The Lost Art of Courage
Friends, the church must foster the art of courage—a boldness that holds its strength in meekness—like the Good Shepherd who lays down his life for his sheep, who could have called down 12 legions of angels with a word.
Aesop told some clever and revealing tales—and this one is not unlike the rest. Sadly, this fable may resonate in our age with those of us in the church. There appears to be one of two extremes common among the people of God—the extremes of the lion. Either shrinking back when we ought not. Or viciously thundering forth when we ought not. It seems the church may need to regain the lost art of courage, for there are those who shy away from battles that must be taken up, and there are those who don bravado and (seemingly) do nothing but battle. What may be lacking in these two poles is the biblical concept of “meekness”—or courage, rightly carried.
The Apostle Paul in Titus 1, speaks to the young evangelist, and lays out to Titus (and by extension, us) a list of qualifications we are all familiar with; the qualifications of elders. After Paul walks through these character qualities he points out that these godly attributes lead somewhere. The character of these leaders have a purpose, a goal, a particular practice. You see, it is not enough to have godly character, the scriptures expect us to rightly labor in accord with that Christ-like character.
You Might also like
-
Addressing Abuse & Defending the Bride
The PCA has a structure for bringing charges against members and officers, and it requires two witnesses of an alleged offense. These two witnesses may be either people or material (e.g., police report). But these scandal-mongering blogs bypass the judicial system of the Church entirely and instead slander the good name and reputation of the PCA as well as her officers and members by spewing these allegations publicly.
We frequently hear about abuse in the PCA. In 2017 concern regarding abuse dominated the secular news media following disturbing revelations surrounding men named Weinstein and Epstein. Concern for this sparked a number of hashtags such as #MeToo and #BelieveAllWomen.
Now – years later – some within the Church have built a platform for themselves as “Abuse advocates” purporting to expose abuse within the Church and particularly the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA).
Even before the recent General Assembly had concluded, Emily Belz in Christianity Today decided there was an abuse crisis in the PCA. She bases her assertion on anonymous, self-appointed “abuse advocates” who say there is.
What is Abuse?
Abuse is hard to define. In Michigan, the worldlings assert abuse is using the wrong pronouns to hurt someone’s feelings. For those influenced by the world, calling a person to repent of his or her sins is abusive.
The PCA must guard against this view of abuse. Some may remember a former PCA pastor, who – facing potential ecclesiastical discipline fled with his congregation into independency – decried it was spiritually abusive to encourage people in the hope of sanctification and the mortification of sexual sins and vile passions.
In contrast to these worldly definitions, the PCA received a report from a committee that studied domestic abuse and sexual assault (DASA); the report defines abuse this way:
persistent maltreatment that causes lasting damage. In this sense, abuse is a misuse of power. Misuse of power can take several forms (physical, verbal, positional, etc.), but the essence of abuse is that it is a misuse of power which wounds another person physically, emotionally, psychologically, and spiritually. (pp. 2306-7; emphasis original)
That is a helpful definition; it recognizes abuse beyond physical forms, e.g., spiritual and emotional abuse. It also highlights that abuse constitutes a “misuse of power,” which is true, but at the same time Christians must guard against allowing a Marxist view of power-dynamics to inform what we consider to be abuse.
Nonetheless, a definition of abuse such as this helps us to distinguish abuse from other sinful patterns or behaviors. Certainly, abuse in its general sense is simply the “misuse of a thing;” all sin is therefore abuse. But if my five year old hits his sister with a Brio train track, is he abusing her?
In one sense yes, but – given that she (for now) outclasses him in terms of height, weight, and strength – in another sense no, since the power differential clearly favors the one on the receiving end and his mother will quickly correct that sinful behavior.
Sometimes it can be hard to distinguish abuse from other expressions of sin and depravity. Often it is quite subjective and comes down to Justice Stewart’s test: “I’ll know it when I see it.”
Alleged Abuse in the PCA
Apart from the aforementioned DASA committee report, abuse seems to be used with alarming frequency in the PCA courts lately. Even the British press covered a situation in which a prominent Nashville pastor was suspended by Presbytery due to abusive behavior. Elsewhere there are instances in which church planters have stepped down and/or are facing discipline because of abusive patterns.
In a more infamous situation, an urban church planter was recently exonerated of claims of abuse (i.e. bullying and sexual harassment) by the Standing Judicial Commission (SJC). The basis for exoneration was the evidence:
Where unambiguous digital or documentary evidence existed, however, it strongly supported the arguments of the Accused, providing objective proof against these specific allegations of sin. This fact affected the Panel’s assessment of the credibility to ascribe to testimony for which there was no tangible evidence or for which there were no third-party witnesses. After carefully examining all the evidence, The Panel unanimously agreed that the prosecution did not meet its burden of proof in this case. (p. 14)
While there is little doubt in this situation improprieties occurred, the SJC did not believe the evidence supported the serious allegations against the accused.
The Biblical Standard
The aforementioned case was a source of much consternation and seemed to be a key turning point for many to conclude there is an “abuse crisis” within the PCA. Twitter and other social media were filled with reactionary outcry in the wake of the decision.
This outcry broadened into rage against the Church judicial system as a whole aiming to depict the PCA as a nest of abusers. New hashtags, customized for the PCA, have been promoted and new websites have been launched: some claim to provide resources for victims; others – more disturbingly – publish sensational allegations aimed at discrediting well-respected saints and harming the reputation of the Church.
In one particularly egregious instance, an anonymous ex-wife of an unnamed PCA pastor makes outlandish claims about an abuse cover-up by one of the most well-respected women in the PCA. But tellingly, the blogpost is riddled with errors of fact, which undermine the veracity of its claims.
I will not link to examples of the sites alluded to above because I do not wish to further publicize outrageous and unsubstantiated claims that malign Christ’s bride. Part of the trouble with these blogs is they vent claims of decades’ old grievances against the PCA as well as members or elders in good standing without any actual evidence.
They make assertions, which are readily believed by scandal-hungry people and provide fodder on which gossipy “abuse fetishists” will graze for weeks to the detriment of their souls.
The PCA has a structure for bringing charges against members and officers, and it requires two witnesses of an alleged offense. These two witnesses may be either people or material (e.g., police report). But these scandal-mongering blogs bypass the judicial system of the Church entirely and instead slander the good name and reputation of the PCA as well as her officers and members by spewing these allegations publicly.
Perhaps there are some who believe the standard of evidence (two witnesses) required by the PCA is too high.
Read More
Related Posts: -
God and Healing
Written by T. M. Suffield |
Sunday, January 22, 2023
It is important to wrestle with these questions in an attempt for answers. Why is God’s will so, seemingly, horrible to some people who love him? Here’s my answer: I don’t know. But I continue to believe that he is the sovereign King of the Universe, that he is Goodness itself, and that he loves me more dearly than I can imagine.I’m a charismatic, I believe that God heals today and that this happens frequently. I’ve watched someone’s leg grow while someone else prayed for them. I’ve felt the muscles in someone’s back untwist while I prayed for them. I’ve known a friend’s brain cancer to disappear. God heals. We can, in a general sense, suggest that God wills that everyone be healed, not least on the basis that sickness has no place in his inbreaking kingdom (Revelation 21).
I’ve also prayed for numerous people who have not been healed, including a dear friend who is going blind, I’ve known a friend die from a brain tumour despite our prayers.
Which at the very least raises a theological question for us. It raises a range of pastoral ones too. Why was it that these people aren’t healed? Is it their fault? Is it mine for not praying correctly?
Some of the big American charismatic churches that are popular in my circles would probably suggest that the problem was with our faith. One particular church suggests in their popular teaching that there is no ‘deficiency’ on God’s end (sure, no one disagrees), so when someone isn’t healed all the ‘lack’ is on our end.
Thankfully they don’t always blame the person being prayed for their lack of faith, though this sadly does happen, more often they would situate the lack of faith in those praying. Which raises some important pastoral questions. And it’s nonsense.
Let’s go back to the Bible. Sometimes, we’re told that Jesus ‘healed everyone he met’ so therefore we would too if we could, indicating that the problem is ‘on our end.’ Except clearly he doesn’t heal everyone he meets: think of Mark 6, which raises its own questions, or of characters healed by the apostles who Jesus presumably knew (e.g. Acts 3).
In the pages of the Scriptures, we find a God who heals, marvellously, time and time again. We also find a God who wounds (2 Corinthians 12). Our theology needs to be big enough for both. We know that the revealed will of God is to heal and to bless. And we know that God sends calamity (Isaiah 45).
Read More
Related Posts: -
Why Do We Need Community?
God is a community of three persons and invites us into His divine community to enjoy friendship and fellowship with Him through His Son Jesus Christ (John 14:1–6, 15–18, 23–24). No amount of marriage, family, church, or friendships will substitute for the fundamental loneliness we will experience if we try to live apart from God. A large part of the Christian hope is that we will live forever in a perfect heavenly community (Rev. 7:9–17).
In May 2023, the United States Surgeon General, Dr. Vivek Murthy, declared a “loneliness epidemic” and announced a “National Strategy to Advance Social Connection” to address this epidemic of loneliness and isolation. In an article for the New York Times, Murthy revealed not only his own experience with loneliness, but the sad statistic that at any one moment, 50 percent of the population are experiencing measurable levels of loneliness.
As expected, this loneliness epidemic affects the old, with 40 percent of nursing home residents having had no visitor in the past year. But it also affects the middle-aged, as evidenced in The Boston Globe headline: “The biggest threat facing middle-age men isn’t smoking or obesity. It’s loneliness.” Perhaps surprisingly, isolation and disconnectedness affect the young the most, with USA Today warning that young people report more loneliness than the elderly. Why is community so important and the lack of it so damaging?
We need community for physical health.
Studies consistently show an increased risk of death when people have few social relationships, especially if they are of low quality. Dr. Murthy revealed statistics showing that social isolation increases the risk for premature mortality by 29 percent. The risk of heart disease increases by 29 percent, strokes by 32 percent, and dementia by 50 percent. The overall increased mortality risk is comparable to smoking fifteen cigarettes a day. Positively, those who have a large network of friends outlive those with the fewest friends by 22 percent. A survey of three long-living people groups found that the top two things they had in common were “put family first” and “keep socially engaged.”
Some studies have shown that those who attend religious services at least once a week have a 25 percent higher life expectancy than those who don’t. Victor Zeines, author of Living a Longer Life, said that’s “probably because church attendance increases social support, a proven life-extender.”
We need community for mental health.
During COVID-19 lockdowns, loneliness increased, resulting in devastating mental health consequences. Young people suffered the most with significantly increased rates of depression, anxiety, and suicide.
Adults who report feeling lonely often are more than twice as likely to develop depression as adults who report rarely or never feeling lonely.
Read More
Related Posts: