Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s “Who Am I?”

Posted on by
Reply

I never fail to be moved by Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s poem, “Who Am I?”  Written while in prison for a failed assassination attempt on Adolf Hitler’s life (an attempt that ultimately cost Bonhoeffer his life), this young Lutheran pastor’s words challenge me time and again.

Major transitions in life probably heighten one’s sense of introspection, and, especially during this time of transition in my life, I’ve been thinking a lot about this wonderful poem.

I’ve been thinking about it NOT because I’m unhappy or feel imprisoned (FAR from it!).  Rather, transitions, especially when one bears a title like “Pastor”, can simply cause one to ask Bonhoeffer’s question, “Who am I?”, regardless of whether or not one is in prison or in a new job or whether one is happy or sad.

It’s important to remember that, ultimately, our identity is in God.

The end of this poem is pure gold.

Something to think about!

 

“Who Am I?”

By Dietrich Bonhoeffer

Who am I? They often tell me

I stepped from my cell’s confinement

Calmly, cheerfully, firmly,

Like a squire from his country-house.

Who am I? They often tell me

I used to speak to my warders

Freely and friendly and clearly,

As though it were mine to command.

Who am I? They also tell me

I bore the days of misfortune

Equally, smilingly, proudly,

Like one accustomed to win.

Am I then really all that which other men tell of?

Or am I only what I myself know of myself?

Restless and longing and sick, like a bird in a cage,

Struggling for breath, as though hands were

compressing my throat,

Yearning for colors, for flowers, for the voices of birds,

Thirsting for words of kindness, for neighborliness,

Tossing in expectation of great events,

Powerlessly trembling for friends at an infinite distance,

Weary and empty at praying, at thinking, at making,

Faint, and ready to say farewell to it all?

Who am I? This or the other?

Am I one person today and tomorrow another?

Am I both at once? A hypocrite before others,

And before myself a contemptibly woebegone weakling?

Or is something within me still like a beaten army,

Fleeing in disorder from victory already achieved?

Who am I? They mock me, these lonely questions of mine.

Whoever I am, Thou knowest, 0 God, I am Thine!

Eric Mitchell’s “A Brief History of the Dead Sea Scrolls”

Posted on by
Reply

I see that the latest Southwestern Journal of Theology is out and that it is dedicated to the Dead Sea Scrolls.

Eric Mitchell’s “A Brief History of The Dead Sea Scrolls” is available free, here.  I’ve Kindled it and hope to finish it over the next couple of days, but, at first reading, it looks very insightful.

If you’d like a good summary of what the Scrolls are all about, and the fascinating history of their discovery, check it out.

D. Martyn Lloyd Jones on “The Reaction” (or, “The Dangerous Aftermath of Intense Spiritual Experiences”)

Posted on by
Reply

I’ve been a pastor now for almost fifteen years.  In that time, a few things have really caught me off guard.  One of those is the amount of depression that God’s people deal with.  Depression is, of course, something that most people deal with to varying degrees.  By God’s grace I don’t think I have ever suffered severe depression, though I do know what depression is.

To that end, I was delighted to discover D. Martyn Lloyd Jones’s book, Spiritual Depression. The book is a classic in the field and consists of a series of sermons that Lloyd Jones (originally a medical doctor) preached from his famous pulpit at Westminster Chapel in London.  I’m becoming increasingly convinced that Lloyd Jones’ book is one of the more profound books I’ve ever read in terms of diagnosing the causes and treatment of spiritual depression.

One of the more intriguing insights he offers is the fact that Christians are especially susceptible to spiritual depression after mountain-top spiritual experiences.  Lloyd Jones refers to this as “a reaction.”  Here’s how he puts it:

“Another frequent cause of spiritual depression is what we may describe as a reaction-a reaction after a great blessing, a reaction after some unusual and exceptional experience. I hope to call attention sometime to the case of Elijah under the juniper tree.  There is no doubt in my mind that his main trouble was that he was suffering from a reaction, a reaction after what had happened on Mount Carmel…Abraham had the same experience  (Genesis 15). For that reason when people come to me and  describe some remarkable experience which they have had, while I rejoice with them and thank God, I always watch them carefully afterwards and am always on the look out and apprehensive on their behalf lest a reaction set in. That need not happen, but unless we are aware of the danger it may do so. If we but realized that when God is pleased to give us some unusual blessing we must be unusually watchful afterwards, we would avoid this reaction that so often tends to set in.”

I think that’s right on, and I’ve experienced the same reality.

It’s an interesting idea, and it begs the question:  why are God’s people so susceptible to spiritual depression after great spiritual experiences?

Is it because of heightened attacks from the devil at such times?  Is it because we simply cannot maintain such spiritual intensity this side of Heaven?  Is it because spiritual mountain tops give us glimpses of a reality that we will not posses completely until we stand in the presence of the King of Kings and Lord of Lords?

As I say, he makes an interesting and, I think, valid point.

Walter M. Miller, Jr.’s A Canticle for Leibowitz

Posted on by
Reply

Wow…wow…WOW!

I’m still reeling from this book, so you will have to be patient.  Mrs. Richardson and I finished it last night, and I found it to be, in a word, astounding.  Of all the novels we’ve read together, this will go down as one of the most memorable.

Originally published in 1959, the late Walter Miller’s A Canticle for Leibowitz is one of the most profound, unsettling, haunting, effective, and brilliant novels I have ever read.  It’s a scifi cult classic, and with good reason.  I think I agree with Time magazine’s initial assessment of the book as “Extraordinary…Chillingly effective.”

I should probably call my father and apologize to him, for he has been telling me for years that I really need to read this book.

He was right.

A Canticle for Leibowitz is a post-apocalyptic novel set in the future and tracing the events of the human race primarily through the lens of a monastic community in the deserts of western North America called The Albertian Order of Saint Leibowitz. The book consists of three movements dealing with three different periods of time:  the 26th century, the year 3174 A.D., and the year 3781 A.D.

The first period deals with the resulting dark ages of ignorance, savagery, and brutality following nuclear holocaust (the “flame deluge” in Miller’s memorable terminology).  The Order of Leibowitz is a monastic community determined to preserve “the memorabilia,” or the remains of the past society of men.  The second movement finds the order dealing with an increase in scientific knowledge, the beginning emergence of the human race out of the long darkness of its own ignorance, and the reconstruction of the basic contours of society.  It is, however, a time also of great strife and war.  The final movement finds the human race in a state of great technological advancement but plagued by the old, consistent malady of man’s moral, societal, and ethical corruption.

In truth, the common thread throughout each epoch, and, in my opinion, the primary concern of Miller’s novel, is precisely the problem of original sin and man’s refusal to recognize that all political and social attempts at reestablishing Eden on the earth inevitably dissipate into barbarism and, ultimately, self-destruction.

Miller was a tail-gunner in WWII, and he knew well the ravages of war.  He participated in the bombing and destruction of a famous monastery in Italy, an event that had a dramatic impact on his life and, obviously, his writing.  He converted to Catholicism (a point that must be grasped if the novel is to be understood) but later lived in adultery, became extremely reclusive, and, finally, died at his own hand in 1996.

Miller understood theology very, very well, and the book is marked by both theological depth and, at times, density.  Some readers may find the copious Latin references burdensome, but they are quite germane to the story and helpful in creating mood and context.

Miller is thoroughly Augustinian in his view of the sinfulness of man.  More than once the abbots of the Leibowitzian order pontificate on the disastrous effects of both the Fall of Man and man’s refusal to see and understand the radical implications of that Fall.  This aspect of the novel reaches its apex in the concluding thoughts of Abbot Zerchi during the second nuclear holocaust as he lay dying.

“The trouble with the world is me…Thee me Adam Man we.  No ‘worldly evil’ except that which is introduced into the world by Man – me thee Adam us – with a little help from the father of lies….’Me us Adam, but Christ, Man me; Me us Adam, but Christ, Man me,’ he said aloud.” (330)

In truth, Miller’s handling of harmatology, soteriology, and theophany in this novel are quite impressive.  Along the way, the novel also offers powerful reflections on war, technology, and euthanasia (particularly in part 3).

In many ways, it’s harder to describe an overwhelming book than a lesser one, and I find that I’m experiencing that even now.  So perhaps I should simply end with this:  A Canticle for Leibowitz is everything a great book should be.  It is thought-provoking, psychologically and emotionally engaging, challenging in the various dilemmas it offers the reader, memorable in its descriptive force, and, ultimately, expressive of the grand verities of the gospel.

This is undoubtedly one of the greatest novels I’ve ever read, and I intend to read it again.

A great, great read.

Highly recommended.

Paul Brewster’s Andrew Fuller: Model Pastor-Theologian

Posted on by
Reply

My Thanksgiving-break book this year was Paul Brewster’s fascinating Andrew Fuller: Model Pastor-Theologian, a selection in B&H’s “Studies In Baptist Life and Thought” series.  Fuller’s is a name you encounter increasingly these days (as evidenced, for instance, by “The Works of Andrew Fuller Project”and “The Andrew Fuller Center for Baptist Studies”), and those familiar with the theological, ecclesial, and denominational frictions within the Southern Baptist Convention will understand why.

Andrew Fuller was a British Baptist pastor and theologian (largely self-taught) who exerted a marked influence over the Baptist church which he pastored and the association of which he was an important part.  (As an aside, Brewster’s description of the heightened collegiality of British associationalism was quite insightful).  So great was his influence, that one historian claimed he achieved a kind of de facto bishopric in the area.  His was a ministry characterized by great fruit and great controversy, the latter likely being the reason for the renewed interest in Fuller today.

Essentially, Andrew Fuller pushed back against the “High Calvinism” (read, “hyper-Calvinism”) of John Brine and John Gill.  I do understand that the contention that Gill was “hyper” in his Calvinism is hotly disputed.  It is possible that Brine’s presentation of Gill’s thought gave rise to the assumption.  It is also possible that Gill was, in fact, a hyper-Calvinist.  I’ll leave that to others to decide.

The hyper-Calvinism of Fuller’s day had essentially suffocated evangelistic efforts among 18th century British Baptists.  Gospel appeals to the lost were expressly avoided unless a lost person gave some evidence of a “warrant,” or indication that they might be among the elect.  As such, evangelism suffered and evangelistic means were avoided.

It must be understood that Andrew Fuller did not break with Calvinism per se, he broke with hyper-Calvinism.  Fuller nuanced his Calvinism into a kind of evangelistic, missionary Calvinism.  He did not reject election.  He simply rejected the notion that a warrant must be present to justify evangelistic outreach.  Fuller argued that, on this side of Heaven, we do not know who the elect are.  As such, we should hear the missionary impulse within scripture and indiscriminately offer the gospel to all people in all nations.  It is hard for us to imagine this being controversial, but it was in his day and context.

Fuller also nuanced his approach to limited atonement, arguing that while the atonement was efficient only for the elect, it was sufficient for the sins of the whole world.  As such, we may yet again feel not only the freedom, but the imperative of preaching Christ to all people, everywhere, under the biblical assumption that the blood of Christ is a sufficient payment for the sins of the world.

Fuller is also notable for his efforts (alongside William Carey) in beginning the Baptist Missionary Society, which constitutes, essentially, the beginning of the modern missionary movement.  Fuller was the society’s head at home, working tirelessly to handle the various organizational, financial, and logistical issues that arose in the execution of this important ministry.  He was, in Carey’s famous terminology, the one who “held the rope” for the missionaries while they went to the field.

Brewster reveals that some believe Fuller to have been under-appreciated in his role in the formation of the Baptist Missionary Society.  Others seem to overstate Fuller’s importance.  To be sure, William Carey’s name is rightly synonymous with the founding of the modern missionary movement, but it is only right to recognize as well the enormous role that Fuller played.  To use Carey’s terminology, what would become of those descending below if those holding the rope were not faithful?  And, by all accounts, Fuller was a faithful “rope holder,” almost obsessively so.

The current revival of interest in Fuller may be attributed in part (as Brewster recognizes) to the controversies surrounding Calvinism in the Convention today.  It is a controversy I’m disinterested in commenting on here.  Regardless, Fuller represents a possible via media in the modern controversy, showing the one side that (a) not all Calvinism is hyper-Calvinism and (b) that Calvinism in and of itself is not inherently inimical to fervent evangelism, and showing the other side that an imbalanced preoccupation with the Calvinist system, untempered by those significant portions of scripture that speak of and illustrate the worldwide missionary impulse of the early church and need to take the gospel to the nations can lead to a stifling of missions and evangelism.

A man like Andrew Fuller, and his example of passionate evangelism and missions, may serve to help temper the unfortunate rancor of the modern situation in the SBC.  To put it mildly, were the Convention populated by people as passionate about preaching the gospel of Christ to the nations as Andrew Fuller was, we may would just see revival break out in earnest in our day.

I was also challenged by this book’s depiction of Fuller’s approach to pastoral ministry.  Fuller was quite scrupulous about the need for him to be an undershepherd to the people of God.  He worked tirelessly in knowing and reaching his people, and those outside of his own church.  Fuller never seemed to coast in his pastoral duties, even though, at times, his work in the missionary society caused him to do less than he likely should have for his own people.

In all, this is a truly wonderful and insightful biography.  It’s well-written (if a tad repetitious at times) and engaging.  I suspect that anybody could read it to great profit.

“The Ragman”

Posted on by
Reply

The Rag Man
By Walter Wangerin

Early one Friday morning, I was walking through the streets of the town and I came across a giant man, 6 feet, 4 inches tall, pulling a cart filled with rags. Although they were but scraps of clothes, they were clean and bright, as was the peddler, calling out the wares… “Rags!” “Come get your Rags!” Clean, new Rags!” “I’ll take your old ones and trade them for new!”

I was very curious to see such a sight – not that I had never witnessed people trying to make a buck on the hard streets, but this fellow seemed so hardy and strong. Certainly, he could find work doing something other than pushing rags? I decided to follow him at a distance to see what he was up to.

At his first stop, he came across a sad woman, crying on the stoop of her apartment building. She held a stained scrap of cloth to her face as the man approached. He stepped over garbage and broken toys and offered the woman a clean handkerchief. As he did so, her tears dried up and her entire face brightened. But as he walked away, the Ragman began to sob uncontrollably. He wiped his face with the old dirty cloth that he had taken from the sad woman on the porch. I shook my head in wonder.

The next person that the Ragman came upon was a little girl. Her head was wrapped in a bandage that was dark with blood. As the Ragman approached, she lifted her eyes and asked for a lovely hat to adorn her head. How could he resist? He reached into his bag and pulled out an yellow bonnet that would fit her just perfectly. Before he laid it on her head, he unwound the bandage from the girl’s head and placed it around his own. As he did so, a thin stream of blood emerged from his own head and trickled down his cheek. He didn’t mind at all as he placed the cheery hat upon the girl’s head and went on his way. Happiness crossed her face for the first time in many days, and the Ragman staggered into the street.

By this time, the sun had moved to a high point in the sky and the Ragman looked up and grew worried. He started to move more quickly and with a greater purpose. Eventually, he came to a man leaning against a telephone pole. “Can I offer you clean clothes for work?” the Ragman offered. The other man sneered and laughed. How can I work, when I have only one arm, and he lifted his jacket away, showing the empty right sleeve. The Ragman simply said, lets exchange coats. What happened next, I still cannot believe. The Ragman removed his jacket and with it came his right arm. He handed it to the man at the telephone pole, who gladly put it on and walked away whole and happy. The Ragman kept going, this time, a bit more slowly.

The Ragman hurried down the street. Before long, he came up a drunk, huddled upon the edges of an overpass, covered in a blanket, the stench of which I simply will not relate here. It did not phase the Ragman, however. He lifted off that awful rag from the drunk and gave him brand new coverings. Immediately, the man stood up and walked away with a strength and purpose not seen in years. The Ragman stumbled and fell with the burden of the old cloths. Still, he moved along, even more urgently that afternoon.

He moved through the streets, crying, bleeding, pulling his cart with one arm, and stumbling along through a haze of drunkenness. He was in such a hurry, I could hardly keep up with him! Eventually, he reached a garbage pit. The Ragman climbed to the top of the landfill and laid out a large blanket. He fluffed up his jacket and laid his exhausted head on the top. The Ragman laid down, closed his eyes, covered himself with the drunk man’s army blanket, and died.

Oh, how shocking and terrible! I was not expecting this at all. I slunk away to my bedroom and cried myself to sleep. I had come to love the Ragman, and yet, he had seemingly died alone.

I was so distraught, I slept all the way through Friday night and Saturday too. All of a sudden, I was awakened on Sunday morning by a bright light! This amazingly hard, pure, shocking light came streaming into my room that day, I could hardly open my eyes. When I did, I had to blink several times. Yet, still I did not believe what I saw. There, standing before me was the Ragman! The only sign of his suffering the days before was a small scar on his forehead. Other than that, he was entirely intact!

I could not believe it, and was filled with shame. I lowered my eyes and my head and hesitantly approached the Ragman. Stripping myself of all my clothes, I stood before him, naked. “Please,” I implored him, “Dress me.” The Ragman turned and chose one of the many shining cloths next to him. The entire room was filled with His glory! He dressed me, then, my Lord, that day. With new rags, I am a wonder beside Him – the Ragman – the Christ!

Some Reflections on the 2010 Annual Meeting of The Evangelical Theological Society

Posted on by
Reply

I joined the Evangelical Theological Society earlier this year and have just returned from my first ETS annual meeting.  It was held in Atlanta from Wednesday until today (Friday).  The theme was “Justification” and the main attraction was a panel discussion with N.T. Wright, Tom Schreiner (Southern Seminary), and Frank Thielman (Beeson Divinity School) on justification and the “New Perspective on Paul.”

I originally joined ETS and planned on attending the meeting when, earlier in the year, it was announced that John Piper and N.T. Wright would be debating justification.  Shortly thereafter, Piper took an eight-month sabbatical and Schreiner was chosen as his successor.  I have been very much looking forward to this discussion, which took place this morning.  I was further encouraged by the involvement of Frank Thielman, a New Testament scholar who has done important work in Pauline studies (and who I was privileged to sit under in a DMin. seminar at Beeson about ten years ago).

Before I get to the panel discussion, let me share a few thoughts about some of the lectures I attended leading up to this morning.  The ETS annual meeting is essentially a smorgasbord of papers presented on a wide variety of subjects.  Attendees may choose to hear whatever papers they’d like (the difficulty is in the amazing number of choices you have).  Then, each day, all attendees are encouraged to attend the plenary sessions (this year’s sessions being led by Schreiner, Thielman, and Wright, respectively, and culminating in the panel discussion).

I had a tremendous time and was encouraged and challenged by the presentations I heard.  Danny Akin’s presentation on regenerate church membership was very well done (and the vigorous discussion-time challenge from a slightly irritated Presbyterian brother was actually mildly amusing).  Gregory Wills’ paper on the history of open communion among American Baptists was quite informative and interesting.  Though I ultimately disagree with Wills’ closed communion position (and engaged him a bit during the discussion time on the subject), I thought the paper was very well done and worth hearing.  Finally, Frank Thielman’s  plenary session from yesterday afternoon was, in my opinion, a masterpiece of careful, balanced, irenic scholarship.  Particularly illuminating was his first-century examples of the word “righteousness” on Roman coinage and how the usage of the word thereon can help nuance our understanding of Paul’s use of the word in, for instance, Romans 1:17.

N.T. Wright’s plenary address this morning, and the panel discussion following it, was utterly enthralling.  The debate on what Paul means by “the righteousness of God” and what the New Testament means by “justification” is, at times, a challenge to follow but is, in my opinion, worth the effort to do so.

N.T. Wright clearly wanted to seize the opportunity to push back against what he sees as some of the more absurd criticisms of him and his work.  Time and again he returned to the theme of, “I’ve been accused of…but, in reality…”  Amazingly, he was not off-putting in doing so.  In truth, one of Wright’s strengths is how very witty and engaging he is.  To put it simply, Wright is a likeable guy that you enjoy listening to (even his most strident critics admit as much).  Frank Thielman, in my opinion, was, today, a model of balanced irenicism in the panel discussion.  I was struck by his obviously sincere appreciation of many aspects of Wright’s programme as well as by his sincere questioning of other aspects of it.  (Thielman, I believe, studied under Wright at Duke Divinity for a while, and their appreciation of one another, even in their disagreements, was obvious and refreshing.)

I’m a bit back-and-forth on Schreiner’s efforts in the panel discussion.  Perhaps it’s simply a matter of body language and personality, but Schreiner seemed more…well…tense, I guess, or perhaps even defensive.  He did seem to kind of snipe here and there.  And yet, I do not want to be unfair: Schreiner is an impressive Pauline scholar in his own right and he raised a number of genuine concerns as well as, I think, reasonable challenges to Wright’s work.  Particularly, Schreiner did not seem to want to concede the point in Wright’s treatment of 2 Corinthians 5:21, and, for now, I remain convinced that he (and Thielman) are correct in pushing against Wright on this point.

In all, though, it was a very helpful, very fair, and very collegial discussion among three great minds on an important issue in theology.  N.T. Wright is a towering figure in Evangelicalism today, regardless of what one thinks of his work and proposals.  I remain unconvinced of some aspects of Wright’s proposals, and am convinced by others.  I will say that I do personally grow weary of the unfortunate (though, I trust, limited) almost-demonization of Wright by some of his more strident reformed critics.  Say what you will of Wright:  his work is important, he is a brother in Christ, and I believe that, in many ways, he can help us read the New Testament more clearly (I say this, again, with some reservations and qualifications).

So I’d like to commend ETS for a fine conference.  I am very glad I attended, and I intend to do so again.

Why Asia Bibi Matters

Posted on by
Reply

A 45-year-old Christian Pakistani woman named Asia Bibi has been sentenced to death by hanging for allegedly insulting the prophet Muhammed.  She says she didn’t do it.  She says she’s been set up by the Muslim women she works with…the women who wouldn’t drink water delivered by Asia Bibi on their worksite because she’s a Christian and the water she brought is therefore unclean…the women who formed a mob to attack her necessitating intervention by the police who took Asia Bibi into custody for her own protection…the police who then turned around and filed a blasphemy charge against her.

So Asia Bibi may hang.

Oh, not to worry:  nobody has every actually been executed under Pakistani blasphemy laws.  Well, technically nobody has.  Ten people accused of breaking these laws have been murdered during the trial process, but never actually executed by the courts.

I’m sitting in my house right now watching a big-screen television.  The heating and air folks came by today to finish some duct work so our house can heat and cool more quickly and efficiently.

I got a new suit today.  A new shirt and tie, too.  I didn’t even buy it!  I used a gift card given to me by some very dear friends.  “I really like the pattern on that shirt,” I told the tailor.

Asia Bibi doesn’t know when they may execute her.

A pastor friend and I had pizza for lunch, and a great conversation.  We laughed a lot.  It was really a blast.

Asia Bibi is viewed as “unclean” by her Pakistani neighbors.

My wife and I took a walk tonight.  We were talking about how the weather is almost perfect.

Asia Bibi may just hang for believing in Jesus.

I’ll go to bed tonight in peace and groan a bit when the alarm clock goes off.

Asia Bibi says she hasn’t told her children yet that their momma might hang for believing in Jesus.

So, I don’t know.

Say a prayer for Asia Bibi:  a little Pakistani woman who’s decided that following Jesus is worth it, even if it costs her her life.

Lord, give her courage.  Lord, help her not to crack under the pressure.  Lord, if Asia Bibi is to die, let her die with grace.

And, Lord, make me like Asia Bibi, I pray.

Amen.

Last Night’s Episode of “The Office” and the Attractive Appeal of the Church

Posted on by
Reply

We caught last night’s episode of “The Office” and I was immediately intrigued to see that it was held in a church.  Jim and Pam were having their baby christened and the entire Dunder Mifflin office attended.  As I say, I was intrigued, and also slightly nervous.  After all, in most cases where the church makes an appearance in primetime, it’s bound to be the subject of derision or an example of imcompetence or abuse.

Imagine my surprise, then, when the episode went on to depict the church in a generally positive light.  More than that, it provided an amazing example of the attractive appeal of the church being the church.

During the announcements before the christening, the priest announces that the church youth group is leaving that day for a three month mission trip in Mexico.  At the reception after the christening, Michael Scott observes the unrestrained joy and excitement of the youth group on the other side of the fellowship hall.  He is deeply moved by their enthusiasm, especially as it contrasts by what he sees as the petty cynicism and bad attitudes of his own employees.  When a young lady stands up to proclaim that the group cannot wait to get to Mexico and work with the poor people there, Michael becomes genuinely caught up in the moment.

He becomes so caught up that when the youth group boards the bus to go on mission, Michael boards the bus with them!  Andy, one of his employees, follows as well.

One of the youth compliments Michael on the bus telling him that she cannot believe he would leave everything to join their mission.

It was a beautiful picture of the inherent evangelistic appeal of koinonia.  In a church culture inundated with evangelistic programs and gimmicks, it would behoove the church to remember that the greatest evangelistic tool we have is the ministry of contrast.  When the world looks at the church, they should be struck by our joy, our counter-cultural mission, our love for one another, and our love for the least of these, especially as these traits contrast with the lost culture around the church.

To conclude, shortly after the bus takes off, Michael and Andy panic and begin to think, “What have we done?!”   Finally, they demand that the bus stop and they jump off to return to their normal lives.  Tellingly, this is not applauded in the episode.  Rather, their abandonment of the mission is seen as just another manifestation of their own neurotic impulsiveness and and shallowness.

There’s a lesson here too, of course.  Jesus spoke about putting your hand to the plough and looking back.  Some left all to follow Jesus.  Others began the journey and turned back when the reality of what following Jesus would mean for their lives set in.

Michael and Andy got off the bus.  One of the kids jumped off with them.  The rest went on to their mission.

Who knew that “The Office” could be convicting?

William Carey’s An Enquiry into the Obligations of Christians to use Means for the Conversion of the Heathens

Posted on by
Reply

William Carey’s Enquiry is rightly considered the manifesto of the modern missions movement, of which Carey is considered the father.  It is a relatively brief and utterly fascinating work in which Carey sought to convince the Particular Baptists of England that the Great Commission applied as much to the modern church as it did to the original disciples who first received it from our Lord.  It is readily available online and will likely serve the modern reader as much, if not more, than it served the original readers of the 19th century.  I do regret not having read this entire work until now.  In addition to being a seminal missiological text, it is compelling, articular, insightful, and convicting.

Carey argued in the Enquiry that the missionary imperative of the Great Commission is as binding today as its calls for baptism and the making of disciples is.  Furthermore, he found in Christ’s words “lo, I am with you always” an implicit akcnowledgment that the Commission is transgenerational in its calling (i.e., it applies until “the end of the age”).

Parts of the Enquiry will seem almost quaint to the modern evangelical, accustomed to large missions boards as we are.  For instance, Carey argued that missionaries would simply have to commit to learning languages, something, he said, that could be fairly easily done in the space of a year or two.  Furthermore, missionaries on the field would need only a small plot of land on which to grow a garden sufficient to sustain them.  Most of all, Carey argued, these missionaries would need to be men of courage and resolve, unafraid of hardship or death.

I was struck by the earnestness of Carey’s tone and the simple logic of his argument.  He pointed out that when a trading company is granted a charter, it wastes no time in pressing to the outer regions of its territory in order to establish relationships and open profitable avenues of trade.  The church’s charter, he argues, includes the whole world and eternity itself is at stake.  Thus, should we not be equally zealous in reaching the world?

Carey’s time was, in some ways, different from our own.  Even so, the same subtle (and not so subtle) arguments he heard against the missionary enterprise are prevalent today as well.  As such, William Carey’s Enquiry remains, and will remain, timely and needed.