O Day of Rest and Gladness: A Service of Worship for the Lord’s Day
Let me urge all involved—Elders, worship leaders, and church members—to prioritize the worship of the Lord’s Day. It is entirely possible that apart from one’s daily quiet time with the Lord, there is no more important activity for a Christian man or woman. For again, here the Father desires specially to gather his children to himself; and here the High King of the Church desires specially to walk among the golden lampstands (Rev. 1:12-13) Therefore, in preparing for the Lord’s Day, let all the leaders aspire to excellence. Let them stand in the counsel of the Lord, earnestly praying for a revelation of his heart and mind for the Sunday ahead (Jer. 23:22, 1 Cor. 14:27). And with that revelation in mind, let them carefully select the call to worship, the Scripture readings, the hymns, the contents of message, and the ministry at the Lord’s Table. Prior to the Lord’s Day, let them communicate with their people, urging them to prepare for it, and helping them to do so. And together with the whole church, let them pray for God’s richest blessing on the gathering. Surely he is eager to bestow it. And if we, on our part, do all we can to prepare the holy ground, surely the Holy One will meet us there.
Liturgically speaking, I have made the rounds. Down through the years this septuagenarian has worshiped in—or observed the worship of—Pentecostal, Charismatic, Orthodox, Roman Catholic, Anglican, Methodist, and Baptist churches. Also, throughout the years during which I served as a pastor, I continually mulled the New Testament (NT) parameters for worship on the Lord’s Day, trying hard to discern them accurately and practice them faithfully. Now, as I near the end of my journey, it has seemed good to me to share my best thoughts on Lord’s Day worship, and to craft a service of worship that I believe would be pleasing to God and edifying to his children.
Theological and Practical Foundations
Here in Part I of my essay I want to share my major premises: the theological and practical foundations upon which I have based my proposed liturgy. There are seven of them.
Lord’s Day Worship is Special
Worship on the Lord’s Day is quite special. Unlike other gatherings of God’s children, on this day the elders and members of a church come together as a whole church (Acts 15:2, 22; 1 Cor. 11:17-18; 14:23, 26; 1 Tim. 5:17; Heb. 10:25; 13:7). Also, the regulations for this assembly are different from, and more stringent than, those pertaining to smaller gatherings (1 Acts 27:7-14; Cor. 11:1-15 vs. 11:16f). But the uniqueness of Lord’s Day worship stems above all from its close association with the mystery of the Sabbath. Theological reflection on this subject is extensive, diverse, and sometimes controversial. For brevity sake, I will give my own view simply by citing a Statement of Faith that I wrote some years back:
We believe that the Sabbath Day, which in the beginning God set apart as a day of rest and worship for all mankind, and which at the giving of the Law he instituted as a day of rest and worship for his OT people, stood as a type or picture of the eternal rest that he now offers to all men—and commands them to enter—through the Gospel. / We believe that Christians do in fact enter this rest, first at the moment of saving faith, then more fully at the entrance of their spirits into heaven, and still more fully at the resurrection of the righteous at Christ’s return. / We believe that in order to underscore the perpetuity of the believer’s rest in Christ, the NT does not, by an ordinance, tie the worship of God to the Sabbath or any special day of the week. / But we also believe that through a holy tradition inaugurated by Christ himself on the day of his resurrection, and perpetuated in the practice of the early church, God’s people are invited and encouraged to designate the first day of the week as the Lord’s Day; that on that day they do well to assemble themselves together in order to celebrate and be refreshed in the spiritual rest God has given them, through a reverent and joyful observance of the ordinances of NT worship; and that in so doing God will be pleased, Christ exalted, his people blessed, and the world confronted afresh with the Good News of the Gospel.1
In short, Lord’s Day worship is special because on that day God specially draws near to his people in order to remind them of, teach them about, and refresh them in, their eternal Sabbath rest in Lord Jesus Christ.
Lord’s Day Worship is Important to God and Man
The worship of the Lord’s Day is important to the triune God. Scripture affirms that he takes great pleasure in his people (Ps. 149:4). Indeed, his people are his chosen dwelling place (1 Ki. 8:10-11; Ps. 132:5-7; Ezek. 43:5; 44:4; John 14:23; Acts 2:2; Rev. 21:3). Knowing their needs, and not unmindful of his own enjoyment, he delights to draw near to them on the Lord’s Day. Abba Father delights to gather his children to himself and take them in his arms (Psalm 50:5, 149:4; Is. 43:2). His exalted Son, their heavenly Husband, delights to speak tenderly to his Bride, and to lay her weary head upon his vast and comforting bosom (Is. 40:1-3; John 13:23, 14:3, 17:24; Eph. 5). The Holy Spirit, knowing these things, delights to facilitate the holy visitation: to unveil and strengthen the eternal bond of love that unites the family of God. For these and other reasons, Lord’s Day worship is indeed important to the Three-in-One.
But it is even more important for man. For though God’s people have been justified, they are not yet fully sanctified. Though they are seated in heavenly places in Christ, they are still making an arduous journey through the howling wilderness of this present evil age (Gal. 1:4; Rev. 12:1ff). Therefore, their needs are great. Because they are weary, they need refreshing (Acts 3:19). Because they are pursued and persecuted, they need protection (Rev. 12:13-14). Because they are without (mature) understanding, they need teaching (Eph. 4:91-16). Because they are called, they need equipping (2 Tim. 3:16-17). Because they have faltered, they need exhortation, repentance, and reassurance (1 Cor. 11:27-32; 14:3). Because they are lonely, they need family; because they are lacking, they need the support of the family (Psalm 122; Acts 2:43-5). And because they are grateful and glad, they need a time and a place in which to express their gratitude and joy (1 Pet. 1:8). In sum, the saints are eager for Lord’s Day worship because they know that on that Day, through word, prayer, sacrament, and body ministry, they will yet again behold the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ, and so be transformed into his image from one degree of glory to the next (2 Cor. 3:18).
Lord’s Day Worship is Regulated
Because God desires to meet with his people, and because their needs are so very great, he carefully regulates his own worship. In particular, he gives us detailed instructions concerning the attitudes, actions, and procedures that are proper to the gathering of the whole church. We may think of these regulations as borders by which he surrounds, creates, protects, and preserves a sacred space, ensuring that he himself may fully fill that space, and that in it his people may be fully edified and refreshed (Rev. 12:6, 14). He gives us regulations so that he may freely give us himself.
Concerning the attitudes that we are to bring to this gathering, the NT provides rich instruction. We are to come with understanding (Col. 1:9), gratitude (1 Tim. 2:1), joy (Matt. 13:44; Phil. 4:4), reverence (Heb. 12:28), humility (James 1:21), sincerity (Acts 2:46), confidence (Heb. 4:16), faith (James 1:6), and eager expectation (Matt. 18:20). We come in order to worship God in spirit and in truth (John 4:24), with all of our heart, soul, mind, and strength (Mark 12:30). We come faithfully, in spite of what we’ve done, and in spite of what we feel or don’t feel, always remembering that God is faithful, and that he is eager to meet both us and our needs (1 Cor. 10:13; 2 Tim. 2:13; Heb. 10:25). And so, having put on these attitudes, we too come with eagerness, hoping and expecting to see his glory fill the house (1 Kings 8:11; Ezek. 43:4; Acts 2:2)!
As for the actions of NT worship, they are far fewer than those of OT times, being carefully designed to facilitate the simplicity of worship in spirit and truth instituted by Christ, and now so supernaturally natural to the regenerate hearts of his flock (John 4:24; 2 Cor. 11:3). These actions include prayer; the reading, preaching, teaching, and prophesying of the Word of God; psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs, sung with grace in our hearts to the Lord; the Lord’s Supper; and, on occasion, the administration of water baptism.
Again, these actions are regulated: The NT prescribes basic procedures for each one. As the procedures become familiar, the worshiper comes to rest in them, trusting that all things are indeed being done decently and in order (1 Cor. 14:40). Thus resting, he is free to give himself fully to the Lord throughout all the service: to listen for his voice, and to wait for his touch. Regulated worship becomes liturgy, the work of the people; liturgy, in turn, becomes a garden paradise where the people experience the work of God.
Lord’s Day Worship is Participatory and Charismatic
Speaking personally, I cannot read 1 Corinthians 12-14 and fail to conclude that here, in good measure, the apostle is regulating the worship of the Lord’s Day. Yes, he begins by laying some theological groundwork, by unveiling the Church as the Spirit-filled Body of Christ, each of whose members is charismatically gifted for the edification of the Body. And for this reason some of the gifts mentioned here will not typically operate in a worship service (e.g. helps, mercies, administrations, healings, miracles; cf. Rom. 12:3-8). Nevertheless, the thrust of these chapters is surely to educate the saints on the gifts of the Spirit with a view to their proper exercise in the gatherings of the whole church (1 Cor. 14:23).
Accordingly, in our thinking about Lord’s Day worship must take seriously the apostle’s words: “What then, brothers, is the sum of the matter? Whenever you come together, each one has a psalm, a teaching, a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation. Let all things be done for edification” (1 Cor. 14:26). I do not believe that a biblically faithful church can exclude this verse from its understanding of the regulative principles of corporate worship. It clearly tells us that Lord’s Day worship is participatory (i.e. each one has something to contribute, though not necessarily every Sunday) and charismatic (i.e. each one contributes that something in the exercise of his spiritual gift).
My cessationist brethren will balk at this claim, believing as they do that with the closure of the NT canon, and with the passing of the foundational apostles, God has permanently withdrawn some of the more supernatural charismatic gifts. I cannot enter into that debate here. Suffice it to say that for nearly 50 years I have been unable to find a single NT text affirming the withdrawal of any charismatic gift. Indeed, in 1 Corinthians 13:8-13 I find quite the opposite, since here the apostle depicts the charismata as essential equipment for the Church Militant.
How so? The key words are “now” and “then”. Now, in the long Era of Gospel Proclamation, the Church needs the gifts of the Spirit in order to fulfill her mission. Now she needs to prophesy, speak in tongues, teach, etc., so that the saints may be gathered in, and the Body built up (1 Cor. 13:8). However, as important as the gifts are, they reflect only a partial knowledge of God, and are therefore only temporary. But when “the perfect” comes—not the close of the NT canon, but the return of Christ, the Consummation, and the life of the Age to Come (1 Cor. 1:7)—her partial knowledge will fail, cease, and pass away (1 Cor. 13:8-9). Then, when she she has graduated into eternal adulthood, she will put away her “childish” things, her childish ways of knowing, speaking, and reasoning, for then she will see face-to-face; for then she will fully know just as she is known (1 Cor. 13:11-13). If, therefore, it is essential for the Church to pass through her spiritual childhood, it is also essential that she permanently possess the distinguishing marks of her childhood: the panoply of spiritual gifts.
All that said, the closure of the NT canon is indeed of great importance. It enables us to identify the various spiritual gifts, and to exercise them properly in their appropriate settings. With reference to the worship of the Lord’s Day, it enables us to prioritize the ministry of the Word (i.e. Scripture reading, preaching, teaching, prophecy) with a view to the edification of the church (John 17:17; 1 Cor. 14:26). It enables us to judge the doctrinal and ethical integrity of various ministries of the Word (1 Cor. 14:29). And it enables leaders, through the exercise of their own spiritual gifts, to structure the Lord’s Day worship in such a way as to incorporate all its elements, while at the same time leaving ample room for the move of the Spirit and the spontaneous participation of various members of the congregation.2
Lord’s Day Worship Specially Regulates the Verbal Participation of Women
The NT places special restrictions on the verbal participation of women in the Lord’s Day gathering of the whole Church. Pressured by the surrounding culture, modern theologians fiercely debate the meaning and application of the relevant texts, with the result that different churches have settled on different policies (1 Cor. 14:34-36; 1 Tim. 2:9-15). My own reading, which aligns with traditional Catholic and Protestant interpretations, is that sisters in Christ may freely participate in congregational singing, and in the corporate recitation of prayers, Scripture, or creeds (yet another good reason to embrace all these practices). They may not, however, engage in any form of solo speech: They may not teach, preach, prophesy, speak in tongues, interpret a tongue, read Scripture, ask questions, or make the announcements.
It should go without saying that in giving us these guidelines God is in no way denigrating the value, intelligence, or spirituality of his daughters, who, just like men, are created in his image and likeness, loved, and redeemed in Christ (Gal. 3:28). Nor are the regulations meant to exclude women from all verbal ministry, since a number of other NT texts authorizes them to teach, pray, and prophesy in settings other than the gatherings of the whole church (Acts 2:17; 18:26; 1 Cor. 11:1-16; Titus 2:3-5).
Why, then, these special restrictions? A close reading of NT teaching on gender relations makes it clear that the rules are designed, above all, to reflect—and to reinforce in the hearts of his people—God’s creation order for the sexes (1 Tim. 2:11-15). By his wise decree—which is meant to image the mystery of Christ and the Church—man is the spiritual “head” of woman: the authority over her (1 Cor. 11:2-16; Eph. 5:22-33). In marriage, in the family, and in the church, God has given to men the responsibility—and with that, the authority—to lead, always with a view to the protection and provision of those under their care. Accordingly, when a woman speaks out in church she inverts the creation order by displacing the authorized leader, replacing him with herself, and setting the men in attendance under her authority, since the Word of God (or the words of the elders) in her mouth is (or is thought to be) authoritative. Paul states that such an inversion is disgraceful, for when the illicit inversion is both performed and permitted, ignominy rightly falls on the woman, her husband, the elders, and the men in the church—all of whom have had their part in turning the world upside down (1 Cor. 14:35).
There are practical considerations as well. If a woman happens to misspeak (as men themselves will surely do from time to time), she will not only dishonor her husband, but may even oblige the elder in charge to correct her in front of her husband and the entire congregation—a needless embarrassment that Paul no doubt wanted to head off at the pass. It should also be noted from 1 Timothy 2:14 that unless a woman is fully submitted to her husband, she, like mother Eve, is especially vulnerable to deception, and therefore to propagating the deception, in the event that she is allowed to speak in church. Finally, we need honestly to admit that a woman speaking in church, by attracting attention to herself, can stimulate sexual thoughts in the men (who are more visually oriented than women), thereby distracting them from the worship of the Lord. This, I think, is why Paul urges the sisters to dress modestly and discreetly when they come to church (1 Tim. 2:9-10).3 The words of the apostle display great practical wisdom, a wisdom that enables us to avoid all sorts of problems, and so to preserve peace in the churches.
I am all too aware that in our day these regulations are highly counter-cultural. It will therefore take great wisdom, love, patience, and courage for church leaders to explain and implement them, and for God’s men and women to submit to them. But if they love the Lord, and if they desire the fullest possible manifestation of his presence and power in the worship service, they will do so gladly.
Lord’s Day Worship Honors the History and Accomplishments of the Church Triumphant
In the Lord’s Day worship the Church Militant joins with the Church Triumphant before the throne of God, in order to worship, praise, petition, and receive from our triune Creator and Redeemer (Rev. 4-5). Because this is so, I think it fitting that the Church Militant should honor the Church Triumphant by incorporating into her own worship the forms and contents that her predecessors developed through their own prayerful interaction with the Word of God. Yes, we must do this carefully, striving to set aside any forms and contents that we consider unbiblical. But our natural bias, born out of love and respect for the work of God in former times, should be to include from the past as much as we honestly can, so that the worshiping Church of our own day may feel an abiding spiritual connection with our Catholic and Protestant forefathers.
In the service of worship below I have sought to do this very thing.
-
What is the “Great Barrier to Church Growth” and Why has it Fallen?
A mother church (a church that plants other churches) would often ask me to help reach these former attendees. And, I would interview them in focus groups. I found they didn’t often leave the church because of a tension or disagreement … but because of access. As they grew in their faith and became more involved in the church, they also were no longer traveling just once or twice a week to the church. Because of ministry opportunities, committee meetings, training, etc. they were now driving multiple times every week to a church. Their journey of discipleship was being impaired, because longer travel distances created a barrier to access.
There’s always been an almost impenetrable barrier to church health and growth. But innovators such as Charles Fuller, Billy Graham, Chuck Smith and David Fusco have been able to break it. What is this barrier and why is it so powerful?
For almost 40 years, researchers have found that the distance people will drive to a church is a main factor in their attendance and long-term commitment. Recent research from the Baylor University Religion Survey confirmed this. Baylor found that a majority (68%) of church attendees drive under 15 minutes to a church. While this pertains to the majority of attendees, some may drive longer in rural areas and shorter in congested areas.
Research continues to support that this four-decade thesis holds true: the majority of your attendees will always be coming from within a 15-minute drive.
How I learned about this barrier from my mega-church experience.
As I was studying church plants as the minister of evangelism and church growth at a megachurch, I found that the majority of people who stopped attending our church did so because they found a church closer to where they lived. I remember interviewing one person who said, “We liked the preaching. And the worship was outstanding. But we travel almost 40 minutes each way. And that’s time we could spend as a family. And, as we got more involved, we traveled back and forth even more often. Now there’s a church just 10 minutes from our house. It isn’t as good, but it’s good enough.”
After interviewing dozens of people, I discovered that an initial factor in their attendance was the good preaching and excellent worship of our mega-congregation. But over time the tedium of a longer drive would wear upon the attendees. They would then find a church nearer home. It might not offer preaching or worship as professionally. But the shorter drive would promote more family time, as well as allow more trips back and forth in their volunteer efforts.
My thesis, in part, was that though initially attracted by high-quality preaching and music, over time people found a church nearby that was “similar enough” in theology, worship, volunteer opportunities and quality.
What causes this barrier? Access. Here are first two of three principles to overcome it.
I would soon be asked to help coach churches that were suffering from this barrier. I discovered the solution usually involves three principles.
1. As people are moving out of the neighborhood and into areas further than a 15-minute drive away, there are new cultures springing up around most churches.
Sometimes called suburban flight, more recently it’s occurred in the reverse, with a gentrification of urban areas (i.e. young suburbanites moving back to the inner city).
Read More
Related Posts: -
Lessons from “The Jonesboro Decision”
What God did in the midst of great suffering was remarkable. God used this situation to knit together a church family, to teach them to wait upon Him, and to show them His goodness even in the midst of great loss and strain. As I talked with one of the “Jonesboro 7” he testified to how God vindicated His word that those who suffer for the sake of righteousness are indeed blessed. The men and their families learned of the sufficiency and kindness of God even in affliction.
Editorial Note: What follows will be controversial and disturbing. Reader discretion is advised. In preparing this series, official documents and public comments have been extensively used to compose the narrative. No attempt is made to assign motives to any of the parties in this case. Reference will be made to inferences drawn by the judges on the PCA’s Standing Judicial Commission as they carefully reviewed the case and noted the process was “abused” and offenses “imagined” by a Temporary Session of Elders against the Jonesboro 7. Any objection to the use of the term “abused” should be directed to the SJC Judges rather than the author of this series who simply reports the judgment of the PCA General Assembly regarding the actions of the Temporary Session in this case.
They wanted to see a gospel centered PCA congregation planted in their town, Jonesboro, Arkansas. It was harder than they thought it would be. In this instance, it was especially hard.
Tucked within the thousands of pages of the 2023 General Assembly Handbook is an innocuous sounding decision from the PCA Standing Judicial Commission (SJC), Harrell, et. al. v. Covenant Presbytery.
As I reviewed the SJC Decision, I was frightened, I was angry. I was concerned that what happened to the men whom I have come to call “The Jonesboro 7” could happen to anyone in the PCA.
The SJC even stated this about what the Temporary Session, comprised of Teaching and Ruling Elders from the Independent Presbyterian Church of Memphis, did:
the failure of the Indictments to include the specificity so obviously available is unjustifiable under BCO 32-5, and we find that the broad Indictments were abused to the prejudice of the Accused who were not adequately informed of the charges against them.1
You read correctly; the PCA General Assembly used the verb abused in reference to the actions of a Session.
The “Jonesboro 7” were subjected to treatment that the General Assembly declared was “unfair” and a violation of “the basic principles of due process as required by our Standards.”
2 Note well: it was not some ephemeral, complicated, or arcane procedure that was violated by the Session, but basic principles.3
In the next weeks, I will be publishing analysis of the case, but I want to begin with several lessons I have learned that I believe others will find beneficial. It is important to consider the lessons of the case first, lest the articles analyzing the actions, testimony, trials, and travails of the case be found too discouraging or disturbing. I am also aware I may not be able to hold all my reader’s attention to the end of the series; a man has to know his limitations.
The lessons, I believe, are what matters most now. I believe the whole of the PCA can learn at least seven things from the tribulations of the “Jonesboro 7.”
1. The Judges on the SJC are Men of Great Integrity
We all have SJC decisions with which we disagree. But even as we disagree at times with some of their decisions or with the way they reviewed (or didn’t!) a lower court’s actions, I believe we should nonetheless admire the commitment and faithfulness of the SJC judges.
The Harrell decision demonstrates the profound integrity of the 22 judges who reviewed this case and their dedication to uphold the PCA Constitution. They are clearly men who take their vows seriously and who are willing to feed Christ’s lambs. The judges on the SJC showed a clear devotion to the cause of Christ and the welfare of His people as they unambiguously repudiated the actions of the Session.
The judges on the SJC did not hesitate to point out a Session had “abused” or done what was “unfair” as shown by the record of the case. When a Session falsely charges seven of Christ’s sheep under its care for daring to disagree whether a man should be “offered to the congregation as a candidate to serve as its pastor,” the SJC will uphold justice and vindicate Christ’s lambs against their accusers.4
One SJC judge, RE Jim Eggert, went so far as to say of this Session: “Session had no lawful authority to insist that the Accused stop resisting the Session’s attempts to ‘recommend’ the minister to the congregation”5
It would have been very easy for the SJC to side with the Elders from wealthy, tall-steepled IPC Memphis and deny the appeal of seven “dirt kickers” from a small city in Arkansas. But instead, and like their King, they took up the cause of the poor and helpless simply because it was right. We should be encouraged the Judges on the SJC love to do justice.
We should be thankful to be in the PCA and we should praise God he has granted judges who serve in this way, judges for whom words and vows mean something, and judges who have pastoral hearts.
2. Process Takes a Long Time
The ordeal for the “Jonesboro 7” began in August of 2020 and did not end until March of 2023 when the SJC decision vindicating them was officially released. During that time they were suspended from the Lord’s Table and deprived of the right to vote or speak in any potential congregational meeting. Even though ordinarily an appeal has the effect of suspending a censure, their Session took the step of leaving the censure in place while the men appealed.
Many times the “Jonesboro 7” could have simply walked away from Christ Redeemer Church and the PCA because of the treatment they endured at the hands of the Session of Elders from Memphis. But these men were committed to the Church and committed to the PCA. So they stayed the course and pursued justice through the process.
It was a painful season.
But because of the pain these men were willing to endure, because these men loved the Church enough to persevere through that pain, perhaps others will learn from their experience and learn from the SJC decision and future Sessions will refrain from the actions similar to what the PCA General Assembly declared to be “unjustifiable.”
Read More
Related Posts: -
When I Believe the Prosperity Gospel
Written by T.M. Suffield |
Wednesday, October 13, 2021
If you follow Jesus you will have your sins forgiven. Your shame will be wiped away to be replaced by the Father’s smile on his beloved daughter, his beloved son. Your fears and afflictions from evil spiritual forces will be defeated by the victory of Jesus on the cross. But they are not the good news.I’m a charismatic, and plenty of others who would claim that label believe some fairly kooky things. It thus occasionally falls to us to carefully disassociate ourselves from what others might believe.
It’s pretty normal that we would occasionally denounce what is commonly called the ‘Prosperity Gospel’—essentially that if you follow the way of Jesus God will bless you financially. You will become rich, or sometimes healthy and rich.
This is a pernicious lie from the pit of hell, but I don’t have a lot of desire to spend time writing about why it is. Here’s the challenge I’d like to offer instead: I think most Christians I know believe something pretty similar.
I think that because I think I do.
Let’s back up a bit. We’re very careful to exclude financial blessing from the blessings that God will give you if you follow the way of Jesus. This is not to suggest that God could not bless us financially—as though Adam Smith’s invisible hand was a spiritual force not under Yahweh’s ultimate command—nor to say that if we receive wealth we shouldn’t thank God.
The problem comes when we imply that finances come as a reward for obedience.
Yet, there are plenty of passages in the Bible that suggest that God does bless the obedient. I think it’s a very reasonable thing to say. Normally we would want to qualify blessing to exclude health and wealth as a rule. Which I would happily agree with.
Here’s the rub. I believe that if I am obedient that God will bless me with comfort. I think it’s likely you do too. This is a lie. I believe that he will secure me gainful employment, a nice house, and a middle-classed lifestyle. God had given me much of the window dressing of middle-classed life, and some of it has come in ways that were frankly miraculous. I am deeply thankful, when I remember to be.
The problem is that if I think it’s a reward—even though I would deny I do if asked—and I experience pain, or even simple discomfort, I’m thrown for a loop. The problem is that I have, and I think we have, a doctrine of blessing that only works for middle-classed knowledge workers like me. The problem is that it’s a doctrine of blessing that would make no sense in South Sudan, or India, or North Korea. The problem is that it’s a false gospel.
Read More
