in March, each installthey will participate with God’s people in the reading ment will explain a particular teaching methodology espeand hearing of God’s Word. cially suited to teaching doctions ago for children younger than they are. No one has trine to children. It will provide examples from lessons ever expected them to master the reading and vocabulary illustrating how to use that method and, when possible, skills needed for such a book, or to drill and practice those resources that may help will be suggested as well. skills. It has been easier all around to lower the expectaIf we learn to explain, define, simplify, and teach doctions for what children should be able to read. In counttrine to our children, what will we gain? Like Paul with less areas, our expectations of children are low. They can’t the Ephesian elders, we will have the assurance that we possibly engage in anything that does not constantly have faithfully taught all of God’s Word to the children change and entertain. They can’t possibly enjoy classical among us. In addition, there’s an added bonus for us, the music or art masterpieces. They can’t possibly sit through teachers. A final quote from Spurgeon on the subject: a worship service. Everything must be centered on them, adapted to their interests and to what they find easy. If we There is no way of learning like teaching, and you do want our children to learn biblical doctrine, we begin by not know a thing till you can teach it to another. You raising our expectations and keeping them high. This will do not thoroughly know any truth until you can put involve swimming against contemporary currents, even in it before a child so that he can see it. In trying to most churches, where keeping it “fun for the kids” is a top make a little child understand the doctrine of the priority. Instead, we should provide an atmosphere in the atonement you will get clearer views of it yourselves, home, in the Sunday school classroom, and in the worship and therefore I commend the holy exercise to you. service that communicates to children our anticipation that they will participate with God’s people in the reading and hearing of God’s Word. Children can understand that Starr Meade is author of Training Hearts, Teaching Minds: the Word of God matters to the people who matter to Family Devotions Based on the Shorter Catechism (P&R, them, and that those people intend for them, the children, 2000). to take part in learning what it teaches.

High expectations can make a tremendous difference in what we can teach. Those expectations, however, must be balanced by genuine understanding for the nature of a child. Too often, when adults have elevated goals for children, that’s all they have. We are the adults; we are the ones to whom doctrine is so important; shouldn’t we have to do at least as much work in making that doctrine understandable as the children have to do in meeting our high expectations? When there is such rich truth in God’s Word, it seems to me a crime to give our children only “fluff” or moral lessons. It seems equally criminal, though, to fail to recognize the needs children have when we teach. They need simplicity. They need definitions. They need illustrations and repetition. They need things to do to help keep them engaged. We have no business forcing children to sit and listen to long lessons full of words they do not know and concepts they cannot follow. Spurgeon says this: “You must next strive to adapt yourself as far as possible to the nature, and habits, and temperament of the child. Your mouth must find out the child’s words, so that the child may know what you mean; you must see things with a child’s eyes….It needs our best wits, our most industrious studies, our most earnest thoughts, our ripest powers, to teach our little ones.”

We should provide an atmosphere in the home, in the

J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 0 8 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 13

Reading Between the Trees

by A. Paige Britton The Bible is book-ended by trees. Have you noticed them?

Over here is the tree in the garden, of which the people must not eat. Presumably they may climb it, or hang a swing in its branches, or lean against its trunk to eat a snack, so long as the meal doesn’t include its fruit. But before they think to do any of these things, the crafty serpent invites them on a disastrous picnic; and suddenly there they are, left with pain and enmity and exile instead of joy and intimacy and home.

And then, a whole Bible later, here is another tree, of which the people may freely eat; and a city that is full of joy and intimacy and homecoming instead of pain and enmity and exile.

Two trees, planted by God the Creator and Redeemer at the beginning and end of the Bible like bookends on a shelf.

Whatever we decide to do with the pages between the trees will make either sense or nonsense out of the bookends. Do we read in the Bible one story or many? Is there a deliberate path from that first tree to this last tree, a progressive revelation that explains this shift from exile to homecoming? Or are the trees just random props in a series of disconnected stories, stories that are maybe myths, maybe symbols, maybe do-it-yourself moral instruction, depending on the mood that strikes me as I read? How am I to read this Bible, between these two trees?

From priestly control of the text to today’s unexamined acceptance of individual interpretations, Christians have often resisted learning from the Bible itself how to read those intervening pages. Here is a vision for tracing a path between the two trees that involves an “unfolding mystery,”1 a progressive revelation that gradually clarifies God’s plan of redemption in Christ, from Genesis to Revelation. From its root to its fruit, this divine plan gives the Bible its organic unity.

Seeing the End from the Beginning: The Promises et’s start with the Owner of the trees, who is also the Author of the book between them. As Inventor of trees and Caretaker of creation, it is God’s prerogative to shape his apples and oaks according to his pleasure and will. And it was apparently his pleasure and will to shape them originally for the delight and use of people: “And the Lord God made all kinds of trees grow out of the ground—trees that were pleasing to the eye and good for food” (Gen. 2:9). In that beauty and provision, there is a strong hint of the divine character, and of a divine purpose behind trees and all things made. Paul has the joy of announcing what the general revelation of apples and oaks cannot articulate:

L

In Season: Meditations on Reading, Preaching, and Using Scripture What role does the Bible play in your life? Is it a resource for daily wisdom, a self-help manual extraordinaire, a doctrinal repository? Perhaps it doesn’t have a regular role in your life because these other uses (and abuses) of Scripture have overtaken its true purpose. Throughout this year, a new feature will appear in Modern Reformation: “In Season: Meditations on reading, preaching, and using Scripture.”

Each article will be written by various people (the laity, professional theologians, and ministers); and each will be unique (a sermon, a hermeneutic, thoughts on application, and even concerns about the misuse of Scripture). We want to continue the conversation on our website, so feel free to e-mail us at letters@modernreformation.org with your thoughts after reading each issue’s “In Season.”

1 4 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M A T I O N . O R G

For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love he predestined us to be adopted as his sons through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will. (Eph. 1:4-5a) This forested planet then was intended to shelter a holy family of God. When at the foot of the one tree holiness was exchanged for sin, and sonship for homeless exile, the Lord God began to reveal the outline of his plan:2 “I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel” (Gen.

3:15). And so it is at the foot of the first of these two bookending trees that we begin to learn to read the Bible properly.

Someone is coming. Who will he be? Where will he go?

What will he do? How will we know him? The promise of Genesis 3:15 raises more questions than it answers, but it answers some: a particular human being; a violent struggle; and enmity once again located between the people and the serpent, rather than between the people and their God. The restoration of intimacy through this Man of Promise, the unfolding of this mystery, begins here.

This is not an isolated instance. There are stepping-stones of promise all the way through our Old Testament, as the gracious prophecy of Genesis 3:15 is reiterated and elaborated through God’s specific revelations to his people. Abraham receives a similar announcement of a “Son of Promise” and hears the additional good news of land and mission, as through him “all peoples on earth will be blessed” (Gen. 12:3; cf. Gal. 4:28); Moses learns about a prophet like himself, whose God-given words will demand the riveted attention and obedient response of his people (Deut. 18:18); David finds out he is the progenitor of an eternal king (2 Sam. 7:11-16); Jeremiah broadcasts the secret of the coming new covenant, a law that is internal and a God who is known by “the least of them to the greatest” (Jer. 31:31-35); and Isaiah comes startlingly close to portraiture in his description of the suffering servant (Isa. 53).

As post-resurrection believers we see these things clarified, as we read with our New Testament eyes, looking back. We in the Church are not the first to do so; after all, Jesus himself “began with Moses and all the Prophets” to exegete the events of his story to the despondent disciples on the road to Emmaus (Luke 24:27). But how fascinating to consider that those who could only look forward to the Man of Promise were graciously justified by Christ alone through faith, even though their sight of him was dimmer than that of the disciples on the road. “Abraham saw my day and was glad,” as Jesus says (John 8:56).

Abraham, it is said, saw the end from the beginning: the unshakeable city of holiness; intimacy and joy; purchased for him by the Child of Promise (cf. Heb. 11:10).

Reading the Old Testament, we watch as if over the shoulders of his descendents as, generation by generation, the saints among them grasp each new revelation of God’s plan. It is green and growing, like a shoot from a stump.

Their faith is trust that the One who makes things grow will certainly bring it to flower and fruit.

Reading the OT with NT Eyes: Types and Shadows f the promises are the stepping-stones between the tree of the garden and the tree of the city, the “types and shadows” are the way stations, treasure houses splendid with christological meanings. Here, too, we are guided by the hermeneutic of Jesus, who claimed to be the fulfillment of it all, and whose Spirit prompted the apostles to unpack the treasures that had been there all along in the Hebrew Scriptures. From the formal “types”—people and

I

things that strongly prefigure Christ—to the myriad metaphors and events that, in hindsight, were hints of Jesus and his work, the Old Testament is lively with connections to the Son. Some connections seem obvious, boldface figures that shout even louder than the skies about the Lord’s handiwork; but some are subtle, easy to miss, just a whisper of divine deliberateness. Examples abound. We quickly recognize the significance of the Passover, the high priest and the annual atoning sacrifices, and that substitute ram caught in the thicket for Isaac. With a little help we can catch the references in the manna and the water from the Rock that was Christ—“spiritual food and drink,” Paul calls these (1 Cor. 10:3-4). Dig deeper and strike the almost playful interplay of the roles of shepherd and king in David’s reign and writing, and wonder that it was the shepherds of David’s hometown who received a heavenly announcement of the birth of the royal Good Shepherd.

In his passing comments and incisive commentary, Jesus occasionally opened an interpretive window onto an Old Testament figure or event, suddenly endowing a familiar passage with arresting newness. What did his hearers make of his claims about the manna, or “the sign of Jonah,” or Solomon’s temple, or Isaiah’s Spirit-filled “Servant”?3 Well, those who should have known him had him killed; if anyone thought that all of these sacred and ancient things referred to himself, they reasoned, he must have a God-complex. What shall we now make of these claims, this permission given to believers to read the Old Testament with New Testament eyes?

The Errors, Take One allen humans that we are, we are likely to err either on the side of overapplication or on the side of indifference and ignorance. On the one hand, there is a great temptation to “run” with Old Testament passages once we have grasped the concept that “it’s all about Jesus”—suddenly we see him everywhere, in every leaf and stone! On the other, there is the temptation of narcissism; that is, of mining the Scriptures of both testaments primarily for moral guidance and spiritual uplift—“it’s all about me.”

From the ancient church to the Reformation, the first of these tendencies often resulted in spiritualized, allegorical interpretations that ignored the context and downplayed the historicity of narratives. Dismissive of commonplace literal interpretations, the influential third-century theologian Origen advocated plumbing biblical texts for the deeper, spiritual sense the Holy Spirit had hidden there.

Thus, in Origen’s thought, Noah signifies Christ, who pilots an ark built of the teachers of the Church; and the people and animals inside the ark (the members of the Church) are assigned to different decks, because “neither the merit of all nor the progress in faith is one.”4 By the Middle Ages, the church had perfected a fourpart form of interpretation called the quadriga (Latin for “four-horse chariot”) in which the symbolic, moral, and

F

J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 0 8 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 15

hand with the implicit expectation of responsible exegesis, knowledgeable pastoral guidpeople was precisely Martin Luther’s intent when he ance, and the humble attitude of the reader.7 Among contempoprotested against Rome. Through translation and rary evangelical Protestants, however, these doctrines often pastoral instruction, Luther encouraged the laity to seem to be coupled instead with the democratic assumption that take responsibility for at least some of their own every believer’s opinion about a passage is equally acceptable. biblical education.

Whether this assumption is a product of postmodernist thinkeschatological steeds had clear priority over the lowly hising, fundamentalist anti-intellectualism, or a well-meantorical nag. A favorite allegorical justification for this kind ing but untutored graciousness (among other possibiliof reading is drawn from the Song of Songs. According to ties) probably depends on the context in which it is one twelfth-century commentary, the Bridegroom found. In any case, the results are the same: teaching (Christ) introduces his wife (the human soul) into a and sharing about Scripture that is too often moralistic, chamber (Holy Scripture), in which there are “four large self-centered, or inventively spiritualized, rather than jars of honeyed sweetness” (corresponding to the four Christ-centered and guided by Scripture. senses contained in Scripture). Uneducated commoners When we know what to look for, we begin to recognize may drink from the first jar (history), but more perfected exegetical individualism everywhere, from Sunday mornindividuals with greater spiritual capacity can be refreshed ing instruction to Christian publications, and also in our (and eventually intoxicated) by the more potent contents own conversation. We are startled to hear a novel interof the other three.5 pretation offered in the firm tone of authoritative doctrine.

Thus, when David slew Goliath (the historical sense), We suspect an author of favoring a particular translation this action signified Christ conquering the devil at the because it confirms his point. We discern in ourselves and cross (allegorical sense), the believer’s struggle against others a tendency to jump from a key word to a moral or the devil’s temptation (moral sense), and Christ’s final uplifting application without much regard for text or convictory over death (eschatological sense).6 Making a text. We wonder if Jesus had to die in order to make a paspassage run on all four horses took such spiritual acutor’s message true, or if an unbeliever could have arrived men—if not, from our point of view, such imaginative at the same conclusions. We sometimes even find ourlicense—it is no wonder the heads of the Church sought selves puzzling over allegories worthy of Origen; for examto keep the reigns firmly in their own hands. Were the ple, “Elizabeth was barren because she didn’t trust God; rabble to try to drive the quadriga, who knew where it she stands for all of us who refuse to let the Lord do his would end up? work in us.”

Such individual conclusions betray a remarkable indifThe Errors, Take Two ference to “the way the words go” in the biblical text,8 et, placing the Scriptures in the hands of the comfrom grammatical categories (e.g., indicatives and impermon people was precisely Martin Luther’s intent atives) to the overarching storyline. Often this sort of when he protested against Rome. Through transhasty exegesis is excused via an appeal to the doctrine of lation and pastoral instruction, Luther encouraged the illumination. It is true that as believers in Christ we may laity to take responsibility for at least some of their own trust that the Holy Spirit is actively illuminating our biblical education. In doing so, he challenged the hierarminds as we read the Bible; but it is also true that we are chy and hermeneutic of the Roman Catholic Church, to read it in community, enjoying the help of those whom rejecting the notion that the “Mother Church” alone was God has placed among us and particularly gifted as teachcompetent to discover what the Scriptures meant. ers. Especially if we are newly developing a working Neither was the Bible a magic book, accessible only to a familiarity with this clear but complex book, we will do privileged, super-spiritual few who could decipher its well to lean on those whose grasp of the Bible’s own “big cryptic symbolism. Rather, even as Christians themselves picture” of redemptive history offers a counterweight to comprised a royal priesthood—needing only one mediaour tendency to let our imaginations or our natural selftor, Jesus Christ—so the Scriptures were inherently clear centeredness run away with our exegesis. Rather than in their proclamation of real, redemptive history and the bowing to ecclesiastical control of interpretation, and in gospel, and could be understood by anyone regarding contrast to our culture’s elevation of the individual, matters of salvation. acknowledging both the learning curve of exegesis and For the Reformers, the doctrines of the clarity of the God-given gifts of preaching and teaching is a sign of Scripture and the priesthood of believers went hand in wisdom and humility before the biblical text.

Placing the Scriptures in the hands of the common

Y

1 6 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N . O R G

Reading Both Testaments with Jesus ow then are we to learn to read our Bibles responsibly between the two trees? First, by recognizing in the unfolding mystery of redemptive history an organic unity, like the trunk of a great oak; then by remembering that the roots of the Son of God incarnate are in a real human family, whose history is also written in this book; and, finally, by the light of the leaves of the New Testament, which is our only reliable guide for identifying the rich christological treasures stored in the Old Testament narratives and prophecies. “Do not go beyond what is written,” Paul warns the Corinthians (1 Cor. 4:6); here a corollary might be, “Find out what is written,” lest we let our imaginations and emotions be our guides.

Will we recognize Christ in the Old Testament in places that are not confirmed in the New? It is very likely. Can we receive moral instruction and examples from the narratives in the Scriptures? Most certainly. May we pause to consider how a passage resonates with our own hearts and lives? Absolutely. But let us be neither dogmatic about our typological conclusions, nor content to see only ourselves in these pages. It matters deeply that we fix our eyes on the unfolding story of Christ, given our propensity to try somehow to save and perfect ourselves. Jesus alone can lead us from the country of enmity and exile to the warm welcome that awaits us at his Father’s house.

It is also vital that we not assume we have reached the end of the story when we arrive at the manger in Bethlehem, or even the cross at Calvary. The Epistles are more than just a postscript to Jesus’ earthly ministry, the section of the Bible that we mine for tips on Christian living—tips that we sometimes feel are rather inconveniently buried in all kinds of extraneous theologizing! No, this teaching too is from Christ himself, no less than when he lectured on the mountain in Galilee; but it is imbued now with the clarifying power of resurrection life.

In the Gospels, the Lord Jesus stands at the junction between the testaments, directing us to see himself as both their author and their subject. Even as he speaks newness into so many Old Testament passages and figures, so do his teachings bear in seed-form all of the content of the rest of the New Testament. In Thomas Bernard’s words, “Every doctrine expanded in the Epistles roots itself in some pregnant saying in the Gospels....The words of Prophets on the one side, and of Apostles on the other, are forever justified and maintained by the words of him who came between them.”9 “I am the door,” proclaims Jesus. “You know the way to the place where I am going” (John 10:7, 9 ESV; 14:4). The expressions are bewildering without the further teaching of the Master, which comes now through the writer to the Hebrews:

H

And as Paul writes: For through him we both have access to the Father by one Spirit....We have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have gained access by faith into the grace in which we now stand.

(Eph. 2:18, Rom. 5:1-2) Having entered through the crucified body of Jesus, we stand in grace—that is, peace granted in place of enmity, joy in place of grief, adoption in place of alienation.

Definitively saved, we are being kept safe now to walk in love; and one day we will arrive safely home at that City where the Tree of Life grows, whose leaves are for the healing of the nations. This is the true end of the story, which Abraham glimpsed; and, really, it is another beginning—planned before the beginning of time by the Inventor and Creator of trees and all things made, who intends after all to dwell forever with his beloved people.

A. Paige Britton (B.A., English, Haverford College and M.A., Special Education, Millersville University) attends Faith Reformed Presbyterian Church with her husband and two children in Quarryville, Pennsylvania.

WORKS CITED 1 Ed Clowney, The Unfolding Mystery (Phillipsburg, N.J.: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing, 1988).

2 Clowney, p .37.

3 Manna: John 6; Jonah: Matt. 12:39-41; Luke 11:29-32; Temple: Matt. 12:6; 26:61; 27:40; Mark 14:58; 15:29; John 2:19-21; Servant: Luke 4:18-21.

4 Origen, “Homilies on Genesis and Exodus,” The Fathers of the Church: A New Translation, vol. 71, trans. Ronald E. Heine (Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 1982), p. 78.

5 Henri de Lubac, Medieval Exegesis: The Four Senses of Scripture, vol. 2, trans. E. M. Macierowski (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000), p. 191.

6 Lubac, pp. 197-98.

7 James Callahan, The Clarity of Scripture (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2001), pp. 140-47.

8 Callahan, p. 215.

9 Thomas Bernard, The Progress of Doctrine in the New Testament (London: Pickering and Inglis, 1864), pp. 60-61.

Therefore, brothers,...we have confidence to enter the Most Holy Place by the blood of Jesus, by a new and living way opened for us through the curtain, that is, his body. (Heb. 10:19-20) J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 0 8 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 17

GRACE OVER RACE

Grace, Race, and Catholicity

by Michael Horton

1 6 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N . O R G

G R A C E ,

W

hen Protestants encounter the words “catholic church,” they usually think of a prominent branch of Christendom. When we confess, however, in the words of the Apostles’ and Nicene creeds that we believe in “one holy, catholic, and apostolic church,” we are one with Christians in all times and places in acknowledging an elect communion in Christ that is even now visible to some extent among us through the ministry of preaching and sacrament. “Catholic” here simply means ‘universal’—the church in all times and places, where the Word is properly preached and the sacraments are properly administered. At a time when churches are divided along ethnic, political, socioeconomic, and generational lines, the question is as urgent for us today as it was for the apostolic church: Will we be defined by Christ and his victory, or by the rival catholicities of this passing age?

Christ Has Already Broken Down the Walls ne of the central concerns of the Apostle Paul was to show that in Christ not only are the wicked justified, renewed, sanctified, and eventually glorified, but that the old wall of hostility between Jew and Gentile has been dismantled. Ephesians is especially clear in underscoring this “mystery hidden in past ages” but now made publicly manifest in Christ’s person and work (Eph. 2:11-4:16).

The most potentially divisive moment in the apostolic church was provoked by the extent to which the gospel defined the church. The predominantly Jewish church was faced with the urgent question: What to do with the Gentiles who professed faith in Christ? Do they have to become Jews when they embrace Christ, or are the laws that distinguish Jew from Gentile no longer binding in the new covenant? “After much discussion,” Peter—who was known to vacillate on the subject—addressed the assembly of apostles and elders with great resolve:

O

“Brothers, you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe.

God, who knows the heart, showed that he accepted them by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us. He made no distinction between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith. Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of the disciples a yoke that neither we nor our fathers have been able to bear? No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are.” (Acts 15:6-11) The Jerusalem Council set the course for the Christian church—defined not by ethnic distinctives of the old covenant, but by faith in Jesus Christ. Peter’s persuasive argument was not drawn from social theory, marketing strategy, or political ideology, but from the logic of the gospel itself.

R A C E ,

A N D

C AT H O L I C I T Y

If the wall between Jew and Gentile has been torn down by the gospel, then surely any divisions that Gentiles erect could be only more unfounded than the first-century tensions. Precisely because the Abrahamic blessing comes not through the law but through the promise: “There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise” (Gal. 3:28-29).

Racism, therefore, is in some sense a denial of the gospel. It narrows the saving work of Christ to the realm of the individual, instead of recognizing that it is a sweeping act of God that rearranges our relationships to one another as well as to God. Because we are reconciled to God by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone, any other identification marker is at least implicitly another gospel, something other than Christ is the tie that binds. Ecclesiology, the doctrine of the church, is therefore closely related to soteriology, the doctrine of salvation. We cannot consistently say that we cling to Christ alone for our personal salvation while denying the catholicity of the church in him.

Where Catholicity Comes From here are voluntary societies based on cultural affinities, ethnic roots, age demographics, hobbies, political views, tastes in music, and so forth; and it is fine for Christians to participate in them since they are citizens of earth as well as heaven. But when it comes to the latter, to their identity as the body of Christ: “There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to one hope when you were called—one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all” (Eph. 4:4-5).

Earlier in Paul’s Epistle to the Ephesians, he grounded this catholicity in the Father’s sovereign election, the Son’s redemption, and the Spirit’s application of redemption (Eph. 1:4-13). I can choose my circle of friends or my neighborhood; but covenantal catholicity is grounded in God’s electing action, not ours. It is the result of a covenant between the Father, Son, and Spirit before all time—not a contract that we make with God and the church.

Jesus reminds us, “You did not choose me but I chose you. And I appointed you to go and bear fruit, fruit that will last” (John 15:16). Consequently, we are commanded to “love one another” (v. 17). I did not choose these people for my sisters and brothers; God did. If I am to be God’s child, I must accept these others as my siblings, coheirs in Christ. A local church (or wider body of churches) is not free to develop its identity in continuity simply with the givens of racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, or consumer affinities. Each particular expression of the church must seek to exhibit the catholicity that is grounded in God’s electing choice rather than in our own. A church in suburban San Diego should seek to be a local expression of the “one holy, catholic, and apostolic church.”

T

J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 0 8 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 17

One Word, Many Languages t has been frequently in Christ that day were more perfectly one than any observed that whereas the Spirit descended on society, yet in a harmony of difference: "In our own Babel in judgment to scatter the proud nations and divide languages we hear them speaking about God's deeds of their languages, the same Spirit descended at Pentecost power." They were one because they shared the same in blessing to unite the peoples and give them a thing, not because they became fused into the same thing. common tongue. However, it is apparent from Acts 2 that Dietrich Bonhoeffer says that the doctrine of election the diversity of languages was fully preserved at Pentecost. warns against surrendering the individual to the In fact, this point is emphasized throughout: “in the community, reminding us that each member of the language of each”; and “amazed and astonished, they community of saints is elect, not just the community asked, ‘Are not all these who are speaking Galileans? And itself. “God therefore really sees the individual, and God’s how is it that we hear, each of us, in our own native election really applies to the individual.”1 Nevertheless, language…about God’s deeds of power?” (vv. 4-8, 11b). it is only part of the story. The communion that Christ Evidently, this gift of interpreting foreign languages was creates by his Spirit is not a fusion but a communion of retained during the apostolic era (1 Cor. 12:10, 30; 14:2-4). persons. The gospel justifies the ungodly and, Much like modernity, the Promethean ambitions of consequently, liberates them for each other in Christ. those gathered on the plains to build a tower reaching to Yet this work of the Spirit is not only individual, it is the heavens would not create the unity of different social—or, as I would put it, covenantal. The Spirit is at people with differing gifts, but a generic sameness: a work in each of the elect, says Bonhoeffer, but precisely natural community. By contrast, the Spirit who created because this is so: “It follows that in moving the elect a world full of diversity preserves it in that diversity and who are part of the church-community established in plurality. Those gathered near the temple at Pentecost Christ, the Holy Spirit simultaneously leads them in to who trusted in Christ that day were more perfectly one the actualized church-community.”2 It is only because than any society, yet in a harmony of difference: “In our of the election of the Father in the Son with the Spirit own languages we hear them speaking about God’s that this is not just another community alongside others, deeds of power.” They were one because they shared the defined by the circumstances of this present age. This same thing, not because they became fused into the same community is not a human ideal, but a divine thing. While modernity suppresses diversity, postachievement. modernity suppresses unity. Refusing to settle for either Also, in both Ephesians 4 and 1 Corinthians 8-14, the form of reductionism, contemporary evangelical Supper (along with baptism and preaching) plays a reflection must take its cue from Pentecost. There are critical role. In Ephesians, the communion that each of not many lords, but one Lord; not many faiths, but one the elect enjoys with Christ (chapter 1) simultaneously faith “once for all entrusted to the saints” (Jude 3); not creates on the horizontal register (to which Christ also many baptisms, but “one baptism” (Eph. 4:5); not many belongs as head) a communion of saints that defies the spirits, but one Spirit of truth (Eph. 4:4; 1 Cor. 24:11, divisions of both Athens and Jerusalem. “Because there 13). is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all As we survey the contemporary ecclesial landscape, partake of the one bread,” says Paul (1 Cor. 10:17). In however, this account of catholicity seems to be the work of the Spirit through the event of Word and reversed. Whereas an almost infinite diversity of sacrament, the church is not simply reminded or doctrine and practice is tolerated, even celebrated, brought to a new awareness of its unity, but becomes churches are becoming more hegemonic than ever with more and more the catholic church in truth. respect to politics, socioeconomic position, age, gender, This means, practically speaking, that the most and cultural tastes. According to pioneering missiologist decisive “location” of any believer is “in Christ.” That is Donald McGavran, “People like to become Christians not to say that one’s ethnicity, language, culture, age, without crossing racial, linguistic, or class barriers….This socioeconomic status, or gender play no role in how one principle states an undeniable fact…[that] the world’s hears and follows God’s Word; but it does mean that if population is a mosaic, and each piece has a separate life the gospel is God’s one word of salvation to all peoples in of its own that seems strange and often unlovely to men all times, then the church is the one society on earth that and women of other pieces.”3 Some readers will see this is completely and exclusively defined by its proclamation. as capitulating to cultural narcissism. McGavran replies: “It is better, they think, to have a slow growing or

Those gathered near the temple at Pentecost who trusted

I

1 8 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M A T I O N . O R G

G R A C E ,

nongrowing church that is really brotherly, integrated, and hence ‘really Christian,’ than a rapidly growing onepeople church.”4 Though clearly rejecting forced segregation on the basis of race, McGavran argues that before people can embrace true “brotherhood” they must become Christians; and since people become Christians more rapidly in culturally homogeneous units, we should do whatever it takes to serve that missional end.5 South African theologians Allen Boesak and John de Gruchy argue that it was Pietist missionaries who assumed this very principle when they planted “homogeneous” churches that inadvertently helped to bring apartheid into existence. In adopting this “missional” path, the Dutch Reformed Church reversed its earlier repudiation of divisions within the church along racial lines.6 According to anti-apartheid theologian and pastor John de Gruchy, Reformed churches were not segregated until the “revivals in the mid-nineteenth century” by holiness preacher Andrew Murray and Pietist missionaries: It was under the dominance of such evangelicalism, rather than the strict Calvinism of Dort, that the Dutch Reformed Church agreed at its Synod of 1857 that congregations could be divided along racial lines. Despite the fact that this development went against earlier synodical decisions that segregation in the church was contrary to the Word of God, it was rationalized on grounds of missiology and practical necessity. Missiologically it was argued that people were best evangelized and best worshipped God in their own language and cultural setting, a position reinforced by German Lutheran missiology and somewhat akin to the churchgrowth philosophy of our own time.7 Ecclesial apartheid is expanding as each generation and demographic market is treated to its own study Bibles and devotional materials, small groups, and “worship experiences.” In fact, some of the leading megachurches with which I am familiar in Southern California offer professionally choreographed theme-services based on musical preferences (50s rock, Hawaiian, country, hiphop, and alternative). Affinity with our peers threatens to rival our affinity with Christ. The sociological “is” (that is, people like being together with others who are like them) is simply taken as the theological “ought,” as if the gospel had no power to redefine our most important social reality. It is as if the church were simply one community of this passing evil age alongside others, rather than the harbinger of the age to come created by the Spirit through the Word.

I have been increasingly impressed by the fact that wherever Christ is the focus of catholicity and Wordand-sacrament ministry the means, a genuinely multicultural and multigenerational community is

R A C E ,

A N D

C AT H O L I C I T Y

generated. However, where ethnic distinctiveness is prized over catholicity, the church easily becomes a reflection of a rival catholicity.

By embracing rather than eliminating cultural differences, the community generated by Pentecost is necessarily oriented toward a catholicity that expresses the end-time harvest of the nations. The fact that Paul’s clearest teaching on the Supper is motivated by the practical problem of allowing socioeconomic differences in the communion of saints shows the similarities with our own age.

Within the history of American Protestantism, catholicity has been undermined more grievously by slavery and racism as well as by socioeconomic divisions.

As these divisions are increasingly recognized as sinful, however, the solution is often to find cultural ways of negotiating and celebrating differences rather than by renewed attention to the cultus—that is, the ministry of the gospel that creates ecclesial unity. As a Christian of northern European descent, it is easy for me to notice that many African-American churches I have attended are shaped by a particular subculture, but I just assume that my own church is not distinguished by such factors.

Yet an African-American brother or sister might think differently. We need to worship together in Christ in order to recognize how culturally bound we are and to negotiate the challenges of being one people.

The current phase of ecclesial division is actually welcomed in the name of mission. In addition to the false catholicity of ethnic bonds or race, it is the false unity of the market. Not only separate churches, but separate “churches-within-churches” are proliferating, each targeting its unique market. In this context, the church becomes a collection of consumers or tourists rather than a communion of saints and pilgrims. Hardly benign, the priority given to the invisible hand of the market is just as schismatic as the divisions of the early church; and for all the appropriate lamentation concerning the denominational splintering of traditional Protestantism, individual choice and stylistic preferences threaten catholicity in our day not only between local churches but within them. It is of the essence of marketing to attract consumers by appealing to the “felt needs” that are ostensibly unique to them, creating demographics defined by those consumer habits. If everyone were fairly similar in basic needs, there would be no motivation to purchase the panoply of ever-new accessories for one’s ever-changing personality.

Where it used to be said (and is still the case) that America’s racial divisions were most evident on Sunday, it is increasingly the case that even families are more divided up into their market niches at church than anywhere else. Today, there are resources for every conceivable demographic and “Christian” versions of anything can be found in popular culture. To the extent that the content generated by this industry retains any substance of the Christian faith, it is cropped to highlight J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 0 8 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 19

outside of it who are drawn to Christ through the Word.

This catholicity requires church and not a special interest group or market niche. patience on all sides. By settling for the truce of A new community is formed by the Spirit as an different niche groups and imperfect yet nevertheless real oasis in a world of strife. even worship services, we not only perpetuate ecclesial apartheid, but deprive that which a specific focus group might find useful, ourselves and our group of the graces that enrich the entertaining, or relevant. We have learned to think as whole body: the weak and the strong (Rom. 14:1-15:6; never before in terms of the uniqueness of overGal. 6:1-10); the rich and the poor (2 Tim. 6:17-19); stereotyped generations. Where church divisions once Jews and Gentiles (Rom. 15:7-21; Col. 3:11); men and resulted in denominations defined by doctrinal women (Gal. 3:28); young and old (1 Tim. 5:1-10). Not distinctives (Lutheran/Evangelical, Reformed, Orthodox, because we all listen to the same music or share the Baptist, Episcopal, Presbyterian, Congregational, etc.), same political agenda, but “because we eat of that one they are now celebrated as “megachurch” and bread” (1 Cor. 10:17) and have been “baptized into one “emergent,” as if each generation were an ex nihilo body” (1 Cor. 12:13). “Because we eat of that one creation. As Timothy Gorringe says, “‘Community’ in this bread” and embrace the same faith in one Spirit (Eph. world is a collection of individual consumers, who might 4:4-5) do we find our true affinity. It was precisely change their preference from week to week.”8 because of worldly divisions that Paul warned the In the name of “incarnational ministry” and diversity, Corinthians to examine themselves before eating and are we actually perpetuating a catholicity of the market drinking at the Lord’s Table (1 Cor. 11:27-34). Each that imposes cultural homogeneity while marginalizing local expression of the catholic church is under that unity in doctrine and church practice? One of the brilliant solemn obligation to “[b]e subject to one another out of successes of the market is that it has convinced us that we reverence for Christ” (Eph. 5:21). are sovereign choosers even while, through its ubiquitous As we “give ear” to God’s Word and privilege the preaching and catechesis (media) and sacraments interpretation of that Word by the communion of saints (advertising), it determines the horizon of our choices. in all times and places, there arises the possibility of a Catholicity does not depend on the similarity of our genuine catholicity that rivals its parodies. Of course, cultural tastes, consumer preferences, or political views. we pick up on some things and suppress others in part Nor does it depend on a similarity of our conversion because of our socialization. However, we all suppress stories, our progress in holiness, or even on our having God’s claim and promise; and in Christ we embrace identical formulations of every doctrine or practice. Yet both, in a communion of saints. When we sit beneath it does require a common confession concerning the the Word, we are all equally condemned by the law and Triune God and the action of this God for our salvation co-heirs with Christ by the gospel. We are not baptized in Christ: one Lord, one faith, one baptism. into a sect of secular sociology and marketing, so should not our hearing be governed by our being in Christ, in Keep the Unity! the already/not-yet tension of his kingdom? Is not this he gospel indicatives create the church. The social location more determinative for us than any church does not have to achieve its catholic other? When the Word creates community, the result is identity; it is catholic because it is Christ’s body. a church and not a special interest group or market Nevertheless, on the heels of this indicative, unfolded in niche. A new community is formed by the Spirit as an the first three chapters of Ephesians, Paul states the imperfect yet nevertheless real oasis in a world of strife. imperative: “Make every effort to keep the unity of the As much as is possible, given the profile of the Spirit through the bond of peace” (Eph. 4:3). This is neighborhoods that churches serve, each local church difficult labor as he points out in several places. The should be a visible expression of this catholicity that one strong must bear with the weak. Effort is required to day will be fully revealed. It is a place where maintain the bond of peace, especially when we are grandparents worship together with their children and seduced into living as if other bodies, other spirits, other grandchildren, and it is once again the case that the callings, lords, faiths, and baptisms vie for our ultimate older teach the younger by word and example; where allegiance. We read in those verses that this requires there is a story larger, broader, and richer than the humility, gentleness, and patience. Not only the young micro-narratives defined by this fading age. This but the old must love their fellow-saints and seek to communion includes both living and dead; those in the preserve a connection with the future as well as the past. suburbs, cities, and rural countryside; multiThe gospel creates a unity, both among those who generational citizens and immigrants in “developed” already belong to the covenant community and to those nations, and those who make up two thirds of the rest

When the Word creates community, the result is a

T

2 0 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M A T I O N . O R G

G R A C E ,

of the world; socialists, democrats, and free-market capitalists.

The church is the place where the young learn to confess the same faith as their elderly brothers and sisters. Yet it is also a place where strangers are welcomed. In the public confession of sin and absolution, in the prayers, singing, and hearing of the Word, at the font and table, we not only recall that the most demographically decisive location is “in Christ,” we actually become located there.

From its Pietist legacy, Protestantism (especially evangelicalism) has more often given rise to new movements than to renewed and reformed churches. At the same time, traditional churches must not treat their people as givens but as gifts—indeed as treasures that have been entrusted to their communion and care. By no means unique to Roman Catholic and Orthodox communions, the challenge of caring for each member of the church-community is just as apparent in Protestant churches. Whenever the congregation is treated as an “audience” or “mass,” Bonhoeffer reminds us, the problem of coming personally to profess the faith for oneself recedes behind the collective faith of the church.9 Baptism is not only God’s promise, it is God’s command to the whole church to assume its responsibilities to the child as agents of covenantal nurture.

Thus the church-community as the community of saints carries its children like a mother, as its most sacred treasure. It can do this only by virtue of its ‘communal life’; if it were a ‘voluntary association’ the act of baptism would be meaningless. This means, however, that infant baptism is no longer meaningful wherever the church can no longer envision ‘carrying’ the child—where it is internally broken, or where it is certain that baptism will be the first and last contact the child will have with it.10

R A C E ,

A N D

C AT H O L I C I T Y

churches could be enriched by a diversity of cultures.

What a blessing it is to us, a testimony it is to the world, and thanksgiving it is to the Triune God when our local churches become more concretely and visibly a sign of the marriage feast of the Lamb! ■

Michael S. Horton is J. Gresham Machen Professor of Systematic Theology and Apologetics at Westminster Seminary California (Escondido, California).

WORKS CITED 1 Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Sanctorum Communio: A Theological Study of the Sociology of the Church, Dietrich Bonhoeffer Works, vol. 1, ed. Joachim von Soosten; English edition, ed. Clifford J. Green, trans. Reinhard Krauss and Nancy Lukens (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1998), p. 162.

2 Bonhoeffer, pp. 158-159.

3 Donald McGavran, Understanding Church Growth, ed. C. Peter Wagner (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1970), p. 163.

4 McGavran, p. 174.

5 McGavran, pp. 174-175. C. Peter Wagner defends McGavran’s approach in Our Kind of People: The Ethical Dimensions of Church Growth in America (Atlanta: John Knox, 1979).

6 Allan Boesak responds, “Manipulation of the word of God to suit culture, prejudices, or ideology is alien to the Reformed tradition.” (Black and Reformed: Apartheid, Liberation and the Calvinist Tradition, ed. Leonard Sweetman [Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1984], p. 87).

7 John de Gruchy, Liberating Reformed Theology: A South African Contribution to an Ecumenical Debate (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991), pp. 23-24.

8 Timothy Gorringe, A Theology of the Built Environment (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), p. 164, from Tönnies’, Community and Society, trans. C. Loomis (New York: Harper & Row, 1963), p. 165.

9 Bonhoeffer, pp. 239-240.

10 Bonhoeffer, p. 241.

Bonhoeffer’s comments not only serve to show the critical difference between a contractual economy (“voluntary association”) and a covenant community, but to impress upon those of us who endorse the latter the danger of socialization without salvation. However, the answer is not to give up on the church—looking outside of the covenant and its institutions that have been appointed by Christ for his people—but to renew a genuine covenantal piety and practice that restores intergenerational and interracial integrity.

The prophets remind us repeatedly of the vision of the latter days, with the nations streaming to Zion, bearing their gifts for the great celebration. As a foretaste of that festival, each gathering of the Lord’s people should reflect as much as possible the diversity of gifts that serve the unity of the body. While the younger believers learn from their elders, they also have gifts to give to the wider body. Think of the ways in which our J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 0 8 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 21

When Grace The Problem ew sophisticated “moderns” regard themselves as racists: that would be tantamount to confessing oneself a “redneck”—a designation more humiliating to most yuppies for its social stigma he far-right National Front of Jean-Marie Le than its self-conscious racism. Most racists wear suits, Pen humiliated the reigning Socialist Party of not white hoods, and work in urban skyscrapers, not Francois Mitterand last spring, even though on rural farms. That’s because most of the population Le Pen made breath-taking remarks about the live in these urban centers and all of us—you and I— undesirability of foreigners, particularly les noires, are partners in this crime. the blacks, many of whom come from such former Christianity holds up the standard of God’s French colonies in Africa as Algeria. righteousness and justice: perfectly loving God and Also last spring, neo-Fascists swept into our neighbor—regardless of race, color, status or parliamentary seats all across Europe—in Germany, creed—to the extent that we would willingly give up Belgium, Austria, Spain, and Italy (including the our own life and property for his or her welfare. If election of Mussolini’s granddaughter)—with you read this sentence correctly, your response will “foreigners go home” likely be: “Name someone who has done that! Isn’t slogans revealing a The issue of racism is one that a bit of an unrealistic reawakening racism across expectation?” If so, it isn’t the continent. Since 1984, moral scandal that cries out for because God did not create over 3,500 Kurds have been killed—not by Iraqis, us with that perfection, a deeper solution than either but because since Adam’s but by Turks. Serbs and rebellion in Eden we have Croats slaughter each the Republicans or the Democrats been following our own other’s civilian populations selfish desires and prein what are called “ethnic can offer this November. purges.” Meanwhile, in the ferring our own happiness United States Pat Buchanan to God’s and our neighwas spouting much of the same sentiments as bor’s. It’s called sin, and we are all sinners. No one, French and German nationalists, and a former not even Mother Theresa nor you nor I, has lived a “Grand Wizard” of the Ku Klux Klan, David Duke, “basically good life.” We are selfish, greedy, proud, gave the country a scare in a Louisiana guberand self-centered. It’s not merely something we do natorial race that was too close for comfort; and the from time to time, it’s what we are. It’s in our hearts Los Angeles riots fired a warning shot concerning to “look out for number one,” and a pagan culture the ethnic tensions among white, black, Korean, that encourages this secular attitude is hardly the and Hispanic groups. first place we ought to look for solutions; that what Of course, the blame for the world’s woes cannot happened in L.A. a few weeks ago doesn’t happen be simplistically placed at the feet of this demon of every night in every city and town is a testimony to race; there are other overarching issues—injustice, God’s common grace. inequity between the weak and the strong, Other religions will tell you what you want to bureaucratic governments and apathetic citizens. hear: There is no such thing as evil—it exists only Each of these deserves our utmost concern, but the if we believe it does (Eastern religions, Christian issue of racism is one moral scandal that cries out for Science, Unity); evil is the product of fate—we a deeper solution than either the Republicans or the can’t do anything about it (Islam, scientific Democrats can offer this November. determinism). But the Christian analysis paints the Although the events described in this 1992 reprint of Michael Horton’s article took place over 15 years ago, the core issues remain pertinent to us today and God's grace is still the answer.

T

2 2 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M A T I O N . O R G

F

Conquers Race picture, warts and all, leaving us in an unflattering light. The truth hurts.

Racism, therefore, is deeper than anything the anthropologists and sociologists can probe with their surveys and studies. Our society not only believes human beings are inherently selfish, it exploits this consumer craving. Trendy preachers will even sell their soul for it—and destroy others. Racism is nothing more than collective narcissism: I love my group above all others because I love myself.

The Solution t’s a good thing Christianity has good news! By the first century, the Jews were anxious for the arrival of their long-promised Messiah or Savior.

As a suffering people, many of the Jews saw the signs and wonders of Jesus of Nazareth, and were convinced by his unique fulfillment of Old Testament prophecies that he was that Messiah. He showed them how superficial their religion had become—concentrating on making sure their own hair was in place by not associating with “sinners.”

Jesus railed at the religious leaders for their hypocrisy and self-righteousness. They wouldn’t bother to help a stranger beaten up and left for dead on the side of the road, but woe betide you if you were a poor person picking grain for food on the Sabbath.

Jesus reaffirmed the Old Testament prophecies concerning God’s plan to bring both Jew and Gentile into one body through this Messiah. “They shall be one flock, with one shepherd,” said the Master.

Suffering public execution at the hands of Jews and Gentiles as a substitute for Jews and Gentiles, Jesus took upon himself our sins and rose from the dead for our justification. Even though we are still sinners, if we trust in Christ we are viewed by God as though we had perfectly fulfilled the Law and never sinned. Out of this liberation from spiritual bondage Christians have found an inspiration for liberating men and women from worldly bondage as well. Take Saul, the chief Jewish persecutor of the early Christian community. On a dusty road Jesus confronted this man of zealous hatred and Saul’s conversion to Christianity was so dramatic he even

I

changed his name to Paul.

This same Paul became the apostle to the Gentiles, and when debate erupted over the assimilation of the swelling ranks of Gentiles into the Jewish-Christian church, Paul came down hard on bigotry and intolerance using Christ as the bond.

Jewish men would pray in the synagogues, “Lord, I thank you that I am not a Gentile, a slave, or a woman.” But the church’s former adversary declared, “In Christ there is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, male nor female. For all are one in Christ.” St. John saw in his vision of heaven the elders praising Jesus, singing, “Worthy is the Lamb, for he was slain and purchased for God with his blood people out of every tribe, kindred, language, and nation and made them to be a kingdom of priests to our God.” At last, grace conquered race.

You often hear even Christians making excuses for racism: “Blood’s thicker than water,” they say.

It’s no wonder that this is all that non-Christians can say; but Christians have in baptism a kind of water that is thicker than blood, a common bath that washes away the sins of pride and prejudice without dissolving identity.

Conclusion know there are political and social solutions to many of the symptoms, but if the root problems of the human heart are to be cured, nothing less than God’s amazing grace is required. People are going to have to listen to the gospel. They will have to get right with God before they can truly love him and their neighbor without self-justification.

I

Reprinted from Modern Reformation, July/August 1992: “How Pro-Life Are You?”

By Michael S. Horton

J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 0 8 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 23

GRACE OVER RACE

Corporate Christian Mergers

by Thabiti Anyabwile

The spring 2006 issue of The American Scholar contains two interesting articles under the feature section labeled “Beyond Race.” In the first article, Amitai Etzioni, a professor at George Washington University, argues that “treating people differently according to their race is as un-American as a hereditary aristocracy, and as American as slavery.” In his view, America is a meritocracy, a place where the national ideal is that people are defined by what they achieve rather than by where they have been.

He says, “Achievement matters, not origin.”

Etzioni proposes that one first step out of our current racial quagmire is to remove racial categories from American public life, like the U.S. Census for example. These categories, he suggests, divide people unhelpfully and artificially; and with the rise of significant numbers of Hispanics, there comes an opportunity to rethink racial categories and forge a new vision of America that lives up to its ideals. In the second article, Nancy Honicker, an English professor at the University of Paris, takes a look at the November 2005 riots in the Parisian suburbs. Honicker points out that these suburbs are peopled largely by emigrants from Africa (Senegal, Ivory Coast, etc). France, however, has precisely the policy Professor Etzioni advocates in his article: the French government keeps no official statistics on race, religion, or ethnic origins of its citizens; and in most cases it is against the law for private institutions to collect such data.

This policy, Professor Honicker argues, contributes to the 2 4 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M A T I O N . O R G

racial discrimination that many immigrants face in France.

THE COLOR/ CULTURE LINES African-American sociologist W. E. B. DuBois (1868-1963) predicted that the problem of the twentieth century would be the “color line.”

Unfortunately this has become true for the twenty-first century as well; though ours is not just the problem of the “color line”—as if only blacks and whites alone were embroiled in the issue, which was certainly DuBois’ context. Ours is the problem of the “color lines” and the even more nebulous “cultural lines.”

Thinking in terms of color is far too simplistic today.

Issues involving ethnicity—and what is commonly called race—have a way of shifting and shading and even blurring in our rapidly international society. DuBois’ color line is sometimes drawn right down the middle of individual people; but what about those who are multiracial? How do we class those individuals and should we? Members of various minority groups are trying to shuffle their way through the personal identity maze that’s created by all of this. Several books illustrate the problem when it comes to personal identity. Mark Smith’s work, How Race Is Made: Slavery, Segregation, and the Senses, argues that whites of all classes, from the colonial period to the mid-twentieth century used not just sight, but all of their senses to construct an artificial binary of “black” and “white” to justify slavery and establish social, political, and

C O R P O R AT E

economic hierarchies. Deborah Dickerson in her iconoclastic reflection on W. E. B. DuBois calls for an end to blackness and the return of the souls of black folks to their rightful owners by redefining blackness and rejecting white ideas about what it means to be black. Meanwhile, Eric Goldstein asks, “What does it mean to be Jewish in a nation preoccupied with the categories of black and white?” In his book, The Price of Whiteness, Goldstein takes a look at the history of Jewish racial identification in America by tracing the hard choices and conflicting emotions faced by Jewish immigrants and their children as they sought social inclusion at the potential price of their ethnic distinctiveness.

You see the quagmire, don’t you? A complex maze of histories, definitions, counter-histories, and redefinitions all aimed at figuring out just who we are—and trying to answer the famous question posed by Rodney King: “Can’t we all just get along?” While there are lots of book titles out there, there are no real solutions offered.

That might be acceptable if we didn’t know that this conflict along the lines of color, ethnicity, culture, and religion was so explosive and volatile. As the May 2007 issue of The New Republic stated: Never again? What nonsense. Again and again is more like it. In Darfur, we are witnessing a genocide again, and again we are witnessing ourselves witnessing it and doing nothing to stop it.

Even people who wish to know about the problem do not wish to know about the solution. They prefer the raising of consciousness to the raising of troops. Just as Rwanda made a bleak mockery of the lessons of Bosnia, Darfur is making a bleak mockery of the lessons of Rwanda. Some lessons, it seems, are gladly and regularly unlearned. Except, of course, by the perpetrators of evil, who learn the only really enduring lessons about genocide in our time: that the Western response to it is late in coming, or is not coming at all.

Nations or ethnic groups war against other nations or ethnic groups, and some nations stand back as they do. It’s as though the earth isn’t big enough for us all and someone has to be homeless or obliterated. People are alienated one from another, hostile and angry. Some are even confused about who they are—puzzled about origins and belonging even as they look in the mirror. It seems that most of us are bewitched, bothered, and bewildered by race and ethnicity. We know that the situation we find ourselves in is unjust and wrong; we feel its unnatural quality in the pits of our stomachs even if we don’t know what to do about it in our heads. We ask ourselves: What is the way forward?

How do we escape this quicksand? Has the American experiment failed with its promise of E pluribus unum, out of many one? Is there no way of affirming our unique differences on the one hand and achieving a permanent peace and unity on the other? Is there no solution for the

C H R I S T I A N

M E R G E R S

estrangement and hostility we witness in the world, that we witness in ourselves?

Ephesians 2 reveals to us the three problems reflected in all of this: our alienation; our hostility and strife; and our homelessness. It also reveals the answer to these problems.

THE ANSWER TO OUR ALIENATION IS NEARNESS TO GOD In Ephesians 2:11–13, Paul summarizes and recapitulates what he has just finished saying in verses 110. Like a good teacher, he is repeating himself and pressing his point deeper into the minds of his readers. In verses 1-10, Paul reminded the Ephesian Christians that at one time they were dead spiritually, separated from God because of their sins and transgressions. He reminded them that they were enslaved by the world, the flesh, and the devil, and so were objects of God’s holy wrath; but God (v. 4) in love and grace rescued or saved them from his own wrath by raising them from spiritual death to life through faith in his Son Jesus Christ.

In verses 11-13, Paul repeats that message, but he adds a different dimension. Whereas verses 1-10 had special reference to individual Gentile Christians and how God saved them by grace, verses 11-13 zoom back to take in a panoramic view—coming into focus are not just the individuals but the ethnic groups in Ephesus. Paul addresses this section to “you who are Gentiles by birth and called ‘uncircumcised’ by those who call themselves ‘the circumcision.’” The address itself points to the ethnic alienation that his readers were facing.

Wrong People—Alienation from Society They were Gentiles by birth or “Gentiles in the flesh.” As the term “Gentile” is a general term used throughout Scripture to refer to non-Jews, in effect Paul is pointing out that they were ethnically “the wrong people” by birth having been born non-Jews, and the alienation they experienced as an accident of birth was compounded by a religious alienation as well. You see that in Paul’s use of the phrase “called ‘uncircumcised’ by those called ‘the circumcision.’” This phrase alludes to the real and centuries-long ethnic hostility between Gentile and Jewish people. To be called “uncircumcised” was to be called pagan or heathen. Since circumcision was the sign of God’s covenant with his people, those not circumcised were outsiders and aliens from whom Israel was to separate itself.

Think of the emotional intensity that goes with the phrase “uncircumcised Philistine” found in the Old Testament.

That’s probably what’s in view here—alienation, disdain, and hostility grounded in religious difference. The sign of God’s covenant people, circumcision, had degenerated into a racial or religious slur in the mouths of his people.

Wrong Religion—Alienation from God Having been born Gentiles, uncircumcised outsiders had certain religious disadvantages (v. 12). Because they were not Jewish by origin, they were to remember that they J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 0 8 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 25

or any other earthly power— but citizens of the kingdom of heaven. Jesus, standing the name of the Lord Jesus Christ for salvation, before Pontius Pilate, said, “My kingdom is not of this reconciliation, and peace through faith in his blood. world… my kingdom is from another place” (John 18:36), were: “separate from Christ”; “excluded from citizenship in by which he meant the kingdom of heaven. We are now Israel”; “foreigners to the covenants of promise”; “without citizens of that place. We don’t belong to this world but to hope”; and “without God.” Their situation was desperate. another. We are now fellow citizens with all who call on The prepositions and adjectives were terrible enough: the name of the Lord Jesus Christ for salvation, separate, excluded, foreigners, without. reconciliation, and peace through faith in his blood. The As Gentiles, they were: “separate” from the Messiah, answer to our alienation is nearness to God through union the promised Deliverer and Savior of humanity from their with Christ—and with one another—becoming one new sins (vv. 1-10); “excluded” from citizenship in Israel, nation. Yet, as I said earlier, humanity is not only alienated which is to say shut out from the one people God chose as from one another and from God, we are also hostile the objects of his special love; “foreigners” to the covenants toward one another and toward God. of promise, the blood oath of God to make for himself a special people and to be to that people their loving and THE ANSWER TO OUR HOSTILITY IS RECONCILIATION merciful God; so, naturally, they were “without hope and AND PEACE THROUGH JESUS CHRIST without God.” They were “Christless, stateless, friendless, “He himself is our peace” (Eph. 2:14). The emphasis here hopeless, and Godless.”1 is strongly on Jesus. In other words, peace is a person. Jesus This is how people show up to our churches. Can you is the only peace available to Jew and Gentile alike. The fact think of a more desolate and desperate condition? They that Jesus is our peace rules out other false sources of peace. were estranged from God’s people, God’s promises, and Peace is found only in him. Peace is not about census studies God himself. No wonder they were hopeless. or data collection, public policy, military might, education or Their alienation from God wasn’t peculiar to them. philosophy, or inner strength quietly self-administered, but Even people of Jewish background were alienated from about another Person—Jesus. “He himself is our peace.” He God. That seems to be what’s hinted at in the is the Lord of peace, the Prince of peace. parenthetical statement at the end of verse 11: “The First, he made the two one. That is, he took those who circumcision” (that done in the body by the hands of were alienated and hostile toward one another, Jew and men).” By including that phrase, Paul is pointing out that Gentile, and unified them. the circumcision group bore the sign of a relationship with Second, he “destroyed the barrier, the middle wall of God outwardly only. Their physical foreskins were cut by hostility.” This barrier or middle wall of hostility was the the hands of men, but the dead skin encasing their hearts symbol of all that separated Jew from Gentile, all that was not circumcised by the hands of God. So they too, separated the people of God from the profane. Some though they had known all the advantages of being born commentators think that this has special reference to the in the right nation and being raised in the correct religious temple of Herod the Great in Jerusalem, which featured family, were separated from God. just such a dividing wall. According to Josephus and white limestone slabs uncovered over a hundred years But Now… ago, there hung on this outer wall for all the Gentiles to Paul wants to remind both Jew and Gentile that they see signs that read, “No foreigner may enter within the are no longer alienated from God—they have been barrier and enclosure round the temple. Anyone who is caught brought near (Eph. 2:13). Just as they were once dead in doing so will have himself to blame for his ensuing death.” As sins and then made alive through faith in Christ, so also Paul wrote his letter to the Ephesians, he knew firsthand they were once excluded and separated but now are the force of this threat as about three years earlier he brought near, brought into a new nation made of Jew and had nearly been lynched by an angry Jewish mob who Gentile. The old disadvantages have been reversed. The mistakenly thought he had taken a Gentile into the alienation caused by birth and religion are overcome now temple. Interestingly, the Gentile in question was an that they are near to God. This nearness is said to be “in Ephesian named Trophimus.2 For some, the middle wall Christ.” In other words, the nearness we may have with of separation had come to symbolize all that excluded the Gentiles and all that established religious pride and God is found through union with his Son. This becomes arrogance in many Jewish people. But there’s another the new identity that overcomes the exclusion and way of understanding this phrase, if we allow the third separation. They were no longer Jews, Ephesians, Asians, aspect of Jesus’ work to clarify it.

Greeks, and the like, but now they were “Christians.”

Third, Jesus brought peace by “abolishing in his flesh the They are now members of a new spiritual ethnic group.

Law with its commandments and regulations.” The dividing With new life in Christ we become citizens—not of Israel

We are now fellow citizens with all who call on

2 6 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M A T I O N . O R G

C O R P O R AT E

wall of hostility is probably best understood in the context as the Law with its commandments and regulations. That Law separated Israel from all who were outsiders. It marked Israel out as different, as God’s people, but eventually became the source of much pride and resulting hostility. This reference to “abolishing in his flesh the Law” is a reference to Jesus’ fulfillment of the Law through perfect obedience, abolishing the penalty of that Law through his sacrifice. Christ took upon himself the penalty of the Law on the cross in the place of all those who would repent and believe in him. But those laws were merely pointers to a greater reality, when the people of God would be cleansed of their sins, counted righteous and holy unto the Lord. That greater reality was established when Christ, the perfect Lamb of God, “in his flesh” died for the sins of his people.

Fourth, Jesus brought us peace when he “came and preached peace to those who were far away and peace to those who were near” (v. 17). Peace was the proclamation made regarding Jesus at his birth in Luke 2:14: “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace to men on whom his favor rests.” However, when he triumphantly entered Jerusalem riding a donkey—itself a sign of peace—the people didn’t recognize that the peace of God had been visited upon them. Luke 19:41-44: “As he approached Jerusalem and saw the city, he wept over it and said, ‘If you, even you, had only known on this day what would bring you peace—but now it is hidden from your eyes.” But to his disciples, those who heard the message and believed, he said, “Peace I leave with you; my peace I give you” (John 14:27). Again, he later said to them, “I have told you these things, so that in me you may have peace. In this world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world” (John 16:33). In Acts 10, when salvation through Christ was first being witnessed among the Gentiles, Peter explained: “I now realize how true it is that God does not show favoritism but accepts men from every nation who fear him and do what is right. You know the message God sent to the people of Israel, telling the good news of peace through Jesus Christ, who is Lord of all.”

The apostles and earliest followers of Jesus came to understand that the very message of Christianity, the message about Jesus, was the gospel of peace.

What was Jesus’ purpose in creating peace?

Jesus’ purpose was to create one new man (Eph. 2:15b18) out of Jew and Gentile, and this new man is characterized by reconciliation with fellow Christians. The peace we seek requires union with Jesus Christ. Apart from union with Christ there can be no lasting union with one another. Horizontal mergers are made possible only through vertical integration; but where vertical integration truly exists, horizontal mergers are inevitable. Both Jew and non-Jew also have reconciliation with God through the cross. Neither the privileges of Israel nor the disadvantages of the Gentiles changed the fundamental problem of our heart’s hostility toward God demonstrated

C H R I S T I A N

M E R G E R S

by our sins. As we look at disunity and hostility in Iraq, Iran, Darfur, and other regions, we are not fundamentally watching the tragedy of humanity not able to get along; what we’re watching is the blooming of a sour fruit whose root is hostility toward God. But Christ Jesus reconciles the faithful to God through the cross. Here we see that the cross achieved peace and reconciliation among humanity, and between humanity and God; and more than that, the work of Jesus on the cross restored “access to the Father by one Spirit” (v. 18).

The breach that occurred when Adam and Eve disobeyed God is finally bridged by the cross. Therefore, Jew and Gentile, all peoples of the earth as one man through faith in Jesus may now have access, a relationship, with God the Father by the Spirit of God. Notice the past tense verbs in this section: reconciliation is something that Christ has already done!

We are living beneath our inheritance on this issue. Let’s not act as if reconciliation across natural lines like ethnicity and class comes through human effort or moral education when Christ has already accomplished it. The imperative to do must rest upon the indicative that Christ has already done. This is why I’m not a big fan of racial reconciliation programs; the answer lies in the cross and the power of Christ’s peace. When we fail to live in peace as one new man, we deny that the gospel is the way of peace and, having a form of godliness, we deny the corporate power of it!

THE ANSWER TO OUR HOMELESSNESS IS A NEW DWELLING WITH GOD Not only do we face the problem of alienation and hostility, but we are also a people who are not at home with each other because of our hostility and sin. In the last few verses of Ephesians 2 (vv. 19-22), Paul sums up this section of his letter with “consequently,” announcing that what follows is the conclusion of the whole matter. The logic of the chapter has gone like this: “As for you… you were dead in trespasses and sins” (v. 1); “but God who is rich in mercy, because of his great love with which he loved us…made us alive together with Christ” (v. 4); “therefore, remember…that at that time you were separate from Christ… without hope and without God” (v.

11); “but now in Christ Jesus you who were far off have been brought near through the blood of Christ” (v. 13); “consequently….” What is consequent to new life in Christ individually, and new reconciliation and unity with others and God through faith in Christ? Three things: citizenship; membership; and dwelling.

Our citizenship has been changed, which is what we’ve been reflecting on all along really. But Paul concludes with another reminder of that fact here in verse 19: “No longer foreigners and aliens (sojourners), but fellow citizens.”

“No longer foreigners and aliens, but fellow… members of the household of God.” The imagery grows more intimate. It’s not just that we’ve made it inside the borders of a new kingdom or territory, but by God’s grace we have J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 0 8 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 27

the One who brings the Gentiles near to God. He, then, is the cornerstone. He Our aim should be to find the strangers and aliens anchors the entire building, and he keeps it level and among us, and see that they are reconciled to us and sturdy. As the cornerstone, he is the foundational most importantly to God. element that joins together the two walls of Gentile and been brought into the King’s household—and not as mere Jew. It is upon Jesus that the entire edifice is raised (vv. 21servants, but as members of that household. We have 22). been adopted into the family as heirs together of this Here is the glorious end of it all! All of history is about kingdom with Christ (Rom. 8:15-17). All who are in God building for himself a holy temple, a dwelling place.

Christ are made a part of one family—God’s family, God’s That dwelling is not made by hands, does not suffer household. Far from being at war, hostile and threatening, construction delays or need weather treatment, or require we sleep securely under the roof of God our King as his bricks and mortar. The temple of God is built on the children. This is the future of all who love and follow cornerstone of his Son, Jesus. It is laid on the foundation Jesus as their Savior. of his sent messengers, apostles and prophets; but it is This household is “being built together to become a raised with the “living stones” of the once dead now living, dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit.” Notice how the once alien now citizen, once hostile now reconciled imagery grows yet more intimate still. It’s not just that followers of Jesus Christ! The one people of God—Jew we’re now citizens, and it’s not just that we’re members and Gentile; black and white; male and female; young and of God’s household; we are the house or dwelling of God old—all of God’s people of all time through faith in Jesus (vv. 19-20). We are a “household, built on the foundation Christ have become the temple of God indwelt by the Holy of the apostles and prophets.” Not on the men Spirit of God. themselves, but on their message; on the message of the This is the destiny of all who repent of their sins and sent ones, or apostles, and the New Testament prophets turn toward God through faith in Jesus Christ. We are who made known the rich truths about Jesus Christ. destined to be his dwelling place, until we hear that final Their teachings are foundational to the New Testament proclamation from the throne of heaven (Rev. 21:3)— church. Without them, the foundation is eroded. That’s “Behold, now the dwelling of God is with men, and he will why every form of “Christianity” that attacks the live with them. They will be his people, and God himself teachings of the apostles crumbles and fails. Liberal will be with them and be their God.” Christianity, the attacks on Paul, etc., all collapse in a heap because they neglect this foundation.

WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES THIS MAKE IN OUR Notice too that this dwelling, this household, is founded UNDERSTANDING OF CHRISTIANITY AND “with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone.” Christ THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH? is the Chief Apostle, sent by God the Father to die for the Ephesians 2 lets us know that Christianity is far more sins of his people and to preach the good news of peace. corporate than we’re accustomed to thinking. It’s not all Christ is the Chief Prophet foretold by Moses in about a “personal relationship with Christ.” To be sure, Deuteronomy 18. He is the fulfillment of Israel’s hope and individuals must repent of their sins and place their trust

We should then be an aggressively inclusive people.

“Ring out, wild bells” from In Memoriam by Lord Alfred Tennyson

2 8 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M A T I O N . O R G

C O R P O R AT E

on Christ for the salvation of their souls; but Christ saves people to make of them one new man. He makes them one body in himself. This passage promises far greater unity than we might imagine; it speaks directly to unity across racial and ethnic lines. This should make us zealous in our pursuit of multiethnic unity in the church. It tells us plainly that racism is incompatible with following Jesus—the two are oil and water, mutually exclusive.

We should then be an aggressively inclusive people. Our aim should be to find the strangers and aliens among us, and see that they are reconciled to us and most importantly to God. We should continue in the work of evangelism and missions so that others might know peace.

We have known the hopelessness of being without Christ, without God, and without the promises of God in life.

Ephesians 2 teaches us that we need a new theological anthropology that helps us to live out the reality of Christ’s accomplishments on the cross.

First, this anthropology might begin with identifying that the image of God unites every one of us far more than any difference divides us. We are all made in God’s image, and God has made every ethnic group from the same blood (Acts 17:26). Second, our anthropology needs to be Christocentric. We need an anthropology that stresses our new identity in Christ and our abiding union with him.

Third, we need an anthropology that stresses we are actually one man, one body, one church. In other words we need an anthropology that is theological, christological, and ecclesiological. Where is the new creation to be seen in this age? It’s in the church. The church is the setting for the diamond of Christ’s redemption and recreation, where the one new man lives out the reconciliation of God and humanity. Fourth, we need an anthropology that is eschatological. Not only are we a new humanity, but one day we will be transformed into a glory not easily imagined or described; one day we will finally and thoroughly be like Christ (1 John 3). We need desperately to have that eternal view of humanity bleed back into our temporal understanding and practice as we reach eagerly

C H R I S T I A N

M E R G E R S

forward to it, living in preparation for it.

As long as humanity lives there will be wars and rumors of wars; strife and hostility will dog and plague our existence; people everywhere will long for peace and will feel like strangers and aliens in this world because we are not made for this world. Our cries for reconciliation are testimonies to the fact that this world is not as it was originally made. Things have gone terribly wrong. Our sin has utterly corrupted everything—it has corrupted our hearts and corrupted our society. Loneliness, alienation, and hostility are abominations. We were made for perfect and intimate union with one another and supremely with God. We were made to reflect the glory of God through a unity that affirms God made no mistake when he made us both Jew and Gentile—African, Asian, European, Haitian, Native American, Hispanic, and so on; a unity that affirms all of that and yet transcends those categories through an abiding oneness with Jesus Christ.

That vision, that reality, that reconciliation is possible only through becoming one new nation, indeed one new man, and taking up one new dwelling together with God; and that is only possible through faith in the shed blood of Jesus Christ who gives us peace with one another and with God the Father through faith in him. Come near to God through faith in Jesus. ■

Thabiti Anyabwile (B.S., M.S., Psychology, North Carolina State University) is senior pastor at First Baptist Church in Grand Cayman, Cayman Islands. He co-wrote with Mark A. Noll, The Decline of African American Theology: From Biblical Faith to Cultural Accommodation (2007), and with John Piper, The Faithful Preacher: Recapturing the Vision of Three Pioneering African-American Pastors (2007).

WORKS CITED 1 John R. W. Stott quoting William Hendriksen, The Message of Ephesians (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1991), p. 96.

2 Stott, p. 92.

J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 0 8 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 29

GRACE OVER RACE

A JOURNEY

ON Reflections of a KoreanI remember it like yesterday. He came up to me and asked, “Where are you from?”

Since at that moment I happened to be in Irvine, California, I immediately responded, “I live in Corona del Mar.” “No, no,” he said, “where are you from?”

Somewhat confused but still attempting to be respectful, I answered, “I’m from here—Southern California.”

Clearly that was not what this inquirer had in mind.

With even more intensity, he tried one last time: “Where are you FROM?” “A stalk of wheat hangs its head lower as it ripens” s a second-generation Korean American raised in a Christian home, I was taught from an early age about the importance of demonstrating respect and humility not only to my parents, but also to anyone within the Korean-American community that had the age or position that necessitated it. The Korean proverb about becoming more humble as one matured was an apt illustration of how I was expected to act—not only because of cultural expectations, but also because of Christian ones.

Interestingly, this cultural expectation of appropriate social interaction began to manifest itself in the way I related to members of other cultures, especially those within the dominant culture of my upbringing (read: white America), regardless of age or position. This meant that I would have to be respectful even to impolite people who apparently did not know how to ask me directly about my racial ethnicity.

Growing up in Southern California in the 1970s, I found myself painfully aware that I looked different from the majority of the people in my school and neighborhood. I not only looked different, but it was also clear that I thought differently from my Caucasian friends.

This created a variety of internal and external challenges as I navigated a journey of what it meant to be a marginalized bicultural person in the predominantly Caucasian world around me. I wish I could say it got easier as I traveled from primary school to graduate school, but it didn’t.

Now, as I find myself teaching at a seminary and ministering in a denomination that are both largely Caucasian in their leadership and makeup, I am forced to

A

3 0 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M A T I O N . O R G

A

J O U R N E Y

O N

T H E

M A R G I N S

THE MARGINS American Presbyterian understand the dynamics of and provide answers to the challenges that Korean Americans like myself face when joining and serving in overwhelmingly Anglo institutions.

This process becomes that much more critical as I continue to advise Korean-American students who are also on a journey of their own, not only having to navigate the ins and outs of seminary curricula, but also having to travel through a maze of uncertainty that is part and parcel of their bicultural identity formation. So what social, cultural, and ecclesial challenges do Korean-American pastors face? This is the central question that this article will attempt to answer.

It must be stated up front that much of what I write is colored by my own background, history, and experiences—especially in the denomination where I am currently an ordained minister, the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA). What follows then are some of my reflections as a second-generation Korean-American Presbyterian minister journeying on the margins between two cultures. Our journey begins with a brief look back at the history of Korean immigration and the development of the Korean-American church. We will then see some of the challenges Korean-American pastors face. We will finally conclude by looking ahead at what the future might hold for Korean-American pastoral leaders.

Looking Back: The History of the Korean-American Church he spectacular growth of Christianity in Korea over the last century has been one of the most surprising realities of Protestant mission history. Ever since the first Christian missionaries began arriving on the Korean peninsula during the late nineteenth century, many were amazed by the success of their modest labors. Horace G. Underwood, the first Presbyterian missionary to Korea, also found remarkable success in his efforts when he arrived in 1885. Many church leaders in the U.S. were astonished by the numerous conversions during these early years, in contrast to the challenges missionaries in Japan faced during this same period.

One reason for the success of these early evangelistic efforts was the adoption of the Nevius Plan of missions.

T

BY

JULIUS J. KIM

J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 0 8 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 31

members, and ministers are Korean. Furthermore, out of about 70 geographic presa large amount (70-80%) of second-generation byteries spread across North America, seven of them are Korean-American young adults had left or were leaving Korean-language specific.

The majority of Koreantheir parents’ churches. Some sociologists have even American churches was established in the mid-1970s given this startling statistic a name: “the silent exodus.” with pastors who, after having received their theoNamed after John Nevius (1829-1893), a missionary in logical training in Korea, immigrated to the U.S. to lead China, this model emphasized the self-supporting, selfimmigrant Korean churches. As a result, many Koreanpropagating, and self-governing goals of the newly American churches (including those in the PCA) are filled evangelized church. While not immediately popular in with immigrant Korean adults who worship in the Korean China, this plan—which stressed the self-determination of language and are led by pastors who primarily speak the local church and her leaders to grow their own Korean. Their children, however, are found in other parts church—was quickly espoused by both missionaries and of the church building worshipping separately in English. new converts in Korea. This spirit would profoundly impact This has created one of the primary challenges for the later Korean immigrants to the U.S. as they attempted to Korean-American church and her leaders. plant their own churches independent of “outside” help.

By the late 1890s, many churches in the U.S. and Our Burdens: Canada—including the Southern Presbyterian Church in The Challenges of Korean-American Pastors the U.S. (from which the PCA was formed)—were sending rom kindergarten to high school, second-generation missionaries to Korea. These early missionaries began to Korean-American young people in church are establish schools and hospitals in addition to their church encouraged to quickly learn the English language so planting work. By 1910, for example, missionaries had they can excel in their studies and work. Separated from established about 800 schools of various grades, their parents during most of these formative years in accommodating over 41,000 students.1 This represented church, the children of immigrant parents end up about twice the total enrollment in all Korean government developing unrealistic concepts of church and family life. schools combined. The success of these and other While they do find some semblance of community life by educational and medical initiatives greatly contributed to joining campus ministries in their college years, many of the progress of these early mission efforts. Today, close to these young Korean Americans find themselves, however, one third of Korea’s 45 million people consider themselves wrestling with complex issues of ethnic and spiritual identity formation without helpful models and guides. As Christian—11 million Protestant and 3 million Catholic. a result, many second-generation Korean-American Presbyterians represent the largest percentage of young men and women do not join their parents back in Protestants at 3 million members. the pews after they graduate.

In 1903, the first Koreans to come to the U.S. were By the mid-1990s, a number of studies revealed that a agricultural laborers in Hawaii.2 Though the majority of large amount (70-80%) of second-generation KoreanKoreans immigrated to the States after the introduction of American young adults had left or were leaving their the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, the Koreanparents’ churches. Some sociologists have even given this American church has played a vital role in shaping the startling statistic a name: “the silent exodus.” While there lives of Korean Americans from its humble beginnings. are many factors contributing to this departure, several In a study done in 1990, up to 75% of Korean within the context of pastoral leadership are worth Americans regularly attend Korean immigrant churches mentioning: emphasis of ministry resources in the Korean here in the U.S. Thus, more immigrant Koreans in the church primarily for the first generation; resistance by U.S. attend churches than Koreans who remain in Korea. first-generation leaders to share leadership; interpersonal By 2001, the Korean Church Directory of America conflicts between first- and second-generation leaders; revealed that there were approximately 3,400 Korean lack of empowerment for second-generation pastors; lack Protestant churches in the U.S., or one church per 300 of training and mentoring for inexperienced secondKorean immigrants. About half of these churches are Presbyterian. As for my denomination, in 2004 the PCA generation pastors; and scarcity of bilingual Koreanhad approximately 200 Asian churches out of a total of American pastors.

1,300. The approximate number of members was 34,000 These cultural concerns between first- and secondout of a total of 330,000—about 11%. At that time, it was generation pastoral leaders in the Korean-American estimated that there were 450 ministers of Asian descent. church highlight yet another challenge. Recent studies by The overwhelming majority of these Asian churches, both sociologists and theologians have demonstrated the

By the mid-1990s, a number of studies revealed that

F

3 2 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M A T I O N . O R G

A

bicultural complexities and struggles found within intergenerational relationships in the Korean-American church context. In particular, young second-generation Korean Americans often find themselves with the unenviable task of forming their identity and finding their social location within a crucible of complex and hostile settings. On the one hand, many young Korean Americans have heard voices in their society that label them as foreign and inferior. On the other, they also hear their immigrant parents’ aspirations for their success in school and career.

As a result of these pressures, many young Korean Americans assume multiple identities in their attempt to navigate between two cultures. Depending upon the circumstances, they will present themselves as “Americans” in some settings while identifying themselves as Korean Americans in others. One scholar writes, “Identity negotiation is part of everyday life for many second-generation Korean Americans. It is a strategy often employed by these individuals to feel accepted by others and to avoid marginalization.”3 Often, however, assuming these multiple identities leads many young Korean Americans to feel inauthentic, isolated, and discouraged.

In addition to these identity formation struggles, many young Korean-American pastors find it challenging to locate and receive a call to a church ministry. While this is undoubtedly a challenge that many young men face once they graduate from seminary, second-generation Korean Americans face unique challenges. On the one hand, while returning to the immigrant Korean church to serve has many advantages, it also poses some problems—least of which is the intergenerational conflicts. On the other hand, though many positions are available in predominantly white congregations throughout the U.S., many of these churches do not consider calling a Korean American to their church. I speak from personal experience.

During my last year in seminary, I contacted some representatives from a denomination that was recruiting potential pastors. After spending a few minutes asking about my testimony and seminary experience, the representative proceeded to ask me what I would like to do after graduating. I told him quite simply that I wanted to be a minister of Word and sacrament in order to proclaim the gospel faithfully to God’s people in the church and in the world. After a few awkward moments of silence, he thoughtfully said, “Hmm, I don’t think there’s a multicultural church in my denomination looking for a pastor right now.” Did I hear that right? I tried again with some uncertainty in my voice, “I’m not looking for a position in a multicultural context; I just want to be a pastor.” Unfortunately, he hadn’t heard me in the midst of what appeared to be a genuine state of reflection as he attempted to locate a church that fit me.

After a few more awkward moments of silence, he came out of his meditative state and exclaimed with a palpable display of excitement, “Oh yes, there is a church on the

J O U R N E Y

O N

T H E

M A R G I N S

East Coast that is half African American!” He paused. Oh no, I thought, here it comes. “The problem is,” he stated, “they’re not looking for anyone right now.”

These descriptions represent some of the main challenges facing the Korean-American church today.

Resources and models for ministry found in our Anglodominated denominations have not adequately addressed these complex sociological and pastoral issues that plague a portion of her church. While some concerned leaders and denominations have sought to develop new ministry paradigms for this emerging generation, many of these attempts have inevitably been nothing more than offering models of ministry that have been deemed pragmatic and helpful due to their successful use by white, mainstream evangelical institutions.

One reason for this lack of resources and support may be due to the residual effects of living in a racially charged society like America. During the past two centuries, Asian Americans have encountered various forms of racism that have not only shaped their own identities, but also their understanding of how and where they fit in this society.

Asians were viewed with racial intolerance on the one hand or with patronizing assimilation on the other.

Categorized as “yellow peril” or as “model minority,” Asians were thus perceived either as treacherous villains who were not desired or as submissive immigrants who must assimilate and adopt the superior culture. As one Asian American scholar writes, “Whatever it is that makes Asians different from what is considered American is construed as something that is permanent or something to be erased.”4 Latent perceptions born from two centuries of misperception may have inexorably influenced white Americans—even those who lead and guide our churches and denominations.

Not too long ago I was invited to preach at a church populated predominantly by Caucasians. Having now lived and worked in primarily racially white contexts for over 20 years, I felt quite at ease preaching in this setting.

What surprised me, however, was a comment after the service was over. One parishioner approached me as I stood by the coffee pot and, after the initial pleasantries were exchanged, suddenly looked at me and exclaimed, “My, your English is quite good!” Stunned, I took a sip of my coffee, wondering whether or not I should cry out, “It should be since I was born here and have lived here for over 30 years!” But I quietly said, “Thank you.” What else could I say? I knew deep down that the comment did not precipitate from any malicious intent. At times like this, I must breathe grace.

Looking Ahead: The Future of the Korean-American Church n his book, The Peacemaker, Ken Sande issues the call to breathe grace upon people with whom you are in conflict. He writes that as beneficiaries of the grace of God, breathed out to us in Christ, we are called upon to breathe out words and deeds of grace. As I reflect upon

I

J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 0 8 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 33

As we are formed more into the image of Christ and Humble and repentant, we all can courageously take the steps to move beyond community, we can come before one another with ignorance and arrogance, and develop the attitudes a spirit of deep humility and trust. and resources for growth and maturity for our church. the future of the Korean-American church and her After all, as the Korean proverb states, a boat will certainly pastors, this is where we must fundamentally begin—with not get to its destination unless there is water. ■ the gospel of grace. It is the gospel that can transform our characters and our cultures.

So how can we support Korean-American churches Julius J. Kim (Ph.D., Historical Theology, Trinity Evangelical and pastors as they journey through difficult territories of Divinity School) is dean of students and associate professor of self-identity and ministry formation in predominantly practical theology at Westminster Seminary California. He also white institutions?

First and foremost, we must once directs the Center for Pastoral Refreshment, a unique institute at again let the gospel speak to us. Korean Americans who WSC dedicated to help sustain pastoral excellence among Koreanstruggle in their bicultural existence must allow the gospel American pastors. of grace to provide both the source and meaning to their lives on the margins. Ultimately, we must learn that before we are Korean, before we are American, we are WORKS CITED 1 Christ’s. We must discover anew our privileged place with Andrew E. Kim, “History of Christianity in Korea: Jesus within the glorious journey of God’s great plan of From its Troubled Beginning to its Contemporary Success” redemption. For in that story we discover a living God (Korea Overseas Information Services).

2 who did not spare his own perfect Son from the shame Much of the statistical data in this article is found in and pain of exclusion. This Jesus, who for the joy set Timothy Tseng, et al., “Asian American Religious before him endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat Leadership Today: A Preliminary Inquiry,” Pulpit and Pew down at the right hand of God (Heb. 12:2). Why? So that Research Reports (Durham, N.C.: Duke Divinity School, we would never be excluded but always be embraced. As 2005).

3 we look by faith to Jesus Christ, the Marginal One who Peter Cha, “Identity Formation in the Secondexperienced the ultimate exclusion from his Father due to Generation Korean American Church,” Reflections on Asian our sins, we will find the resurrection power to walk this American Theology, eds. D. J. Chuang and T. Tseng pilgrim life with renewed faith, hope, and love. Because (Washington D.C.: L2 Foundation, 2006), p. 6.

4 we who rest and rely upon that Savior are united to him Tim Tseng, “Beyond Orientalism and Assimilation: in his eschatological journey of hope.

Towards an Asian American Identity,” Reflections on Asian This gospel cannot only transform our characters, but American Theology, eds. D. J. Chuang and T. Tseng also our cultures. As we are formed more into the image (Washington D.C.: L2 Foundation, 2006), p. 22.

5 of Christ and as we understand that the church is a graceCha, p. 16. based community, we can come before one another with a spirit of deep humility and trust. As a grace-based community bound together by our common union with Christ, we are characterized by “neither the Western practice of individualism that negates communal values nor the Asian practice of collectivism or of age-based hierarchicalism which stifles individuality.”5 Within that atmosphere of grace-renewed trust and hope, we can then develop the necessary resources to foster growth and maturity in the Korean-American church, particularly in critical areas such as mentoring, placement, leadership development, and empowerment for promising secondgeneration leaders.

as we understand that the church is a grace-based

“The water has to reach the shore for the boat to come” his task will not always be easy nor will it be fun— but it will be glorious. Empowered with the power and hope of the gospel, we can work together for the good of God’s kingdom purposes. We need each other.

T

3 4 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M A T I O N . O R G

GRACE OVER RACE

The Hispanic Challenge Explaining What It Means to Be Reformed

by C. A. Sandoval If you’ve ever played the popular party game, Taboo, you know that the goal of the game is to get your teammates to guess secret words without using any of the closely related words listed on the game cards. For example, if the secret word is “car,” you have to describe what a car is to your teammates without using words like “automobile,” “drive,” “road,” or “tires.” Now imagine trying to explain to someone what it means to be Reformed or what a Reformed church is without using words like “confessional,” “Westminster Confession of Faith,” “John Calvin,” or even “Reformation.” This is the challenge I frequently face when interacting with and ministering to U.S. Hispanics; and it is a challenge that arises not out of a lack of intellect, but out of a lack of certain historical and cultural contexts.

Contextual Voids and the Bible In general, a Hispanic is anyone of any race who has some ancestral, cultural, or historical ties with Spain, its former New World colonies, and the Spanish language. In this sense, the term “Hispanic” is very much like the term “American.”

Not all Americans are Anglo-Saxon, but all Americans—by virtue of being American—have some ancestral, cultural, or historical ties with Britain, its thirteen American colonies, and the English language. In the U.S., the vast majority of Hispanics are either first generation (i.e., the generation that first immigrated to the U.S.) or second generation (i.e., the first generation’s children born in the U.S.), although there is a growing number of third generation and beyond. As with most other Americans of immigrant descendent, by the third and fourth generation, Hispanics are more American than anything else and so have closer ties with the American culture, history, and religious background. First-and secondJ A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 0 8 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 35

Hispanics, the Bible may not be the final and only authority on religious and Spain and its colonies, and to this day the Reformation spiritual matters, but it remains authoritative noneand its return to biblical Christianity form no real part theless and is still viewed as containing some level of of the Hispanic culture or religious background. supernatural or mystical power. Of course, respect for generation Hispanics, however, still maintain most of their the Bible doesn’t always translate into obedience to it; but Hispanic ties, and thus lack the historical and cultural in most of my interactions with Hispanics, I don’t have to contexts needed to make sense of Reformed “jargon.” spend much time (if any) convincing them that the Bible And for these Hispanics, the contextual voids are the is the Word of God. They may not have any clue what the result, in my opinion, of the two largest religious Bible contains (again, due in part to the Roman Catholic movements that currently define Hispanic Christianity, and charismatic influences), but Hispanics still revere it on namely Roman Catholicism and charismaticism. some level, either for religious convictions and traditions Historically, the Roman Catholic Church (by way of the or superstitious motivations. And this remnant of Spanish Inquisition) did an amazing job of preventing the reverence and respect for the Bible is precisely the point of Reformation from making any significant or lasting impact contact and context that I make most use of when upon Spanish subjects in Spain or the New World. As explaining what it means to be Reformed. such, a virtually impenetrable fortress was erected around Spain and its colonies, and to this day the Reformation and Taking God’s Word Seriously its return to biblical Christianity form no real part of the When interacting with Hispanics I explain that being a Hispanic culture or religious background. More recently, Reformed Christian means that I must take the entire after more than 450 years of Roman Catholic dominance Bible seriously, not just the parts or passages that are most and very little Protestant influence, the charismatic convenient or easiest to understand. It means that I must movement has swept through Latin America with its have a serious belief in, obedience to, and application of supposed return to the apostolic church’s teachings and the whole of God’s Word. For example, I must believe all supernatural gifts. The movement claims to provide that Scripture teaches concerning salvation—not just hundreds of thousands of Hispanics with a closer, more man’s responsibility to respond to the gospel in faith and immediate, and more intimate relationship with God, repentance, but also God’s sovereignty in determining which is missing in Roman Catholicism. Charismaticism, who is saved. In John 10:24-25 we are told that many however, ultimately fails to ground itself in all of God’s had chosen not to believe that Jesus was the Christ Word and ignores not only the Reformation but most of despite having heard his words and seen his works the last 2,000 years of Christianity as well. Lastly, although themselves. Immediately afterwards in vv. 26-30, pockets of historic Protestantism do exist in Latin America, however, Jesus tells the unbelieving crowd that they many Protestant Hispanic churches and denominations don’t believe in him because they are not part of his flock; have increasingly absorbed charismatic practices and i.e., God the Father has not (sovereignly) given them to doctrines.

Jesus. In these verses we see not only humanity’s While the history of Hispanic Christianity in Latin responsibility to respond in faith to God’s words and America is of course much more complicated, the majority works, but we also see God’s sovereignty in selecting of first- and second-generation Hispanics in the U.S. who whom he will give to and preserve in Christ. The same call themselves Christian tend to be either Roman Catholic two truths are simultaneously taught in Acts 2:37-41. or charismatic in one way or another. Explaining what Those who heard the gospel being preached in their own Reformed Christians and churches are, therefore, requires language on the day of Pentecost were “cut to the heart” something other than a crash course in European or and asked the apostles, “What shall we do [to be saved]?”

Protestant history. It requires an explanation that is both In response, Peter tells them they must “repent and be relevant to the Hispanic context and fundamental to our baptized,” and that they must “save [themselves] from Reformed doctrines. And that explanation is simply this: this crooked generation.” Yet he also tells them that the that a Reformed Christian is one who takes all of God’s promise of salvation is for everyone whom God “calls to Word seriously, and that a Reformed church is one that himself.” Neither Jesus nor Peter shied away from preaches, teaches, and does everything according to only preaching and teaching God’s sovereignty and man’s the Bible. responsibility in salvation, and so a Reformed Christian is Despite (or perhaps because of) the Roman Catholic someone who humbly believes and applies (but perhaps and charismatic influences upon Hispanic Christianity and not fully comprehends) both of these biblical truths. the Hispanic culture in general, many Hispanics still have As a Reformed Christian, I must take seriously what the some form of respect for the Bible. In the minds of many entire Bible says about God’s perfect law because it reveals

A virtually impenetrable fortress was erected around

3 6 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M A T I O N . O R G

T H E

who God is, who I am, and what Jesus did for me. God’s law demonstrates that he is a morally perfect, holy, and just Judge whose judgment is blameless, righteous, and impartial (Ps. 51:4, Rom. 2:5, 11), who has always required perfect obedience for justification and salvation (Rom. 2:6-10, 12-16), and who alone is “lawgiver and judge” (James 4:12). At the same time, God’s law shows me who I am without Christ—a sinner whose sin is ever present and offensive to God (Ps. 51:3-4), a foolish and idolatrous creature who suppresses the truth in unrighteousness (Rom. 1:18-32), a thoroughly depraved rebel who is unable to justify himself (Rom. 3:9-20), and a transgressor who is held accountable to all of God’s law (James 2:10). And yet God’s law also reveals what a great Savior I have in Jesus. He is a Savior who has justified and saved me not only by dying for me (stricken, smitten, afflicted, and crushed in my place for my sins; Isa. 53:4-6; Rom. 3:21-26), but also by living for me (perfectly obeying God’s law in my place; Rom. 5:10-21; Matt. 5:17-18; Gal. 4:4-5).

According to God’s Word Only Additionally, I tell Hispanics that a Reformed church preaches, teaches, and does everything the Bible commands and nothing more. A Reformed church, I explain, preaches all of God’s Word as one continuous story of how God saves his people through Jesus Christ.

From the very first book in the Bible, God promised to save Adam and Eve through one who would be the very offspring of Eve, one whose defeat of Satan would come with a personal and painful price (Gen. 3:15). Toward the middle of the Bible, Jesus himself instructs his disciples that the whole of Scripture centers on him and directs our attention toward his work as Christ and Savior (Luke 24:25-26, 44-47). At the end of the Bible, John describes as best as possible a vision of the host of heaven worshipping and praising him who is both the Lion of Judah and the Lamb of God, who was slain for God’s people yet lives in power, wisdom, honor, and glory for ever and ever (Rev. 5).

A Reformed church also teaches all of God’s Word as one cohesive and unified structure, not a random collection of disconnected truths. In Acts 17:10-12, we find the noble and eager Jews at Berea studying, comparing, and “examining the Scriptures daily” to see if what Paul was teaching corresponded to the truth of Scripture; and as they did so, many of them believed. In 2 Peter 3:14-18, Peter not only states that the sinful manipulation of Paul’s writings and the rest of Scripture leads to destruction, but in doing so he also recognizes that Paul’s writings are as authoritative as the rest of Scripture and therefore contain the same unified, structured truth.

Paul himself tells the saints at Ephesus that to God’s apostles and prophets and also through God’s church, the “mystery of Christ” and “the manifold wisdom of God” have been revealed and made known—the mystery and wisdom of not only the unity of Jews and Gentiles in

H I S P A N I C

C H A L L E N G E

Christ’s body, but also the unity of God’s eternal plan and purpose expressed throughout all of Scripture (Eph. 2:193:12).

Lastly, I briefly explain that a Reformed church worships, evangelizes, and even organizes itself according to all of God’s Word and for his glory, not according to human-made ideas and desires or for humanity’s glory. A Reformed church worships God according to God’s commandment, not adding or taking away from it, not absorbing or even inquiring how a fallen world tries to worship its gods according to “human precepts and teachings” (Deut. 12:29-32; Col. 2:18-23). A Reformed church also evangelizes according to God’s Word, guiding people through the Scriptures (Acts 8:26-38) while relating and connecting to their particular culture and background (Acts 17:16-34). By fully complying to the Great Commission, a Reformed church makes “disciples of all nations” by more than merely bringing people into the faith (expressed through baptism), but also nurturing and teaching them in the faith (Matt. 28:18-20). Moreover, because the Church is the manifestation of God’s kingdom here on earth, the Reformed church organizes itself according to the King’s commands, with pastors, elders, deacons, and accountability structures generally prescribed in God’s Word (Acts 15:1-35; Eph. 4:11-16; 1 Tim. 3:1-13; Titus 1:5-9). In short, if the Bible says it, a Reformed church preaches, teaches, and does it; and if the Bible doesn’t say it, a Reformed church doesn’t preach, teach, or do it.

Biblical to Its Fullest Extent Ultimately, explaining to Hispanics what it means to be Reformed reminds me, and it should remind us all, that being Reformed is not so much about our beloved confessions, creeds, and catechisms, as it is about being biblical to its fullest extent; and that our Reformed doctrines (contained in our confessions, creeds, and catechisms) are the clearest summary of God’s truth and gospel this side of glory. ■

C. A. Sandoval (B.S., Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology; M.Div., Westminster Seminary California) is an ordained minister in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church (OPC). Born in the U.S. to Cuban and Guatemalan parents, Rev. Sandoval has been called by the OPC’s Presbytery of the Midwest to plant a bilingual Hispanic church in Chicago. The church plant will be overseen by Covenant OPC in Orland Park, Illinois, where Rev. Sandoval is currently serving as associate pastor.

J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 0 8 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 37

GRACE OVER RACE

Grace, Race, and Families The Gospel and Transracial Adoption Since my wife and I have adopted two children, we have received a number of puzzled looks and interesting comments, especially from those of other cultures. We once gave a Somali woman a ride to the store, and when she found out our little infant girl was adopted, her only question was, “How much you pay for that baby?!” When talking with our neighbors from India about adoption, the husband, with a glance down at our young kids, whispered to us, “Don’t ever tell them they’re adopted. It’s better that way.” (I never did ask if he thinks someone might someday slip and “break the news” to our son, who is full African American!) Another time we were in the checkout line at WalMart, and it was quickly evident that our black-and-white family created a serious category confusion for our Muslim clerk. Her head swiveled back and forth between me and my son as if she were watching a tennis match at Wimbledon!

It dawned on me that despite the fact that America is certainly not a “Christian nation” (as that term is often used), its general Judeo-Christian influence may have contributed to the relatively widespread acceptance of adoption among Westerners. This hypothesis led me to look into how a religion like Islam views adoption.

The Legal Fiction of Adoption in Islam Many Christians know that the fatherhood of God is a foreign concept in Islam, and therefore Muslims do not have a doctrine of spiritual adoption. However, many do not know that Mohammad himself had personal involvement—and controversy—in a familial adoption.

In A.D. 626 Mohammad paid a visit to his son Zayd, a former slave whom he had adopted a number of years earlier. It turns out that Zayd wasn’t home—but his beautiful wife, Zynab, was. Mohammad caught a glance of

BY

3 8 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M A T I O N . O R G

J U S T I N TAY L O R

G R A C E ,

his barely dressed daughter-in-law through a curtain and quickly fell in love with her. After Zayd divorced Zynab, Mohammad sought her hand in marriage. However, it was considered incestuous to marry a woman who had been married to his son, and Mohammad indeed regarded Zayd as a true son. Mohammad had declared during the adoption, “Zayd is my son; I will be his heir and he shall be mine.” But soon after Mohammad fell in love with Zynab, he received a new (and convenient!) revelation: “Allah does not regard…your adopted sons as your own sons.” By no longer considering his adopted son to be a true “son,” Mohammad would no longer be marrying the former wife of his “son.” Mohammad and Zynab eventually married.

In contemporary Islam, adoption functions as a sort of “legal fiction.” A Muslim family may refer to their adopted boy as a “son,” but they must remember that this is really just a word, not a reality. The adopted boy may refer to his adoptive parents as “father and mother,” but legally they are simply his trustees. He goes by the surname of his birthparents, not his adoptive parents. He receives his inheritance from his birthparents, not his adoptive parents.

And even though the adopted boy and his adoptive parents’ biological daughters may relate to each other as “brother and sister,” when they grow up it is legitimate for them to marry each other.

The Qur’an says that Allah has not “made your adopted sons your sons in fact. That is your own saying, the words of your mouths….Call them after their true fathers; that is more equitable in the sight of Allah” (33:4–5).

The Legal Reality of Adoption in Christianity A glorious contrast is found in biblical Christianity.

Adopting children—far from being something that is prohibited or something to be ashamed of—serves as a powerful metaphor to depict our forensic welcome into the family of God. Those who have been clothed in the righteousness of Christ receive “the Spirit of adoption as sons, by whom we cry, ‘Abba! Father!’” (Rom. 8:15). The Spirit bears witness with our spirit not only that we are to be called children of God, but that “we are children of God” (Rom. 8:16); and if we are children, then we also “heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ” (Rom. 8:17).

The ramifications for this legal change are not only vertical, but also horizontal. One of the great unveiled revelations of the gospel is that adopted Gentile believers and adopted Jewish believers are both “fellow heirs, members of the same body, and partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel” (Eph. 3:6).

So adoption marks a radical relational change both vertically (as we become children of our heavenly Father) and horizontally (as we become fellow heirs and brothers with Christ, and through union with him, fellow heirs with other brothers and sisters around the world and across the ages). J. I. Packer gets it right in his classic, Knowing God: “Our understanding of Christianity cannot be better than our grasp of adoption.”

R A C E ,

A N D

F A M I L I E S

TRANSRACIAL ADOPTION This issue of Modern Reformation is devoted to the theme of grace over race, exploring the many ways in which the gospel overcomes our racial divisions. One way this is done is when people adopt children across racial lines for the sake of the gospel.

There are several reasons why Christians should welcome and support transracial adoptions. In enumerating these, my intention is not to suggest that every Christian couple should adopt children or adopt transracially. To make such an artificial rule would unwisely go beyond Scripture. I also do not mean to suggest in any way that transracial adoption is somehow more noble or praiseworthy than adoption within one’s own ethnic group. My suggestion is simpler; namely, that it is a good and necessary scriptural inference that the church should celebrate and encourage transracial adoption as one way of demonstrating the dynamics of gospel-centered kingdom life.

Caring for the Orphans and the Fatherless God exercises fatherly care for the fatherless (Ps. 68:5) and commands us to do the same (James 1:27). The context of care for orphans often also includes care for widows—constituting two categories of people that need loving protection and leadership, and yet do not have access to these normal means of familial grace.

In various ways the church should be taking active steps to use its resource to provide such protective care and to assist those who are the most vulnerable and needy.

Within the broad category of “orphans” in particular, fatherless children in minority and international communities need families who will compassionately meet their needs and demonstrate the reality of the gospel.

With regard to domestic adoptions in the U.S., the basic state of affair with regard to whites and black is the following: (1) Caucasians do the vast majority of the adopting; and (2) Caucasians by and large desire to adopt Caucasian babies when they adopt domestically. As a result, there is a tremendous need for African-American children to find homes in which they can be raised “in the discipline and instruction of the Lord” (Eph. 6:4).

Related to this is the tragedy and evil of abortion. The effect of abortion in the black community is nothing less than staggering. As abortion providers continue to concentrate their resources on urban areas, some AfricanAmerican pro-lifers have even started a fact-filled website with the name blackgenocide.org to draw attention to this massive problem. Black women are three times more likely than white women to have an abortion; 1,452 black babies die from abortions every day. If you were to add up AfricanAmerican deaths since 1973—from AIDS, violent crimes, accidents, cancer, and heart disease—the total is around 4.8 million. The number of African-American deaths from abortion during this same time period is 13 million.

This has led Alveda King—a niece of Martin Luther King, Jr.—to see an intimate connection between civil J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 0 8 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 39

categorizing of others, of course, goes way beyond race.

When we see someone adoption is not about making a social statement or for the first time, we almost instantly assign labels: fat/ engineering diversity. It is about the body of Christ thin, tall/short, old/ young, smart/dumb, beautiful/ ugly, awakening to the indicatives of the gospel and smooth/awkward, winsome/ offensive, etc. The gospel is seeing its implications. for all these people. Every rights and the rights of the unborn. She writes, “How can tribe. Every tongue. Every nation. No matter what your the ‘Dream’ survive if we murder the children? Every background or what you look like or what you can do, aborted baby is like a slave in the womb of his or her there is only one requirement to become a member of mother. The mother decides his or her fate.”

God’s family: trust Christ the Savior. By adopting What can be done? One thing we can do is support transracially we can create a microcosm of the genuine initiatives to increase crisis pregnancy centers in urban diversity within the blood-bought body of Christ, showing areas (for example, see heartbeatofmiami.org). Another that our external differences are ultimately inconsething we can do is to encourage Christians to provide quential, and that the good news of Jesus Christ causes us homes for these African-American children. to care more about shining a God-glorifying light into At the end of the day, welcoming and encouraging darkness than we care about our differences or whether or adoption is not about making a social statement or not we all look the same. In this way, Christian families engineering diversity. It is about the body of Christ can demonstrate what God’s kingdom looks like and the awakening to the indicatives of the gospel and seeing its way in which it operates. implications. As God’s children, we stand in awe that the Creator who spoke the world into existence has become Challenges of Transracial Adoption our caring Father. We shake our heads in wonder that the I am sometimes asked about the challenges of being One who upholds the universe by the word of his power white and raising a black son. Thus far, quite honestly, it (Heb. 1:3) is not ashamed to call us his brothers (Heb. has been relatively easy. When we adopted our son we 2:11). We know that we deserve nothing but wrath, and were members of a church where there were numerous instead have received grace upon grace in the gospel. It is minority adoptions. We lived in a diverse neighborhood in this radical reality of the gospel that frees us from our love the heart of the city; and now that we live in the suburbs, affair with comfort and moves us outward to serve those our surroundings are still diverse. Our next-door in need. We who have been rescued will desire to rescue neighbors are from India. Across the street there is a others; we who have received the good news will desire to household where an African-American man and his build families where the gospel can be demonstrated and Hispanic girlfriend have a daughter, and the Hispanic girl’s relayed. mom lives there with her Caucasian boyfriend. All of that to say that in terms of “fitting in,” having a racially mixed Caring Less about Our Distinctives family has been quite natural for us! The negative Being a Christian does not obliterate all of our natural comments we have received—like an African-American differences, but it does relativize them. The very things that gentleman telling my wife at a grocery store that he felt matter most in the world—ethnicity, social status, and sorry for black kids with white parents—have been few gender—are utterly irrelevant for becoming members of and far between. I mention the relative ease of our God’s family (Gal. 3:28). Christianity is not blind to ethnic personal situation not to be insensitive to those facing distinctions and differences, but they are as nothing more challenging situations, but simply to say that at times compared to the fundamental covenantal category of the challenges we anticipate or envision may not always human beings created in the image of God, represented by play out in reality.

Adam or by Christ. The country you live in and the ethnic We don’t regard our transracial adoption as something group you belong to are as nothing compared to whether especially noble or sacrificial, or anything like a social you are “in Adam” or “in Christ.” In the end, those are the statement. This is simply the way that God in his “races” that ultimately matter—not where our ancestors providence has designed our family to expand, and we were born, or the shape of our eyes, the texture of our sense his great grace in the way he has knit our family hair, the color of our pigment, or the accents in our together. language.

But some people still wonder if transracial adoption is The world cares very deeply about differences. Attempts all that wise. Will they be called names in school? Will to produce racial diversity or encourage racial harmony their friends tell them that my wife and I are not their often accent rather than lessen our consciousness of how “real” mommy and daddy? Will our kids have an identity different we can be from one another. Our constant crisis, unable to figure out who they really are? Will we

At the end of the day, welcoming and encouraging

4 0 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M A T I O N . O R G

G R A C E ,

lack sufficient knowledge about racial dynamics and the right words to use in every situation? Will we be introducing problems that they would not have faced if they had been raised by parents who look like them? The answer to all of these questions is a resounding maybe! All of our children—whether biological or adopted, whether the same race or different—are going to face various challenges throughout life. We simply cannot predict with any degree of certainty what particular obstacles they will encounter—nor can we prevent all of them. Will our kids be eloquent and persuasive or stammer with stage fright?

Will they be the star athletes or the class klutzes? Will they be leaders or followers? Will they be healthy or sickly? We simply do not know. If we had to have fully satisfactory answers to all our questions before we acted, we would all be stuck in permanent paralysis. At the end of the day, we have no biblical warrant for designing our lives around things we cannot control, nor do we have warrant for maximizing comfort at the expense of need. We pursue God in faith, and this faith is not by sight.

It’s important to recognize that in the midst of talking about spiritual adoption, Paul listed a requirement of kingdom citizens who are to be heirs of God and co-heirs with Christ—we will receive an inheritance “provided we suffer with him in order that we may also be glorified with him” (Rom. 8:17). To be a member of God’s family and to be a co-heir with Christ means to follow him in obedience, which often entails suffering. In other words, to be a Christian is a call to suffer: “Through many tribulations we must enter the kingdom of God” (Acts 14:22). If we’re surprised at suffering, then it’s because we haven’t read our Bibles closely enough: “Beloved, do not be surprised at the fiery trial when it comes upon you to test you, as though something strange were happening to you” (1 Pet. 4:12). If a disciple wants to be like his teacher, and a servant like his master, then we are going to be maligned like Jesus (see Matt. 10:25).

So the issue is not ultimately whether or not our children will suffer and face challenges—they will. The issue is whether we are working to show how Godcentered, cross-centered faith responds to such opposition.

Now with all of this said, no one wants to create situations of undue suffering for their children. There are times when transracial adoption may be unwise. For example, we have American friends who are in the adoption process and who will be serving in cross-cultural missions in the Middle East. Being an African-American child in a white family in an Islamic country that already stigmatizes adoption would be exceedingly difficult.

As long as sin remains—this side of the return of Christ and the ushering in of the new heavens and the new earth—racism will remain. There is virtue neither in overstating or unstating this reality. But the idea of having qualms about transracial adoption (or interracial marriage) because it will create opportunities for more racial prejudice doesn’t ultimately make a lot of sense. As John Piper has commented, “It’s like the army being defeated

R A C E ,

A N D

F A M I L I E S

because there aren’t enough troops, and the troops won’t sign up because the army’s being defeated.”

Conclusion As I’ve stated on more than one occasion in this article, my goal is not to argue that transracial adoption is the best or only way to live in gospel-motivated obedience to God’s Word and in response to the needs of the world. I’m simply proposing that transracial adoption is one thing that Christians should celebrate and consider. Speaking personally, the Lord has used the process and the reality of adopting our children for my wife and me to ponder afresh the deep wonder that God—in his inscrutable kindness— saw fit to graciously stoop and rescue us, not only declaring us to be righteous in his sight, but also to welcome us into his family. ■

Justin Taylor is Study Bible project director and associate publisher at Crossway. He has edited and contributed to several books, including A God-Entranced Vision of All Things (2004) and Reclaiming the Center (2004).

J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 0 8 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 41

“M

editate daily on the teachings and life of anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are Jesus.” Good solid advice from any pastor caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in under any circumstances; but in this case, a a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one radical pledge by anyone wanting to join the nonviolent directly, affects all indirectly….”

Civil Rights movement under Martin Luther King, Jr. This “In deep disappointment I have wept over the was the first “commandlaxity of the church. But ment” on the pledge card be assured that my tears that every volunteer had to have been tears of love. sign. Other pledges on the There can be no deep card: “Walk and talk in the disappointment where manner of love, for God is there is not deep love. love”; “Pray daily to be used by God in Yes, I love the church. How could I order that all men might be free”; do otherwise? …Yes, I see the “Sacrifice personal wishes in order that all church as the body of Christ. But, men might be free”; “Observe with both oh! How we have blemished and friend and foe the ordinary rules of scarred that body through social courtesy”; “Seek to perform regular neglect and through fear of being service for others and for the world”; and nonconformists. There was a time “Refrain from the violence of fist, tongue, when the church was very or heart.”2 This was to be a revolution— powerful—in the time when the but one of complete nonviolence, of love, early Christians rejoiced at being and finally of justice. deemed worthy to suffer what they Forty years ago this April 4, while it is believed. In those days the church still debated who was ultimately was not merely a thermometer that responsible, this Baptist pastor who recorded the ideas and principles of preached freedom and unity in Christ’s popular opinion; it was a thermostat name was shot and killed. This year as that transformed the mores of well marks the forty-fifth anniversary of society….Things are different now. his powerful address to the So often the contemmultitude gathered in porary church is a weak, Washington, D.C., “I Have a ineffectual voice with I have a dream that one day this nation will Dream,” which some hail as an uncertain sound. So rise up and live out the true meaning of its one of the greatest speeches often it is an archdeof the twentieth century. fender of the status quo. creed: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, This is also the forty-fifth Far from being disthat all men are created equal”....I have a dream turbed by the presence year of his book, Why We that my four little children will one day live in Can’t Wait—a landmark of the church, the power work that contains his structure of the average a nation where they will not be judged by famous “Letter from community is consoled the color of their skin but by the content of Birmingham Jail,” written by the church’s silent— on April 16, 1963, after he their character….With this faith we will be able to and often even vocal— and Ralph Abernathy were sanction of things as hew out of the mountain of despair a stone of arrested during the they are….” nonviolent Civil Rights hope. With this faith we will be able to transform “Let us all hope that demonstrations in the the dark clouds of racial the jangling discords of our nation into a largest and most segregated prejudice will soon pass beautiful symphony of brotherhood.1 city in Alabama (lest we away and the deep fog of forget: separate restrooms, misunderstanding will be drinking fountains, schools, lifted from our fearparks, sections on the bus, churches; blacks forbidden to sit at drenched communities, and in some not too distant store lunch counters, to eat in “white” restaurants, or stay at tomorrow the radiant stars of love and brotherhood will “white” hotels). What is surprising is not his usual persuasive shine over our great nation with all their scintillating eloquence, but the fact that this letter was King’s defense to beauty.”3 the accusative clergy for his motives.

In several important ways, the Civil Rights Movement was a success—although American society has by no means “I cannot sit idly by in Atlanta and not be concerned reached the top of that mountain. We have journeyed a about what happens in Birmingham. Injustice (continued on page 46)

“How long?”

4 2 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M A T I O N . O R G

INTERVIEW for

d ialogue

in

and

out

of

ou r

c ircles

An Interview with Pastor Ken Jones

Bringing the Reformation to the African-American Church Michael Horton recently talked with Ken Jones about the issue of bringing the doctrines of grace to African-American churches and the problems that still cause division today. Rev. Jones is pastor at Greater Union Baptist Church in Compton, California, and a co-host of The White Horse Inn. He also serves as Sunday School Director and Chairman of Credentials Commission for the Long Beach Harbor Association of the California Southern Baptist Convention.

What is the current state of affairs for race and Reformation theology today?

The race issue is such a large and pervasive issue that I think you have to divide it up into subgroups. As it relates to the black/white issue—that’s the area where I’ve been particularly active over the last several years—there is an effort being made by a number of African-American pastors that I’ve been involved with to try to expose the African-American church across denominational lines to the doctrines of grace. There’s a small contingent within the Presbyterian Church (PCA); and we’ve worked with them over the last few years with a conference in Miami that actually started when we worked together with the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals and we hosted an AfricanAmerican pastors’ conference that we put together. I’ve been involved with Anthony Carter who wrote the book on being black and Reformed, and who speaks at a lot of different conferences. We’ve done some things to try and expose as many African-American churches to the doctrines of grace as we can. The extent of the effect, I don’t know.

You’ve given me a lot of insights on the whole history of not only race relations, but some of the reasons why African Americans have not responded historically to Presbyterian/Reformed traditions, yet have been more attracted to Pentecostalism, to Arminian Baptist churches, and really have not had a lot of interest in “Reformation” Christianity. Besides the fact that almost all of our churches are white, what’s the history here?

Most African Americans in this country have Southern roots, and Southern Presbyterianism was a stronghold for reformational Christianity in America for a long period of time. The connotation is slavery and racial

segregation, so it hasn’t been pleasant. When we had revivals—even the first Great Awakening—there was more participation of the slaves during the revival meetings than in the actual church services. Initially, in about 1680, there was an effort to evangelize the slaves; but one of the reasons for the hesitation on that was the fear that if they became Christians, then they would have to be granted their freedom because they’d have to be considered equal brothers.

Which is interesting because at the Synod of Dort, where the so-called five points of Calvinism were devised, they passed a resolution that whenever a slave became a Christian, under the auspices of the Dutch East India Company wherever it was in its far-flung reaches, those slaves would immediately be set free.

Yes, that was the fear. There was an edict passed in the Virginia Commonwealth about 1689 or so, which gave rise to the SPG, the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel; but the edict basically maintained that if a slave became a Christian, that did not guarantee their freedom, they were to remain slaves. At that point, the slave owners were more diligent in catechizing and evangelizing their slaves. Interestingly enough, one of the people who argued strongly for at least the sharing of the gospel, if not the freeing of the slaves, was Cotton Mather. He wrote a stern tract against the slave owners who refused to evangelize their slaves. So what took place in about the first 50-150 years of the church (that’s a wide range because it’s hard to gauge) is that many of the slaves were catechized with the Apostle’s Creed, the Ten Commandments, and the Catechism.

They were included in the slave master’s church, but it was really marginal. They were not allowed full participation of membership and could sit in only certain places. On the plantations they had what they called the “invisible institution,” which was outside the purview of the master, where they would come togeth-

J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 0 8 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 43

African-American churches, as they began to be established, reflected the methodology hung over from the Finney and Wesley influence.

er and worship, borrowing from the forms of the slave master’s church, but also including a lot of things from their traditional tribal religions. Many historians, including sociologists like W. E. B. DuBois, have acknowledged that these secret worship services were barely Christian—if at all—initially, but eventually over a period of time they did become more Christian in character. Still, that was their only form of worship and free expression; so when the revivals came along— even in the first Great Awakening where it was more expressive and more open for non-preachers and nonclergy to actually participate—that’s when they became more vocal. It was really under the preaching of George Whitefield that we began to see larger numbers of slaves participating in the services and actual conversions; and then there was the rise of the establishment of African-American churches in the late eighteenth century. One of the reasons for the heavy Arminianism, revivalism, and Pentecostalism is because people like Wesley, Finney, and others who were more liberal in their theology, were much more committed to the abolition of slavery. So therefore the African-American churches, as they began to be established, reflected their methodology—even if they kept some of the forms of the some of the more Presbyterian or confessional churches—they kept the methodology, especially the moralism hung over from the Finney and Wesley influence.

Do you see examples of churches that are integrated ethnically? I know your own church is probably more ethnically integrated in terms of representation than most churches in your neighborhood. On the other end, what accounts for that? We see something similar in the church I belong to and in the church Kim Riddlebarger pastors. There is a lot of integration— it’s not just one ethnic group. What brings people together?

I can’t explain it other than in our situation a lot of it has to do with my exposure on the White Horse Inn and speaking at different conferences so that people have different expectations when they come to our church. Unfortunately, when people come to a black church there are certain emotional expectations, but it’s sort of gleaned where they get a chance to have it pre-analyzed with me because they hear me in differ4 4 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M A T I O N . O R G

ent settings and know that my theology is more reformational; so we’re sort of pre-screened for them and they have different expectations when they come to our church.

Do you think that racism is still a problem culturally, or do you think by and large it’s no longer culturally acceptable to have racist views or at least to express them?

I think all of that. It’s not as culturally acceptable to have racist views or to express them; but I think there is a significant race problem that has yet to be addressed. I think we’ve addressed some of these issues superficially, but in terms of having preconceptions about a group of people or one person because they come from a particular group, that is something we live with; and I think we as Christians have probably not done a good enough job in applying the Scriptures to deal with those issues. I think it’s a very serious problem, but not of the same nature—I don’t think we still have those same sorts of efforts to oppress groups of people simply based on race as we did in the past—but in terms as to having preconceived ideas about groups of people simply because of the color of their skin. I think it’s much more subtle.

What about within the church? Do you think that the fact that many of our churches are divided by race is due to racism or are there other causes?

People have language barriers: Koreans worship together because they speak a different language, especially within the initial wave of immigration; and that was the case with the Dutch Reformed and the German Lutherans and so forth. Do you think that there are practical reasons or, especially with the black/white issue, do you think that when people have choices—and our society is so given to choice—a lot of white Christians will still prefer to be with other white Christians?

Again, that’s a multilayered question. For one thing, I do think people are more naturally comfortable with people who are like them color-wise, education, profession, class—there a lot of factors that make us more comfortable with people who are like us. Certain other ethnic groups—you mentioned the Korean community for instance—find it easy to hide behind language and say that we worship together because of language; but language is not the barrier that it used to be. If you go to many non-English speaking countries, there’s still English available. It’s not what it was in the period of massive immigrations of the early twentieth century when you had people from Eastern Europe who had problems learning the language; their opportunities to learn were much more limited, and so they tended to flock together and to be with people who spoke the

same language. I don’t think that’s as much as a real problem today as it has been in the past. It goes back to the two tables of the Law, which has to do with our love for God and our love for our fellow man. In the Fall, we have failed to meet both tables of the Law, and our interaction with people who are other than us is an extension of our failure to love our neighbor as ourselves.

So loving ourselves more than our neighbor—in other words, narcissism—can take a group form.

Not just that I love myself more than I love you, but I love my group more than your group.

Exactly. Or we become more distrustful of another group for whatever reason we are equipped to believe the worst about an individual or a particular group because they are other than us; or someone does something to you that we’re going to blame the whole group for. On the black/white issue, all of that is true—a self-love and a hatred of others—but on top of that, the black church has really developed outside the theological scrutiny. When you look at Protestantism in America, all of the discussions, all of the great theological debates over the last century and a half—since the founding of our country—haven’t included the African-American church. It’s kind of grown up in obscurity. We haven’t been included in the discussions and so therefore largely it has not developed along theological patterns. The expectation of the AfricanAmerican church is to provide music for Disney or for McDonald’s Songfest or other gatherings. I spoke at a pastors’ conference in the Midwest a couple of years ago—there were about 1,500 pastors, mostly Anglo— and after I was finished, a brother came up to me and said, “Man, I was waiting for you to get loose.” What he was expecting was this sort of rhythmic sing-song preaching that is characteristic of black preachers. But that’s the expectation. People loved E. V. Hill. Not only was he a powerful speaker, and when he got the gospel right he really nailed it, but he was Arminian and not really connected to any theological position. The reason he was so powerful and so well loved on TBN was because of his presence. People love those characteristics of a black personality, but they don’t take them seriously in terms of theology.

Don’t you think that if our theology was deeper both in the black churches and in the white churches—if that was the tie that binds—we wouldn’t say your churches and our churches, we would say Christian churches? Our group and your group wouldn’t be defined along ethnic lines, but along the only dividing line that really matters—believer and nonbeliever, the church and the world?

I hope that would be the case. I’d certainly think that would be the case. If we had a deeper commitment to theology in the African-American tradition more inten-

tionally and historically, and maybe in the white tradition more consistently, there would be less division along racial lines.

Certainly if it weren’t about style, we wouldn’t say, “I don’t like the way they sing or I’m not comfortable in that kind of environment”; but rather, “Look, we all have to exchange gifts here. We have to realize that God has put us together, our confession is what unites us, and our differences—as important as they are—simply cannot determine what church I go to.”

But unfortunately those are the issues that people still think about because the style is so distinct. Our church is a little unusual. White visitors come and think, “Oh, this is lively, this is good.” But African Americans come in and think, “Oh, this is dead.” So we’re somewhere in this limbo, we’re in between. Whether that’s right or wrong, I don’t know. I understood that our people initially would not feel comfortable singing through the Trinity Hymnal, which is why I didn’t introduce it when we brought theological reformation to our church.

There were enough good hymns in the National Baptist Hymnal for us to continue to use it. I just went through the hymns and gave a list that was permissible to our musician: “Those are the ones you play; anything other than that, you need to come and see me first.” But it would have been such a culture shock for our people to all of a sudden worship in a Reformed church—now they would be able to handle it—but early on it would have been such a culture shock that they would have rejected the theology. I think the same would be true with going the other way; that is, people coming from a confessional church to an African-American church. My heart goes out and my hat is off to some of our white members who have been a part of our church through this long transformation of the congregation; they’ve been patient, they’ve endured a great deal.

So one of the benefits of our mixing and mingling, of our being put together by God in the same church, is that we are forced to recognize how much of our own faith and practice is cultural. I think a tendency of a lot of white Christians is to assume that whatever is different from what we do is culturally defined; what we do is vital. I don’t think I have an accent until I go to France.

I think that’s very true. Anything that man touches, his cultural fingerprints are going to be all over it; and it’s naïve to assume that if because you do it, yours is right and theirs is more influenced by culture. I think that’s part of the fear that African Americans may have about giving up the entity that is the black church. It used to be said, and I heard this growing up as a child, that the black church is the only thing the black man owns in this society, which may have been true when my J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 0 8 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 45

grandfather was a child. I think the effort to preserve this entity is one of reasons that for many years most African-American Christians in this country were Baptists. It was not just the theology, but it was the ecclesiology where there was no central governing body determining the affairs of that local congregation—because they lost too much trusting that central governing body—and so in a Baptist ecclesiology they were able to govern their own affairs. But I think there is a sense among many African Americans that if we open the door to include others, then we lose what is uniquely black, which is disheartening to me because the one place where I think our culture should certainly die away continuously is within the church, just as we die daily in Christ. The church is not the place to preserve any cultural or ethnic tradition, no matter what we think. Granted there was a period in American history where the church was the only primary platform that African Americans had to make their voice known, which is why the black preacher was the spokesman for the community. But that’s no longer the case. If you look at the Civil Rights movement, most of the leaders were preachers. Many of them were preachers for necessity of the cause—if they were just politicians they wouldn’t be heard, but as a leader in the church they would be heard. But again, I think those days have passed; and I would love to see us jettison the cultural distinctives of our worship or of our church environment, and welcome those things that we have in common with all Christians—and that’s across the board, whether it’s Dutch, German, Korean, or whatever.

Last year at our conference in Miami, there was a gentleman who had been attending since the first one with ACE years ago. He came up to me at the end and said, “I’ve heard you speak on a number of occasions, and I’ve heard you talk about the pain of losing members as you’re trying to establish the doctrines of grace.

Brother, I want you to know that this really resonates with me.” Then this tall distinguished-looking gentleman just started crying. “My church is in North Carolina and, Ken, we had about 1,500 people and it got down to as little as 100 to 150 people; and week in and week out, I was asking, ‘Lord, am I doing something wrong?’ I keep coming back to this conference, and I hope you brothers keep having it, because every time I come I’m reminded that I am doing something right. This is God’s church and this is what God’s people need.”

4 6 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M A T I O N . O R G

“How long?” (continued from page 42) great distance in the past forty years, but we have many valleys and steep rocky slopes yet to overcome—even within the Body of Christ.

I know you are asking today, “How long will it take?” Somebody’s asking, “How long will prejudice blind the visions of men, darken their understanding, and drive bright-eyed wisdom from her sacred throne?”…Somebody’s asking, “When will the radiant star of hope be plunged against the nocturnal bosom of this lonely night, plucked from weary souls with chains of fear and the manacles of death? How long will justice be crucified, and truth bear it?” I come to say to you this afternoon, however difficult the moment, however frustrating the hour, it will not be long, because “truth crushed to earth will rise again.” How long? Not long, because “no lie can live forever.” How long? Not long, because “you shall reap what you sow.”4 Next year commemorates the ninetieth anniversary of Dr. King’s birth. While there is little hope we can solve all our racial problems by next January 15, each of us can personally—and collectively—do our part as Christians. With the psalmist, we also ask, “How long, O LORD?” The answer today is still, “Not long.”

Patricia Anders is managing editor of Modern Reformation.

WORKS CITED 1 Martin Luther King, Jr., “I Have a Dream,” Washington, D.C., August 28, 1963.

2 Martin Luther King, Jr., Why We Can’t Wait (New York: Penguin Books, 1963), pp. 63-64.

3 King, pp. 77, 91-92, 95.

4 Martin Luther King, Jr., “How Long, Not Long,” Montgomery, Alabama, March 25, 1965.

REQUIRED READING FOR 21ST CENTURY CHRISTIANS modern

reformation

m u st-r e ad s

Readings on Grace over Race From Every People and Nation: A Biblical Theology of Race

by J. Daniel Hays InterVarsity Press, 2003 One of the first booklength treatments of race as a theological category, Hays’ work demonstrates a redemptive-historical understanding of this most divisive issue, pointing the reader to the allencompassing kingdom of God populated by people from every nation, tribes, people, and language.

More than Equals: Racial Healing for the Sake of the Gospel

by Spencer Perkins and Chris Rice InterVarsity Press, 2000 The authors have been friends and partners for more than a decade in the difficult ministry of racial reconciliation. This revised and expanded edition includes a new introduction, afterword, study guide, updated resources and a new chapter by Perkins, “Playing the Grace Card.”

SEE ALSO: Grace Matters: A True Story of Race, Friendship, and Faith in the Heart of the South by Chris Rice (Jossey-Bass) The Faithful Preacher: Recapturing the Vision of Three Pioneering African-American Pastors by Thabiti M. Anyabwile and John Piper (Crossway Books)

Reconciliation Blues: A Black Evangelical’s Inside View of White Christianity

by Edward Gilbreath InterVarsity Press, 2006 For over a decade, journalist Edward Gilbreath interviewed many of the key leaders in racial reconciliation. In this book he interviews himself, resulting in a compelling personal look at how evangelicals thoughtlessly perpetuate racial inequalities, stereotypes, and prejudices.

On Being Black and Reformed: A New Perspective on the African-American Christian Experience

by Anthony J. Carter P&R Publishing, 2003 Anthony J. Carter demonstrates the historical, biblical, and theological consistency of Reformed theology, the richness of the AfricanAmerican Christian experience, and the merit of bringing the two together.

Being Latino in Christ: Finding Wholeness in Your Ethnic Identity

by Orlando Crespo (InterVarsity Press)

A Beginner’s Guide to Crossing Cultures: Making Friends in a Multicultural World

by Patty Lane (InterVarsity Press)

Growing Healthy Asian American Churches

by Peter Cha, S. Steve Kang, and Helen Lee (InterVarsity Press)

J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 0 8 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 47

REVIEWS wh at ’s

b e i n g

r ead

Facing the World

T

his volume is a collection of presentations that was delivered at the sec-

al spiritual formation, theological education, and radio ministry. ond general assembly of the World Reformed Fellowship (WRF) in 2006.

In one sense, reviewing this volume presents a challenge The WRF is a network for communication and sharing of resources for a because there is a degree of unevenness among the essays. number of Reformed Some are more theological and well documented, and othdenominations, associers are simple presentations reflecting thought upon diffiations, local congregacult issues facing the global church. Nevertheless, one can tions, institutions, agenevaluate the volume by noting the strengths and weakcies, and individual nesses as a whole rather than focusing upon any one parleaders. According to ticular essay. the editor, this organiThe book’s strengths lie in the expressed desire to face a zation “fulfills the number of difficult situations that confront the global dream cherished by church. For example, in the essay that covers the conflict in John Calvin in the the Middle East, there are important points raised that all 1500s, the Westminster Christians should consider, such as the number of children Divines in the 1600s killed on both sides of the Palestinian-Israeli struggle (55). and George Whitefield For many Christians who automatically support Israel, it is and Jonathan Edwards important to consider that there are Palestinian in the 1700s of truly Christians—not merely nominal Christians, but brothers worldwide cooperation and sisters in Christ—who suffer at the hands of Israel (63). among the Reformed There are also helpful resources in a number of the chapbranches of the church” ters of the book that help dissect the spirit of the age, mod(13). To be a voting ern paganism, and unbelief (81-122). There is also the chalmember of this organilenge that seminary professors should consider teaching Confronting Kingdom zation, one must affirm abroad in Africa or China so that seminary students outside Challenges: A Call to a historic expression of the West can gain access to first-rate theological training Global Christians to Carry the Reformed faith in (207).

This is a simple way to augment the often modest the Burden Together the Gallican Confession, training that students in other parts of the world receive.

Edited by Samuel T. the Three Forms of The book, however, does present two fundamental Logan, Jr. Unity, the Second weaknesses. First, in a number of places where one would Helvetic Confession, the Crossway, 2007 expect to see the gospel of Jesus Christ explicitly men251 pages (paperback), $15.99 Westminster Confession tioned as the key to confronting the challenges that face of Faith, the London the church, one does not find it. In some places, it seems Confession of 1689, or the Savoy Declaration (15). that the authors assume the importance of the gospel The overall theme of the book is one of exploring what without actually making reference to it (19-29, 64-79). In global challenges face the church, and what opportunities, others, however, there seems to be a greater emphasis tools, resources, and responses the church can offer. The upon social action rather than the propagation of the book is divided into four sections: theological foundations; gospel. For example, in the chapter on HIV/AIDS the practical applications—sharing challenges, sharing opporauthor states, “Young people are responding to governtunities; and a final challenge, sharing burdens and opporment and church education to abstain, delay sexual activtunities with “mainline” and “separated” brothers and sisity, be faithful, and use condoms” (130). It seems here that ters (5-6). The essays cover a range of topics including the there is a tacit approval that churches should be involved importance of evangelism, the need for unity, the conflict in sex education and even promoting safe sex with the use in the Middle East, the burden of global sex trafficking, of condoms. To be sure, the author does call for the church modern paganism, the need for apologetics, the burden of to pray, for example, for the conversion of the AIDSHIV/AIDS, missions, ministry to the urban poor, ministeriinfected rapist and not just the victim of such a horrible

4 8 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M A T I O N . O R G

crime, and to preach God’s love and forgiveness (132). Yes, the gospel should always be accompanied by a cup of cold water, a diaconal component, but it seems that the church’s emphasis should be upon the ministry of Word and sacrament.

A second weakness is that it is difficult to discern in what way various presented solutions offer a distinctively Reformed response. For example, one author writes, “I am convinced that denominations are irrelevant to God as we head into a post-denominational twenty-first century….

We need to repent of our divisions and move past them” (232-33). In another chapter, one finds similar criticism of the multiplication of Reformed denominations through schism, and offers in response that the answer to such denominationalism might be through a “symphonic theology” (151). There are two stand-out exceptions, where one author calls for unity by maintaining the commitment to the Reformed creeds and confessions, and for more money to be spent on the translation of Reformed literature into other languages (45, 210). Yes, the Reformed community has been sinfully marked by schism; but denominations sometimes exist for a good reason, such as when mainline churches abandon the gospel. The biblically based theology of the Reformation should not be scuttled in favor of a watered-down pan-Protestant theology (e.g., 236). Misuse of the truth does not mean that setting it aside is the answer.

One can profit from reading this book because it will likely take readers beyond their own suburban microcosm or urban Western setting, and place before them the broader global challenges facing the church. At the same time, however, one also hopes that the WRF will make a greater effort to set forth not merely an evangelical but a Reformed response to these problems, one centered upon Word and sacrament.

J. V. Fesko (Ph.D.) is pastor of Geneva Orthodox Presbyterian Church in Woodstock, Georgia.

The Ministry of the Missional Church—A Community Led By the Spirit

by Craig Van Gelder Baker Books, 2007 208 pages (paperback), $16.99 If you ever want to feel lost, try church-planting in an ethnic context different from your own while living in the United States. Believe me, you’ve never felt so stupid, no matter what your favorite professor said about you in seminary.

Secondly, if you ever want to make others feel lost, try asking this question at a small-group Bible study or Sunday School: “If the Holy Spirit was wrapped up in a box under your chair, and

you brought it up to your lap and took off the lid, what would he say to you, and then what might he start doing with you and others in this room?” Deer in headlights have had longer answers I can assure you.

Missiology professor Craig Van Gelder, formerly at Calvin Seminary and now at Luther Seminary, seems to know that the church is facing a lot of lost folks, and by that I do not mean the unsaved. I am referring to ministry leaders and participants, including myself, who are church-planting or guiding established churches in vision, conflict, or transitions.

Van Gelder’s latest book offers two tools. One is a definition of what it means for the church to be Spirit-led and missional. The second is both a definition and a demonstration of what it looks like for a church to apply open-systems theory to its organizational flow and leadership development.

In the first half of the book, Van Gelder briefly covers the ministry of the Holy Spirit in the Old and New Testaments, and argues that one must understand the Spirit’s role in creating the church in order to understand the church’s missionary nature. A church cannot discern its purpose without understanding how the Spirit forms, leads, and shapes it.

When discussing the Gospels, Van Gelder points out that Christ performed everything in the power of the Spirit as the fulfillment of the Old Testament’s expectation of the Messiah and the manifestation of the kingdom of God. “This reign of God in Christ represented a force field of the power and presence of God’s redemptive work in the world….[T]he clear manifestation that the Spirit of God was present, (Matt. 12:22-30; Luke 11:14-23)” (38).

When the Spirit is given at Pentecost, Jesus had anticipated a community of believers to be built up around the evangelistic work of the apostles and future disciples (Matt. 28:18-20), but he did not provide a lot of detail about how this community of believers would be organized and relate to the challenges and needs of its local context. Certainly, we are given examples of leadership and organization both in Acts and the Epistles as well as early church writings, but nothing is declared to be universally normative, and that’s where Van Gelder’s thoughts on organizational theory and open-systems theory in particular come into play.

These are the fruit of the social sciences’ labors, providing tools and paradigms for leadership in the twenty-first century. They do not trump biblical theology or church polity necessarily, and never are they to usurp the leading of the Holy Spirit. An open-systems model allows for an organization (e.g., the church) to have a dynamic, interdependent relationship with its context and community. The organization pulls in scarce and valuable resources from their environJ A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 0 8 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 49

ment (people, money, land, etc.), which are then processed and transformed by the organization and ushered back into the environment. At both points—the point where people and resources flow in and the point where ministry flows out—feedback is necessary to assess the church’s effectiveness. This feedback mechanism creates a learning loop for all in the church and some in the community.

A closed system, on the other hand, does not take its context into account when forming theories and philosophies of practice. While the military is one example of a closed system, churches can fall into this as well; Van Gelder cites the negative example of shrinking churches that face rapid transition in their neighborhoods due to immigrant populations and attempt to solve their problems by: 1) searching for a pastor who can bring back the glory days; 2) implementing internal ministries to strengthen member commitment such as small groups or prayer strategies; 3) developing mercy ministries, but with no intent of enfolding participants in the life and membership of the congregation; or 4) developing a ministry to attract people from far away to drive to their location.

“Such efforts may have some impact on strengthening member commitment along with attendance and participation for a time. But none of them, individually or collectively, are sufficient to address the more systemic issues facing the congregation…. Such a congregation must recognize that it cannot close itself off from its context and changing community if it hopes not only to survive but to also develop meaningful ministry” (126-127).

Another important point made is that a church with an open-systems approach has boundaries it needs to continuously examine: the geographic locale; buildings utilized; biblical and confessional values that shape the religious heritage; and the organizational history and core ministry values. Even though the church’s primary identity is as the body of Christ, united to him by the Spirit, these four boundaries contribute to a congregation’s culture or ethos, and congregants as well as formal leaders contribute to and impact all of these.

In working with a Hispanic church-plant in Dallas, I would add a fifth boundary that significantly contributes to the culture of the church, and that would be socioeconomic. Unfortunately, we worship homogenously when it comes to our dollars, schools, and clothes. Coming from a life of privilege, I am continuously introduced to a culture of poverty (an American version) that profoundly impacts church ethos and practice. I also work as a counselor in an affluent church downtown, and that too has a formidable culture that affects practice. It is also much easier to place formal feedback mechanisms among the church’s wealthy.

Don’t we assume everybody wants our opinion anyway?

It’s not so easy to establish this among poor, immigrant populations who are often robbed of a voice; but we must seek their voice and believe that God intends for it to come forth.

Van Gelder offers much more in his short book, making it well worth the read. After studying the growth and development of the church in Acts, he notes that in five of 5 0 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M A T I O N . O R G

his six examples the church experienced significant change that was neither planned nor anticipated. Welcome to churchplanting and church life, ladies and gentlemen, where strategies are essential, but the Holy Spirit will disrupt, interrupt, and raise folks up, often in spite of us.

Near the end of the book, Van Gelder warns us to account for sin and brokenness, and then talks about guiding a congregation through significant and often painful change. I think it would have been helpful if he had also warned against failing to discern the Spirit’s work from the spirit of the age. It would also be good to articulate that while we need a refresher course on what the Holy Spirit does to reconcile all of creation to God in the creation-fallredemption schema, not all the Spirit’s work is saving work.

The Holy Spirit dwells only in believers; and while the Spirit provides gifts and mercy to all, the New Testament repeatedly shows us that there is an antithetical relationship between the world and the Spirit (John 14:17; 1 Cor. 2:14).

When it comes to initiating change of a church’s vision and guiding a congregation through transition, Van Gelder offers helpful maps and also cites stages and cycles to anticipate. He has statistical backing for the types of responses people give, both for change and resisting it, and how to work well with each group.

As a Christian consultant friend of mine pointed out, working well and being led by the Spirit using open systems as a form of organizational management does not guarantee “success” by worldly standards. A church may just have to close up shop in the end, maybe due to persecution or imprisonment, and that will have nothing to do with failing to follow Christ’s lead in the end. So who’s ready to sign up for that?

Shannon Geiger works as a part-time counselor at Park Cities Presbyterian Church and is part of a church-planting team serving the Latino community in Dallas.

The Truth of the Cross

by R. C. Sproul Reformation Trust, 2007 178 pages (hardback), $15.00 Over the years I’ve begun collecting extra copies of books that I have found to be insightful, motivating, and rooted in gospel truth. They are the kind of books that you go back to again and again. Each page draws you to the heart of the gospel and spurs you into prayer and reflection. Most importantly, these are the kind of books from which any person at any point in their

spiritual walk can benefit. It took only one chapter of R. C. Sproul’s new book, The Truth of the Cross, to convince me that this was one of those books. At only 178 pages, Sproul manages to capture the heartbeat of Christianity—Christ’s atoning work on the cross—and expound on its depth, richness, and necessity. Sproul engages the reader with a combination of Scripture, history, and apologetics, which all seek to drive home our need for Christ.

The cross is a central symbol in the Christian faith. It floods Christian bookstores, greeting cards, jewelry counters, and book covers. It serves as a reminder that Christ died for our sins. However, the depth and importance of its message are grossly neglected in many modern evangelical circles. After a thorough reading of the New Testament, it is fair to say that the central crux of Christ’s ministry continuously points to the cross. His message, actions, and teachings all culminated the day he changed the world. “If we could read the New Testament with virgin eyes, as if we were the first generation of people to hear the message, I think it would be clear that the crucifixion was at the very core of the preaching, teaching, and catechizing of the New Testament community—along with, of course, the attending capstone of Christ’s work” (5). Sproul’s opening chapter starts out with a strong push toward the obvious: man is sinful and in desperate need of salvation. We cannot forget or excuse our sin. It is a universal bond that can only be broken one way, through Christ. Sproul points out that “if we can convince people of the truth of the identity of Christ and the truth of the work He accomplished, it will become instantly apparent to them that they need it” (7).

The truth and necessity of the cross are heavily dependent on the nature of God. Sproul spends a good deal of the second chapter outlining God’s nature through the pages of Scripture. Through every twist and turn God is consistently just, merciful, and loving. No matter what name sin is given—whether it be a crime, debt, or enmity—Sproul continuously emphasizes God’s consistency in dealing with our sin. God does not forget or overlook our trespasses. He lovingly opens up a way for redemption and salvation that is whole and everlasting. Christ’s work on the cross turned God’s justified wrath away from the elect.

The later chapters of this book heavily emphasize humanity’s total depravity and deep need for what the cross accomplished. Sproul does not sidestep the fact that salvation is a work of God, as we are justified by faith alone in Christ alone. Instead, Sproul clearly sets forth the victory and freedom that arise as a result of Christ’s work on the cross and subsequent work in the heart of every believer.

It is undeniable that this book strives to bring the truths of the cross, God’s nature, and Christ to the forefront. In each chapter Sproul clearly accomplishes this in a way that is both insightful and refreshing. He not only draws his readers back to core gospel truths, but also masterfully weaves in critical doctrines such as election, limited atonement, and justification in a way that adds depth and clarity to the necessity of Christ’s pivotal work.

R. C. Sproul does a phenomenal job in this book outlin-

SHORT NOTICES Greed as Idolatry: The Origin and Meaning of a Pauline Metaphor

by Brian S. Rosner Eerdmans, 2007 214 pages (paperback), $22.00 In Greed as Idolatry: The Origin and Meaning of a Pauline Metaphor, Brian Rosner wants to uncover what’s so bad about the kind of greed that drives modern men to build temples to money and consumption. More specifically, he seeks to unpack one of the strangest metaphors in the New Testament: Paul’s statement that greed is idolatry (Eph. 5:5, Col. 3:5). Why would Paul equate these two things that seem to us to have little direct connection?

To unlock this curious equation, Rosner employs all the tools of biblical theology combined with historical research. After surveying the various ways in which the phrase “greed is idolatry” has been interpreted by theologians down the centuries, Rosner turns to an intensive tracing of both the subject and predicate of that phrase in Jewish and early Christian writings, both biblical and non-canonical. He then surveys the surrounding territory of both terms, revealing the fullness of what they meant to first-century readers and hearers. Finally, he links all this together to propose that Paul’s statement was an intentionally brash metaphor meant to shock his audience into understanding that greed is far more terrible a sin than they may have thought. It is nothing less than a direct affront to the One True God who alone deserves to be loved, served, and trusted.

Rosner’s book serves as a model of biblical theology done well in service to the church. By uncovering the impact of an odd phrase on its first-century audience, he also reveals why we ought to take greed much more seriously in our day.

—Mark Traphagen

(continued on page 53) J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 0 8 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 51

ing the need, necessity, and understanding of the cross by examining various doctrines and Scripture, and by illustrating the nature of God. Yet another strong point that cannot be overlooked is the apologetic tone this work takes. Sproul wraps up this book with an entire chapter dedicated to answering difficult questions that arise in connection with the magnitude of the cross. The questions posed range everywhere from why the shedding of blood is necessary, the concept of God’s presence to those in hell, humanity’s depravity and limited atonement, and how today’s postmodern philosophies affect views of the atonement. Sproul’s approach to these questions is concrete and direct. In an age heavily bent toward tolerance and free will, it is becoming a rarity to find those who will approach doctrine and religious topics in a straightforward fashion.

Over the years, a lot of ink has been spilled regarding the truths of the cross; a myriad of theological dissertations and sermons have all sought to teach on this topic. Out of this vast array there are too few that have sought to present a solid theological standpoint in a relevant way.

Sproul’s work does just that. He approaches a weighty topic in a thorough yet concise manor. This is by far one of the best comprehensive works on the cross available.

Denise M. Malagari recently completed the Master of Arts program at Westminster Theological Seminary (Philadelphia) and lives in the Philadelphia area.

Kingdom Coming: The Rise of Christian Nationalism

by Michelle Goldberg W. W. Norton, 2007 256 pages (paperback), $14.95 A self-described secular Jew and ardent urbanite, Michelle Goldberg takes her readers behind the scenes of a movement she has dubbed ‘Christian Nationalism,’ a “totalistic political ideology” that begins with the idea that “the Bible is absolutely and literally true” and extrapolates from this “a total political program...a conflation of scripture and politics that sees America’s triumphs as confirmation of the truth of the Christian religion, and America’s struggles as part of a cosmic contest between God and the devil.” Christian Nationalism, Goldberg argues, “claims supernatural sanction for its campaign of national renewal and speaks rapturously about vanquishing the millions of Americans who 5 2 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M A T I O N . O R G

would stand in its way” (6). The “ultimate goal” of this movement is not fairness but dominion: “The movement is built on a theology that asserts the Christian right to rule.

That doesn’t mean that nonbelievers will be forced to convert. They’ll just have to learn their place” (7).

Although this reviewer’s usual reaction to reading the theologizing of atheists is similar to that of watching the blind juggle (i.e., amusement mixed with horror), I was both surprised and disturbed at the accuracy of Goldberg’s portrayal of Christian Nationalist leaders and the theology that compels them (surprised, because it’s not every day that I come across a Jewish writer who can navigate the labyrinthine relationship between Tim LaHaye’s Dispensationalism, D. James Kennedy’s postmillennialism, and R. J. Rushdoony’s Reconstructionism; and disturbed, because she understands the relationship of eschatology to cultural vision more clearly than most Christians I know).

Among the topics Goldberg examines are Christian homeschooling and its importance for raising up the next generation of faithful conservative politicians and lobbyists, the revisionist history necessary to instill in us the myth of the evangelical piety of our nation’s Founding Fathers, the politics of homophobia, Intelligent Design, the elitism of faith-based initiatives for the poor, and the politics behind abstinence-only education. Goldberg points out the incredible irony of the fact that Christian Nationalism’s closest allies in these cultural battles are none other than Islamic fundamentalists. According to a story Goldberg cites from The Washington Post (the headline of which read: “Islamic Bloc, Christian Right Team Up to Lobby U.N.”), “American evangelicals have made common cause with Islamists at the United Nations” to plot strategy on social issues (208). The lines defining good and evil, it seems, have been redrawn according to cultural rather than religious ideals. This is nothing new of course. If many Protestant denominational distinctives have been sacrificed for the sake of waging a common cultural war, why stop there? Muslims, if anything, are certainly good in a fight.

Though the Jesus of Calvinism has been dubbed “The Transformer of Culture” by H. Richard Niebuhr in his seminal work, Christ and Culture, the degree to which the Geneva Reformer (or for that matter, the second Person of the Trinity) advocated social transformation as belonging to the church’s mandate is still an open question. What is not open to debate, however, is the Christian Nationalists’ interpretation of Jesus’ Great Commission to his disciples prior to his ascension to the Father’s right hand. Also closed is any discussion about the cultural content of that commission, let alone the deeper issue of whether it contains such cultural content in the first place.

The Christian Nationalist political agenda, Goldberg points out, is essentially a baptized version of the talking points of the Grand Old Party. Though a robust critique of the movement’s underlying eschatology falls outside Goldberg’s purview or expertise—but she has plenty to say about its politics—it seems, to this reviewer anyway, that the differences between the politicized versions of pre- and

postmillennialism pale in comparison to their glaring similarities. Both are consumed with power and the flexing of political muscle, and both are fearful of losing their influence and fading into cultural obscurity.

Throughout Kingdom Coming Goldberg both advocates a return to the rationalistic epistemology of the Enlightenment and assumes, somewhat naïvely, that such “objective” thinking will forever cure religious mankind of the need to force our cunningly devised fables upon our neighbors. The notion, for instance, that an evangelical scientist can have anything meaningful to say about cosmic origins is absurd in Goldberg’s estimation. An atheist biologist, on the other hand, has no ideological axe to grind and therefore may speak authoritatively without having to recuse herself due to a conflict of interest.

Aside from the biased nature of Goldberg’s pretended lack of bias, her overall point is certainly well taken: Christianity has been co-opted and its true aims commandeered for political ends, and narrow ones at that.

Conspicuous by its absence from Christian Nationalist rhetoric is any actual defense of their understanding of what a Christianized society would look like. Instead, with a “wink wink” here and a “nudge nudge” there, we are exhorted to elect officials who will restore godliness and Christian virtue to our once-glorious land. “Godliness,” of course, really means unbridled capitalism, and “Christian virtue” is code for maintaining U.S. foreign policy and the War on Terror.

But what about those Christians who don’t believe that America is under a national, conditional covenant with God like Israel in time past? What about the thousands of sincere saints who don’t think the U.S. Constitution belongs in the Ark of the Covenant along with the tables of the Decalogue and Aaron’s rod that budded? And what about those believers whose eschatology precludes them from identifying the eternal concerns of the kingdom of Christ with the earthly affairs of the kingdom of man?

It is human nature to desire to unite with others of a like mind. What is often lacking is some banner or common cause to measure our like-mindedness and give us a reason to come together. While it is perfectly legitimate for fellow citizens of the civil sphere to rally together for a social cause, or for brothers and sisters in Christ to celebrate their unity in the gospel, it is altogether illegitimate to collapse these two kingdoms into one (a mistake Calvin called a “Jewish folly”). When we label our unity “Christian” while defining it by the bullet points of a political party (on either side of the aisle), we sacralize the secular, trivialize the sacred, and misconstrue the nature of Christianity as a civil religion whose first great commandment can be swallowed by the second.

Jason J. Stellman (M.Div., Westminster Seminary California) is pastor and church-planter of Exile Presbyterian Church in Woodinville, Washington. (Citations correlate to the 2006 hardback edition.)

Short Notices (continued from page 51)

Pierced for Our Transgressions: Rediscovering the Glory of Penal Substitution

by Steve Jeffery, Michael Ovey, and Andrew Sach Crossway/Good News Publishers, 2007 384 pages (paperback), $25.00 A person’s attitude to the cross tells you much about their theology as a whole, as it is on Calvary that we see the divine response to the human predicament. Thus, the perennial attempts throughout church history to relativize and even deny the propitiatory and substitutionary nature of Christ’s sacrifice should not simply be understood as peripheral discussions; they indicate a constant tendency to revise the very essence of the Christian faith to conform to wider cultural mores and shibboleths. It is thus a great pleasure to commend a book such as this, which seeks to defend a biblical, orthodox understanding of the atonement and to reinforce the nonnegotiable centrality of God’s wrath against sin and merciful grace toward humanity. Careful readers will find much here that will enable them to articulate with clarity and conviction this important gospel doctrine.

—Carl R. Trueman

BRIEF MENTIONS The Mission of God: Unlocking the Bible’s Grand Narrative

by Christopher J. H. Wright InterVarsity Press, 2006 581 pages (hardcover), $38.00 Christopher Wright ups the ante for what we mean by ‘missions’ to nothing less than our participation in God’s own great mission: the reclamation of all things, including this created order. Along the way he provides us with a model of a more God-centric narrative hermeneutic and a greater motivation to holistic missional activity.

—Mark Traphagen

(continued on page 55) J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 0 8 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 53

POINT OF CONTACT: BOOKS YOUR NEIGHBORS ARE READING Eat, Pray, Love: One Woman’s Search for Everything across Italy, India and Indonesia

by Elizabeth Gilbert Penguin Books, 2006 334 pages (paperback), $15.00

Divorced, depressed, and desperate to understand her place in the universe, journalist Elizabeth Gilbert decides to take a year off and travel the world in search of God. Or herself. Or herself as God. Well, it’s complicated, this spiritual tour, and the significance of her desire to take such a voyage of self-discovery to countries beginning with the letter “I” is not lost on her.

Italy, India, and Indonesia may have little in common besides the self-defining initial, but Gilbert believes each culture will provide one critical lesson of spirituality she must learn if she is to survive—lessons of pleasure, devotion, and balance. So she packs her bags.

It’s helpful as we push off with her on this voyage to know something about her religious background.

“Culturally, though not theologically, I’m a Christian,” she declares in the early pages. “I can’t swallow that one fixed rule of Christianity insisting that Christ is the only path to God. Strictly speaking, then, I cannot call myself a Christian….To those who do speak (and think) strictly, all I can do here is offer my regrets for any hurt feelings and now excuse myself from their business” (14). This is a charitable sentiment but does not preclude “strict Christians” from shrugging off their hurt feelings and following her on this personal journey she makes public, analyzing the path to God she follows.

Or should I say paths. Rather than studying various religions and then choosing one—as a reader could reasonably expect in this context—Gilbert takes a consumerist approach. She starts with the closest dish on the all-youcan-eat spiritual buffet and then adds sides on the basis of being healthy or traditional or because she can’t resist the gravy. “This whole book is about my efforts to find bal5 4 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M A T I O N . O R G

ance,” she declares; she wants to “be with God all the time” but not “totally give up worldly pleasures.” Well, who doesn’t? But the world’s major religions involve dietary laws, celibacy vows, the observance of certain fast days or periods of silence, the sacrifice of autonomy—none of which appeal to Gilbert. In fact, she has a better idea: “What if you could somehow create an expansive enough life that you could synchronize seemingly incongruous opposites into a worldview that excludes nothing?” (29).

The buffet metaphor is appropriate since Gilbert spends the first third of her year eating her way across Italy. Pasta, pizza, and gelato are among her companions while she fulfills a longtime goal of learning to speak Italian, fights depression and loneliness by journaling, and explores historical districts with citizens who have endured centuries of hardship while celebrating simple pleasures. Regaining confidence in her value as a human being, she begins to treat herself better: sleeping more, getting exercise, reading, slowing down to enjoy a meal of produce at its peak.

Four months and two jeans sizes later, Gilbert takes herself to India to develop spiritual discipline, a positive decision for someone who seems to have little experience actively cultivating any kind of discipline. She moves into the Ashram of her Guru, where she rises early for prayer, yogic meditation, and floor scrubbing. She studies the Bhagavad-Gita, from which she derives a guiding principle: “God responds to the sacred prayers and efforts of human beings in any way whatsoever that mortals choose to worship—just so long as those prayers are sincere” (206).

The prayers and efforts she chooses are intended to produce enlightenment, a simple but difficult concept: “OK— so we are all one, and divinity abides within us all equally.

No problem. Understood. But now try living from that place” (123). (Fair enough—how would you live if you realized you were god?) After weeks of struggling to quiet her mind, she experiences a moment of rapture in which she believes she has ascended to heaven, and on another occasion calls her ex-husband’s soul to meet her on the rooftop in a mystical farewell exchange of forgiveness.

Finally free from her emotional baggage and centered in her own divinity, as she perceives it, she flies to the Indonesian island of Bali to pursue balance. For the first few weeks, she is apprentice to a medicine man who imparts a variety of wisdom to her, including a technique for “smiling in her liver.” While there, she is moved by compassion to help a local single mother build a house.

But mostly what she does in Bali is have lots of sex with an older Brazilian expatriate. Gilbert portrays this sexual abandon as the balancing point of everything she has learned about pleasure and devotion, but it is hard to see how a newcomer spiritualist who spent four months in prayer following 20 years of serial sexual relationships can refer to yet another affair as “balance.”

Gilbert is gregarious, embarrassingly honest, and sincere. She is also impulsive, scattered, and a bit entitled.

Her ruminations include excellent insights, such as why many of us have an inability to relax and enjoy pleasure

without guilt; or how providing a casserole can be an act of grace; or how we need to “learn to stay still and endure a bit more without always getting dragged along on the potholed road of circumstance” (173). Yet, to a lifelong devotee of any religion, her tone has the feel of a teenager back from two weeks of digging latrines with a youth group in a South American village offering casual advice to a veteran missionary. You want to applaud her for setting aside the clutter of everyday life and pursuing God, but you also want to remind her that a year of eating and praying and having wild sex on a tropical island isn’t the same thing as a lifelong, self-denying commitment to a Person greater than yourself. Her hand-crafted religion is certainly more exotic than mine, but since she has dismissed any spiritual authority other than her desires, on what basis can she claim it is better?

It’s easy to understand why people have turned hungrily to this bestseller. Gilbert says prior to her journey that she was “tired of being a skeptic” and that many of her friends long “to have something to believe in”; indeed, this is perhaps the defining heart cry of her (and my) generation, the impulse that leads to the act of setting out with a searchlight. What’s not easy to understand is what people get out of the book. True, it’s a fascinating account, but almost a case of the emperor has no religion. Her “worldview that excludes nothing” has not synchronized the “seemingly incongruous opposites” as she intended, but has in fact excluded those bits that don’t fit in—bits like, “The wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.”

Eat, Pray, Love is an accurate barometer of contemporary spirituality, telling of the confusion and anguished seeking of the young professional generation that has grown up in an increasingly global world under the banner of toleration at any cost. Christians involved in communities that are unwilling to respond openly to bare existential questions will find some aspects of Gilbert’s passionate approach appealing—and, therefore, Christian leaders will find this book useful for informing themselves and preparing for serious discussion. But young (and old) spiritual pilgrims seeking encouragement and insight for their journey would do well instead to turn to Lauren Winner’s Girl Meets God, a similarly styled—but significantly sounder— spiritual memoir.

Mindy L. Withrow is co-author of a series of church history books for children and host of a literary review blog (mindywithrow.com). She lives in Northwood, Ohio.

Brief Mentions (continued from page 53)

The Emotionally Destructive Relationship: Seeing It, Stopping It, Surviving It

by Leslie Vernick Harvest House Publishers, 2007 256 pages (paperback), $12.99 The Emotionally Destructive Relationship provides a critical first step down the path of healing and growth for those who find themselves stuck in abusive relationships—with no idea how they got there or how to get out. Those who suffer in these relationships and those who want to help them will find a humble fellow traveler in Leslie Vernick.

As always, Vernick meets the sufferer and the sinner with compassion, truth, concrete direction, and lots of hope. I look forward to using this book with my counselees.

—Winston Smith

An Old Testament Theology: A Canonical and Thematic Approach

by Bruce Waltke Zondervan, 2007 1,035 pages (hardcover), $44.99 In An Old Testament Theology Bruce Waltke shares his lifetime of devout scholarly study of the Bible. He is a master interpreter and all of us—scholars, clergy, and laypeople— benefit greatly from his tremendous insights into the text.

This book is a must read for all who study the Old Testament.

—Tremper Longman, III

When Sinners Say “I Do”

by Dave Harvey Shepherd Press, 2007 190 pages (paperback), $13.95 This book is destined to become a classic. Dave Harvey has done for the subject of marriage with When Sinners Say “I Do” what Tedd Tripp did for parenting with Shepherding a Child’s Heart—he has resisted the urge merely to rattle off a series of techniques and principles, and has sought rather to apply the gospel to every aspect of marriage. He does this in an engaging, conversational style that reads easily and is punctuated with applicable and moving illustrations of the gospel that bring relevance to marriage. I wish every married couple, and every couple preparing for marriage, would read this book. My wife and I are sure to read it again and again.

—Jim Weidenaar

J A N U A RY / F E B R U A RY 2 0 0 8 | M O D E R N R E F O R M AT I O N 55

FINAL THOUGHTS f r o m

t h e

d e s k

of

the

editor-in-chief

Practical Theology

T

he Civil Rights movement not only brought greater freedom and justice to

white denominations, reminding us that the parAfrican Americans and other racial minorities, it liberated the rest of us from ticular challenges that face different minority groups slavery to our own fears and suspicions. Happily, this legacy has become as are part of the “burdensharing” that belongs to deeply imbedded in the story of our nation as the Boston the whole church; and again we hear about the relevance Tea Party and Paul Revere. and sufficiency of Christ and his gospel. Drawing on his Reading over the previous articles, however, it’s easy to own rich experience, Justin Taylor has reminded me all see that even the best efforts of human beings to bring over again just how amazingly “lucky” we are to be able to love, peace, truth, and justice to the cities of this age fall address God as Father even though we are adopted. In all short of the glory of God and his city. of these ways, we have seen once more just how truly Over 15 years ago, riots broke out in Los Angeles in the practical doctrine is for everyday reflection, attitudes, and wake of the Rodney King beating. Our organization sponaction. sored a weekly “academy” for adult Christian instruction The doctrine of creation reminds me that all races in south-central L.A. and I recall driving with great trepiderive from the same family. Racial diversity is part of the dation through the area to teach. At the same time, a pasgreater diversity displayed throughout creation. It’s God’s tor in the area was struggling to bring his church to his plan. The Fall reminds me why I am inclined to forms of newfound understanding of the doctrines of grace. We collective as well as individual narcissism. Redemption became friends and at the height of this crisis we decided reminds me that “in Adam” versus “in Christ” is the only in this strife-torn area to hold a conference called “Grace real divide now. Election reminds me that I did not choose Over Race.” The building was filled with Hispanics, my church as a circle of friends who look, think, and act African Americans, and a few white and Korean pastors like me, but that God chose me to belong to his family, and and laypeople. in adopting me made me a joint-heir with brothers and sisEver since, Pastor Ken Jones has been not only a close ters “from every tribe, kindred, tongue, and nation” (Rev. friend but an ally in this work of bringing the message of 5:9). In Christ, we share in the same Spirit, inheritance, God’s grace to a wider audience. Ken’s church is now and faith, drinking of the same cup and eating of the same more racially mixed than it was before, less defined by culloaf. And the hope of glory helps me to live today with a tural and political affinities, and reaching out to the whole foretaste of that unsurpassable shalom, when the only L. A. basin with an infectious love for Christ and his gospel. kingdom left standing will be God’s forever.

Similarly, the church that I helped Kim Riddlebarger plant in Anaheim, as well as the one of which I am now an associate minister, reflect the racial diversity of our region. In Michael S. Horton is editor-in-chief of Modern Reformation. all three cases, the unity has not been driven by multiculturalism, but by the gospel. I share Ken Jones’ hope that we can all become defined more by our relation to Christ than our relation to culture.

In this issue, Thabiti Anyabwile has reminded us that Christ has already definitively abolished in his body the wall between Jew and Gentile, much less any other form of racial division. At a time when many professing Christians treat racial reconciliation as the gospel (i.e., our work), Pastor Anyabwile points us to the gospel of God’s victory in Christ as the basis for our daily work of practically realizing that victory in our midst.

Julius Kim and Chris Sandoval have given us greater insight into what it is like to minister in predominantly

5 6 W W W. M O D E R N R E F O R M A T I O N . O R G