A Centered Church

Those of us for whom English is our first language live in the days of shrinking vocabulary; it is the time of slick and ‘cool’ abbreviations (lol for instance) and the hijacking of beautiful words to other uses (‘gay’ and ‘wicked’ are examples).  

For those who dare to be profoundly challenged by a non Christian book written in 1994, scared even, then Professor Barry Sanders’ writing in “A is for Ox” will stir response, especially when you take note of the subtitle “The Collapse of Literacy and the Rise of Violence in an Electronic Age.”  Literacy is such a gift, to hear story is wonderful and to be able to read books of different kinds enhances that gift incredibly.  We should all be growing in stature as far as our reading skills are concerned and that includes increasing our vocabulary rather than seeing it diminish.  Parents should be setting an example and reading with their children to introduce them to the preciousness of books and their uses.   

[superquote]Our desire to increase in the knowledge of the Lord and the ‘story’ of His ways should never diminish; it should increase without ceasing.[/superquote]

I thank God that I can read and that I have been able to increase my vocabulary too, all through the years I have believed that God would lead me to the right books and to hear the right words, those that are timely, utterly ‘right’ for me and how frequently this longing has been answered by Him Who is ever faithful.  Our desire to increase in the knowledge of the Lord and the ‘story’ of His ways should never diminish; it should increase without ceasing.  The church has a responsibility to foster reading and hearing the Word and words that present what probably nowadays is best described as a true Christian worldview.  The Bible should be our reading priority.  It presents God’s worldview and therefore the only true worldview.  Yet, along the pilgrim way we take, God does send authors across our path, books that may be ‘profane’ ones, as the Puritans would call them!

We would swap the word ‘profane’ with ‘secular’ nowadays.  Profane means common and, as far as the Puritans were concerned, such authors, providing they wrote with some sense of a true worldview, could be read unto the help of the soul but could never match up to the Bible narrative itself.  Charles Haddon Spurgeon of the nineteenth century speaks of the gold nuggets of the Scriptures, the word of God and, in contrast, the gold leaf of some secular writers.  That captures the truth perfectly.  I can recall how, many years ago a book came into my hands and I could not understand what the author was saying.  I am referring to the book entitled Biblical Psychology by Oswald Chambers.  I shelved it, and probably would have never read Chambers again, but several years later I sensed a deep prompting to read him, and this time, it was as though I was ready, I devoured every word contained in his writings.  How I thank God for Oswald Chambers!  Of course, when we read, it is like a school, we do not attempt to begin at levels beyond us, there is graduation in reading and there most certainly is with vocabulary too.

[supertagline]“True Christians are logocentrist.”[/supertagline]

Something I read in Madeleine L’Engle a few years back confirmed my own experience of learning new words.  When I come across a new word I do not reach for the dictionary but read it again and again in the sentence it is found and then in the paragraph.  I toss it around to see if I am helped towards its meaning by context, only when I have decided “it probably means thus and thus” do I reach for a dictionary or usually, nowadays, do a word search on my Kindle or laptop.  For instance, I came across the word quotidian recently, I had never heard of it, and only after some pondering decided it must have something to do with the regular and ordinary things we might face day by day.  Sure enough when I looked on my computer I had hit an approximation of the right meaning only missing the thought that it includes the idea of the mundane.  Recently I was challenged by another word contained in the phrase “True Christians are logocentrist.”  By the way, my computer does not like this word and underlines it in red!  But, for me it was a bit easier to work out the meaning because I knew that logo must be linked with the Greek word logos and centrist has to do with what is central.  I found myself agreeing with that short sentence, “True Christians are logocentrist.”

I know that some might disagree with me and say that true Christians are Christocentric but I would agree with that too.  Christ Jesus Who is called the LOGOS in John’s gospel chapter one is also “Christ in all the scriptures” (Luke 24:27); therefore we cannot be Christocentric and not be logocentric.  How can we possibly say that we love God and His Son Who is our heavenly husband and display a distinct disinterest and boredom with the Bible ‘love letter’ He has left us?  A letter, very long, it is true and containing sixty-six sections, yet the Bible has been sent to comfort us till our Husband comes!  As we reflect on church history and even recent developments in church life could we confidently affirm that our churches are ‘logocentric’ I wonder?   Up until about fifty years ago the historical Christian church has been divided into three great traditions.  These are the Roman Catholic, the Eastern Orthodox (such as is found in Greece and Russia and other parts of the world) and Protestantism.  Each of these three communions centered in different realities.  The Roman Catholic centered itself in the institutional order of their church.  Stretching down from the pope, cardinals and priests to the ‘laity.’  Eastern Orthodoxy focused elsewhere, namely in what we could call mystical fellowship with God, theosis, as it is usually known.

[gn_pullquote]The institutional did not figure so much as the individual experience of achieving oneness with God.  Around about five hundred years ago what has been known as Protestantism emerged and it took for its center the word of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.[/gn_pullquote]

The institutional did not figure so much as the individual experience of achieving oneness with God.  Around about five hundred years ago what has been known as Protestantism emerged and it took for its center the word of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.  The open Bible on the lectern and the reverence for the holy business of expounding its contents to the people testify to this and those who came to know God in Christ in this communion gradually became known as “Evangelicals,” those who love and believe in the evangel, the gospel concerning Jesus Christ, and the gospel preached and taught in the midst.  We could describe the Protestant Evangelical wing of the church as ‘logocentrist’ then.

However, this last fifty years or so has witnessed a change, the emergence of what is usually known as the charismatic tradition.  In its beginnings that word ‘charismatic’ was not used at all.  It had its birth in breathings of God’s Holy Spirit that brought renewal to many Christians from those other traditions, especially the Roman Catholic and the Protestant.  It was fresh and refreshing but, like all movements of God has become somewhat formalized by men and women and is now very much another tradition.  In its beginnings it was frequently thoroughly logocentrist and evangelical but as it progressed there has been a blurring of that aspect.  Personal experiences and ‘spirituality’ came to be the criteria of what was valid and true and what was not and the Word centeredness was gradually shoved to an off-center position.   Obviously that leads to the serious question, “how do you now define an Evangelical Christian?”  Movements morph, subtly adapting themselves and now we have another emerging movement in the Christian church, in fact some of its adherents actually use the word ‘emergent’ and, although a very loose term describing all sorts of attempts to make the church contemporary and attractive to the outsider, it also describes what is mainly a North American phenomenon having little relevance in many parts of the world, yet it is getting plenty of press.  In both Great Britain and USA the word ‘evangelical’ has been adjusted in the thinking of many leaders who espouse the idea that they are the emergent church.

[gn_pullquote]perhaps the most disturbing is the woolly mindedness and dilution of the place of the Word of God and the Lordship of Christ.[/gn_pullquote]

A number of things are discernable, but perhaps the most disturbing is the woolly mindedness and dilution of the place of the Word of God and the Lordship of Christ.  Just today I heard a radio program from a prominent London radio station.  It was one of those ‘forum’ programs, a debate between those who are regarded as Christian leaders.  A prominent British Evangelical (and a man full of good works and reputation) was being asked concerning his change of position on a matter that strikes at the heart of the Image of God in man and woman.

What was sad, but often predictable were his first word and those of the sentence he spoke.  His first word was “I’m,” and that was followed by “am a pastor.”  Very different from Peter on the day of Pentecost, who, when asked what was going on that day, began with “God” (Acts 2:17).  Peter was indeed “I’m” but he did not begin with his experience but with God and what God had said.  Interesting too that he was an apostle, a messenger sent from a higher power.  Sent to proclaim, preach and deliver urgent news.  All those ideas are connected with the word translated “preach’ in the New Testament.  Yes, Peter was also a pastor, but first of all he was a proclaimer of Good news from God above concerning Christ Jesus.  He was not commissioned to dilute his message to the prevailing culture as is so often being done today within certain segments of the churches including the ‘emergent’.

The Bible begins with God and with “God said” and never with “I’m.”  The Bible story begins this way because without God and the Word there would be nothing.  All begins with God!  It is all so obvious and yet how every one of us can run the risk of missing the obvious!  There are reasons for this subtle slide away from the statement “True Christians are logocentrist.”  As we know, one of the greatest dangers to the church is the pressure of the cultural milieu in which it is seeking to bear its testimony and in our day one of the massive shifts taking place has been from the primacy of the spoken word and reading skills into the prominence of images.  Quick fire flashing images are the means of communication.  Screens and movies, laptops and Pc’s, screens are everywhere!  Pictures in tabloids and magazines mesmerizing the attention till people are drunk with the images.  By the way, we ought to note how very difficult it would be to understand what a picture in a newspaper was portraying without a word caption!  But, the picture grabs the attention first for sure!   In this regard take note of the serious irony seen in an event in the book of Exodus.  God revealed Himself through writing words on tablets of stone.  He summoned Moses up into His earthly mountain headquarters where there was fire, earthquake and thundering (Exodus 24:12).  He commanded Moses, He did not invite, He did not plead, He did not ask or suggest.  All was filled with Lordship of God.  Moses was not invited to give his opinion but to receive what God wrote.  “Come up unto Me in the mount and be there and I will give you tablets of stone, and a law, and commandments which I HAVE WRITTEN, that you may teach THEM.”  God is the original speaker of words and the writer of them too, without Him speaking nothing was made that was made (Genesis 1:3,6 for instance).  And without Him being the writer Israel would not have had a story as His people.  See how God’s proclamation begins!  “I am the LORD thy God” (Exodus 20:2).  “You shall have no other gods before Me.  You shall not make for yourselves any carved image or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth” (Exodus 20:3-4). God was about the business of forming His new community and that work began with His word, His speaking, His law, not the opinions, even those of Moses His messenger.  No wonder the church of today is a weakened community if it does not understand this fundamental, if there are not those in its leadership who are enflamed with “God has said” rather than adapting things more in the likeness of the serpent whose word was ‘yes, has God said?”

God was regulating the life of His community; they had been saved out of the bondage of their former existence (Egypt) so that they might be His image among the nations!  Foundational to that was they were not to make God after their own image!  While Moses was meeting God on the Mount, the people became impatient and told Aaron to mould an idol, an image that they could worship, a representation of Yahweh.  It should be a serious lesson to us that Aaron, in complying with their wishes told them to “break off the golden earrings which are in the ears of your wives and your sons and your daughters (Exodus 32:2) and yours too (Exodus 32:3), and all the people did as they were bid and unstable Aaron removed that which emphasized and adorned the place of the ear and refashioned it into something that could satisfy the fascination of the eye!  Remember what happened in the garden (Genesis 3:6), “and when the woman saw.”  She ate of the fruit when the eye replaced what Adam had heard from God with his ear.  There is indeed a strange irony in this.  Ears do not see, but we live in days when that which satisfies the eye-gate and glittering images are replacing that which comes by the hearing of the ear.

[gn_pullquote]John says that first he ‘heard heard behind me a great voice” and only on turning did he see a most incredible vision of the Person of Christ.[/gn_pullquote]

I note that even in the Book of Revelation, a book filled with visions that graphically come to the eye (and provoke the imagination of all who read them), everything begins with the word heard and that has to be written down.  John bore record of the word of God and of all things that he saw (Revelation 1:2).  That chapter begins with the words “Blessed is he that reads and those that hear”(Revelation 1:3).  John says that first he ‘heard heard behind me a great voice” and only on turning did he see a most incredible vision of the Person of Christ.  Unless John had written down what he heard and saw and these things were read in the churches, there would have been no seeing.  Note the order, the place of writing, reading and then seeing!  Perhaps you have seen the disturbingly amusing pictures of the average family of today sitting together in a restaurant each engrossed in their individual cell phones or multimedia gadget and unable to enter into face to face communion with those present at that moment.  The world’s fascination with images and the screen is epidemic and contributes to the erosion of language, reading and vocabulary in our electronic age and the church is becoming swept along in the tide.  It is as though some of the churches are no long true in the sense of being ‘logocrentist.’  Instead they could be called ‘imagocentrist’ or ‘musicocentrist’ if we could be allowed to invent those words.

But, I want to wind up this musing by focusing on something else that seems to run along in companionable fellowship with this shift away from truly being logocentrist.  Perhaps you have read this far and want to say to me, but there are plenty of books available, more Christian books than ever, more secular books too.  There is no shortage of words, politicians, newspapers, magazines and online availability.  I answer, how many really listen to the often-ceaseless babble and who reads a whole book?   Not many I would suggest.  Also, have you noticed that somehow many prefer things to be more discursive, conversational, friendly and tolerant?  “Don’t preach to me,” could define it, at least a little.  “Discuss with me, blog with me, let us have something interactive please” helps sum it up.  “Give us a life with no absolutes please.”  “We are mature enough in the 21st century to make up our own minds!”  What a lie that one is!  

Now, this friendly attitude is creeping into the churches too.  I mention the ‘emergent’ churches and frequently they have jettisoned the pew or the seats in rows and opted for a more ‘laid back’ approach.  Lounge seating (maybe even leather!) so that everyone can feel comfy and space for the coffee mug too.  Well, that is fine, nothing wrong with that at all, provided it is held in balance.  Again, for an understanding of these things we must examine the Bible, that book in which God has revealed Himself and His ways consistently.  If we are not mastered by God and His word the world will master us.  We must hold to those things shown in the Scriptures and there we find three main words describing the way THE WORD came in the early church and its ministry and we find that even in the way God worked among His people in the Old Testament was identical.  I have already used the word “preach” and how it has bad press nowadays.  In the New Testament it is linked with the idea of proclamation of urgent news.  Paul brought the kerygma. He preached the good news; his ministry was kerygmatic and had the note of the authoritative word from a higher power.  This was usually the way he began.  It was thrilling news, filled with God and what He has done.  John Baptist came preaching like that (Mark 1:7).  Discussion was not preeminent, John was a herald of God and the same word is used of the early ministry of Jesus when He came after John was arrested proclaiming (kerusso) the good news of God (Mark 1:14).  Kerusso is the act of proclaiming the kerygma of God.  It is not suggestion but announcement and commandment from the He who is Lord of all.  However, this is not the whole story for if we look further we will come across another word describing the ministry of Jesus and his messengers, it is the word ‘teach.’  “And He opened His mouth and taught (didasko) them (Matthew 5:2).  There is a shift here, it is not so much emphasizing proclamation as describing consistent instruction.  Perhaps it implies something calmer, less insistent, more reasoned and appealing to the mental powers of the hearers whereas the preaching whilst not being unreasonable also addresses them in order to obtain the full obedience of their will and allegiance of their affections.  We look through the book of Acts and we find things usually beginning with the proclamation and then with the instruction and consistent teaching, but, added to this and following closely in train is the word often translated ‘encouragement’ or ‘exhortation’ or ‘consolation.’

Maybe an Old Testament prophet, Isaiah summed this word up when God spoke to him that he was to speak “comfortably and tenderly to Jerusalem” (Isaiah 40:2).  Whereas the word ‘kerygma’ carries the freight of declaring the word of a higher authority, as though the messenger is standing in a place of authority elevated above the hearers (not in himself but because of the One from Whom he is sent), and the word ‘didaskos’ can suggest sitting and instructing followers of the word who are themselves attentively seated, our third word is derived from the beautiful Name Jesus gave to the Holy Spirit, the Parakletos, the Paraclete, the One called alongside to help!  This ministry of encouragement can best be pictured as the person ministering the word walking alongside with arm around the one to whom he or she is speaking.  It contains the idea of discernment, application of great truths to the specifics of that person’s life, to help that soul by directing it into walking on with God.

Now, I first came across these thoughts more than twenty years ago and found them used by the apostle Paul, when describing his ministry in Ephesus (Acts 20:1,20,25).   Surely the church should not neglect engaging in all three forms of ministry duly recognizing and obeying the priorities involved?  Preaching must not be neglected, the unequivocal proclamation from God that brooks of no discussion.  Then the necessity of systematic instruction to those who are heeding the proclamation and the ministry of comfort alongside these two.  What of these do I neglect, what of these is absent in my church or are all three present with their fine complement and wondrous riches?  What takes priority in your assembly; is it all cozy and good time pals gathering together to put their ‘two pennyworth’ into the discussion so that all feel happy and depart unchanged?

One final thought, I suggest that we might find the equivalent of these three aspects of ministry back there in the first books of the Bible where Moses was so much involved.  We can trace God preaching, God proclaiming first, from the Mountain He spoke and there was no discussion with messenger or the people (Exodus).  They were not invited to offer their opinions but to accept with the totality of their beings that which He commanded them.  Then we note the teaching, the instruction mode coming more to the fore in Leviticus and Numbers and finally, there is a great tenderness and comfort in the ministry of Moses as He writes things a second time, which is what Deuteronomy means, the second giving of the law.

Amen, how abundantly God wishes to bless His people, what riches He has for the world if they, hearing His message and seeing His life lived out in His people, will believe and follow Him.