THE SEARCH for a CHURCH

+

++ 

For reasons I may explain some day I have moved to a small farming community north of Northampton and I am now looking for a local church wherein I can worship God and serve His people. I have just begun, but the prospects are poor. Locally there are two congregations. One is Roman Catholic, the other is UCC (United Church of Christ), and I am neither Catholic nor liberal. Last Sunday morning I attended a NACCC (National Association of Congregational Churches: somewhat more conservative than the UCC) church in Florence, 12 miles away, and the preaching was an inspirational pep talk, not an exposition of Scripture. Regionally there are Fundamentalists, Charismaniacs, Unitarians, plus open liberals who affirm nothing.

The situation has caused me to pause, to consider what I really want in a church. Bottom line, I desire:
1. a church that is Trinitarian,
2. a church that is subordinate to Scripture,
3. a church that is orthodox--as defined by subscription to the Ecumenical Creeds,
4. a church that is Christocentric,
5. a church that is scripturally anthropocentric,
6. a church that is evangelistic,
7. and a church that is ecumenical.

In other words, plan A, I am looking for a basic biblical congregation. I am not sure what plan B will be, but I'm sure it won't be pretty; I live in post-Christian, postmodern western Massachusetts. Nevertheless, perhaps God will lead me to an ecclesiastical oasis in this religious desert. I pray it's so. Pray for me if you would, and thank you.

More Sqawking from the Dodo Bird

+

++

Last year, sometime in the month of September, I was excommunicated from a PCA (Presbyterian Church in America) church for leaving my wife of 38 years. I do not dispute the legitimacy of this Session's disciplinary actions against me. Insofar as I was guilty of adultery and refused to repent, the ordained leadership of that assembly did precisely what was required of them both biblically and BCO-wise (Book of Church Order). I am, however, now a member of an American Baptist congregation--hardly a contemporary bastion of Reformed worship and culture. Obviously, then, a lot has transpired between late Summer of 2012 and early Spring of 2013, but the content of today's Churchwarden entry certainly is not the progression of my repentance or theology--which are distinct matters requiring dedicated posts all unto themselves! No, today's article is about personal liberation from Westminster Confession-ism, legalistic preaching and prideful pastors.

I. First, prideful pastors: They are not endemic to the PCA, of course, yet my former denomination definitely has been infected by more than a few of them--a reality experienced nationally by many and locally by me. I have sat under four PCA preachers over the past 33 years and fully 75 percent have been blowhards. One particular man of the cloth is unquestionably the most self righteous, arrogant, Presbyterian autocrat I have ever known in nearly four decades of ecclesiastical service. He was born with genetic omniscience and knows absolutely everything about anything. Furthermore, he insists upon hearing nothing but the echo of his own infallible voice. Naturally his nonnegotiable opinion is the foremost option worth considering in every circumstance; it is inerrant and bears, pragmatically at least, an authority secondary only to Scripture. Challenge the guy, as I have done occasionally, and feel the wrath of a god amongst men!  For the sheer sake of spiritual survival I deliberately chose for a long while to be his total "Yes Man" because disagreement with him was typically met with smoldering indignation. Thus I am intensely thankful, indeed, to have been providentially removed from this pastor's demeaning influence; I just wish to God I had never sinned myself into an involuntary exodus from his Egypt. Regardless though of that preacher's arrogance, my own sinfulness is admittedly worse to an infinite degree (I harbor no illusions about who I really am). Still I refuse to ever again submit to a ministry wherein the pastor willfully positions himself as a pope who speaks ex cathedra.

II. Secondly, legalistic preaching: The Bible balances moral imperatives with spiritual indicatives (see Ephesians for a dynamic example). Preaching that consistently emphasizes the imperatives above the indicatives is legalistic. Preaching that consistently emphasizes the indicatives above the imperatives is antinomian. Antinomian preaching is rarely a problem in the PCA, but legalistic preaching is modus operandi in several PCA pulpits. The Law is thundered from Mount Sinai habitually, Sunday after Sunday, whereas the Gospel is proclaimed from Golgotha quite occasionally. The Law of God convicts the sinner of his/her sinfulness. The love of God convinces the convicted sinner of faith in Christ and repentance from sin. You would think such a biblical balance would permeate PCA preaching, especially since the denomination bills herself as, "obedient to Great Commission of Jesus Christ." Alas, it often does not. How happy I am to be gone. I won't be returning anytime soon--trust me!

III. Lastly, Westminster Confession-ism: I am strongly pro credal. Confessions/creeds are provisional expositions of sound doctrine, summaries of core and prevailing orthodoxies, and super-essential to preserving the purity of any denomination or church. My quarrel is not with confessions, per se, but rather with confession-ism: in other words, freighting a doctrinal standard with the infalability and inerrancy of Scripture. The Protestant battle cry against Rome of, "Reformed, and always reforming," is pure bullshit in actual day to day practice. The WCF represents not only an alternative theology to Catholicism (as well as Eastern Orthodoxy, mainline Protestantism, Charismania, and evangelicalism), it also functions as the Arbiter of All Theological Truth, unassailable by the results of conscientious exegetical research. According to the fuzzy mathematics of Reformed figuring the fundamental equation is: WFC+/-0=100% Biblical Orthodoxy. Nothing else could possibly add up! Infallibility obviously resides solely in God's Word alone. Consequently Reformed and Always Reforming should be more than a mere slogan. It ought to reign supremely as the cardinal spiritual discipline amongst those who claim unwavering allegiance to the Book. I agree substantially with the WCF in so many of its specifics, but I cannot give that Confession the unwarranted authority bestowed upon it by the zealous guardians of the Reformed guild. My individualistic subscription is limited strictly to the Ecumenical Creeds because their consensual dogma consists of "that which is believed everywhere, in all times, by all [people]." Everything else is liable to reform whenever careful exegesis demands conscientious refinement.

My critics would be sorely mistaken to believe I am embittered against the aforementioned preacher, wrong to assume I abhor the PCA, and incorrect to construe my confessional stance as evidence of further apostasy from God. Nevertheless I can't control what anybody thinks. By God's grace I am finally traveling down the road of repentance, slowly, haltingly, and frequently delayed by detours, yet the primary judgement I concern myself with nowadays is God's. Perhaps the above liberations indicate growth in grace, maybe they portend a different trajectory altogether. Time will tell. Meanwhile I'll keep marching towards Zion--with a mighty prayer I'll truly get there!  

Credal comfort: The 39 Articles of Religion

+
++

I spent several hours last evening doing a spiritual experiment by rummaging through numerous web sites advocating this theological perspective or that. The result is a serious redefinition of what boredom really means: The Calvinism/Arminianism debate doesn't interest me anymore. The covenantal/dispensational debate doesn't interest me anymore. The New Perspective/Old Perspective debate doesn't interest me anymore. The Federal Vision/Truly Reformed debate doesn't interest me anymore. The liberal/conservative debate doesn't interest me anymore. The errancy/inerrancy debate doesn't interest me anymore. And just for good measure, the contemporary worship/regulative principle debate doesn't interest me anymore either. Dogmatic polemics are Yawnsville nowadays; none of them interest me anymore. Which is not to say I'm disinterested in theology, but the provocative contents of those controversies no longer incite a wild-eyed desire to always be on the "right" side of an argument.

Disclaimer: If you're expecting yet another Churchwarden assault on the Reformed camp . . . well, sorry to disappoint you cause that ain't happening.

With few exceptions the doctrinal disputes of the Church have never been definitively resolved in a way which has effected universal consensus. Nor would I suspect such a miracle to ever happen. And, thus, I feel I have wasted far too much of my so-called Christian life fighting battles nobody could possibly win regardless. Therefore why bother waging war anymore? I've finally lost the taste for blood and the arrogance from thinking I was a faithful soldier in yet another modern reenactment of some ancient heretical skirmish.

But I'm hardly anti-credal. Whenever I say, as a Christian, "I believe . . . ," I've necessarily stated a creed. Credal affirmations are impossible to avoid and they are imperative to make: Neither a Christian nor a Communion can believe nothing and still be a believer or a Church. Also creeds, properly employed, prevent the eccentricity of individualism by contextualizing personal beliefs within a broader community of faith. Although I've left (and have been excommunicated from) the Evangelical/Reformed fold, I'd be a fool to pull up anchor and let myself drift away from the core othodoxy of the historical Church. Consequently, like I've indicated many times before, I unreservedly affirm the particulars of the Ecumenical Creeds. However, just because I'm not Reformed per the Westminster Confession, I am still Reformational according to the category of generic Protestantism--being neither Roman Catholic nor Eastern Orthodox. Consequently I have adopted The 39 Articles as my own personal confessional statement. I'll briefly elaborate upon why momentarily. 

A primary concern of mine as I enter into the last decades (presumably!) of my hitherto hollow life is orthopraxy. Obviously orthopraxy cannot be divorced from orthodoxy and survive for very long. How one thinks determines how one acts and when it comes to discipleship the pursuit of God is determined by the god one pursues. And core orthodoxy preserves the truth about the God who has revealed Himself in creation, history, Scripture and Jesus Christ. A good creed merely summarizes essential aspects of the symbiosis between divine disclosure and human discipleship, and The 39 Articles are quite serviceable to that end. For me those Aricles provide comfort because they are:
1 Protestant (Article XI. Of the Justification of Man/Article XII. Of Good Works)

2. Practical (See Articles XII-XVI)

3. Ecumenical (Article VIII)
4. and Latitudinal: This confession is bare bones basic, thereby allowing theological exploration within protectively orthodox parameters. 

Bottom line: Although I am not an Anglican, here is an ecclesiastical creed I can personally embrace and therefore it shall be the public confession of The Churchwarden. 

The Churchwarden: a once totally Reformed, now quasi neo-orthodox blog deeply rooted in Anglican soil--strange indeed, but hardly unexpected!


***Note to my Reformed friends, assuming I have any Reformed friends left: That J.C. Ryle guy you love to read so much, he was an Anglican who subscribed to The 39 Articles also. Just sayin' . . . !

Miscellaneous Drivel

+

++

FIRST: REFORMED THEOLOGY 

Not a few of The Churchwarden articles I wrote last summer/fall were freighted with theological bombasticism because I was (Language Alert!) full of bullshit then. I know, I know, "bullshit" is not a Christian word, but "bovine stercus" doesn't carry quite the same connotation and it makes me sound like a dung beetle--which reminds me of a joke: Two disillusioned dung beetles are sitting at a bar. One says to the other, "Is this all there is to life, Murray, just eat shit and die?" Murray ponders the question for a moment and then answers rather somberly, "Pretty much, Harry, pretty much." Indeed, I digress. Back on track . . . I basically generated more heat than light in 2012, as evidenced by the steaming piles of stinky words I kept crapping out with each new blog post, so wisdom seems to demand a measure of present clarity for my ever patient readers. What does The Churchwarden (i.e. me) honestly confess at this stage of the journey? Well, homies, that's a very interesting question especially since the public interest is focused upon where I actually stand in regard to Reformed theology given my 23 year tenure (1988-2012) in the Presbyterian Church of America (PCA) and now my new affiliation with the American Baptist Church--the ecclesiastical equivalent of Alice's Restaurant . . . "you can get anything you want."

But first things first:

1. I confess Christ as my Savior. Despite having no assurance of salvation because I see more sin than sanctification in my daily living, either Jesus saves me or else I perish. Thus trusting Him for redemption is not optional since He is the Way, the Truth and the Life (John 14:6). 

2. I advocate pursuing Christ. I royally suck at discipleship, nevertheless I don't deny its necessity.

3. I trust the Bible to be God's Word--inerrant in the original autographs and infallible in translation, yet always authoritative for orthodoxy and orthopraxy either way. Those nuances, you should know, are quite deliberate.

4.  I affirm the Faith expressed by the Ecumenical Creeds. They summarize the non-negotiable borders of biblical Christianity. Most everything else, doctrinally, is negotiable (for me at least).

As for Reformed theology:

1.  I still adhere to Covenant Theology, as opposed to Dispensationalism, although I question the classical schema because it fails to take the historicity of the various covenants (Abrahamic, Noahi,  Davidic, etc.) seriously in my opinion.

3.  I still believe in the absolute sovereignty of God, as defined by the symbiotic outworking of His omnipotence and omniscience, but I question whether or not every incident in thought, word or deed that happens in the context of space/time is the inevitable consequence of a pre-existing divine decree. This is not to say God doesn't have a plan because He most certainly does according to Scripture, nor am I saying God has not preordained certain events to occur when, where and however they happen--again, because Scripture declares He has. But decretal theology, Reformed style, removes God from present tense participation in human history, which is clearly contrary to the Old/New Testaments, both of which contain numerous instances of Him historically acting and reacting within our sphere of existence. For the record, I am not becoming an advocate of Open Theism. However I increasingly feel an exegetical obligation to interpret God as the Sovereign who actively rules in real time.

3. I am neither for nor against TULIP. All five points seem logically air tight, yet are they exegetically tenable? Perhaps so, maybe not, but if the Church of Jesus Christ hasn't resolved the Arminianism/Calvinism controversy by now then my opinion hardly means diddley piddley and I'm not particularly fond of the debate anymore. It's enough for me to know that I am a sinner, Christ is the Savior and that if He really has saved me He's done so efficaciously and intentionally. 

What concerns me most nowadays are matters of discipleship rather than systems of doctrine. I spent over 30 years as a dog-biting Calvinist of the Reformed persuasion and during much of that period I essentially idolized the Calvinistic creeds and confessions by elevating their theology over God himself. The result was spiritual bankruptcy, undoubtedly a contributing factor to my fall from grace. I flounder as a disciple of Christ, but at least I know that following Him is infinitely and eternally more critical than allegiance to some provisional systematic theology.

SECOND: STOLEN FROM MY DAUGHTER

 My kid wrote this on her Facebook page. I thought it was well worth ripping off and posting on The Churchwarden:  

Forgiveness is a decisive action, not a feeling. In making the choice to forgive someone, there is no room for bitterness to either take root, or to continue growing. In choosing to forgive, we also make the choice to let go of anger, while allowing peace from God to take over. It's NOT always an easy choice to make, but it really can be done. - "Be ye therefore merciful, as your Father is merciful." Luke 6:26

  

THIRD: WINTER FISHING CIGARS 
 

Stogies on the stream serve three priorities: pleasure, protection from blood-sucking insets and annoying the snot out of politically correct fly fishing posers--all worthy purposes indeed. Lately I've been puffing the Tempus by Alec Bradley. But it's winter, the bugs are gone and all the PC posers are hibernating (Praise Jesus!) so the real pleasure of a cigar is in the smoke itself. The Tempus is an excellent cold weather stick that retains its shape despite chattering teeth and delivers enough nutty flavor to make at least 35 minutes minutes of deliberately standing waist deep in a 36 degree water seem not quite as stupid as it really is. Highly recommended.

FOURTH: MY BETH-BRIAR
 

Above is the "engagement briar" my fiancee, Elizabeth, bought for me from a renegade Christian artisan named Chuck Long (http://www.cllongpipes.com/). It also serves double duty as a prayer pipe, the briar I typically light up whenever I'm praying about trouble in paradise. The puff-and-pause rhythm of smoking is such a boon to petition and reflection that I've christened this bowl the Beth-Briar, my go-to pipe for those times when necessity demands I ask God to show me the error of my ways and lead me down the path of relational righteousness. A Presbyterian might say the pipe is a means of grace. Would I still be considered Reformed if I said, "AMEN!"?

FINALLY: A BOOK ON PRAYER
Bottom line: Yancey's book is the best volume I've read on the subject in years. And if anybody needs help with prayer, it's me. For many months now I've been struggling with the propriety of most everything I've thought, felt, said and done towards someone who means more to me than human language can possibly communicate. I have unintentionally done deep damage and often I despair that I'll ever repair what I've done. I feel hopeless, but with God there is hope. Thus I pray every day that He makes me into the man I ought to be. Hopefully He answers sooner than later. The pain has reduced me to my unvarnished self. Helpless apart from His sovereign grace, I seek His face earnestly. Philip Yancey's brilliantly written book gives me courage and the encouragement that I may actually be heard. 

***Addendum to the above paragraph: Occasionally God resorts to, shall we say, a rather bizarre way of answering prayer. Today while succumbing to the irresistible call of nature I was given insight to see the root cause of my particular problem and wisdom to resolve it. There is something quite humbling about God suddenly showing up when your pants are down around your ankles! But thankfully He did, and the healing has finally begun.