Notes from Evensong talk on Emmaus narrative from Luke 24 last night May 15 2011. Newly called co-pastors Mike Massar and Griff Martin were present. Got a lot of strong positive feedback on this.

Paradigmatic texts of the Bible – those that summarize or frame life in relationship with God

microcosms – deep rich inexhaustible stories of the Bible
Isaiah 6
Romans 8(?)
Luke 24

Microcosms -> astronomy
color picture = 3 pictures in 3 different colors
not one color picture but 3 combined

Luke 24
3 post-resurrection stories of transformation
3 women :: empty tomb and angels (no Jesus)
2 of them :: recognize Jesus in breaking of bread
11 :: direct encounter of risen Christ

So we can read Walk to Emmaus as one of a series of three stories

3-4 years ago staff meeting
Jay and plan to share vision over 6 months
focusing on Luke 24
his read of the story
my read of the story – not against his but different
cannot remember what I said

If in astronomy take 3+ pictures in 3+ different wavelengths -> what are 3+ ways to look at Luke 24?

1) Relationship

2) Presence

3) Knowledge/Understanding

1) Relationship

2 of them – deliberate ambiguity (men? married couple?)

Jesus is the stranger = paroikos = lives somewhere not their home
2 disciples welcome the stranger
talk with him = questions and listening and answers

note – not we go there but they come here
the paroikoi come to us – what do we do when they come here?

consider Acts and Passover and Pentecost
nations come to Jerusalem
then Jerusalem to the nations
centripetal and centrifugal movements in Christian mission (David Bosch)

conversation
hospitality
welcome to our home
share a meal together
(separation?)

2) Presence

Where is Jesus? -> Where is God present? (main issue of post-resurrection narratives)

dualities of divine presence in Luke 24

1. individual and communal

Jesus and me
Jesus and us – we overlook?

2. Bible and sacrament

word and ritual
is Jesus somehow present in communion?

3. memory and experience

recognize presence in the moment
but also in memory -> now I see how God was there!

3) Knowledge/Understanding

Movement from not knowing/understanding/recognizing -> recognize/understand/know/proclaim

not know – where is Jesus? what now?
not recognize
not understand – here the Scriptures

conversation with questions – although Jesus asks first

kerygma – basic story of Jesus who he is what he did
not theology and not Bible – just telling the basic story
summary of Christian faith ~ Apostles Creed?
for Baptists :: hymnal?

Scripture

Eucharist/Communion/Lord’s Supper -> ritual worship

then they recognize // understand // (memory) // know

the Lord is risen indeed!

testimony -> share what they know (experienced) with others

(Still room for mystery -> Jesus disappears from their sight)

Is there a way to put these 3 pictures together and form one? one pictures that represents the life of the Christian community centered around liturgy (word and ritual)? the story of Emmaus is our story – story of this church family?

We are on a journey. Sometimes a journey to Baton Rouge / always within Baton Rouge / sometimes from Baton Rouge. We have questions. About the news. About life. About God. This is a place where people can ask questions. Where someone listens to us. Is interested in who we are where we are from and what are we doing here. Where we share the basic message about Jesus Christ the Son of God. Where we study the Bible together. Where we worship together. Practice hospitality together. You come to my house. You invite us to your apartment. We share meals together. Friend chicken / beans and spinach / tea eggs and bigos / fufu and Kigali and grapefruit jello. We experience the love and presence of God together. We share our stories with each other. We discover and learn things together. And although it breaks my heart sometimes we get up and return to where we came from. And always we hear and carry with us and share the paschal proclamation It is true! Christ is risen! The Lord is risen indeed! (from sermon on Luke 24 to Church of the Nations in May 2011)

From CBSNews:

Loughner’s parents, silent and holed up in their home since the shooting spree, apologized publicly Tuesday.

“There are no words that can possibly express how we feel,” Randy and Amy Loughner wrote in a statement handed to reporters waiting outside their house. “We wish that there were, so we could make you feel better. We don’t understand why this happened.

“We care very deeply about the victims and their families. We are so very sorry for their loss.”

One cannot imagine what such times are like for the family. Our child did this?!?

How does the community behave toward the parents and other family members? With hate? anger? scorn? Or does the community reach out to them with understanding? compassion?

Several years ago a young man in Baton Rouge was shot and killed after he exchanged gunfire with police. I knew his sister well. She was a strong Christian and often worshiped with my small congregation. She brought her/their mother a few times.

Because of my relationship with the family I drove over and stopped by their apartment. They were not there. They were staying with friends in order to have a few days of peace away from the spotlight. There were several cards and notes along with some flowers in front of the door. I had written out a short note and stuck it between the door and frame.

Several days later the mother called. Could she come by the church to meet and talk with me? Of course.

I will not relate the content of the conversation. But one thing I will share is how she described everything she and her husband did to try to help their son return from the path to destruction on which he was traveling.

Sometimes when a child commits a horrible crime people ask and where were the parents? what did they do? how did they try to stop this from happening?

I can tell you that at least some of the time the parents tried to intervene. And those efforts either worked or did not work or worked but only temporarily. Two years ago I conducted a funeral for a young man who was involved in drug addiction for many years causing his parents all sorts of grief and heartache. Finally he was no longer taking drugs was living in another city and working on a graduate degree. A friend came by his apartment and offered him a hit.

Could parents like these have done more? Could they have done better? Maybe. Maybe not. Who are we to judge? And how are we to judge?

There is a difference between our son was killed after shooting at police or our son died while taking drugs and our son killed more than 30 people and then himself or our son killed 6 people and injured several others but is still alive.

But I wonder what the parents of the young man who committed the shootings in Tucson are going through. And how the community as well as the nation are treating them. Despite what their their son did.

Perhaps no issue has generated more controversy at University Baptist Church than worship. By which one means worship style.*

Twelve years ago when I began serving here we had two Sunday morning services. One early more contemporary and supposedly the growth/outreach service. One later more traditional. The growth/outreach service was not growing in attendance. When the congregation began to debate whether to discontinue it became clear that only a few participated because of style. Most because of the earlier time – which means one attends worship earlier is finished earlier and has a larger portion of Sunday free.

So University Baptist Church went to one worship service with a rotating/blended style. Some Sundays more high church and traditional. Some more contemporary. I thought it was a great solution and was working well.

And then our last senior pastor after a few years pushed hard for the creation of a new second service. It would be emerging in style – not contemporary. It would be the growth/outreach service – to attract and involve the unchurched of/and the current generation. Most significantly it would be the later service.

Several people have said to me they had no problem with a second service. Even with an emerging worship style. What bothered them was that the traditional would become the early service and the emerging service would take what they regarded as the primary time. Moreover they felt there were serious problems with how that decision was made.

All those in favor say ‘aye’.

Aye.

Okay then the motion passes. There will be a second service. Emerging style. 11:30 a.m. and the traditional service will be at 9:15 a.m.

Wait. What?!? We didn’t agree to that second part!

At the time I supported the creation of a second service. With an emerging worship style. Was not happy with the 11:30 a.m. time. That is rather late. And since my own small congregation shares many activities we would have to change our time as well. We lost a couple regular families because 11:30 a.m. is just too late for them. They need to get to the lab/library/office.

But there we were.

Attendance was much stronger for the earlier service. There is some debate concerning whether attendance at the second service was growing. Some advocates of the second service pointed to evidence that most of our Sunday morning guests came to the second service. It was fulfilling its purpose.

Throw in some controversy concerning the term emerging and its relationship to the so called Emergent movement. It was becoming increasingly evident that the senior pastor was theologically more liberal than even this moderate Baptist church.

And now that senior pastor has been gone for more than a year.

Most of this is just background.

I believe that right now given our much lower attendance at both services – especially the second service – and that the person who birthed the second service is gone we should consider returning to one Sunday worship service with a rotating blended style. This is a private and personal opinion. I could be wrong. My small congregation has it own worship gathering and so my opinion does not carry so much weight.

Here is what really troubles me.

It has been made clear to me in conversations that if we discontinue the second service and move to one service with a blended worship style that most of the people who attend the second service would be hurt and angry and would leave.

Why?

I am not entirely persuaded that contemporary or emerging worship style is the cultural language necessary for reaching this generation. Christ the King Catholic Church on the Louisiana State University campus is busting at the seems with several services on Sunday many standing room only with several thousand attending each week.

Catholic. Mass. Several thousand. Standing room only.

Traditional liturgical worship styles seem to attract young people quite well thank you very much. Granted we might ask if Christ the King uses what freedom it has to make what changes make Mass more attractive to university students. Guitar instead of organ? And so on.

But we are not Catholics. We are Baptist Protestants.

I am concerned that yes perhaps this current generation of Baptists expects contemporary and/or emerging style to such an extent that if a church does not provide that they will look elsewhere. Can it be that we have created this by raising an entire generation with certain expectations? That we feed them a steady diet of casual contemporary emerging and so on – and then sure enough that is all they will accept when they become adults?

Perhaps I am wrong. Perhaps I should be more open to these newer worship styles. Fair enough. But does that work both ways? That the emerging generation needs to work harder to appreciate and even include the traditional and the liturgical?

If children grow up on junk food – and no I am not saying contemporary or emerging worship style is junk food – do we just shrug our shoulders and say “oh well sure you can have pizza and soda for dinner again”? Or do we educate our children such they learn to appreciate and even enjoy different and often more nutritious foods?

Have we failed to help our children appreciate and even enjoy more traditional and liturgical worship? Even if – thanks to modern popular culture – they also enjoy and even expect newer forms and styles? Of course one can respond that those who prefer more traditional and liturgical need to learn to appreciate newer styles and approaches.

That “they will just leave and go elsewhere” really bothers me.

Why? Why would they do that? Why is that all they expect and accept?!?

And while we are on the subject – to what extent do Anglican or Catholic or Orthodox Christians struggle with this issue of worship style? Ah therein lies the rub.

Addendum:

A dear reader of this website offered the following in his excellent comment:

From what I have experienced, a worship service in itself will never “attract” the unchurched/prechurched/dechurched people in the community. They do not care about worship style – that is a church member debate. I can understand the need to incorporate modern elements (video, guitar, etc.) when appropriate, but not at the expense of deeply rich, traditional worship elements. In the end, I hesitate to say, most contemporary services are started under a false pretense – that the unchurched/prechurced/dechurched are out there waiting for a contemporary service to draw them in. This is simply not reality.

Word. By the way let me make clear that I am a strong supporter of using presentations/clips in worship. To my knowledge I was the first person to use a presentation during a sermon in University Baptist Church and almost almost always have a presentation when preaching to my own small congregation. We have found it helps people concentrate on the message not the messenger. It also helps people get back on track if their attention wanders. Finally when preaching to people many of whom English is not their first language it greatly helps them understand the message. We always use English subtitles when we have movie night.

*Postscript:

Quite possibly what we have been facing is not about worship style at all. But about something else. Power? Theology?

Supporters of full inclusion for gays and lesbians in The United Methodist Church drape the central table in black cloth during a demonstration on the floor of the 2008 United Methodist General Conference

Was perusing Lectionary Homiletics for December as part of my weekly sermon preparation. Noticed how many contributions are from Ed McNulty. Wonder who that is? Do a search. Come across a website that might tell me more. Turns out to be the blog of a very liberal Presbyterian minister who serves a congregation in a town located in northeast Tennessee. Hey wait a minute. I recognize that town. That’s where my wife was born and grew up! And we even visited that church once around Christmas. Even then recall we thought it was a good and interesting experience but we probably would not go back next time we were in town.

Took a few minutes to look over this pastor’s blog. Curious about where he comes from. What his basic views are.

Look – I went to Baptist Theological Seminary of Richmond which is across the street from Union Theological Seminary / Presbyterian School of Christian Education. Cross-registered and took several classes at the historic Presbyterian seminary. Regularly attended their chapel services. Had plenty of Presbyterian friends. Yeah many of them were pretty liberal.

They had nothing on this guy in Tennessee. Compared to him they are staunch traditionalists.

The point is not to knock this active and passionate Presbyterian pastor who happens to serve in my wife’s home town. Just giving some background.

Among his other big causes – which include 9/11 trutherism for which I have little respect or patience along with Peak Oil an issue with which I do have some sympathy – is equality in the Christian church for Lesbian-Gay-Bisexual-Transgender(?) persons. Fair enough. That is his prerogative.

(In this post I will not specify his name or congregation or URL of his blog. Not out of contempt or disrespect. But because this is not personal - this is not about him but about something he wrote and what it represents. Plus this is one of those times where I would rather not invite conflict.)

Among other things he shares his response to a questionnaire regarding Amendment 10A which has something to do with changing the rules about ordination to Christian ministry in the P(resbyterian)C(hurch)-USA:

How would you respond to those that say that if we pass 10a individuals and congregations will leave the PC(USA)? That question fosters co-dependence and bullying. We need to treat people like adults and expect adult behavior. If folks cannot in good conscience stay in the church, then I guess they will go. No one is forcing them to stay or to go. However, many people have already left the church because of our discriminatory policy. Some even have been defrocked. You do the right thing and let the chips fall. I think once the church passes 10a we will become stronger. We certainly will be more in the spirit of Jesus.

This response is the one that jumped out at me the most. Try to follow the reasoning and then I will address the larger implications.

1. People say they will leave if we make this change? That is a form of co-dependence and bullying.

There is some truth to this. People at University Baptist Church occasionally play the “don’t do this or I will leave” card and it can be a form of emotional blackmail. Although this is a difference between “don’t make this change in the time and style of Sunday morning worship” and “don’t make this change in whether or not we ordain people in same-sex relationships to the Christian ministry”.

2. If people really have that much of a problem with this change then they will leave. No one is forcing them to stay or go.

Well that is not entirely true is it? If you belong to an institution or organization because of what it stands for and it makes what you regard as a fundamental change that you believe turns its entire purpose upside down then there is a sense in which yes you are being forced to leave because to stay is a violation of your conscience yes? How many liberals or rather leftists said they would leave the United States if George Bush was re-elected president? Gee why did they say that? Were they being forced to leave? In one sense no – no one was putting a gun to their head. But in other sense yes – because to them it means “I can no longer in good conscience remain a citizen of this nation”. How can someone who presents himself as so liberal and open-minded and understanding and all that good stuff not understand something so basic? That people are forced to leave because to stay represents a violation of their basic convictions? And this pastor cannot say “oh come now that’s no violation of your Christian convictions” because whether that is so or not is not the point. The point is how these persons and congregations view the proposed change.

This above is the most significant part of this pastor’s argument and we will return to it.

3. So we lose some people and churches. Yeah but have we not lost people and churches because of the current policy?

Well first of all consider the Episcopal Church. Have they lost more or gained more what with the consecration of Gene Robinson as bishop? Are same-sex couples suddenly flocking to the Episcopal Church and asking to be baptized? Are people who think same-sex relationships are morally neutral suddenly flocking to the Episcopal Church and asking to become members? No? Yeah sure a few people are attracted to liberal churches and liberal denominations. But far more leave and/or never seek to join because they are either repulsed or just plain uninterested.

And while we are at it just how many people and churches have they lost because of the current policy? Care to throw out a number with some hard evidence behind it? Or is he just blowing rhetorical smoke?

But that is a weak argument. Ultimately one should do something because it is right not because it is popular. This pastor is aware of that. Well – sometimes. In fact he plays both the we’ll gain more than we lose and the we just need to do the right thing cards in the same paragraph.

We do have to grant one point. If by we’ll be stronger he means that the Presbyterian Church (USA) will no longer be conflicted because of this issue then yes that is probably correct. After the dust settles and many people and churches leave then yes they will have tremendous unity on this otherwise divisive issue. They will be known for their stand and people will join them or not.

Now back to that very significant statement If folks cannot in good conscience stay in the church, then I guess they will go. No one is forcing them to stay or to go. However, many people have already left the church because of our discriminatory policy.

This is the painfully obvious point and question.

If the church stands for something that goes against their conscience and convictions and therefore people will be free to leave… and the church currently stands for something that they think is fundamentally wrong… then why don’t they leave?

Why do you seek to radically change this organization/institution to suit your convictions? Why not join some other organization/institution? Why not form your own?

If you do not care for the terms of your marital relationship why does the other person have to leave and you get to keep the house?

Ah… perhaps therein lies the answer.

It is easier to take something that someone else created – not to deny that you may have helped along the way – and change it. That it is to create something new and different that reflects your desires.

See – generations of Presbyterians have lived and given and served and died to help create this denomination. Because of what it stands for. And if change it such that these people think it is radically different – no longer traditional biblical Presbyterian Christianity – then that bothers them very much indeed. They do not want to give up what they built – and yes I recognize that liberals in some sense helped build this house and we can debate the difference that makes or not – to people who want to change it into something they regard as fundamentally different in character and purpose.

But the liberals want to take over change the denomination – and it is about much much more than same-sex relationships and one only has to read this pastor’s blog to recognize that the issue of same-sex relationships is the tip of a much larger theological and ideological iceberg – in ways that traditionalists cannot endure and say oh well no one’s forcing you to stay. So the traditionalists what? give up the churches and seminaries they helped to build? the organizations into which they poured their lives?

They have to leave the house and either move into some other house or starting building a new one from scratch.

Don’t believe me?

Look at the Episcopal Church once again. When Episcopal parishes say “we cannot live with the leadership and directions of this national church” they are not allowed to keep the buildings which they built and paid for (mostly or entirely – yes I am aware of how dioceses play a role in building up parishes). To the victors go the spoils. The losers have to start again.

So why don’t liberal Presbyterians just leave and form their own new denomination? Heck one can even let liberal Presbyterian congregations keep their facilities. Heck we can even let them keep a seminary or two. If they can keep them running.

No – what we see is these innovators would rather take over and co-opt something and change it to be more in line with their point(s) of view.

Melkor did not create the orcs. He could only take what Iluvatar created – men and elves – and change them into orcs. Melkor was not able to create anything original of his own.

Parasites do not produce or create so much as they co-opt other life for their own purposes. No I am not calling liberal Christians parasites. But I will dare suggest that this “we will start doing things you did not imagine when we first got married but you have to leave and we keep the house” attitude is a form of parasitism.

Honesty compels one to suggest some counterarguments.

a. We are not trying to turn our denomination into something different. We are trying to return it to its original nature and purpose. (Diana Butler Bass makes this argument explicitly – although inconsistently because she often appeals to changes in current social and cultural attitudes.)

One must then ask “at what point in the history of the Presbyterian church did a majority of Presbyterian Christians hold these views on Christian faith and practice?”

b. We are trying to return it to its original nature and purpose. You are the ones who have been taking our denomination in a new and wrong direction.

This sounds like the same argument as #a and perhaps it is but it relates to the fundamentalist takeover / conservative resurgence (depends on one’s point of view) in the Southern Baptist Convention. See – liberals are not the only ones who attempt to radically change something. My intent is not to bash the Southern Baptist Convention nor to defame evangelical/conservative friends and brethren. In fact I have started to identify again – partly – with Southern Baptists over the last few years. My goal is to understand their point of view. Moderate Baptists believed that the conservative movement of the 1980′s that was pretty much accomplished by 1990 represented a departure from historic Baptist Christianity. Obviously more conservative Southern Baptists do not see it that way. They believed liberal-moderate denominational leaders and seminary professors were the ones who were beginning to drag the denomination in a wrong direction.

One important difference is that the Southern Baptist Convention by definition could not take buildings and facilities away from more moderate Baptist congregations. Oh we can complain about professors losing their jobs and takeover and radical transformation of denominational institutions and structures. And as a matter of fact moderate Baptists to a large extent did end up having to create something new pretty much from scratch. I know. I went to one such seminary and most of my professors had been forced or pressured into leaving their positions at Southern Baptist seminaries.

(While we are it at surely the reverse is also true – that some conservative Baptists have felt compelled to leave a moderate Baptist congregation.)

But let me reiterate what I think is a key point and a compelling question.

Why do people who represent a minority viewpoint seek to transform an organization/institution/denomination so that it is more in line with their distinct convictions – rather than just leave and start their own?

In fairness I must acknowledge that there may very well be – indeed I assume that there is – a good answer to that question. But I have not figured it out yet.

The deacons of University Baptist Church asked me to lead the ordination process for one of my fellow ministers who is not yet ordained.

The church by-laws are not very clear on what exactly is the process.

In the event the Church is requested to license or ordain applicants to the ministry, the applicant shall present to the Pastor a written application, including explanation of both personal conversion experience and call to the ministry. The applicant should attach a record of education and provide a list of three references. The Pastor shall investigate, as he deems necessary. The Pastor shall appoint a committee of three Church members to aid in the investigation. Their findings and recommendations will be presented to the Deacons. Upon approval, the applicant will be presented to the Church for a final decision. Upon approval of the Church, the Pastor is authorized to implement Licensing and Ordination.

The by-law raises almost as many questions as it answers. What exactly is the pastor supposed to investigate? what findings are we looking for? what are the criteria for whether or not to ordain someone?

But these questions arise partly because of a larger question. What is ordination?

The dirty little secret is that Baptists have almost no theology of ordination. So who do we ordain? why? and what does ordination do? I did ask the candidate for an explanation of her understanding of ordination as well. Not as a test. But just to see what does she think we are doing?

I spent an afternoon searching through books on theology and Baptist history looking for answers to these questions. The results were disappointing but not surprising.

In seminary our primary textbooks for Christian theology were Ethics and Theology by the Baptist theologian W. James McClendon. There are only two brief references to ordination. And McClendon never truly explains it.(a)

The famous Baptist Faith and Message 1963 statement – one of the reasons I became a Baptist during my second year at university – says absolutely nothing about ordination. All it says is that the officers of the church are pastors and deacons. The 2000 statement is exactly the same except it adds that women cannot be senior pastors. Which means it says nothing about ordaining them.

I searched through Baptist Confessions of Faith by William Lumpkin. Most of them say something along these lines:(b)

• The officers of the church are pastors and deacons.
• The church ordains by laying on hands after prayer and fasting.

(Which is interesting because in twelve years with this congregation one sees little prayer and no fasting associated with the process of ordination.)

So at best we can surmise that ordination represents setting someone apart for a particular role in the church. The primary role of pastors seems to be preaching and teaching and watching over the flock. And since the candidate in question is a full time vocational minister clearly we are considering whether to ordain her as a minister/pastor not a deacon.

This in turn raises awkward questions about what happens if we ordain her as a minister-not-senior(?)-pastor. The Baptist Faith and Message 2000 statement clearly states no women can be senior pastors. But how would the local Baptist association? the state convention? the Southern Baptist Convention respond if we ordain a woman as a minister but not as a senior pastor? There are Baptists associations that have removed congregations for ordaining women not as senior(?) pastors but simply as staff ministers. Since the 2000 statement says nothing about ordination or women as staff ministers clearly these Baptist associations apply the statement beyond its actual wording.

It is quite possible that if we ordain this person it will damage or end our relationship with the Baptist Association of Greater Baton Rouge. That does not mean we should not ordain her.

Speaking of her.

To me the issue is not “should we ordain women?” The issue for Baptist Christians is “why do we ordain?” I do not see how we can debate or object to the ordination of women as ministers or pastors until we first figure out how Baptists understand and therefore practice ordination.

Other Christian traditions have a clear theology of ordination. Typically along one or both of these lines:

• apostolic succession
• the authority(? right? power?) to perform sacraments

But Baptists have no real concept of apostolic succession. And no real concept of sacraments. Even McClendon – who stretches the envelope of Baptist theology in ways I appreciate – goes no farther than outlining the concept of effective signs. So how is an ordained minister or deacon different from someone who is not ordained? Often the answer is “no different at all”. Ordination is understood primarily in terms of affirmation and setting apart. Which mean what exactly?

Do not misunderstand me. I will do this just as I led the ordination service for a deacon who happens to be a woman. But these are some of the questions that challenge us as we journey through this process toward the ritual of ordination and what it means for the life and work of the Christian church.

Notes:

a) “Ordination may rightly be included here if we see it as partial recognition of distinctive vocations in the kingdom of God” (McClendon, Theology, 144).

b) See “A Short Confession, 1610″ sections 23-27 (Lumpkin, Baptist Confessions of Faith, 108-109) especially “Yet is not every one therefore a teacher, elder, or deacon, but only such as are orderly appointed to such offices. Therefore, also, the administration of the said offices or duties pertaineth only to those who are ordained thereto, and not to every particular common person”.

Also “English Declaration at Amsterdam, 1611″ sections 20-21 (ibid. 121-122) especially “That the Officers off everie Church or congregation are either Elders, who by their office do especially feed the flock concerning their soules, or Deacon Men, and Women”.

Also “London Confession, 1644″ sections XLIV-XLV (ibid. 168) especially “And as Christ for the keeping of this Church in holy and orderly Communion, placeth some speciall men over the Church, who by their office are to governe, oversee, visit, watch”.

“Second London Confession, 1677″ chapter XXVI sections 8-10 (ibid. 286-287) “A particular Church gathering, and completely Organized, according to the mind of Christ, consists of Officers, and Members; And the Officers appointed by Christ to be chosen and set apart by the Church (so called and gathered) for the peculiar Administration of Ordinances, and Execution of Power, or Duty, which he intrusts them with, or calls them to, to be continued to the end of the World, are Bishops or Elders and Deacons.

“The work of Pastors being constantly to attend the Service of Christ, in his Churches, in the Ministry of the Word, and Prayer, with watching for their Souls, as they that must give an account to him”.

“The Orthodox Creed, 1679″ section XXXI (ibid. 319-320) is nearly identical to the Second London Confession, 1677.

Granted this is but a sampling. But does give some idea concerning not so much how ordination is performed as ritual but how ordination is understood in terms of who we ordain and why. The above emphasize setting apart for a particular office with special responsibility for the spiritual condition of the congregation.

Update: 2010-10-13

Sure enough Dale Moody in The Word of Truth – arguably one of the best Baptist theologies of the 20th century – has a good discussion of the issue (452-460) although he does not fully or finally resolve the question(s) of what exactly is ordination within the Baptist tradition. He does however explore the biblical evidence exceptionally well. With regard to the apostles he emphasizes the importance of dynamis and exousia – power and authority. With regard to the epistles he emphasizes the importance of charismata and cheirotonia – spiritual-gifts and ordination (literally “hand-stretching/laying”). With regard to the Pastoral epistles he emphasizes 1-2 Timothy and what appears to be the “pouring of one man’s powers into another man” (ibid. 158). Moody clearly and strongly distinguishes charismatic and official ministries within the Christian church. He summarizes:

The picture that develops is one of a large charismatic circle that includes all the people of God, all members of the body of Christ; but some members with unusual gifts and qualifications are set aside for special ministries that have official status…. There is no reason why those “who live by the gospel” should not be consecrated to the life to which they have given themselves. (ibid. 159-160)

It would appear that an important ingredient in any discussion of ordination is not just gifts and not just office but also whether this is the primary (perhaps life-long but not necessarily) vocation to which the ordinand commits.

East Shanghai Church

Complicated. Changing. Encouraging.

Those three words encapsulate what Chinese Christians shared with me concerning religious freedom and the state of the Christian church in China.

The third of my three goals for the trip through China was to observe first hand just what is going on in China with religious freedom in general and the Christian movement in particular. For years I have not been able to get a clear and consistent picture. On the one hand I hear horror stories about Christians being persecuted. About the underground church. Secret missionaries. But on the other hand most Chinese people who participate in Church of the Nations never mention any of this. As if being a Christian is not a big deal. Unless one is a member of the Communist Party and/or works for the government or a university. And then one has to keep a low profile. There have been several Chinese people over the last eleven years who have said “I would like to become a Christian but I cannot because of my work and position back home”. A few have been baptized secretly – no non-Christian internationals told or invited.

So which is it? Is it difficult to be a Christian in China or not? And which narrative is more accurate? The “suffering persecuted church” narrative? Or the “people can be Christians and churches can minister openly” narrative?

Let’s start with the raw data. What did I see and do?

I visited three registered churches – Three Self Patriotic Movement churches that cooperate with the Chinese government. (1) Haidian Church in Beijing. (2) A registered church in Yangling. And (3) East Shanghai Church. Oh and I should add (4) a registered church in Nanning.

I also visited or talked at length with (people in) three family churches – churches which are not registered with the Chinese government. (1′) That meets in a large apartment in north Beijing. (2′) That meets in a small apartment in north Beijing. (3′) That meets in rented space at a television studio in Beijing.

1. Haidian Church in Beijing

Haidian Church meets in a huge extremely modern building – almost does not look like a “church” and yes that is a mild criticism. They have several worship services to accommodate 3000+ members. We arrived half way through a Chinese service and tried one of the overflow rooms (where people watch and participate by video feed from the main sanctuary). There was no room but my friend said “this is a pastor from America who has come to visit” and they found us a couple spots. Those who came represented a good cross section of Chinese society but especially young people and university students.

We stayed also for the English language service which is led partly by Chinese and partly by English speaking foreigners. My classmate C_ Y_ who teaches at Peking University said this is quite unusual and suggests the pastor is both clever and careful. He is able to work with the Chinese government so effectively that Haidian Church is able to do things that normally the government would not permit.  About half the congregation was Chinese (especially young and university people) and the other half foreigners (mostly Americans). The style of worship was definitely “contemporary” and I do not mean emergent – about 10-20 years behind what one normally sees among evangelical churches in the United States. The sermon was given by a Chinese woman who speaks exceptional English. It was excellent and focused on obedience to the commandments of God.

There are several registered churches in Beijing. This sounds great. But do the math. You have several churches each of which includes maybe 3000-7000 people. In a city of 20 million. Clearly the vast majority of Beijing residents do not have ready access to a church that worships and ministers openly. What the Chinese government allows barely scratches the surface of what the Chinese people need.

Every registered church in China also functions as a bookstore. This is where Chinese people can purchase Bibles and other basic Christian literature.

I should note my Chinese friend (who is a professor at a university) did not entirely care for Haidian Church. Her concern is that the church is so large that people can come and go without ever truly being part of the life of this church family. Whereas Church of the Nations is small enough that visitors are always noticed and welcomed. Relationships and friendships form. There is community. But this is not really a comment on registered churches – her concerns would apply to any large church in the United States. I countered that Haidian Church does offer Bible study and discipleship groups – you can choose to become involved and connected.

(1′) House church in north Beijing.

That afternoon a good friend took me to visit a house church in north Beijing. It meets in a rented apartment – with a large living room that functions as a sanctuary and holds maybe 100 people. I met and talked for 2 hours with several members of this church. Two attend a seminary in Hong Kong. One a recent convert. Plus a few others. Some spoke English.

What they tell me is that even this unregistered church can worship and minister openly. Most of the time. For the most part. There are times and circumstances when the Chinese government will give them some difficulty. Such as during the Beijing 2008 Olympic games the government said “this church is too big – you need to divide and meet in smaller groups”. And the church cannot engage in activities that are too public – such as an evangelistic event in a public park.

They were mildly critical of registered churches. Their concerns are that because registered churches must cooperate with the government there are inevitable compromises. Also there is a lack of emphasis on obedience. And accountability is almost non-existent. When I told them about the sermon that morning by Cathy Zhang at Haidian Church they were surprised and somewhat encouraged.

They did express some specific concerns about religious freedom in China. First that the Chinese government appears to be choosing sides – supporting Buddhism and even Islam. But not Christianity even though there are many more Christians than there are Buddhists or Muslims. Second that there are some Chinese who argue that Buddhism should be declared the official religion in China. Why Buddhism? Because Christianity is perceived by some as Western even American. Whereas Buddhism is not. At the time I wondered if these Chinese Christian friends were exaggerating – but later (especially in Shanxi province) I could see what they were talking about.

I asked “what message can I bring back to American Christians for you? what can we do to help you?” they mentioned a few things. Number one was the need for more and better training. There is a lack of good theological and pastoral training in China. They would like to be able to attend strong seminaries in other countries such as the United States. But that takes money. If American Christians want to help Chinese Christians receive strong training we need to work harder at providing good scholarships and financial support. And of course they asked for prayer.

Now my good friend who attended Louisiana State University is not herself a member of this house church. That evening I had dinner with her and her family at their small two bedroom apartment. An American who teaches in China joined us. He has lived in China for several years and grew up in a missionary family that served primarily in Japan. He told me quite plainly “there is no underground church in China. It’s not underground. It’s completely open”. And that there is no need to smuggle Bibles into China. People can buy Bibles openly in China and there are plenty being published to meet the need. The only reason some American pastors talk about smuggling Bibles is because they want to “play at being James Bond”. He himself is fairly active in a Three Self church in Beijing. I have seen shows on television about American Christians visiting truly underground churches – traveling in vans with curtains drawn so no one can see the Westerners within and churches that meet in caves or basements outside of town with people standing guard outside. But this American argued that such shows do not reflect the current situation.

(2) Yangling Church

Very different from the big modern expensive building full of educated people in Beijing. Not far from Northwestern A and F University. But a more humble and simple church building. Wooden benches. The restrooms are basically concrete latrines. Mostly local people and farmers. Many do not have more than a middle school education. The female pastor speaks in a strong local dialect. And yet I enjoyed this worship gathering most of all. It seemed more honest.

My friends in Yangling – a university town about one hour from Xi’an – tell me that the university administration strongly and actively discourages people from participating in this local church. Indeed they warn visiting scholars against having anything to do with Christian churches when they are in the United States. Although I do see some university students and faculty.

The order of worship is interesting. At all three Three Self churches I visit the first half hour is practicing songs. There is little singing during the worship service proper. Although they sing the Apostles’ Creed. They – and I saw this in house churches – read at least one Psalm responsively (men and women alternating). The choir at Yangling Church presented a beautiful and moving rendition of Psalm 23 in song. And apparently we were there on one of two testimony Sundays. No sermon – just people going forward and sharing testimonies. Several people took pictures of videotaped parts of the worship gathering. No one seemed to mind.

(3) East Shanghai Church

East Shanghai Church - exterior

East Shanghai Church is in many ways the closest to a modern-traditional American Protestant church. Beautiful old building in excellent condition. Very well organized with plenty of ushers to help you out. Lists of rules for how to behave during worship – such as no going to the bathroom during the sermon! Traditional wooden pews in good repair. They even provided me a Chinese-English hymnal which is uber cool because now I can sing along with everyone else.

The sermon is good but mind crushingly long. After about 45 minutes I suggest we get going. Apparently she was almost done because the service ends a few minutes after we leave. Super long sermons are quite normal in China.

The friend who took me is also a university professor. She does not normally attend church. She tells me she cannot partly because of her job but mostly because of her husband who is a police officer. He cannot even be seen with me a foreigner. Exactly what kind of police work? Her husband told her “it’s better if you don’t know”. The Shanghai Expo is keeping him extraordinarily busy – maybe three days off in the last few months. My guess is he is the Chinese equivalent of a domestic security agent. Again – it seems that being a Christian is not a problem for ordinary Chinese people. But it is a problem for people in certain positions.

(4) Chonghe Church in Nanning

Apparently one of my friends in Nanning got in touch with a local church – they wanted me to come by and visit. Chonghe Church was crammed into a multi-story building on a narrow street in downtown Nanning. In many ways like a modern Baptist church in America. The sanctuary is relatively small but has a baptistry (beneath the platform – so baptism by immersion), high end sound system, projector and screen, band instruments (such as guitars and drums), and equipment so that people in overflow rooms can watch the live video feed. Part of the building is for their ministry that provides housing for elderly widows who have no children of their own to care for them.

From my journal:

Several staff. Three services with around 2000 members. Li Ping shows us around. Now head to restaurant. There we meet with two friends(?) of X_ who work for the government. Plus three people from Chonghe Church. As well as Z_. Most people do not speak English so most of the conservation revolves around me in Chinese. The two groups of other people have never met each other so it is interesting to see how government workers interact with Chinese Christians. Does not seem to be a problem. Li Ping and Xile Joy are very open and share literature with Peng and Wang.

Toward the end of dinner I ask what the Chinese Christians would like me to pass on to brothers and sisters in America. Please pray. Pray for economic development in Guangxi – one of the less developed provinces in China. For the young people. For men – most Chinese Christians are women. For Christian married couples – that they can be an example to other Chinese. For people in the government.

(2′) Small house church in Beijing

During my last Sunday in China I visit the small house church that meets in my friend’s two bedroom apartment. By small I mean six people. X_ has been studying piano. There are three other people besides her family. We sing several songs. There is prayer and Scripture reading. Her husband L_ alternates preaching with W_ who picks me up and drives me to the apartment. The sermon is a theological exposition of the first sentence of the Apostles’ Creed: I believe in God the Father Almighty maker of heaven and earth. It is one and a half hours long. Ouch. Even if you take into account Chinese and English translation still it would have been nearly an hour. After we finish I am asked to lead in the celebration of Communion. Their one year old son D_ participates because he has been baptized. Many house churches are strongly interested in Reformed theology. X_ and L_ have been studying Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion in Chinese translation.

(3′) Large family church in Beijing

I have been put in touch with S_ Church via a professor at Louisiana State University who keeps in close touch with a young man active in this church. Two years ago they bought property for 10 million yuan. But the real estate company has not allowed them to take possession – even though this costs them a substantial daily fine. Apparently the Chinese government is involved and is blocking this large house church of 1000+ from having their own property because of the significant legal implications.

If you let an unregistered church buy property – you cross a mighty big legal line.

So while the property is on hold they rent space at a government television studio. Which is interesting. My friends X_ and L_ come along because they have always wanted to see S_ Church and meet some of its leaders.

From my journal:

There is a gentleman standing outside. Yes? Are we looking for a place to eat? No we are here for the church. Ah then – and he tells us where to go. Apparently if we are not looking for S_ church he would have been less helpful.

S_ Church meets in the bottom floor of a television studio – with a restaurant right next door in the same building. X_ H_ finds us and we head into the worship space. The space and the service in many ways are familiar. Except for the Chinese language the order and style of worship are similar to independent/evangelical traditional/contemporary. Half of the songs are traditional translated into Chinese. The other half are recognizable “contemporary” – the term is problematic – worship songs also translated into Chinese. There are prayers. The choir sings at least once. The people recite a Psalm together – women and men alternating each verse. Women lead the worship service. There is a central screen and a projector which shows words. There is a time of open/vocal prayer where everyone stands and prays out loud at the same time – have seen this before.

Then the pastor(? later confirmed to be the pastor) comes out. Soft spoken man who appears to speak simply. Apparently this is the sermon. I ask X_ H_ if this is a good time to step out and have a chance to talk. I cannot stay for another two hour service all in Chinese.

X_ H_ is an engaging and outstanding young(?) man who speaks impeccable English with an educated British accent. xxx xxx The conversation that follows is exceptional. Some of what he shares is revelatory. Some confirms impressions/observations so far about religion and Christianity in China.

Perhaps in a separate document will write up what I can about the conversation. In a nutshell the situation in China is (1) complex (2) changing rapidly – he knows 25 people in his former place of work have become Christians in just the past three months and (3) generally encouraging. The government seems to be saying “we are going to grant you more freedom – but you need to wait a little bit”. He tells me it would have been no problem for me to carry and give out my church business card. Now that is remarkable and not what American pastors in Baton Rouge were telling me. Again – do we exaggerate the situation? So far that has been the case. The church in China is not entirely free. But neither – at least according to what I see and hear – does the situation match some of the horror stories one hears in the United States. Am I missing something?

He says we focus too much on the issue of who is in power rather than specific details and situations.

What can we do? What help does the Chinese church need?

• Prayer

• Training – a shortage of spiritual/theological knowledge among pastors/leaders (he quickly emphasizes that by knowledge he means faithful Christian knowledge)

• Media – by which he means journalists and writers who will (a) produce materials (devotional/spiritual literature, how to live the Christian life, and so on) and (b) promote reading of those materials. This is when X_ expresses her strong interest – she has written articles and her husband is a journalist. One could add publishing/promoting Chinese translations of Christian literature as well. One of the elders is working on Institutes of the Christian Religion by John Calvin. Dude. But is there not already one?

Concluding thoughts

So is there religious freedom in China or not? In a nutshell what I found was a high amount of freedom for Christians – so long as they did not bump into what I call the “ceiling”. The government does become much more restrictive during certain sensitive times. Shaowang Church was meeting in a public park(!) – and streaming their worship services on the internet! – until President Obama came for a visit. Then the government said “you need to get out of here” – hence the television studio.

So what to make of the “horror stories”? What to make of a June 04 2010 article by Baptist Press?

Persecution of Christians in China is still a widespread problem and an ignored topic in the secular media, said Bob Fu, president of ChinaAid, in an interview with Baptist Press.

Fu knows about persecution firsthand. He suffered for his faith in his homeland before he and his wife Heidi fled to the United States in 1997. A leader of the student democracy movement that was squelched by the Tiananmen Square massacre in 1989, he became a Christian the same year. In 1996, secret police discovered the Bible school he and Heidi founded and imprisoned both of them. After their release and further persecution, they escaped through Hong Kong.

Fu started ChinaAid (www.chinaaid.org) in 2002 to bring international attention to China’s repression of unregistered churches and their members.

I am unwilling to question what Fu states. Perhaps the situation is different the farther one gets from the big cities. Or in certain less developed provinces. Perhaps what Fu describes is entirely accurate but somewhat out of date. It is difficult to match this article with what I saw and heard during my journey through China.

Quick note to let gentle readers know I have been a bit busy getting ready for my first trip to China.

After 11 years serving as pastor of Church of the Nations the mother church University Baptist Church has graciously allowed me a mini-sabbatical of 2 months. Technically a 1 month sabbatical plus 1 month study leave. A large part of these 2 months off is a lengthy trip to China. Because more than half of the people with whom I minister are from that nation. The trip itself has 3 main goals:

• Visit some of the people who were part of our activities. And maybe make some new contacts.
• Understand better the nation its people and its culture by experiencing it first hand.
• Learn more about what Christianity in China is like.

I will visit (1) Beijing (2) Taiyuan (3) Xian (4) Nanning (5) Guangzhou (6) Hong Kong (7) Shanghai (8) Qingdao then return to (9) Beijing for the return trip to Louisiana. I will spend 2-4 days in each city depending on how many people there are to visit and how much there is to see and do. The one exception is Hong Kong – that part of the trip is basically just for fun. Although I do know a rabbi who moved there a couple years ago.

I have been surprised at how difficult it is to plan a 4 week trip with 8 different stops visiting something like 30-40 different people and families. Something like 1-2 hours each day for several weeks. Had to create a spreadsheet just to keep track of all the people and their contact information. Have created a master itinerary file that contains all travel contact hotel and activity planning information. It is about 80-90% complete. I still do not know where I will stay or what I will do some days.

I am both excited and nervous about the trip. I used to enjoy flying but now I cannot stand it. I usually adapt quickly and easily to the local culture and language but this will probably be the most challenging so far. But I am looking forward greatly to seeing these people. Including – as of yesterday when I finally got in touch with him again – a biblical scholar at Beijing University who graduated from the same doctoral program at Cornell University. He began his program as I was finishing mine.

Usually when I tell people about this trip they say “oh a mission trip to China! how wonderful!” This is not a mission trip. Not that there would be anything wrong with that. I will not be working with any churches there registered or not. Although I will of course visit a few churches. And believe it or not I will have two opportunities to give a lecture to Chinese university students. Awesome. But basically I am going as a tourist.

I am not sure to what extent I will post publicly about the trip. We will see.

Funny how everything works together.

I was mildly annoyed when 3 teenagers who attend Church of the Nations said they needed me to take them home in the church bus – which had left 10 minutes earlier. Sigh. Which meant not being able to give a report during deacon’s meeting. I was not planning to go to deacon’s meeting but apparent our deacon representative had not been receiving our regular emails. Argh.

Got back in time. Gave report. Left meeting early about 2:00 p.m.

If all of that had not happened I would not have heard what may be the single best discussion of the nature of sin I have ever heard. Although I listen to Ancient Faith Radio I have never listened to Steve the Builder. He was ostensibly discussing homosexuality – but the podcast is not only about that and that is not where I think its value primarily lies.

The Christian faith does not give us a definitive answer in the “nature/nurture” debate on any human frailty. Genetically caused disabilities are as much a trait of the fallen world as weaknesses visited upon us by lack of nurture and love. The issue for the Christian is the fact that “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Rom. 3:23). What is the “glory of God”? It is living in perfect love and communion with God and other human beings.

But we don’t live in perfect love; we are born into corruption, futility, and death. We are conceived by fallen flesh and born into a fallen world. We are dealt a set of fallen DNA from conception. The moment we leave the womb, we are placed in the arms of a broken person, then taken home to a place where broken people are working out their salvation with fear and trembling at best, or with no fear of God at worst. From our first interactions, we are mishandled, neglected, and broken in ways we did not choose and often cannot consciously identify. The sins of the fathers are visited upon the following generations, not as punishment but as inevitable consequence. We are all broken.

I do not like telling people “go do this or read that” because I believe so strongly in (a) human freedom and (b) the authority of the Holy Spirit. But on this occasion please take the time to listen to this podcast or at least read through the transcript.

Addendum: In the interest of fairness let me share that my friend Joshua (theologically conservative and politically liberal) did not care for the piece much at all. If I may summarize (which means I am not doing full justice to his critique) (1) it fails to distinguish sin-as-condition from sin-as-acts (2) what was sin in 1st century might not be sin for us today (3) it sounds paternalistic (4) its understanding of people (who want to be) in same-sex relationships is skewed and limited.

This is part 3. The beginning of the good news that Qohelet offers – joy. Adobe Acrobat and PowerPoint files for the presentation.

Ecclesiastes study presentation 3/4 – PowerPoint

Ecclesiastes study presentation 3/4 – PDF

Testimony time.

I am fascinated by the significance of small random decisions. When I do something unusual and/or unexpected. Two recent examples.

I hate WalMart. I hate shopping. But need to eat something for lunch. Because it is Lent need to find something with no meat or dairy in it. So grit my teeth and drive the 1/2 kilometer down the road to the neighborhood WalMart for only the 3rd or 4th time since it opened. Granola bars fit the bill very nicely by the way. And who do I run into? A woman whose well known and much loved mother was killed in a car wreck back in November. Devastating loss to the family and to our church. I have been concerned about her dad but have not visited with him because he works in Washington DC. Turns out he has applied for a job at the university so may be back for good.

Seems like a small thing but here is the point. If I had not decided that day at that time to do something I never do would not have had to chance to catch up with a family whose lives were shattered five months ago.

This week headed over to Women’s Hospital to visit a member of my small congregation who was having trouble with her pregnancy and has to stay in bed until the baby is ready to be born. Okay that part is not unusual or unexpected. Driving back to the church office pass by a shoe store where I bought special inserts a year ago. “Well I did need new shoes and inserts for my trip to China might as well do it now”. Turn around go back and head into the store. Looks like only one person working so need to wait. Ah but the others were all in the back and a young woman is the first to come out and offer to help me.  Do not normally announce to the world what I do but for some reason mention I pastor a small congregation for internationals and need good shoes for an upcoming trip to China.

“Oh yeah? My dad’s a pastor. Have you heard of (name)? He works for First Baptist. Started a mission church for the arts community downtown”.

I have indeed heard of him and of the church start. We get interesting postcards inviting us to their activities. That church start was in some ways the model for our second worship gathering. We certainly know First Baptist. For several years I worked with (name) who is now at First Baptist. Does she know him? Of course she knows him very well. You know he and wife just had a baby. Yes I know saw them a couple weeks ago at a wedding shower.

Here is the thing. How often do I buy shoes? How often do I drive through that part of town? Of all the times on all the days I chose to turn around  to buy a new pair of shoes. Of the several employees working in the store that day who do I get? And what if I had not randomly casually mentioned my work? But I get to meet someone who is an important contact.

Yeah these two meetings do not seem momentous or life changing. But it fascinates me how what seems like a trivial random decision lead to a kairos moment that one senses was supposed to happen.  We sometimes think of the providential hand of God evident in the life changing momentous decisions we make. I go to Wednesday night prayer meeting and meet a woman whom I did not imagine would be my future spouse. I pull an envelope out of the trash which leads me to the next eleven years of ministry in a state where I never imagined I would live.

But the providential grace of God is also evident in the seemingly trivial and ordinary. Buying granola bars at the grocery store. Buying a new pair of shoes on the way back to the office. Qohelet would understand and agree.