The glory of Thanksgiving

Thanksgiving is an amazing holiday. It is distinctively American, and Puritan. It is an annual reminder of the glories of Christ, His church, His gospel, and His work in the world. It is also a testimony of God's grace demonstrated on this continent, which was lit by such a great beacon, as the Pilgrims established the church here as a "city on a hill, that cannot be hidden."

It is astounding that no one has ever managed to really commercialize Thanksgiving. Even more amazing is the fact that the ACLU has not yet--at least according to my knowledge--sought to outlaw Thanksgiving (because of its Christian roots, etc.).

Thanksgiving remains a very special day. On it, even pagans and unbelievers are made to stand speechless, recognizing that even they ought to be thankful to someone for something.

For we who have been especially blessed in Jesus, let us be ever-thankful; and may we always seek the welfare of those who are yet outside the pale of grace--even as our Pilgrim fathers did with the native tribes that were around them.

Good time to look to church

With the recent results of the elections last week in the United States, it is a good opportunity for believers everywhere to reassess our priorities, values, and direction.

No doubt many American Christians have erred, by placing too much of their spiritual welfare directly on the makeup and condition of the civil government. God would have our primary focus *not* be there, but rather on Christ's church.

Let us return to the Bible's instruction, and start the transformation of culture, not from Washington DC, nor from any state capital, but rather from the heartbeat of the local church (as she is connected to all other faithful churches, and as she is benefitted by centuries of gracious supply of God's Spirit).

As we become self-conscious churchmen, we will then be able to be effective in the state, the family, and in every other imaginable sphere of life as well.

Christians that go to hell

There, I was pretty sure that title would capture your attention.

What is a "Christian"? A Christian is a baptized member of the local, visible, outward church of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Some Christians are faithful. These are those who are regenerated (or born again), and who demonstrate the sincerity of their faith by consistent perseverance in Christ--manifest first and foremost in their churchmanship.

Apostate Christians abandon the faith, denouncing their baptisms.

Unfaithful Christians are loose. They do not verbally renounce Jesus, but they are faithless, manifesting this (primarily) in their disdain for Christ's church.

Some Christians are confused. They would perhaps like to be faithful, but they have been taught that they don't need to do anything (especially regarding church), in order to be so.

Evangelicals have complicated the matter over the past 50 years, or so, by using terminology such as this: "Joe became a Christian today, since he accepted (or received) Christ." The problem with this language is that no one has a clue about the validity of Joe's decision, until or unless Joe joins himself to a church (hopefully, a good one).

There is a difference between a regenerate person, and a Christian. All regenerate souls are Christians, (with very rare and odd exceptions--as, for instance, when a person dies before they can be baptized in the church). But not all Christians are regenerated--as all of us know numerous examples of unfaithful (former) professors of faith (in Christ).

Therefore, some Christians go to heaven; and some Christians go to hell.

Leaving church . . .

Awhile ago I read where Barack Obama had "resigned" from the UCC congregation in Chicago, where the notoriously racist minister had been.

Candidly, I know nothing about the details, and subsequent ecclesiastical situation of the Obamas. I want to believe the best, and assume that they were transferred to another (much better) church fellowship.

But that whole dynamic reminded me that there are only three ways to legitimately leave a church: 1) through a transfer; 2) through death; or 3) through excommunication.

Our body once had a member who did a dirty deed (which he had already been caught doing previously). Upon discovery, he then communicated with us that he was no longer a member (of our communion). He tried to "resign," as it were. Such an approach is inadmissible.

And the same thing would apply for Mr. Obama. Just because he (understandably) wanted to distance himself from Rev. Wright, this does not mean that he should fail to go through proper ecclesiastical channels and procedures.

Bottom line: let God's true people always seek to be, by grace, good and faithful churchmen--for the glory of Christ.

Sunday + Church + Worship = Culture (6th article)

It has been said that automobile dealers in Illinois would be very upset, if the law prohibiting car sales on Sunday was ever revoked. Here is an interesting example of where Puritan culture still affects everyday life.

As more and more Christians become faithful churchmen, we will see this kind of culture-changing phenomenon occur more frequently.

All people need a Savior, a day of rest, a covenant community, and the pure worship of God. This is why our evangelism must be designed around the needs of the whole person.

As we set the example, and enjoy the blessings and pleasures of grace, we will shine before the world.

Sunday + Church + Worship = Culture (5th article)

You might be wondering, “How am I a ‘Culture-Former’ simply by being a faithful churchman?” Good question.

First of all, God has covenantally given the whole world—not to unbelievers—but to the children of the church, the children of grace, the children of God. (See Ps. 37:9, 11, & 22 for just one set of many Biblical proofs of this.) Those who are justified by grace through faith in Christ; and who are bound together in the body of Christ are given jurisdiction and dominion of the earth.

Therefore, those with ownership rights are also endued with governing responsibilities. Now, you might be asking, “If all this is true, then why is Sunday, church, and worship so key and important?” The answer to this question is along these lines: “Culture-formers” have got to hear from and be spirited by the Ultimate Culture Governor, God Himself. And HE has designed it so that those who would be His “vice-regents” must be instructed and encouraged by Him, from and in His church, on the Lord’s Day.

Sunday + Church + Worship = Culture (4th article)

In the New Covenant every Sunday (or “Lord’s Day”) is a holy day. Therefore, the Puritan church celebrates 52 “holidays” a year, (and sometimes even 53 [as in 2007], depending on how the calendar lays-out).

The New Covenant believers live from Lord’s Day to Lord’s Day. Every day of the week is *not* the same. Sundays are special—because on them the church celebrates both the historical bodily resurrection of Christ, and its own corporate spiritual resurrection in Christ.

Church becomes the center of the believers’ lives, and Sabbath (Sunday) worship is the crowing glory of the church’s service to God.

From this “mountain-top” experience, then, we re-enter our normal weekday (“valley”) worlds, better equipped and prepared to serve, order, and govern the realms into which God places us.

Sunday + Church + Worship = Culture (3rd article)

What we do in the church service on Sunday is *the* most important thing we do all week. The church’s Sabbath worship of God is the closest thing to heaven that we can experience on earth. Our Christian lives flow down from, and out of our congregational service on The Lord’s Days.

Fixing our own house first

The church is to regulate, teach, and dictate culture. But this can only be done effectively after we have been sure we've done everything we can to clean-up our own "church" houses, first. The process goes this way: let us look to our own individual (local) churches, then to our presbyteries, and then to our denominations.

After we've done what we can there, we go to the broader church. You might be wondering, "How do we do this 'clean-up,' especially since there are a lot of messes about, and some of them are centuries old?" Good question. First of all, where we actually have power and jurisdiction, we must use it. (This is the case in our own church denominations, for instance.) Then, where we do not have direct power and jurisdiction, we employ words of instruction and admonition (with as much understanding and grace as possible--especially in the initial stages).

The church needs to be governed by the Puritans among us. They are the ones with the courage and the doctrinal goods to go after some of the most public, scandalous, (and pernicious) errors first, like the ordination of homosexuals, etc. Again, since most of us are not operating under those (more liberal) denominational structures, we must do our work "from afar" (as it were), with words. (Where we can personally interact, that is good, too.)

The entire church does not need to be *completely* straightened-up before we begin addressing the non-churched world, (or else, we would never get started at all)--but a sincere effort must first be put forward.

Sunday + Church + Worship = Culture (2nd article)

Everything good flows down from above, from God, as per Jas. 1:17. God works through His truly called and ordained pastors and elders, who then bring the gospel to Christ’s church. The parishioners then begin to conceive of themselves as the Lord’s gospel “foot soldiers,” His agents on earth. The believing church is God’s salt and light in the world.

Culture begins to be changed, and is transformed automatically, simply from the doing of the right thing. But the place where “the right thing” must begin is the worship service in church, on Sunday. Once the believers learn to think “covenantally,” or in a church-centered way, everything else begins to take on new (redemptive) shape as well.

The great error of our day, (and it has actually been around since the Fall itself), is to imagine that somehow God has altered His course, and that He will operate aside from His biblical system (of Sunday, church, and worship). But the truth of the matter is that the Lord has never abandoned this grand program. Through it He will win the world—but not in any other way.

Sunday + Church + Worship = Culture (1st article)

When Christ and His church (which can never be separated) are at the center of the equation, then we are in a position to make a real difference in the world. Note that “Sunday” and “Worship” surround “Church.” The reason for this is that unless we have God’s New Covenant Sabbath Day (the day of Jesus’ resurrection) set aside as holy, our Christianity has no savoriness, nor credibility.

The world inevitably follows the church. When the church does not stay faithful in three areas: preaching, the proper administration of the sacraments, and discipline—then the rest of the world falls apart also (following the church’s bad example).

In a world of turmoil (much like we are in today), all people flee to some refuge. Many religious people (even professing Christians) are seeking to find their help first and foremost in one of two places: government (the state), or the family (the home). But neither of these two (good and God-given) institutions were ever designed by the Lord to be the first point of cultural contact and transformation. Only Christ in His church holds this sacred privilege.

Canceling Sunday services?

Just today, I read in our local paper of an area church, (that word may well need to be in quotes [""]), which has chosen to cancel its Sunday services in the month of June, to spend the time instead doing nice deeds for people in the community. And, of course, as one would expect, this is being met with applause from the world.

But why should it not be laden with the approbation of the unbelieving world? After all, non-believers apply no value to Sunday church worship, and they probably view it mostly as a waste of time. "Why not spend your religious time doing something actually useful?", would be the musing of the non-Christian culture.

But here is the problem. When the faithful church honors her Lord by gathering on Sunday, in order to properly worship God--THIS very act is the *highest* service it (the church) can do for the world. Now, does the world realize, or appreciate this fact? No. But it is true, nonetheless.

That aforementioned gathering of religious people, (the name of whose organization I am not going to mention here) needs to learn a very basic, yet profound lesson: God demands (and deserves) the Sabbath worship of His church. If people want to do nice things for others, that is a good thing, (or, at least it can be a good thing, if done for the right reasons)--but it can never please God, when it robs Him of His rightful due.

Culturally-Relevant Worship

We hear this term these days: "Culturally-Relevant Worship." What does it mean? My experience with it goes along these lines: worship is to be in a mode and form that is roughly consistent with the norm of the society (in which that particular church is found).

But if that is the case, then there are some serious problems with "culturally-relevant worship." Consider these conundrums: 1) which "culture" (within the broader one), is to get the ascendancy? (In other words, will your worship cater to white people, black people, or Spanish-speaking people, [to use just one set of examples]?) 2) Just how far does one dare go, with "culturally-relevant worship"? (Surely, the very worst, and most offensive dimensions of the world's practices should be omitted.)

Here is the problem, in a nutshell: The church is NOT to seek to be "culturally-relevant." That is a thoroughly misguided goal. Instead, the church is to be the setter and establisher of culture. The way this is done, is through simplicity, and good sense--all based on the principles of the Holy Scriptures.

Is English the predominant language (of a given society)? Then, use it. But beyond that, be careful about everything else. In church, on Sunday, only *certain* elements are to be employed, including preaching, prayers, sacraments, vows, etc. But nothing else is to be done.

There are other times, and other places for those (other) things to be tried out. (Some of them may even be done in the church building.) But Sunday is special. It is not to prostituted to the whims and desires of anybody (or any culture).

Is it sinful to go to church too much?

This may seem like a strange question (above), given that this is an Ecclesiocentristic blogsite.

The answer to the question posed in the heading is, "It depends."

It is never sinful to go to a properly-constituted church service on Sunday, since this is the Lord's Day, the New Covenant Sabbath.

But it could very well be sinful to go to church during the week. First of all, God never commanded that there be church services during the week; and secondly, going to them could definitely be sinful.

"How?", you might be asking. One way is that by going to non-Sabbath church services, a person could well be skirting his clearly and truly God-ordained duties--as a husband, a father, an employee, a neighbor, or a citizen. Sometimes people seek to assuage their guilt by "out-Godding" God, through doing things that are patently religious (but never commanded by the Lord).

If people would simply do what God *does* command, like go to His worship, in church, on Sunday, they would be a whole lot better off.

God is never impressed by "hyper-religion." He prefers simple and sincere faithfulness over all forms of fanaticism.

Bring on the Sunday Christians!

Do any of you remember the stereotypical portrayal of the "Sunday Christian"? He was a bad guy, since his religion (allegedly) only went as far as Sunday. But the truth is: unless our Christianity indeed *does* get re-started every Sunday, we are no Christians at all.

The criticism was designed to imply that the best believers were more concerned about everything else in their lives--and less worried about the gracious privileges and duties inherent in the New Covenant Sabbath (Sunday).

Of course, the truth is precisely in the middle of this confusion. Sunday church worship is absolutely essential to authentic Christianity--but one's covenant life does not end there. When we properly worship God, as the church, on the Lord's Day, we are then in a position to be faithful throughout the week.

But there is no such thing as a "good" Christian who seeks to avert church, worship, and Sabbath observance.

Therefore, bring on the "Sunday Christians"!

Of Pinkos, Patriarchalists, and Puritans

It seems to me that American religious life (of a Christian flavor) can be delineated into three basic groupings, which I am referring to as "Pinkos, Patriarchalists, and Puritans." (I like the alliteration.)

Pinkos are on the far left. They believe that the state is the savior. These are typically theological and church liberals. All of their answers are to be found in government, law-making, and social engineering.

Patriarchalists are on the far right. These people are generally extremely conservative. Their salvation is to be found in the family, with the father serving as the "god-figure." All the solutions to life are to be garnered from home life.

Puritans are in the middle. Their first line of priority is the church (and neither the state, nor the family). Puritans seek to affect, change, and revolutionize *all* of life--including the home and the government; but they seek to do this first and foremost through the church.

To be fair, Pinkos and Patriarchalists also pay some heed to the church, (and to the home [in the case of Pinkos]; and to the state [in the case of Patriarchalists])--but this is subservient to their first allegiances.

Let us see the genius of the Puritan model. In so doing, we will actually benefit both the state, and the family--as we serve them through the church.

The Church As Culture

Today, so many Christians are falling over each other, seeking to be relevant to their culture. In many well-meaning and well-intentioned ways, they are striving to affect culture, interact with it, and even change it. There is a sincere desire to in someway offer an alternative to secular “culture,” by coming up with different variations on a theme—viz. by creating “Christian” movies, books, etc.

But a much better thesis (derived from the passion of this blogsite) is that the church is to *be* culture—in relationship to which all other facets of life—be it family, government, industry, art, music, etc.—ultimately derive whatever meaning, purpose, and usefulness they rightly possess (from and by God).

The church as culture begins on Sunday, during the Sabbath worship of God, under the authority of the Word of God (the Scriptures), and the eldership established in the church by God (from within the Scriptures). Without this starting point, there is no hope for true, noble, or purposeful culture at any level whatsoever.

Once this is concept of the church as culture is established, however, there is room for a whole world of other culture, which, in the final analysis derives its meaningfulness from God, Christ’s church, the Gospel, and the Bible itself.

Why Not “Christocentricity”?

Someone might inquire: “Why not talk about ‘Christocentricity,’ (Christ-centeredness), rather than ‘Ecclesiocentricity’?”

This is a good question. Of course, we are aiming here, on this blogsite, to fully promote the glory, cause, and Kingship of Jesus. All of life is to be “Christocentric.”

But the problem with this term (“Christocentricity”), when the rubber meets the road (in the Christian life), is that it loses its meaning, and pungency. The reason for this, is that everyone who would even remotely consider himself “Christian,” in terms of his religious passion and involvement, would also employ it. Virtually every Christian church and para-church ministry would immediately claim to be “Christocentric.” This would be true of everyone, from snake-handlers, to the highest forms of Roman Catholicism.

The issue, really, is that of *authority*. Where will Christ seat His rule, *primarily*, with regard to the issues of faith and life, here on earth? That query, is truly the crux of the matter.

The Reformed faith has always, traditionally, followed the old path here—even that traversed by the Roman Catholics—in seating the authority of Jesus, on earth, first and foremost, in the church. (And it has used the Bible to come to this conclusion.)

Historically, the alternate locus of Christ’s rule has (sometimes) been the state, as exemplified by the king, for instance, of England, (as King Henry VIII, for example, made himself the head of the church there).

In recent memory, some have sought to place the reign of Christ on earth, in the home, or family—with the father being, in actual fact, the final arbiter of the Messiah’s dealings in this life.

One might ask: “Well, isn’t the solution to the authority question to be answered by, ‘It’s to be finally found in the Bible’?” Our response to this question, is undeniably, “Yes,” (but with a caveat). The Bible itself *delegates* authority. Its own specific mandates spell out that the home, the state, and the church are all to have authority. But among these three, the *greatest* is the church. This is the primary argument and emphasis of this entire blogsite. (The reasons for this may be found throughout, especially in some of the earlier postings.)

It is interesting to consider that the alternatives to church-centeredness, (which are, when its all said and done, either the state, or the home), often appeal to the Scripture for the justification of the primacy of the king, or the father. And though no responsible Christian would deny that Jesus is concerned about the earthly king (and his domain), and the family’s father (and his realm)—one would be much misled to believe that these two spheres are the *principal* seat of Jesus’ reign on earth. Clearly, and without any doubt, the Scripture itself teaches the primacy of the church, even over the state and the home.

But this supremacy is never to be abused, or to be used to disrupt either the state or the family. Instead, it is to instruct, serve, and bless them, in the ways they should go.

Good "One World Government"

How often have you heard, over the years, fearful and foreboding tales of the emerging monster of "one world government"?

Well, here is a good twist on a notoriously bad theme. God is all for a form of "one world government." That government is that of His holy and blessed Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, who does and will rule the earth, in and through His church. Isaiah 9:6 & 7 speaks of this reign.

There, we read these words: "For unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given; and the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. Of the increase of His government and peace there will be no end, upon the throne of David and over His kingdom, to order it and establish it with judgment and justice from that time forward, even forever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this."

Jesus is establishing His "one world government" in and through His church. He alone is the King. He does not rule through a pope, or a prelate. Instead, He Himself governs, in and through His church officers.

Ecclesiocentricity: Accomplished and Applied

Do any of you remember the great book, written by John Murray, entitled, "Redemption: Accomplished and Applied"? I am piggy-backing on that phraseology here.

Last week, a very excellent young Christian churchman asked me for our daughter's hand in marriage. I was glad to accede to his request.

But my first question to him was not, "How will you school your children (if God gives them to you)?"; or, "How many children do you plan to have?"; or, "Will our daughter be working inside or outside of the house?"

I am not saying that those issues do not have some relevance, and that they should not be broached. But they are far from primary. My first question (as many of you have anticipated, I am sure), was, "How will you lead our daughter, with regard to your church life and commitment?" And, of couse, that is *the* key question.

It wouldn't matter how many children they might, or might not have; nor how they school them; nor how they support themselves--if this issue of church was not settled satisfactorily.

Our future son-in-law, being the brilliant churchman that he is, was more than impressive in his fine responses to all my queries, (especially the one about church!).

Saving church wives from bad husbands

This post may seem odd, at first glance. And, thankfully, this circumstance does not come up everyday, (literally). But, it is likely that this scenario will present itself more and more, as time passes. And the reason for this is the insurgence of the radical patriarch: the husband and father who claims the final say in all things, ecclesiastical, or familial.

In the case of an abusive husband, (who is or is not a church member), whose wife is a church member, the session (elder board) of the church must take jurisdiction over the case, and intervene, as a greater authority (than those that exist within the family). It is that session's duty to protect this woman, for her good, and Christ's glory.

Some, who would assert the inviolability of the home (or family), might object, claiming that the elders have no right, or jurisdiction here. But this is incorrect: they do indeed have authority in this realm.

It may be necessary, in some cases, to counsel the church wife to remove herself from the man. In more extreme cases, it may be necessary to advise her to divorce him.

It is hoped that none of these situations would ever present themselves; and God is able to save His church from the uttermost--but this is the kind of situation that delineates the differences between godly ecclesiocentricity, and the ungodly form of patriarchalism.