I recently ran across an article in the London Telegraph reporting on a survey debunking the popular myth of “Catholic guilt.” Combined with several other articles and interviews I’ve heard of late – many filled with opinions about what the Roman church should look for in its next Pope – this got me thinking about how far the concept of “ultimate authority” has fallen in the past decades. Continue reading
Author: pmulner
Sneakin’ Works Through the Back Door
Today a friend and I met to talk for a couple of hours. We talked some about church history, current local church dynamics, specific individual and family situations, as well as several Bible passages that came up over the course of our discussion. Regardless of the particular topic we were pursuing, a common thread emerged throughout: that people (us included) love to run away from grace and toward law whenever possible.
It takes a lot, nothing less than a work of the Spirit, to convince us that we cannot save ourselves and need, through grace, the righteousness of Christ. Unfortunately, the battle against works doesn’t stop there. Having been saved through grace, we still find ways to sneak works in the back door. We judge ourselves on the basis of our performance and, having so judged, give in to sorrow or pride accordingly.
Brothers, Please Just Preach the Gospel
I’ve been meaning for several weeks, since I first heard about “pulpit freedom Sunday,” to write something about it. I procrastinated, and now it’s the day before it happens and I need to spend the time on my own sermon rather than lamenting what other folks might do with theirs. Nonetheless, I want to give a few brief thoughts about why this is a monumentally bad idea. Continue reading
What can we learn from “cheering” for abortion?
Using his Twitter account and the Lifeway Research Blog, Ed Stetzer recently lamented the claps and cheers of affirmation that occurred at the Democratic National Convention whenever the subject of abortion was mentioned. In the blog post he makes a point I also heard recently in an interview conducted by WORLD News Group:
In 1992, President Clinton talked about making abortion “safe, legal, and rare.” Now the DNC cheers its mention– dozens of times– and never mentions the “rare.” Perhaps the cheering points shows us that the “rare” part was just a talking point from another era.
It is no secret that I am pro-life. However, there are obviously people who disagree with me. But, if you are going to be pro-choice, at least don’t cheer the idea– at least long to make abortion “rare.”
(Incidentally, the number of times Bill Clinton has been positively referenced by republicans in the past two weeks is a disturbing and ironic point for another day.) Continue reading
When You Come to a False Choice in the Road – Don’t Take It
Earlier this week Eric Metaxas, noted biographer and evangelical rock-star, posted an opinion piece in the Christian Post on the subject of how pastors ought to respond to the ongoing redefinition of marriage debate. Metaxas’ article was in direct response to the news that both John Piper and Leith Anderson have publicly declined to endorse the amendment.
It will become clear that I believe Metaxas’ position is in error, but a discussion of the marriage amendment is not my primary reason for entering the fray. My greatest concern with Metaxas’ article is not the position he takes on the marriage issue but the rhetorical techniques he employs to defend it. These unhelpful techniques are not unique to Metaxas but are commonly employed by many of us and we ought to be careful to avoid them. What follows is an attempt to facilitate careful consideration of what I consider to be linguistic slight-of-hand tricks.
Courage and Meekness
A rather obvious, but important, lesson to learn is that people are wired differently. These differing personalities result in different ways of handling similar situations. We see this a lot in the ministry: godly and wise men, when faced with similar circumstances, can come to a wide variety of conclusions about the right course of action.
Some men make decisions quickly while others spend more time coming to their conclusions. It can be sinful to be too hasty just as it can be sinful to delay a decision irresponsibly. Yet neither is right or wrong every time. Some men are wired for (godly) confrontation, while others have perfected the “honey, not vinegar” approach. Each has its place. I trust few would dispute this much.
Some thoughts on sovereignty
The stars seem to have aligned for me to do a great deal of thinking and reading about the sovereignty of God this week. I’m preparing for a Lead with Character trip and God’s sovereignty is a major teaching point for the level 1 trips. I’m also preparing the evening sermon for next Lord’s Day on the topic as we work our way through Arthur Pink’s book The Attributes of God.
I’ve certainly spent a fair share of time studying this subject in the past. My initial exposure to this doctrine was one of the major events that lead to my taking hold of a more mature faith in college. Hearing Dr. Terry Eves’ explanation and biblical defense of that doctrine, against the objections of a room of undergraduate skeptics, began the process through which I came to recognize the intellectual respectability of the Christian faith. The ability of Christianity to withstand legitimate intellectual inquiry was something I hadn’t known before.
Rick Santorum and My Daily News Feed
It’s never a surprise to open my RSS reader and find stories about the GOP presidential contenders. I do, after all, subscribe to the feeds of several news websites. I also subscribe to the blogs of some prominent evangelicals, so some of the articles I see are not from CNN or the Wall Street Journal, but Douglas Wilson, Al Mohler, or other evangelical leaders with large web followings.
I think religious leaders, especially those who have to stand in a pulpit on Sunday morning, ought to be very careful about publicly endorsing a candidate. I don’t think it’s wrong to do so, but I do think our priority ought to be to teach our people how to think about voting more than stumping for any one politician. At this point in the political season however, I think Wilson, Mohler, James Dobson, Tony Perkins, and many others have dropped the ball.
Let me be very clear – though I do not support Rick Santorum, I believe Christians and Christian leaders have the freedom of conscience to do so. I’m not trying to take these men to task for throwing their support behind the former Pennsylvania senator. I’m trying to take them to task because the arguments they use in his favor are often illogical or false and thus fail to assist in teaching us how to think about candidates and elections.
Jane Epps de Witt (10/18/27-2/3/12)
Yesterday I attended the funeral of a wonderful Christian woman, Jane de Witt. Drs. Sinclair Ferguson and Derek Thomas preached at the funeral and, while their primary focus was the gospel, each did praise various aspects of Jane’s life and faith. One thing that stuck out in my own mind was their observation that Jane chose to be joyful. Even when life was difficult Jane made the conscious choice to “Rejoice in the Lord, and be glad,” (Psalm 32:11). Dr. Thomas recalled that breakfast at the de Witt’s table always included “eggs and a psalm of praise.”
Jane, and the ministers in their observation, was right: being joyful is a choice. Our ability to choose joy is closely tied to our experience of Christian hope. In Psalm 71 the author cries out to the Lord for deliverance. “In your righteousness deliver me and rescue me; incline your ear to me, and save me!” (Verse 2), and “For my enemies speak concerning me; those who watch for my life consult together and say, “God has forsaken him; pursue and seize him, for there is none to deliver him” (Verses 10-11). These circumstances seem far from ideal. Yet the Psalmist concludes, “But I will hope continually and will praise you yet more and more. My mouth will tell of your righteous acts, of your deeds of salvation all the day, for their number is past my knowledge” (Verses 14-15).
The Scriptures do not call us to deny the difficulty of our circumstances or to pretend that we enjoy trial, hardship and suffering. But they do call us to a vibrant hope and trust that transcends circumstances and fixes its attention on the unchanging Christ. Jane de Witt chose joy. What will you choose?
Age Discrimination
I’ve spent most of my life being the youngest person in the group* – no matter what group it was. In spent the bulk of elementary school in classrooms other than my grade level. When we moved, and I entered a new public middle school in January of 8th grade, I was the only person in my grade who wasn’t already a teenager. Later, I would become the only eleventh-grader who wasn’t old enough to drive. I didn’t turn 18 until April of my first year of college. Since my friends were always my classmates, they were always older.
I graduated from college at 21 (I’d been 21 for about four weeks). I was the youngest member of our seminary class. Since so many men come to seminary several (or many) years after they graduated from college the age difference there was even more pronounced. I graduated from seminary at 24, was licensed in the Presbytery that year and was ordained into ministry one year later.
My whole life, particularly when I’ve done things other people haven’t liked, my age has become an issue. Whenever I spoke publicly with any degree of confidence I would hear comments about my age. If I ever suggested that someone else was in error they’d find a way out of it by taking a jab at my age. This works best in large groups of people. I’ve seen few ad hominem attacks are more successful than those based on age. It is certainly the most socially-acceptable type, especially if you can play it off as a joke. The target’s failure to be amused will only serve to further demonstrate their immaturity. (“Typical young person – takes himself so seriously!” See how self-fulfilling these attacks are?)
I can’t pinpoint the age when it stopped bothering me but at some point it did. I remember being really offended every time someone tried to use my age as a weapon against me. Then I remember not being offended any more. For years – at least five that I can recall – I’ve been able to ignore those kinds of comments rather well.
They aren’t always directed solely at me, either. I remember much of the early marital advice we got. Some of it was quite bad but no matter how graciously we objected we were reminded of our youth and marital inexperience. The same thing happened when we had children. The same thing still happens when we’re talking to some parents of older children. “Just wait – you’ll see.” It couldn’t possibly be that we’re right about our own marriage and children. We just haven’t grown up enough yet to see that we’re wrong.
As I said, I can’t pinpoint the age when it stopped bothering me. But I can pinpoint the age when it started to bother me again – 29. Perhaps it’s the closeness of 30. Perhaps I’ve regressed in maturity or other stresses have caused me to become more sensitive to criticism. Whatever the cause, I confess that I’ve become very weary of the accusation of youth. I’m not talking about the private admonishments which encourage me to act differently. I appreciate those even when I don’t agree with their assessment. I’m talking about the way a person can shift the attention from their own error to my (supposed) error simply by making a joke or knowing comment about my age. A small eye roll and a mildly sarcastic tone are sure to win the favor of a gathered crowd.
I find those attacks repulsive for two reasons. The first is that so many people immediately buy into them because it’s what they want to believe about young people. If anyone younger than they speaks with confidence they want them to be wrong. And they want them to be shown to be wrong because young people shouldn’t speak with that kind of certainty.
The second reason is more significant: it completely cuts off debate on the real issue. It doesn’t matter how illogical or demonstrably false the original claim was. If a young person objects to it and the response to the objection is joined with some kind of age-based attack – the debate is won. Anything you try to say in response, unless you recant of your original position, is shot down as being defensive and overly sensitive. In a courtroom you’d have no option but to rest your case prematurely; the jury has stopped listening.
Let me begin my conclusion by admitting that I battle daily with excessive pride. I make no claims of humility and certainly hope that, over time, God will refine my character. But every once in a while I suspect that it’s not the pride of youth, but the insecurity of one in the presence of youth, that’s the real issue.
* I was only the second-youngest in our college graduating class. Joshua was a few months younger than I.
What I Think 