https://theaquilareport.com/a-reflection-on-kindness-from-anthony-doerrs-all-the-light-we-cannot-see/
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/12f2a/12f2abb15a2d322463a5cb69eeba10d72d1b8fdc" alt=""
Anthony Doerr’s Pulitzer-winning novel All the Light We Cannot See promises a story that “illuminates the ways, against all odds, people try to be good to one another.” This intricate work of historical fiction delivers on that promise and provides a compelling journey for any reader; but for the Christian, I believe it offers enduring lessons about kindness.
Kindness transforms us.
In January of 1941 in Saint-Malo, a young French girl named Marie-Laure is unable to get herself out of bed. Her circumstances weigh so heavy even simple tasks prove impossible:
She becomes unreachable, sullen. She does not bathe, does not warm herself by the kitchen fire, ceases to ask if she can go outdoors. She hardly eats.
Like others throughout the book, the cruelty of the world threatens to crush her.
The cook and maid of the Saint-Malo home, Madame Manec, sees this and refuses to watch her suffer alone any longer. Though it is not her responsibility, she takes Marie-Laure out of the house and down to the Breton coastline. As her lungs fill with crisp sea air and her curious fingers trace the frames of surrounding barnacles, Marie-Laure slowly comes back to life.
Madame Manec risks going out of her home during wartime to stand on a cold beach for three hours so a child not her own can feel again. This is kindness: to love another selflessly and without expectation of return.
Reading simple and profound acts of benevolence from All the Light We Cannot See during my own season of depression comforted me. Those who have tasted the bitterness of life know the sweetness of a hand reaching out through the fog of suffering. In many ways, these fictional glimmers of goodness lifted my weary chin to gaze at the transformational kindness of Jesus.
The gospel of Jesus Christ is for the despondent. It is right for our hearts to break when relationships are severed; for sobs to wrack our bodies when death steals the life of one we loved; for us to acknowledge the sheer wrongness of pain’s existence.
We could have been left in the despondent darkness of sin, but God in his lovingkindness sent Jesus to be the light of the world that those who believe in him may be saved.[1] Tasting communion upon our lips regularly reminds us of this love: the body of Christ broken for us, and the blood of Christ shed for us.
You Might also like
-
Should We Stay or Should We Go?
Written by Jon D. Payne |
Thursday, November 18, 2021
Don’t give up on the PCA. Double down in your commitment to pray, stay informed, and get involved. Obviously, there may be a time in the future to organize and depart together as a large group of confessional churches. But now is not the time. There is much to be encouraged by after the last General Assembly. Will you, therefore, along with the GRN, seek to prayerfully, winsomely, transparently, boldly, compellingly, and with integrity, contend for the future faithfulness of the PCA?It’s a question that more than a few PCA elders and members are asking right now. The recent Standing Judicial Commission’s (SJC) decision to reject the complaint against Missouri Presbytery has left many disheartened. Moreover, the current presbytery voting tallies on Overtures 23 and 37 show that there is no guarantee they will meet the two-thirds threshold necessary for a vote at next summer’s General Assembly. What if the overtures fail? Would this mean that all positive momentum gained this past June at the 48th General Assembly is lost? Has the time to depart the PCA finally come? The answer is a resounding NO!
It is not time to depart the PCA. It’s time to contend for the PCA—to humbly contend for the biblical and confessional faithfulness of our beloved church.
Divergent Visions for the PCA
The recent disclosure of National Partnership (NP) emails punctuates the fact that there are vastly divergent and competing visions for the future of the PCA. Most are now recognizing that these disparate visions are highly incompatible. The cache of NP emails also reveal that there are profoundly different methods of seeking to advance those visions. Over the years we (the GRN Council) have been encouraged to adopt similar political machinations as the NP, but we’ve firmly resisted. It’s not our way. It never has been.
The progressive wing’s sympathy with, or doctrinal indifference to, various tenets of Side B gay Christianity has been a major contributing factor to this sad incompatibility and division. It’s caused a heartbreaking rift in the PCA. To be sure, there are other matters fostering discord. It hardly needs mentioning, however, that Revoice doctrine is the most divisive issue at present. Even with the adoption of the excellent Ad Interim Committee Report on Human Sexuality there remains significant confusion, obfuscation, indifferentism, and fracturing over whether officers in the PCA should be permitted, for any reason, to retain and promote a settled gay identity. From my perspective, a split is inevitable if Revoice doctrine finds a permanent home in the PCA. Christ’s followers are called to renounce, hate, and mortify their sins, not foster and promote an identity with them.[1] We are called to kill our sin, not manage it. Those in the PCA who believe otherwise should repent or peacefully depart and find a denominational home elsewhere.
A Compelling Reformed Vision for the PCA
Over the past several years the Gospel Reformation Network has sought to publicly promote a compelling vision for the PCA—a transparent vision to cultivate warm-hearted biblical and confessional Presbyterianism in our churches and presbyteries. Through public articles, videos, conferences, lectures, seminars, booklets, seminary chapels, and luncheons we’ve aspired to encourage fellow elders to hold fast to the PCA’s founding vision—to be Faithful to the Scriptures, True to the Reformed faith, and Obedient to the Great Commission. We haven’t always done this perfectly, but from the beginning, it’s been our aim and focus; and by God’s grace it will continue to be.
The GRN’s purpose and distinctives are published on our website, in case you haven’t seen them. Moreover, we will host our second GRN National Conference, May 4–5, 2022 in Birmingham. Mark your calendars for this wonderful time of worship, teaching, and fellowship. We would love for you to join us. All are most welcome!
Members of the GRN Council have maintained regular interaction with our brothers on the opposite side of controversial issues facing the PCA. This is something for which I’m deeply grateful, despite the frustration that we (and they) often feel in our conversations. What many around the denomination do not realize is how much discussion actually occurs behind the scenes. I’ve personally grown from these interactions. They’ve helped me to understand better where my brothers are coming from, and what their positions truly are. These exchanges have also helped me to recognize the sin lurking in my own heart.
What Now?
Perhaps you are thinking, “So, if it’s not yet time to go, then what must be done? What can be done? What should I do personally? What should my session and congregation do to contend for the future faithfulness of the Presbyterian Church in America?” Here are a few actions items that I would humbly ask you to prayerfully consider:
Read More
[1] Shouldn’t we all be gravely concerned when a PCA minister feels the freedom to publicly post #LGBTinChrist? -
Supreme Court Will Hear Major Religious Free Speech Case from Colorado
Given the current conservative leanings of the high court and its recent decisions affirming religious freedom, this case is setting up to be an important one. It may prove to be the perfect opportunity for the high court to finally vindicate the free speech rights of Christian creative professionals whose chosen messages do not conform to the politically mandated ideology of the local governments where they operate.
When Denver-area baker Jack Phillips won his religious discrimination case against the state of Colorado at the U.S. Supreme Court in 2018 after declining to create a wedding cake for a same-sex “marriage,” the justices decided in his favor on the basis of the religious hostility exhibited by particular state officials toward his religious beliefs about marriage. The court avoided the even weightier questions of free speech that lay at the heart of the case.
Now, four years later, another creative artist is challenging the same Colorado nondiscrimination statute that ensnared Jack Phillips—as well as other wedding professionals in other states dealing with similar statutes—for compelling Christian businesspeople to express messages contrary to their faith.
Lorie Smith is the owner of 303 Creative LLC, a Denver-area graphic design and wedding website where Lorie hopes to celebrate marriages and bring her Christian faith to bear on the creative work she does in blogging about and building memories for the couples that hire her.
While she doesn’t discriminate against any customer because of who they are, she does desire to limit her wedding business to opposite-sex couples because of her Christian beliefs about marriage, and that’s something that Colorado law does not permit.
Smith’s courageous legal efforts to fight the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act (CADA) and operate her business in accordance with her faith have not gone well to date. When she sued the state in 2019 to have the law declared unconstitutional, she lost in federal district court and again at the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
That didn’t discourage Smith, to her credit.
Lorie appealed the 10th Circuit’s decision to the U.S. Supreme Court, which on February 22 announced it would hear her case. The news is encouraging for those who value religious freedom, free speech, and the right of creative professionals to be free from government-compelled ideology.
Given the current conservative leanings of the high court and its recent decisions affirming religious freedom, this case is setting up to be an important one. It may prove to be the perfect opportunity for the high court to finally vindicate the free speech rights of Christian creative professionals whose chosen messages do not conform to the politically mandated ideology of the local governments where they operate.
Read More -
Stepping Up to Overture 29
This year’s Overture 29 seeks to prompt questions in the examination, instruction, and discipline of officers and candidates for office. As theological debate about how best to apply the doctrine of sanctification to modern sexuality has arisen in the Church, one approach emphasizes the issue of language and self-identification. This is the attraction of this year’s Overture 15, which would likely just prompt one sort of question: Do you describe yourself as a homosexual? But this year’s Overture 29 commends a deeper exploration of the root issues, prompting further questions either in an examining committee or on the floor of a Presbytery. The virtue of this year’s Overture 29 is that the corresponding line of inquiry will address deeper issues than any one label, issues which are obvious to careful readers of the AIC Human Sexuality report, advocates for Side B Gay Christianity, or the latter’s most thorough critics who see the deeper root issues.
The 49th General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) passed Overture 29 with over 90% of the Assembly voting for it: 1922 to 200. This Amendment now heads to the Presbyteries for consideration, and reads, as amended:
16-4. Officers in the Presbyterian Church in America must be above reproach in their walk and Christlike in their character. While office bearers will see spiritual perfection only in glory, they will continue in this life to confess and to mortify remaining sins in light of God’s work of progressive sanctification. Therefore, to be qualified for office, they must affirm the sinfulness of fallen desires, the reality and hope of progressive sanctification, and be committed to the pursuit of Spirit-empowered victory over their sinful temptations, inclinations, and actions.
Overture 29 was in many ways a refinement and replacement for last year’s Overture 23 that narrowly failed to pass the Presbyteries (as Item 2) which read:
16-4. Officers in the Presbyterian Church in America must be above reproach in their walk and Christlike in their character. Those who profess an identity (such as, but not limited to, “gay Christian,” “same sex attracted Christian,” “homosexual Christian,” or like terms) that undermines or contradicts their identity as new creations in Christ, either by denying the sinfulness of fallen desires (such as, but not limited to, same sex attraction), or by denying the reality and hope of progressive sanctification, or by failing to pursue Spirit empowered victory over their sinful temptations, inclinations, and actions are not qualified for ordained office.
While the first section is identical, we can explore how the text has been updated and – given the General Assembly’s greater acceptance of this year’s Overture 29 – improved in the middle and last sections of the proposed amendment.
Middle Section Changes
First, the middle section of last year’s Overture 23 read: “Those who profess an identity (such as, but not limited to, “gay Christian,” “same sex attracted Christian,” “homosexual Christian,” or like terms) that undermines or contradicts their identity as new creations in Christ, either by denying the sinfulness of fallen desires (such as, but not limited to, same sex attraction)…”
This verbiage can be confusing to read, perhaps due at least in part to the parenthetical statements. The concern of this section is to describe the relationship of an officer to his indwelling sin. Last year’s Overture 23 prohibited finding identity in our sins (i.e., sinful desires, thoughts, words, behaviors, etc.). Carl Trueman has recently (and notably) connected the concepts of “expressive individualism” with modern concepts of identity.[1] Last year’s Overture 23 intended to clarify that our sense of meaning, purpose, worth, and personhood before God cannot be defined by our sinfulness or sinful desires, but rather with our position as new creations in Christ.
Over the course of the last year, the parentheticals, which contained particular sin identities to illustrate the broad categories, became a source of resistance and confusion for some presbyters. For instance, the example of a “Same-Sex Attracted Christian” has not been a source of cultural identity in the way “Gay Christian” has been connected with Gay Identity.
In its place, this year’s Overture 29 as amended, simplifies this confusing text and the debated particulars by simply stating the principle, “While office bearers will see spiritual perfection only in glory, they will continue in this life to confess and to mortify remaining sins in light of God’s work of progressive sanctification.” The relationship between an officer and his sin is stated, not with reference to “identity,” but with the confessional and biblical language of “confess” and “mortify.” The virtue of this year’s Overture 29 as an improvement over the language of last year’s Overture 23 is that the updated language is consistent with the Report of the Ad Interim Committee on Human Sexuality (2020)[2] and the Westminster Standards in how they deal with these concepts. For instance, you can look at the similarities with Statement 3 on Original Sin in the AIC Report (p. 7), as well as the relevant chapters in the Westminster Confession of Faith (WCF) on Sin (6) and Sanctification (13). The language of “mortified” (WCF 6.5, 13.1) is found there as well as the teaching that there is “still some remnant of corruption in every part” (13.2), and yet “the regenerate part doth overcome” (13.3) .
The Confession is clear that sin – in its corrupting influence – persists in saints as they make their pilgrimage through life on this earth, even as the Spirit transforms them. As Thomas Watson put it: “Sanctification and glory differ only in degree: sanctification is glory in the seed, and glory is sanctification in the flower.”[3] That is, Glorification is planted and starts to grow in Sanctification and our time on earth, but glorification is not perfected on earth.
Here, it is worth noting that the language of both last year’s Overture 23 and this year’s Overture 29 express this balance with either the vocabulary of “identity” (23) or the Confession’s language of “confess” and “mortify.” On the other hand, another overture passed by the Assembly this year, Overture 15, proposes to add to the Book of Church Order (BCO) the following statement on the office holder and their sin:
7-4. Men who describe themselves as homosexual, even those who describe themselves as homosexual and claim to practice celibacy by refraining from homosexual conduct, are disqualified from holding office in the Presbyterian Church in America (emphasis added).
The language of this year’s Overture 15 originally contained the same verb as last year’s Overture 23 (“identify”), but was changed to “describes themselves” in the minority report passed at the General Assembly. Comparing the three Overtures, this year’s Overture 29 employs the biblical and confessional categories of “confess” and “mortify” rather than a debated concept of “identify” from last year’s Overture 23, or the broad “describe themselves” of this year’s Overture 15, which is unclear as to whether or not concepts of identity or confession are implicated in the act of self-description. One must at least concede the virtue of this year’s Overture 29 using the less ambiguous concepts of confession and mortification, as they are clearly defined by their use in our Standards.
Final Section Changes
The other section of this year’s Overture 29 that has major revisions from last year’s Overture 23 is the final section which reads as follows:
Therefore, to be qualified for office, they must affirm the sinfulness of fallen desires, the reality and hope of progressive sanctification, and be committed to the pursuit of Spirit-empowered victory over their sinful temptations, inclinations, and actions.
This year’s Overture 29 carries over the concern to address the issue behind words of identity or self-description, namely the matter of sanctification. The language itself is cleaned up from last year’s Overture 23, replacing the prohibition of a “denial” in last year’s Overture 23 with seeking positive “affirmation” of three propositions in this year’s Overture 29.
Read More
Related Posts: