My thanks goes to ChurchSocial for sponsoring the blog this week. Church Social gives congregations a safe place to communicate, share information, and manage membership online.
There are a few new Kindle deals to close out the week.
(Yesterday on the blog: The Great Rewiring of Childhood)

This article offers some helpful perspectives on living as Christians during politically-charged times.

“When was the last time you were at a funeral when someone didn’t take the opportunity to talk about their own life when eulogizing the person who has died? We all do it. It’s nearly impossible not to.” In this sense, Glenna says, it’s often wise to “borrow” a death.

Keri Folmar describes and celebrates the many ministries of godly women.

Nick Batzig says “We don’t have to be weighed down with perpetual regrets for not having loved believers as we ought to have loved them here and now.” This is a very freeing thought.

Randy Alcorn asks and answers the “color blindness” question.

You don’t have to agree with everything an article says to benefit from it. And that was the case for me with this one (though I am generally in favor of offering some programming for at least the youngest children during services).

“I would still have passed that way even if I had known I would be mistreated, for by sharing his burden I became the first to share in his sufferings.”

There are two little rules which, if we would observe them, would work a marvelous change in most of our lives. One is, “Never be discouraged.” The other is, “Never be a discourager.”
—J.R. Miller

This week’s Free Stuff Friday is sponsored by Christian Focus Publications. They are offering copies of The Illustrated Westminster Shorter Catechism five winners.

Each generation must not only come face to face with the truth of the gospel, receiving and embracing it for themselves; they must also guard that which is entrusted to them, in turn passing on and entrusting to yet another generation.
Stretching back to the early Church (in fact one could even say right back to Old Testament times), each successive generation has been taught in one way or another through a catechism.  The Westminster Shorter Catechism stands in a long line of catechisms that has been used as a tool to help teach ‘the faith once delivered to the saints’ (Jude v3) down through the ages and which has endured and remained with us.  Alongside the Heidelberg Catechism, the Westminster Shorter Catechism was penned during the Reformation period; Heidelberg in 1563 and the Shorter Catechism in 1647.
Since then, the Shorter Catechism has been used in Reformed and Presbyterian churches, becoming both well-loved and well-worn (though not a universal experience, otherwise we would not have felt the need for the project!)  Yet it remains that it has stood the test of time – a testimony to the work of the Assembly of Divines – and there are many children and young people learning such great truths and a great many older folk who still remember what they were taught in their day by a previous generation too.
But if you ask people about learning from a catechism you will receive mixed responses.  For some it is dry and antiquated, the reserve of students, theologians, and those folks in tweed jackets. Others ‘had’ to work through it for membership class and now see no further use.  Some may have fond memories of a parent, grandparent, or loved Sunday School teacher who lovingly taught them so many years ago and still remember clearly what they memorised.  Some of us may have no more familiarity than beyond the iconic Question 1.  But does it have to be so?
The project to publish the Illustrated Westminster Shorter Catechism wanted to help provide a tool to continue the use of catechism as a learning tool and form of discipleship.  It aimed to put the catechism back in hands of families, children, young people, and church leaders too; hopefully to encourage those who already practice catechetical learning; and, to introduce it  – or even reintroduce it (perhaps removing some barriers at the same time) – to those not in the practice.  As already alluded to, there can be an image of catechism as dusty, old, outdated, irrelevant, and so the aim was to undertake the project in a contemporary, accessible, and visually attractive way.
Knowing the great heritage that we were working with, how much meaning, theology, and doctrine are behind every word, great care was taken when seeking to modernise and simplify the language and phrasing, ensuring that nothing new was written or introduced.  Hopefully by updating some of the language and phrasing many more people will be introduced to the teaching of the catechism.  With the help of beautiful, carefully thought out artwork, it is hoped that the illustrations will aid teaching and learning and understanding the questions and answers of the catechism.  In our day and age, people are accustomed to great illustrations and graphics, but more than being only aesthetically attractive the illustrations used seek to capture something of the main point being covered.  We need to engage our children and young people and discuss the faith, to help them understand what they are learning – ‘what they believe and why they believe it’ type conversations.  Why not engage them with a contemporary voice that is accessible and creative?
Ultimately, we are convinced by the truth the catechism teaches – something undertaking this project only helped reinforce – and we want you to experience that, holding fast, receiving, and embracing the truth the catechism teaches.  The Shorter Catechism is worthy of the reading and study of all Christians for the truth it so concisely contains.  You may not be able to memorise it; but you can engage with it, use it, talk about it, discuss it, be amazed and humbled by it.  You can pass it on, even to another generation.

Enter Here
Again, there are five copies to win. And all you need to do to enter the draw is to drop your name and email address in the form below, which will add you to Christian Focus’ mailing list.
Giveaway Rules: You may enter one time. Winners will be notified by email.
Christian Focus are giving away copies of The Illustrated Westminster Shorter Catechism to five randomly selected lucky winners who sign up to their mailing list below.

.iIDDUy { background: rgb(255, 255, 255); border-radius: 0.3125rem; max-width: 35.25rem; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; padding: 2.5rem 2.75rem; position: relative; }.dEVaGV { font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; color: rgb(93, 93, 101); display: block; font-size: 0.875rem; font-weight: 400; margin-bottom: 0.5rem; }.iFTUZ { color: rgb(221, 54, 42); }.iMsgpL { appearance: none; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); border: 0px; border-radius: 0.1875rem; box-sizing: border-box; box-shadow: rgba(142, 154, 173, 0.1) 0px 2px 0px 0px inset, rgb(210, 215, 223) 0px 0px 0px 1px inset, rgb(255, 255, 255) 0px 1px 0px 0px; color: rgb(67, 77, 93); font-size: 0.875rem; line-height: 1.5; min-height: 2.8125rem; outline: 0px; padding: 0.75rem 1rem; transition: box-shadow 0.2s ease 0s; width: 100%; }.iMsgpL:focus { box-shadow: transparent 0px 0px 0px 0px inset, rgb(80, 156, 246) 0px 0px 0px 1px inset, rgba(80, 156, 246, 0.25) 0px 0px 0px 2px; }.bMslyb { margin-bottom: 1.5rem; }.liOVdz { margin-bottom: 1rem; }.gDVPix { margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; max-width: 29.125rem; padding-bottom: 3.125rem; }.fyndJN { display: block; margin: 0px auto; max-width: 100%; max-height: 7.5rem; }.efTFaG { background-color: rgb(123, 177, 61); border: none; border-radius: 3px; color: rgb(255, 255, 255); display: inline-block; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 1rem; font-style: normal; font-weight: 700; line-height: 1; outline: 0px; padding: 0.75rem 1.5rem; text-decoration: none; transition: background-color 0.1s ease-in 0s, box-shadow 0.1s ease-in 0s; }.efTFaG:hover { cursor: pointer; }.jVBYvJ { background-color: rgb(46, 180, 238); border: none; border-radius: 3px; color: rgb(255, 255, 255); display: inline-block; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 1rem; font-style: normal; font-weight: 700; line-height: 1; outline: 0px; padding: 0.75rem 1.5rem; text-decoration: none; transition: background-color 0.1s ease-in 0s, box-shadow 0.1s ease-in 0s; }.jVBYvJ:hover { cursor: pointer; }a, abbr, address, article, aside, b, blockquote, body, caption, cite, code, dd, details, dialog, div, dl, dt, em, fieldset, figcaption, figure, footer, form, h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6, header, html, i, iframe, img, label, legend, li, main, menu, nav, object, ol, p, pre, section, small, span, strong, sub, summary, sup, table, tbody, td, tfoot, th, thead, time, tr, u, ul { border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; }*, ::after, ::before { box-sizing: inherit; }html { font-family: “Helvetica Neue”, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; }h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6, html { color: rgb(67, 77, 93); font-weight: 400; line-height: 1.5; }a { color: rgb(25, 169, 229); text-decoration: underline; }button, label, p { overflow-wrap: break-word; word-break: break-word; }

The revival at Asbury has already come to an end. What began as a brief and simple chapel service turned into a weeks-long worship event that drew tens of thousands of participants and elicited tens of millions of opinions. Only now have I gathered my thoughts and bundled them into this “cold take.” I trust you won’t mind that I’ve chosen to share it as a series of short thoughts rather than a single essay.

❖
Some things may be wrong or misguided, but not particularly dangerous. A small revival (or purported revival if you prefer) at a small college far away does not necessarily demand a great deal of scrutiny by those who have no connection to it. While it is good to have “powers of discernment trained by constant practice to distinguish good from evil” (Hebrews 5:14) there is usually little need to put the effort into what does not intersect your life and what is unlikely to cause anyone any great harm. Those biblical calls to discernment ought to be considered alongside the exhortations about meddling in affairs that are not your own.
❖
Revival is not a clear biblical category like, for example, deacon or baptize. It’s not a word we find in the New Testament, and it does not tell us to try to generate revivals or be on watch for them. It doesn’t even instruct us to pray for them, though that may be a very good thing to do. It’s clear that God sometimes chooses to work in ways that we choose to label revival, but God’s greatest and most consistent work is through the ordinary means of grace within the local church. Because the Bible does not define revival, it may be difficult to know exactly what one is and exactly when one is happening. It may describe a range of circumstances and experiences.
❖
The New Dictionary of Theology offers a helpful definition of revival: “God’s quickening visitation of his people, touching their hearts and deepening his work of grace in their lives. It is essentially a corporate occurrence, an enlivening of individuals not in isolation but together.” If this is an appropriate definition, then examples abound in Scripture and church history. And if this is an appropriate definition it does not set the bar all that high—where we see God quickening a number of people all at once, touching their hearts and deepening his work of grace, there we may have a revival. A revival does not need to sweep over the globe or impact millions to be genuine.
❖
When revival breaks out, we need to guard against treating it as something that has an almost mystical or mythical quality to it. God’s plan for the world is centered around the church, so we should be careful not to inadvertently disparage his “Plan A” which is—and always will be—the church. Of course we should also hesitate to treat revival as if it is nothing or to speak ill of what God may be using for his glory.

❖
It seems to me that news of an outbreak of revival is best met with a guarded optimism. We don’t need to be naive but also don’t need to be incredulous. And if that revival begins in a tradition very different from our own (though of course one that acknowledges the gospel) we should perhaps be especially glad and hopeful, for it is good to be reminded that God is at work in many different places and through many different people. Speaking personally, I would like my first instinct to be “Praise God” rather than “Fat chance!” (Jim Elliff: “How do you respond to a pastor friend who says that the youth in his church have experienced repentance and brokenness and restored relationships in spontaneous youth-led gatherings which are less than perfect. Do you immediately tell him how skeptical you are, or do you rejoice?”)

❖
A revival that emerges in a Wesleyan school led by Wesleyan faculty within the Wesleyan tradition is likely to manifest itself in ways that are distinctly Wesleyan. It is therefore unlikely to feature Presbyterian worship or Baptist doctrine. And that’s okay. We could perhaps imagine genuine revival breaking out simultaneously at a very good Anglican Church in Australia and a very good Reformed Baptist church in Zambia. I doubt many of us would be shocked or dismayed if they looked quite a bit different from one another even as we rejoiced in them both. I doubt many of us would be shocked or dismayed if we were drawn far more to one of them than the other. We should not demand, then, that a revival arising from a different Christian tradition look just like our church. For reasons that are his own, God sees fit to work through many different theological streams or traditions.

❖
Jonathan Edwards once made some good and helpful observations about the distinguishing marks of revival, but his observations are not authoritative. He, after all, lived at a particular time and in a certain place and within a distinct context. And, of course, he was a sinful, finite, limited human being like you and me. So yes, when we hear whispers of revival, by all means, we should look up his work on the subject. But even as we appreciate his insights, we should be cautious about demanding that a revival looks exactly like his description or about disparaging one that doesn’t perfectly match it. All of which is simply to say that we should avoid using Edwards as a kind of trump card.

❖
The internet in general and social media in particular demand the constant creation of content. Many people crave hot takes from their favored content creators and this means that much of the material that gets generated during curious or controversial events is not particularly thoughtful or useful. In fact, much of it is created to generate income, to satisfy existing subscribers, or to draw new ones. Don’t doubt that there’s money to be made and platform to be gained by having opinions on even something as good as revival. Thus it’s important to distinguish between creators who really have something to contribute and those who are merely in it for themselves, usually through relentless negativity. After all, cynicism and controversy are still the easiest ways to gain a following.
❖
Any revival is likely to encounter not only opposition but competition. There will be people on one side who refuse to acknowledge that it is (or even may be) revival and who try to discern it out of existence. God may not snuff out a smoldering wick, but many of his people will gladly do so. Meanwhile, there will be people on the other side who want to turn it into a complete circus. If one group is determined to make it far less than it is the other is determined to make it far more. Both are essentially just wanting to use it for their own ends. This seems to have been the tension at Asbury and I think we should all respect the school’s administration for being aware of this and for working hard to prevent excesses. I did not envy them their task.
❖
You don’t need to care about everything. You don’t need to take an interest in everything. You don’t need to have an opinion on everything. You certainly don’t need to voice your opinion on everything. If a situation like that at Asbury doesn’t intersect your life in any way, you can pray for it or you can just never give it another thought—both perfectly valid responses under the circumstances.