Describe your church and denominational approach to Christian education of children and youth? Has this changed significantly over the course of your ministry? In your opinion, what are the strengths and weaknesses of your tradition’s particular approach?

• • •

Rev. Angie Gage

Within the United Methodist Church as with most denomination, Christian Education of children and youth is essential in helping to build their understanding of who God is and who they are in relation to God.  The history of education within the United Methodist church is important.  Many United Methodist churches were the first to offer basic educational classes in communities.  The idea of Sunday school originates back to the days that basic education was offered within the walls of the church.  Then on Sundays, the Sunday School would focus on educating individuals in the Bible and spiritual formation.

When I was a child, Christian education was essentially Sunday School.  We had the weekly leaflets that contained our lesson.  But the thing I was most fascinated with was this flimsy little square of black that would play our music on the record players.  It wasn’t a regular record.  I remember those records just as much as I remember the lessons, maybe even more.  I was thrilled that we used this new kind of record in class.  Because I was so fascinated by the record, I was determined to learn the songs even more.  Sunday School was a lesson, music, and a craft.  That was pretty much it.

The other essential of my Christian Education was vacation bible School.  In those days, it was like going to Sunday School all week long.  It was Sunday School with extra activities.  I went every year, but only to the Vacation Bible School at my own church.  I knew all the people teaching, all the kids attending.  It was a time to learn in fast forward.

Then there was camp.  Oh, camp was always great.  I learned how to make a God’s eye at camp with simply two popsicle sticks and some yarn.  I learned how to make a cross out of match sticks.  I think my mother still had it a few years ago.  I learned how to make friends and treat each other like we really liked each other.

So, with my childhood, the essentials were Sunday School (first and foremost), Vacation Bible School, and Church Camp.

Rev. Angie Gage, continued

When I was in college, I was teaching Sunday School to youth,  I noticed things had changed just a little.  The material actually talked about things that youth were worried about in their daily lives.  There was more interaction, more time for discussion.  It was a little more relevant to what was going on in their lives.  Sunday School was becoming more interactive for youth.  Vacation Bible School was still offered, but it now had a youth component to it as well.  Maybe we were making steps in the right direction.

Walk into a Sunday School classroom at my church on a Sunday Morning and you realize that the idea of Christian education has stayed the same, but adapted to the culture.  My last church was so into their newest curriculum, they installed wall-mounted TVs with DVD players in all of the classrooms.  No longer did we have songs on flimsy square records or cassettes.  No know we have music videos, short TV shows to help teach the lesson, and so much more.  We might still have take-home leaflets, but now they are in full color, not just three or four colors.  The leaflets include information that parents need to know and encourages parental continuation of the lesson.  The curriculum teaches the Bible while helping them to understand even earlier about how the Bible story relates to their lives today.  My current congregation has used a rotation model for Sunday School.  The children learn through interaction with the Bible story in music, story, drama, cooking, and more.  Who would have ever thought that through cooking, we can teach the Bible stories, but we can.

Vacation Bible School has even changed.  There is story, puppets, drama, recreational games relating to the lessons, snacks relating to the lessons, and so much more.  Vacation Bible school includes video and some internet connection.  Who would have ever thought it thirty or forty something years ago!  Vacation Bible School is no longer just for kids.  Now VBS has components for youth and adults.  Wow!  How exciting and innovative.  Yes, even adults can go to Vacation Bible School.

Children and youth still attend church camps, but not quite as much as they used to do.  Now, youth have opportunities to attend youth events on a grand scale.  Within the United Methodist Church, we offer an international United Methodist youth gathering every four years.  I attended with my daughter and her youth group in July of 2007.  Imagine, over 8000 youth with their adult leaders gathered in one place to worship and learn together.  I saw youth’s lives transformed.  I saw youth worship freely, as if no one was looking.  This past July, our international youth event was broken into two locations.  Youth from all over gathered in Indiana and in California to worship, serve, pray, and learn.  When I was a youth, we didn’t have big events like this.  Now we do.  Our youth have opportunities to learn beyond the traditional Sunday School and Sunday night youth.  Most youth meet at least twice a week, outside of Sunday School.  They not only focus on learning the Bible, but also in putting their faith into action.

There are many strengths and weaknesses to what we do today.  Some of the strengths revolve around how Christian education is attempting to keep up with the culture.  There is an attempt to keep up with technology and offer more studies through video and distance conferencing.  However, the cost of these become prohibitive, thus making it a weakness as well.  A small membership church finds it difficult to pay hundreds of dollars for one video.  In that case, it is easier to just use a curriculum that is not dependent upon a video.  Another strength is that the curriculum writers are realizing that people lead busier lives now and don’t’ have quite so much free time.  The weakness in this is that there is no interaction with the bible study during the week and the material is often watered down in an attempt to  please the culture.

How do we authentically provide Christian Education for our children and youth?  We have to make sure we are using theologically sound material.  If you are a part of a denomination that has it’s own publishing house, then use the materials published by your denomination.  If you are not a part of a denomination with a publishing house, research who the publisher is, who the author is and find out what their theological beliefs are.  Researching the materials we offer to our children and youth ensure that we are providing them with the absolute best education we can.  It doesn’t matter if we are providing Christian Education through Sunday School, special programs, regular activities, Wednesday night events, after school events, camps, etc.  It doesn’t matter what the venue, just make sure it is good sound material to ensure that our children and youth receive the absolute best.  As a United Methodist, I like to use materials published by Abingdon Press, Discipleship Resources, and Upper Room.  Southern Baptist have Lifeway.  The Presbyterian church has Presbyterian Publishing Corporation.  Disciples of Christ have Chalice Press.  The list goes on and on.  There are companies not related to denominations like Zondervan.  All of these provide Christian Education material of great value.  You just have to find what is right for your church.

I know that I strayed from the question, but I just have to go in the direction that I am led to go.  I see changes that have happened and am impresses yet saddened at the same time.  We offer more opportunities, but too often are offering watered down Christian Education.  I just hope that as we teach the gospel every day, we consider that what we do today has an impact on their tomorrow.  In being true to God’s calling for us to spread the gospel, we must remember that while we can offer it to them in a new culture with new technology, we shouldn’t have to present them with a Hollywood Jesus, but an Eternal Savior.  I’m Just Sayin’ (as my daughter would say).

Pastor Daniel Jepsen

Allow me to focus my response more to the youth side (rather than younger children) since I have more experience here. I will answer the first two questions by telling you what I have learned from working as a youth pastor in three churches (and now as a Pastor still weekly involved with the teens).

First, discipleship is more caught than taught. That is, it is less like an algebra class, and more like learning a trade. Kids learn Christianity and what it means to live as a Christian much more by modeling than by a class. For this reason, it is important that not only are the teens exposed to good adult role models, but that some events (for example, camps, trips, service projects, etc…) provide the opportunity for interaction with those role models.

Secondly, discipleship includes training the mind in a biblical worldview, not simply teaching random devotionals. For this reason, we work out a three-year scope and sequence for teaching through the bible, Christian doctrine and history, and Christian practices. What we want to avoid is simply giving talks on hot-button issues.

Thirdly, “program-driven” approaches are less effective than an intentional approach. A program-driven approach emphasizes a schedule of activities (Sunday school, youth group, service projects, outreaches, etc…). The goal is to get more and more kids participating in more of the activities. An intentional approach (I would say “purpose-driven” but that phrase has been hijacked) focuses on asking, “What do these kids need in order to become more like Christ, and what can we do to help?” After a few years of youth ministry, I began asking those two questions, and I turned to the New Testament for answers. I did a rather thorough study of the biblical concept of Christian maturity and especially of the Greek adjective teleios, which is described as the goal of the Christian life, and is usually translated by the words, mature, perfect, whole, or complete. After studying all the passages, I summarized them under five headings. Maturity comes from:

• Receiving God’s word (through scripture and obedience)
• Loving God’s family (through service and fellowship)
• Connecting to God’s heart (through worship and prayer)
• Sharing in God’s plan (through evangelism and mercy)
• Suffering

I and the other leaders attempted to help provide ways for the teens to be involved in the first four of these (alas, we did not trust ourselves with the last). Sometimes this was encouraging the teens to be involved in the regular activities of the church. Sometimes it meant creating special opportunities for the teens. Sometimes it simply meant giving them a tool. Of course, it always looked better on paper than in reality.

Finally, I have learned that the affections need to be trained and not just the mind filled. C. S. Lewis notes, “Until quite modern times all teachers and even all men believed the universe to be such that certain emotional reactions on our part could be either congruous or incongruous to it—believed, in fact, that objects did not merely receive, but could merit, our approval or disapproval, our reverence or our contempt…St Augustine defines virtue as ordo amoris, the ordinate condition of the affections in which every object is accorded that kind of degree of love which is appropriate to it. Aristotle says that the aim of education is to make the pupil like and dislike what he ought. When the age for reflective thought comes, the pupil who has been thus trained in ‘ordinate affections’ or ‘just sentiments’ will easily find the first principles in Ethics; but to the corrupt man they will never be visible at all and he can make no progress in that science. Plato before him had said the same. The little human animal will not at first have the right responses. It must be trained to feel pleasure, liking, disgust, and hatred at those things which really are pleasant, likeable, disgusting and hateful. “

I have certainly seen the truth of this. Nothing is easier than to spot young people who have grown up with a great deal of Bible knowledge, yet really have no heart to worship God by a life of obedience to Him. Their mind is formed, but not their affections.

How does the Church help train the affections? Well, first we must recognize that the parents will have the most influence here. It is more important that they display an attractive, grace-filled love in the home than that they have family devotions or send their kids to Christian schools. Also, the church can help do this by facilitating modeling, as noted above. The idea of a Youth Pastor is not an unmixed blessing, but the right person in this role can serve as both a model of how to live the Christian life, and also help young people to want to do so. Thirdly, I believe music plays a crucial part. That is, music speaks to the soul and the emotions, and should be a foremost tool for training the affections. Because of that, within each church’s ability, young people should have a time and place to worship with music that is not only biblically true, but attractive and meaningful to them. I don’t mean that this is necessarily on Sunday morning. Finally, the church must preach and model grace in all that it says and does.

The biggest weakness I see in the evangelical approach is two-fold. First, often the lessons about training the emotions are not learned, and we end up with kids with more knowledge than devotion. Second, many churches are too ready to hand off education (of teens especially) to a youth pastor. As my words above show, I see a real need for adult models who will invest time in the life of the kids. So my caution here is not against the concept of a youth pastor, but the wrong use of a youth pastor. He or she cannot do this without a team of other committed adults. Unless the church as a whole owns this ministry, and enough of them show it by putting skin in the game, all of his or her weaknesses will soon characterize the whole youth ministry. Also, when that youth pastor leaves, kids who have only bonded with that minister will feel rather alone in the church, or even in their faith. Few things are sadder than a youth group centered on a youth pastor.

Fr. Joe Boysel

In thinking about the Christian Education of children, it seems to me that there are two major components to this endeavor: content and delivery. The former obviously deals with the specificity of the teaching, while the latter concentrates on the method of instruction. Let me look at this topic, then, from an Anglican perspective, keeping in mind the twofold nature of Christian education.

Anglicans, standing in the catholic tradition of the Church, have done an excellent job preserving a summary of the essential teachings of Christian faith through the Catechism of the Church (you can find this catechism in the back of the 1979 edition of the Book of Common Prayer, p.843ff). The Catechism represents a doctrinal summary of that which we believe and is framed in a “Question and Answer” (often called Q&A) style. It thus assumes a ready mind, full of inquisitive energy, as it supplies the nomenclature for important theological queries. A corollary benefit of the Q&A style is that it fosters in the student a habit of thinking about theological matters in a rational framework. What’s more, teachers and priests may easily form from the Catechism lessons on the Bible, ethics, dogmatics, and so on with logical and age-appropriate precision.

When it comes to content, Anglicans have good stuff. It’s precise. It’s unequivocal. And it’s catholic. Unfortunately, good content is not enough.

As I think about the way Anglicans have handled Christian education in America over the past couple of centuries (and much the same could be said about Anglicans on other continents over the same period as well) I have to admit that we’ve done a very poor job delivering the message to our children. We’ve had a collective assumption that children will learn all they need to know in 30 minutes a week of Sunday school, at the Communion rail, and when they’re in Confirmation classes as teens. Our major failure, then, has been to embrace a lifestyle of constant religious instruction.
Having come from a decade in an American evangelical church (Nazarene) I see a definite advantage to the delivery methods of American evangelicals. The typical program for families in the Church of the Nazarene includes an hour long Sunday school every week together with two worship services and a midweek religious scouting program. Children reared in Nazarendom are constantly being taught Bible, theology, and ethics from the cradle up.

The strength of the American evangelical churches (and the corresponding weakness of mainline churches) appears to thus be found in their respective religious fervor, which naturally translates into their approach to theological pedagogy. If only Anglicans shared the zeal of the Nazarenes (or the Baptists or the Pentecostals), I think we would find clever ways to deliver a clear, consistent, and orthodox message.

Presented by Chaplain Mike

Our regular feature with friends from different Christian traditions continues today with a question about the place of church history and traditions in our current practice. There are a couple more Gangstas who have said they may want to chime in addition to those represented here. When I get their posts, I will publish part two.

Oh, and just for the record, Pastor Daniel did NOT ask nor authorize me to put a picture of John Calvin with his post. I did that on my own. Just for you, Dan.   : )

TODAY’S QUESTION: What part does the teaching and understanding of church history have in your tradition and in your local parish or church ministry? How well versed would you say your congregation is in the history of the church? What suggestions would you have, from your experience, on helping believers know more about our past and traditions?

Rev. William Cwirla (Lutheran)

Presented by Chaplain Mike

UPDATE: This just in. Gangsta Joe Boysel has joined the conversation. He said something about being out on a “job.” Not sure what that means, but he looked much more relaxed than the last time I saw him. Take a few minutes, even if you’ve already read the original post, and hear what Pastor Joe has to say.

As we post some comments from our Gangstas this month, we welcome a new contributor to the smoke-filled room. He is Monsignor Paul Koetter, a priest here in one of Indianapolis’ fine Catholic churches. The church is in a parish where I have many patients, and I can witness to the vibrancy of their community and the wonderful pastoral care that parish members receive. I recently attended a funeral service at his church, and was so impressed by his ability to teach and explain the various parts of the mass that I asked him to join our gang for these discussions. I’m grateful he agreed to at least give it a try—he is a busy man after all. Thanks, Father Paul!

TODAY’S QUESTION: The Memorial Day weekend marks the beginning of summer and the season of leisure and recreation for most Americans. What do you do for leisure and recreation? How do the concepts of “enjoyment,” “pleasure,” “leisure,” and “fun” fit in your theological thinking? How does your church tradition teach you to think about and approach this aspect of life?

Rev. Joe Boysel, Anglican

I think the relationship between work and rest is a much overlooked theological topic for twenty-first century Christians living in the Western world. Indeed, how does the relationship between work and play function in a person’s life?  How does the interplay between activity and rest, occupation and Sabbath bring balance (i.e. shalom) to one’s life?

The Fourth Commandment stipulates that God’s people are to “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.” So rest is a command. But so, too, is work. The “ten words” that God gave to Moses continue: “Six days you shall labor, and do all your work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the LORD your God.” Work and rest. Starting and stopping. Both are important.

Furthermore, the Bible prescribes more than just a weekly schedule, doesn’t it? Work and play, doing and not-doing, are addressed on annual cycles and even half century cycles, too. It seems that humans were designed to do (a lot!) and to be replenished by intentional not-doing. I suppose it is much like working out at the gym. When a person lifts weights, the work actually rips the muscles, tearing its fibers apart. But when the muscles are given time to heal, the restoration process makes them much stronger than they were before the workout began. It seems that things aren’t much different for the human spirit. All work and no play rips a person’s life apart by giving no respite for healing. On the other hand, all play and no work makes one flabby and incapable of doing important tasks.

In my work as a clergyman, I find that it’s easy to confuse my work as a priest with my relationship with the Lord. “Of course, I’m a Christian; I’m a priest for crying out loud!” But being a priest is not the same thing as being a Christian. In fact, there are times when being a priest militates against my faith. (It’s not as easy as it looks to shepherd people!) So, I find that when I work too much and rest too little that I begin to lose sight of both my vocation and my relationship with the Lord. Oh, I can still run a church. But instead of a shepherd leading people towards the Eternal, I instead become what Eugene Peterson calls, “a branch manager of a warehouse outlet that markets God to religious consumers.”

So rest is important. No, it’s more than that: Sabbath stands as a MORAL issue. Following the Decalogue, it would be easy to get the impression that Sabbath keeping is the moral equivalent to fidelity in marriage or transparency in accounting. Let me put it another way. I think that failing to keep a Sabbath is sinful in the same way as a banker who embezzles money or a husband who cheats on his wife. And, although perhaps in a lesser way, so is forgoing annual extended respites. Vacations are not a luxury, they are a spiritual necessity.

Holidays don’t need to be lavish, though. We’re a clergy family, which means we’re poor by definition! Fortunately, though, we know people who are less poor than we are. One of the families we know is the Wadley family. The Wadleys own a home in Bethany Beach, DE. They inherited the home and have kept it so that they might make it available to clergy families for a place of rest. The Wadleys pay the utilities and stock the house with beach supplies and then schedule clergy families to use the home for a week or two at a time – free of charge. (If God blesses people according to their generosity, the Wadleys will need dump trucks to haul their wealth around in heaven!)

So every year the Boysels descend upon Delaware. We go to the beach every day and acclimate our bodies to the cool water of the North Atlantic. We read novels and play lots of board games. We drink cheap wine (well, the over 21 group does) and we stay up late playing Monopoly. We keep no schedule and we try to avoid email. In the morning, Abby and I are up first, so we sip hot coffee on the porch swing and say Morning Prayer together. In the evening, we eat seafood or pizza or cotton candy while walking the strip at Ocean City.

At the end of our time in Delaware, we load up the car with the kids, the dog, and the swimsuits and head back to Ohio. We feel different than when we set out; more calm, more relaxed, more at peace; more whole. And when I get back to work, I remember that while it takes a Christian to be a priest, being a priest isn’t the same thing as being a Christian. Without this rest, I imagine I would forget that. So I guess rest is more than a command, it’s a gift.    

Rev. Daniel Jepsen, Non-Denominational Evangelical

What do I do for leisure and recreation? Well, as in any other area, sometimes I get this right and sometimes I get it…not so right. When I get it right I find leisure and recreation in two areas. One is hiking. The other is reading. I add the qualifications since I haven’t hiked for a while (it takes a good deal of time, and the weather has been all wet lately), and the type of reading I find re-creating takes some work and energy and I haven’t been doing much of that lately either (I seem to be intellectually drained lately). So I often settle for less than ideal forms of recreation, like watching tv with my wife or a movie with my son, surfing the internet, or reading a magazine. These things are not bad, but are not ideal for me. To be honest, leisure is an area I have struggled in lately.

How do the concepts of “enjoyment,” “pleasure,” “leisure,” and “fun” fit in my theological thinking? I am very positive toward these things. The church has too often listened to the platonic voices denying fleshly pleasure and exalting “spiritual” experience. The pleasures of this life are a great gift of God, and operate on two levels: First, they bring enjoyment in and of themselves, and are thus the means of evoking gratitude towards God. Second, they are also pointers to the kind of bliss we will experience in the new creation. When we take delight in a good meal, we honor the cook. When we take delight in sex, beauty, food, sleep, etc, we honor God. But we should also look beyond these things; their very goodness should make us long for the ultimate goodness, when we will be with God, enjoying, with others, “eternal pleasures at your right hand” (Psalm 16:11, NIV).

Related to this, one of my biggest concerns about our culture is that we are increasingly chasing pleasure without gratitude, and in such a way as to draw us away from God, rather than more anxious to be with the author of such pleasures.

How does my church tradition teach me to think about and approach this aspect of life? I am in the very broad evangelical tradition, with all its faults and quirks regularly decried on these pages. One of the advantages of this heritage, however, is its eclecticism. I often start my morning devotions with Fenelon, the great Catholic mystic, but I could just as well read Luther, Calvin or Tozer. My “church tradition” encourages me to seek out those writers and thinkers of whatever age or denomination who seem to have the most biblical approach to the issue at hand. I am able to embrace the Roman Catholic aesthetic of music and art, while distancing myself from the ascetic streak running through much Catholic thought. I know some imonk readers don’t care for John Piper, but I feel he has done much good in restoring the right view of pleasure, and I am grateful for this (even as I disagree with his Calvinism).

In short, since my “tradition” does not have a settled view or tradition on this, I am gratefully free to learn from others.

Msgr. Paul Koetter, Roman Catholic

Recreational time for me has usually included the beauty of the outdoors.  In my twenties I vacationed numerous times in Colorado, camping and hiking in the southwestern part of the state.  Later I began snow skiing in the winter and taking canoe trips into the Quetico Provincial Park in Ontario, Canada.  Recreation, for me, involves getting away from the normal routines and finding time to breath in the beauty of nature.

For me, nature is rejuvenating.  Away from the crowds, the Canadian experience is particularly refreshing because the land, air and water are so pristine and pure.  One can safely drink from the lakes and the only motorized sound that you might hear would be a low-flying pontoon plane.  I have held the personal belief that nature is always in harmony with God.  Nature is always doing what it should do!  When I spend time with nature, it seems to pull me back into a deeper harmony with God.  I feel more peaceful, my ability to trust seems to grow and I am able to see and appreciate my blessings with greater clarity.

A few years ago I was blessed to visit the Holy Land.  During the time, our guide took us to ancient Caesarea Phillipi, also called Banias, where Jesus asked his disciples, “Who do people say that I am? And Who do you say that I am?”  At this site, we experienced the cold mountain streams running down from Mount Hermon.  Because Caesarea Phillipi is about 25 miles north of the Sea of Galilee and because of the refreshing spirit of the mountain streams, our guide suggested that maybe Jesus came to Caesarea Phillipi to get-away and for R&R (rest and recreation).  I had never thought of Jesus getting away to relax, but it made so much sense to me.  I could picture Jesus, sitting by the cool streams, relaxing and speaking with his followers.

I believe God wants us to enjoy the blessings that he gives to us and not just be rushing about all the time.   Our digital world seems to be moving faster and faster, and it is difficult to truly “take time”.   But, “take time” we must. True recreation should help us see the blessings of life with greater clarity and gratitude.

As the song from the sixties says, “Slow down, you move too fast.” Good words for body, mind and spirit!

Rev. William Cwirla, Lutheran

In the medieval “Golden Legend of St. John,” Cassiodorus reports that the apostle John was seen idly playing with a pet partridge that someone had given him.  A young man passing by made sport of it to his friends saying that the old man was playing with a bird like a little child.

John called the youth to come to him and demanded to know what was in his hand.  He held out a bow.  “What do you do with it,” John asked.  “We shoot birds and beasts,” the young man replied.  “How does it work,” John asked.  The young man showed him, stretching out the bow and holding it, then relaxing the bow again.  “Why have you unbent the bow,” John inquired.  The young man explained that if it is bent for too long a time, it would be weaker to shoot with it.

St. John replied, “So, my son, is the way of mankind and contemplation. If it is always bent it would be too weak, and therefore it is expedient to have recreation.  The eagle is the bird that flies the highest, and most clearly beholds the sun, and yet by necessity of nature, it does him well to descend low.  Even so when mankind withdraws a bit from contemplation, he returns with renewed strength and burns more fervently in heavenly things.”

The Lutheran doctrine of vocation views the Christian as a priest to God, baptized into the royal priesthood of Christ, and placed in priesthood and neighborhood to serve the neighbor in love.  For the Lutheran, “vocation” is not simply “what one does for a living.”  Rather, vocation is the sum total of all one’s aptitudes and abilities, guided by holy wisdom, lived out in trust (ie faith) that win or lose, succeeding or failing, one stands justified before God by grace through faith for Christ’s sake and is therefore free to worship, work, and play, offering up all things as living sacrifices to God and loving service of neighbor in gratitude for the one Atoning Sacrifice that makes it all possible.

I don’t believe in “avocations” as such, as though these were little satellites orbiting around the “more important things.”  I prefer to think in terms of priesthood, lifting up the creation to the Creator, consecrating all things – whether a good meal, a fine wine, a game of tennis, a nicely tended garden, a crafted piece of wood – all things are lifted up and consecrated by the Word of God and prayer, whether that be in work, in worship, or in play.  This is our priesthood.

St. John kept birds.  I’ve kept tropical fish and planted aquaria.  I enjoy the “stuff” of creation, what some call “nature,” whether hiking, bicycling with my wife, or scuba diving.  It all reflects the ordering divine Word and Wisdom who made all things and holds all things in existence.

My workshop gives me an opportunity to work with my hands, with tools and material.  It satisfies a creative urge to make something out of nearly nothing. God made the wood, but He gives it into our hands to make something of it and offer it back to Him.  Woodworking as priesthood.  I do the same with my preaching and teaching, but the results are far less tangible.  When people admire some little crafted box or mirror or bookcases, I can say, “Thank you” and enjoy their surprise that I built these things with my hands.  My pastoral work will see its fruition only on the last day, and not one day sooner.

I was given the gift of music by way of my mother who had a lovely soprano voice and a great talent on the piano.  Singing in our congregation’s choir affords me an opportunity to join my people in praise rather than lead them.  It is both relaxing and uplifting.  I used to play the piano and the clarinet.  I still dabble with the guitar now and then.

George Leonard, in his book Mastery, says that dabbling is the greatest obstacle to the mastery of anything.  At least now I understand.  I have mastered the art of dabbling, and have learned to enjoy all of it while mastering none of it.  Dabbling in music, I’ve grown to appreciate disciplined musicianship.  Dabbling in woodworking, I’ve learned to appreciate the craftsman and the artist.  Dabbling in home improvement, I’ve learned new respect for the tradesman.  I’ve dabbled in chess, classical guitar, square-foot gardening, drawing, plumbing, cabinet building, electrical, finish carpentry, and more that I’ve long forgotten.  A friend of mine says that I’m on a quest to find something I can’t do.  I’ve discovered that I can a lot of things, modestly well.  I’ve embraced mediocrity as the fair exchange for breadth.

All of it finds is way into preaching, teaching, and pastoral conversation.  Pastoral work deals with words – God’s Word, people’s words, words of confession and absolution, reconciliation and forgiveness.  God-words – “theology.”  There is lots of listening and speaking, reading and writing.  The world of “stuff” and craft and digging in soil, along with fine food and wine in the company of friends with much good music, is my retreat, my oasis, where the pastoral bow can be relaxed so that it can be taken up with renewed strength and fervor.

Presented by Chaplain Mike

TODAY’S QUESTION: What do you read? What kinds of books do you most frequently read? What do you read for pleasure? What is the best book you’ve read in the past year? In our day, reading habits include blogs and web publications. Which are required reading for you?

Alan Creech, Roman Catholic

I’ll do what I can to answer this one. I assure you, it will be the shortest among the Gangsta gang. “What do you read?” Not much is the short answer. I don’t read a great deal at all. I’ll have a little fit from time to time, go buy something and try to read it. I say “try” because that’s what it ends up being – trying to read something. I’m a slow reader – very slow. I don’t get how some people can barrel through a 400 page book in less than a week! That blows my mind. And it frankly puzzles me a little bit. Why? What’s your hurry? I don’t know – I just don’t get it.

Briefly, I’ll say something about the reading culture in some Christian circles in recent times. It seems a bit on the voracious side to me. I mean, it seems almost like a fetish. Having to have another, then another, then 5 more, then 10 more new books to read, to devour. Now, while I would honor the desire to learn, to grow, etc., I would also say that reading something new is by far not the only way to learn or grow. Spiritual growth more than likely often happens in ways we have no idea about – God working in us when we’re not even acutely aware that He’s doing so, and in ways we don’t even come close to understanding. Clamoring for much knowledge could well be a distraction from the real work that needs to be done in cooperation with our transformation. OK, that’s that.

I do read blogs and some articles on the internet. I have a feed reader set up and skim through several daily. Sometimes I stop and read something all the way through – not too often, but sometimes. Here are a few that come to mind…

• America Magazine
• National Catholic Reporter
• Catholic Sensibility

And a lot of personal blogs – no, not just Catholic stuff as you might think from the above. I don’t even heavily “read” those – just skim them and read something if I see something that catches my attention.

Read for enjoyment?? What’s that? The only thing I guess I probably “read” for enjoyment are fly fishing magazines – Fly Fisherman, Fly Rod & Reel, and American Angler – 3 good ones. Also some fishing/fly tying related websites here and there. If we’re too flooded to fish, I can at least read about it, right?  Peace to all in this house.

Rev. Daniel Jepsen, Non-Denominational Evangelical

One of the great joys of the pastorate is the opportunity to read and learn. In the office, I read the following types of books:

First, I read a lot of commentaries and reference works.  These consume the majority of my reading/studying time.  I especially love those few commentaries that marry exegetical detail with spiritual devotion. D. A. Carson is my favorite here.

Secondly, I read books about ministry. Eugene Petersen takes pride of place here, though John Piper is also very helpful

Thirdly, I read books of devotion.  I especially love some of the older writers, including the mystics.  Fenelon, the great mystic and arch-bishop seems to always speak God’s word to me.  Andrew Murray and A. W. Tozer have also shaped me. Dallas Willard is a living godsend.

For pleasure reading , I go to the classics, especially the Russian masters. Dostoevsky and Tolstoy are masters of speaking truth through beauty.  I also favor Thomas Hardy and Jane Austin.  Occasionally, I find great joy in old poetry (such as George Herbert).

I don’t read much modern fiction, because the sheer abundance of it makes looking for a good read akin to finding a needle in a haystack.  My exception here is Umberto Eco.  I read everything of his (even though is worldview is almost opposite of mine). Also, P. G. Wodehouse always makes me laugh.

My pleasure reading also includes some history and biographies, and a little bit of philosophy and science (a little goes a long way here).

In terms of the internet, imonk is where I start.  It and Books and Culture are the only Christian blogs I spend a lot of time at.  I must admit I am a big fan of the humor site, Cracked.

I currently subscribe to four magazines: The Atlantic, Wired, Books and Culture, and Christianity Today.  I also have a stack of back issues of First Things I am still wading through.

Finally, the best book I have read in the past year is actually one I am re-reading: The Brothers Karamazov by Dostoevsky.  After the scriptures, it has meant more to me than any other book.  If you pick it up, be warned: not everybody likes it. It is long and meandering, and somewhat confusing to westerners.  But to me, it not only gives the most profound psychological portraits I have read, it also gives (what seems to me, anyway) the only real answer to the problem of evil.

Two other books that have helped me a lot in the last year are Humility by Andrew Murray, and Works of Love by Kierkegaard (though I have only just started this one).

Angie Gage, United Methodist

I have always been a big believer that to make sure a person’s mind stays sharp is to exercise it.  Mental exercise by reading is something I love to do, but never seem to have as much time to read as I would like.  But in reading this month’s question, I realized that I read much more than I thought.  My reading consists of pleasure reading and professional reading, electronic media and print media.   I guess in my style, I am somewhat eclectic.

I have some required daily readings.  You can be assured that every day I am reading the Bible (in print, online or on my iPhone), one of my devotionals (again, usually it is on my phone), and the news.   To me, the Bible is required daily reading, not just for sermon and study preparation, but for my own personal spiritual growth.  I can’t expect members of my congregation to read the Bible daily if I don’t do it myself.  Part of being a spiritual leader within the church is to set an example.  The best way to show what to do is to actually do it.  I have several translations that I use:  New Revised Standard Version, La Biblia de las Américas (yes, I read the Bible in Spanish), The Message, Contemporary English Version, Common English Bible, and a few others.  I find that by reading from several different translations I get a broader view.  When reading the Bible for anything other than pleasure, I also enjoy consulting modern commentaries and John Wesley’s commentary to get a view of what the scholars have said after extensive study.

Devotionals are great ways of daily structured Bible readings and personal study.  My all time favorite devotional is My Utmost for His Highest.  I have read this devotional many times through.  Each year on every day, it seems as if there is always a new message for me.  I have read it in the classic language and the more modern language.  My favorite is the classic language.  Whether I read it in the morning, middle of the day or at night, it seems as if Oswald Chambers had an insight into what I would be facing that particular day of my life.  I also have a women’s devotional that I use in my office.  It was written for women, by women.  Since I just bought a new iPad2, I am anticipating that I will be reading even more on it than I do on my phone.  I love the convenience of using modern technology for my reading habits.

One thing I love to read is the news.  However, I don’t read the news from a newspaper these days.  I depend on the online newspapers and news websites.  I read what is in our local paper online, realizing that I miss some of the feature articles.  I read news at the various news websites.  The great thing about reading the news online is that I can read the papers from the areas where I have previously served as a pastor as well as my hometown.  It is nice to be able to keep up with what is going on in those areas in this way.  I could sit and watch the news on T V but to me it is much easier to read the news online as I can select the stories I feel are significant for me to read.

I have lots of friends with blogs.  I like to go and read their blogs.  Of course, these blogs are about theology and ministry.  I do have one friend (actually a young lady that I taught at church for the first time when she was in kindergarten) who has a blog that is all about her experiences as a military wife and life.  I do like to read her blog.  I have found that through the blogs that I read, I am able to find quite a few ideas to use within my ministry.  Blogs help me in broadening my view and perspective by opening myself up to the thoughts of others within my field who have varying backgrounds and experiences.

Over the last few years I have not done as much print reading as I did when I was in seminary.  However, I do find it essential to keep myself abreast on the latest of theological research and writings.  Almost a year ago I went from being the solo pastor in a mid sized church to being the associate pastor in a large church.  This past year, I have read the book When Moses Meets Aaron by Gil Rendle and Susan Beaumont.  This book has been helpful in figuring out the various roles in a church with multiple ministry staff and where I fit as an associate pastor in relationship with the senior pastor.  For someone who had been the only paid ministry staff in both of my previous churches, this book has been invaluable.  Books on leadership and church growth have become my favorite for my ministry setting.  However, I also have a great love for books on evangelism and outreach.  Another book, which I have read many times over, is Garage Door Evangelism.  This book is now ten years old, but still holds many lessons for me.  I pick it up about once a year just to read through quickly.  Want a list of my favorite books or books I would suggest?  I think that will be the first posting on my new website:  http://preachergirl.net/blog.

In our day, we have to remember that the generations that lived solely on print media is slowly disappearing.  While I still want to hold my Bible in my hand, read through it, make notes in it, today’s generations don’t find that to be an essential.  I like to make notes in my books, but those younger find it just as easy to make notes in their Kindle or Nook or some other eReader.  I don’t, but acknowledge that others do.  Technology has made it easier to put the Bible into the hands of people in a new way.  It makes it easier for study to happen anyplace.  I am a part of the print generation that appreciates the technology of today’s generation.  I am just waiting for the car that will drive itself so that I can truly sit back and enjoy a good book (print or on an eReader) as I travel down the highways of my life.

Joe Boysel, Anglican (AMiA)

A wise man once said to me, “If anyone ever advises you to read a book because such-and-such is a ‘good book,’ you should tell them you’re sorry, but you only have time for great books.” Dennis Kinlaw (the wise man who gave me that advice) was right, you know. If a person set out to read only the great books of the world, they’d never finish because there are already so many that a lifetime isn’t long enough to read them all. What’s more, new ones are forthcoming every day. So, reading a good book only means you’ll miss out on reading a great book, and that hardly seems like a bargain.

Unfortunately, though, the only way you’ll ever know if a book is a great book is by reading it. Like art and music and film and wine, the difference between a good book and a great one simply depends on the literary palate of the reader. Still, there are the “classics,” and they are so-called for a reason. Consequently, I think everyone should try and read a goodly portion of these works. Likewise, I think everyone should try to make it to the Louvre or London’s National Gallery. I think every soul should give a listen to Tchaikovsky, Brahms, Beethoven and The Beatles (especially The White Album!). Furthermore, a person will miss a lot if she never gets to see Ben Hur or Rio Bravo or The Princess Bride. And it would be plain criminal if someone never allowed a perfect Cabernet Sauvignon to glide over their lips chasing a savory bite of fillet mignon into the depths of their digestive system. Criminal, I tell you!

So, naturally, I think everyone should read Dostoevsky’s Crime and Punishment, Hawthorne’s The Scarlet Letter, Shakespeare’s Hamlet (although Shakespeare is better viewed than read), and so on. But don’t stop there, read the poets, too. Read Robert Frost, Emily Dickenson, Ralph Waldo Emerson, William Blake, Geoffrey Chaucer, Maya Angelou, William Wordsworth, Shel Silverstein, and Dr. Seuss. For in the works of the classic novelists and poets you will certainly find the very best stuff of life: science and romance, theology and philosophy, mystery and passion, virtue and vice; it’s all there!

Oftentimes, though, I require a little less subtle forms of cognitive development. On those days, I love to read Eugene Peterson, N.T. Wright, C.S. Lewis, John Stott, Stanley Hauerwas, and Walter Brueggemann. I have also read all of Jan Karon’s Mitford books – and I loved them, even if they are chick books. I’ve also devoured all the Harry Potter books and thoroughly enjoyed them, too. What I most enjoy, though, is a gritty novel with the flare of an indie film (e.g. Crazy Love by David Martin).

When I’m reading in the field of religion, however, I want someone who embraces the human condition with reckless courage, whilst not abandoning  the requisites of a holy God. I want to read someone who will grapple with the struggle for meaning and who finds the dirty fingernails of people, constantly climbing out of holes, beautiful. Religious literature remains useless to me unless it deals honestly with the messiness of humanity together with the high demands of Scripture.

I should also add that I detest the cheesy hipster books, common in contemporary religious literature, most of all. I loathe Rob Bell’s writings, not because I think he’s a heretic (I don’t) but because he seems intellectually shallow to me. Ditto for John Maxwell, Max Lucado, Joyce Meyer, Zig Ziglar, and just about any popular author you’re likely to find at the local Christian bookstore supercenter. I also don’t read many blogs for exactly the same reason. I do, however, read IM because it’s not cheesy or shallow! (Nice save, huh?)

I know, I know: I’m an elitist snob. It’s true! What’s worse, it’s not even my most abhorrent quality! Trust me, I have more than enough unpleasant qualities to make even me repulsed by me.

In short, when I read books (yes, I prefer books) I want to read someone who blends intellectual rigor, literary interest, and an earthy honesty. Sadly, though, these traits are rare. So I sift through a lot of good books looking for the great ones. And, yet, the world remains filled with great books. So my best advice is for you to click out of this dribble of mine and get on with reading something great. Chop-chop!

Fr. Ernesto Obregon (Orthodox)

Let me start with the blogs and web publications first. I am a regular reader of various news sites. CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, BBC (Great Britain) are regular stops for me. I am also fan of humor, so there are two blogs I look at: Pithless Thoughts and OrthoDixie. I will also look at websites with which I do not fully agree, as I think that it is important for me to read different opinions on current subjects. Thus I will look at sites as varied as the Huffington Post and the Glenn Beck websites.

But, it may surprise you to know that my favorite reading is fantasy and science fiction. There are two reasons. One if the more expected one, I simply enjoy science fiction, imagining myself in the situations, the derring-do that is often involved. But, there is a second reason. The great science fiction writers have to create entire worlds that logically hold together in such a way that the reader will not stop reading because of inconsistencies in the story. However, in the midst of creating entire worlds, often with multiple cultures, writers of fantasy and science fiction are often better prognosticators of what certain cultural and political tendencies will lead to than many “sophisticated” analysts.

Think about Christian fantasy and science fiction writers such as J.R.R. Tolkien, G.K. Chesterton, and C.S. Lewis. They most certainly help push you to think in different ways about how God relates to us. But, the non-Christian science fiction writers often force me to think through the implications of various theological, cultural, and political opinions that I may hold. By writing very plausible stories but with perhaps very different assumptions from mine, they challenge me to rethink my assumptions and to ensure that the beliefs I hold are truly accurate and godly, and not merely a reflection of my opinions and my sinfulness. So, often it has been a science fiction or fantasy story that has pushed me to reconsider some of my intellectual infrastructure.

You might wish to read two books of “Christian” science fiction besides the typical C.S. Lewis trilogy that many read. Try reading “Leaps of Faith” and “Infinite Faith, Infinite God.”

I also read the Church Fathers, but I have essentially given up on reading any modern books sold at a modern Christian bookstore. I find them sadly lacking. It is a sad statement to make that fantasy and science fiction writers have stimulated my mind more than modern Christian writers.

Presented by Chaplain Mike

Four of our Gangstas have come out of hiding (though they are still not showing their faces) to talk with us about how they approach the season of Lent, personally and in their church traditions.

Also—A big IM “Congratulations” to Gangsta Rev. Angie Gage, who was married on March 18 to John Michael III at her church in Paragould, Arkansas.

TODAY’S QUESTION: We are in the midst of the Lenten season. Describe how you personally approach Lent and Holy Week. What devotions or spiritual practices do you participate in during this season as an individual and/or with your family? How does your particular church tradition inform and contribute to your personal practices?

Rev. William Cwirla (Lutheran, LCMS)

The word “Lent” comes from the word for “Spring,” the season falling in early Spring. Lent is a kind of “spring cleaning” for the soul. As the Israelites once swept their houses clean of leaven in preparation for the Passover, so Lent is a time of sweeping out our lives of all that interferes with our receiving the gifts of Christ. “Cleanse out the old leaven that you may be a new lump, as you really are unleavened. For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed. Let us therefore celebrate the festival, not with the old leaven, the leaven of malice and evil, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth” (1 Corinthians 5:7-8).

Lent is the church’s forty days of purple, in imitation of our Lord’s 40 days in the wilderness following His baptism, with altars, pulpits and pastors adorned in somber purple or scarlet vestments signifying the penitential and baptismal character of the season. In many Lutheran congregations, crosses and crucifixes are veiled in purple or black as part of the overall liturgical restraint that characterizes the season. Following an ancient custom that goes back to Ambrose, “Alleluias” are omitted or spoken silently.

Alleluia cannot always
Be our song while here below.
Alleluia, our transgressions
Make us for a while forgo;
For the solemn time is coming
When our tears for sin must flow.

For Lutherans, Lent is a time of increased devotion. Wednesday or weeknight services are common in many congregations. My congregation is participating with other congregations in a rotation of pastors who are preaching on the topic of Baptism. Typical Lenten preaching focuses on themes from the catechism, such as Baptism, or aspects of our Lord’s passion and the various events leading up to His death on the cross.

Almsgiving and acts of charity are also a part of Lent as we take up offerings for those in need. Of course, this goes on all the time, but there is a particular focus in Lent. Fasting is also part of Lent for many Lutherans, and seems to be increasing as a devotional practice. Some give up favorite foods or “addictive” activities such as watching television.

In past years, I have forgone wine and certain foods, following the example of traditions that have a more rigorous fasting discipline. This year, I have chosen not to fast for a variety of reasons. Unlike the Orthodox, fasting is a personal piety among Lutherans, though you may find congregations here and there who make fasting more of a communal exercise. Lutherans recognize that while fasting is indeed a fine outward discipline, it does little toward restraining the sinfulness of the flesh. True mortification of the flesh comes as the Law has its killing way with us.

As part of my own Lenten devotion, I try to do a bit more disciplined reading, especially along devotional lines. I’ve been reading Gerhard’s Handbook of Consolations and Starck’s Prayer Book along with some other selections from our Lutheran fathers and daily readings in our Lutheran Confessions and our wonderful Treasury of Daily Prayer. My wife and I have put greater effort into our daily prayers at home to restart what had languished somewhat in the time after Christmas.

The focus of Lent, as in all the other seasons, is really not on ourselves and our spiritual discipline, but on Christ, “who for the joy set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame.” As we reflect on our weakness, sinfulness and death under God’s Law, we are also brought to an increased awareness of Jesus as our Savior, that He bore our sins in His own body and in His wounds we have our healing.

In our Lutheran tradition, Lent has some of the finest hymns, typically in minor keys with rather heavy lyrics. This is the antithesis of pop Christianity with its incessant emphasis on joy, joy, joy, joy down in our hearts. The joys of Lent are sublime and hidden. One of my favorite hymns for Lent/Holy Week is by Paul Gerhardt, a 17th century Lutheran hymn writer. Taking a devotion on the wounds of Christ attributed to Bernard of Clarivaux, Gerhardt focuses on the Christ’s head, beaten and bloodied, crowned with thorns and pale with death.

O sacred Head, now wounded
With grief and shame weighed down,
Now scornfully surrounded
With thorns, Thine only crown.
O sacred Head, what glory,
What bliss, till now was Thine!
Yet, though despised and gory,
I joy to call Thee mine.

Daniel Jepson (Non-denominational)

I confess a disadvantage when writing about Lent and its practices.  I have very little background, and am still discovering the fullness of the Lenten season.  Though I grew up in a Lutheran home, we seldom went to church or spoke of spiritual things.  Later, as a teenager, I became quite active in a fundamental Baptist Church, where Lent was not even mentioned (being, I believe guilty by association).

As far as family practices, this has changed as the kids have changed and gotten older.  My children are all in High School now, and I find that modeling the Christian life is more effective than any set practices.  We, of course, attend the special services of our church, and tend to focus our prayers more on the cross.

Personally, I have not been a big practitioner of “giving things up for Lent”, partly because the theology behind this seems a little shaky to me.  Instead, I tend to focus on things which put my gaze on the cross (instead of what I am giving up). For me, this includes reading (either the passion narratives or a theology/devotional book), and listening to music (such as Michael Card’s album, “Known by the Scars”).

Joe Boysel (Anglican)

As we approach the Lenten season, our family begins the process of becoming more and more aware of the need for making some sort of small, personal sacrifice. Like many Christians, we call it “giving something up” for Lent. The youngest children are not always quick to embrace this discipline. One year, I recall driving to church on the last Sunday of Epiphany, discussing with my 10 and 7 year-old sons what, exactly, we could “give up” for Lent as a family. We kicked around a few ideas with no real enthusiasm until my wife suggested we give up television. That’s when my 2nd grader went ballistic! “No, mom, please! Anything but TV!” Then, like a stroke of genius had suddenly overtaken him, the boy said, “I know! Let’s give up going to church!”

And so Lent has not often felt a warm embrace in our house. Still, we think sacrifice is an important discipline, so we try to encourage the children to pick something and see if they can fast that small pleasure for the whole 40 days. Abby and I likewise make private choices about fastings. But, like good Anglicans – who are constantly aware of the calendar – we celebrate every Sunday as a feast day with no fasting; save, of course, for the “special word” we’re not permitted to utter throughout Lent! (Do you know the word of which I speak?)

A corollary to our Lenten subtractions, though, is our Lenten additions. For our family, as well as for our parish, I try to communicate that Lent is not just about giving stuff up, it’s also about adding goodness in its place. This year we added a midweek study at church, accompanied by a simple meal of soup, sandwiches and water. We even handed out small collection boxes, so people could put the money they would typically spend on their evening meal in the box, which we’ll later gather and donate to an inner-city food pantry.

The aim of these Lenten disciplines, however, both in homes and as a parish-wide community, is not simply to feel the pinch of an annual minor inconvenience as a way of remembering the sufferings of Christ. Indeed, it seems to me that we trivialize the cross when we compare our deferred chocolate fix to a crucified messiah. On the contrary, what the Lenten sacrifices and piety practices should do is to disrupt our self-centered lives just enough and just long enough to begin to form new habits and maybe – just maybe – help us grow deeper spiritual roots into the eternal.

I’ve already intimated that I find a strong overlap between personal and corporate practices in keeping a holy Lent, and yet there is more. Liturgically, the church (both local and catholic) enters Lent together on Ash Wednesday. Then, locally, we eat together and study together. There are more opportunities to pray together, as we offer daily Morning and Evening Prayer. On Sundays, we refrain from saying that ancient Hebrew phrase which is often translated “praise the Lord,” and we hear the Decalogue read every week. We also refrain from singing the Gloria and in its place we sing the Kyrie. In other words, the Sunday Eucharist becomes more penitential in its sentiment and the lessons and sermon tend to focus on human obligations of piety.

When we get to Holy Week, we will celebrate a mass on Palm Sunday. I avoid the common practice among many churches that combine Palm and Passion themes on Palm Sunday. It seems too much of a concession to people’s self-centered lives to cram holy week into a section of the Sunday liturgy, but that’s me. Our next mass takes place on Maundy Thursday and it concludes with the stripping the altar. We will also set up an altar of repose at the close of the Holy Thursday liturgy for a mid-day Communion on Good Friday. Our Good Friday evening service will be a Tenebrae service (no Communion), focusing on the cross of Christ. Saturday evening will be the Easter Vigil mass that begins outside the church and in three movements concludes round the altar. Easter Sunday mass will begin at the typical time and will be filled with music – essentially every song using that wonderful Hebrew word! At last, on Sunday afternoon, the priest will rise from the Easter dinner table, stumble towards an ox blood, leather recliner, put up his feet and collapse in deep sleep till sometime on Tuesday!

Finally, I want to mention that I find it difficult to separate my personal Lenten practices from the liturgy of the church, and maybe that’s how it ought to be. Of course, maybe it’s also because I’m a priest who spends every day in the church! But essentially, it seems that the life of the person should be so intertwined with the life of the community that where one ends and the other begins remains a difficult dissection to make. At least I like to think that, anyway.

Bless the Lord, who forgives all our sins.
Joe

Father Ernesto Obregon (Orthodox)

As I reflected on Chaplain Mike’s question, I kept wondering why there was something about the question that kept making it difficult to answer. After all, it is a straightforward question that I could answer with a simple list of services and practices. And, then I realized what it was. It is the word “individual.” You see, during Lent, I and most Orthodox actually become less individual. What do I mean?

During Lent, I, and most fellow Orthodox, become mini-monks. That is, not only does the frequency of our services increase, but we give over some of our “autonomous” self to the Church and allow it to tell us what to do. Both the Scriptures and the Church already tell all of us (whether Orthodox or not) some of what to do. After all, we are told to love God, to love one another, not to kill, to read the Scriptures, to pray, to go to worship on Sunday, etc. But, in Lent, among the Orthodox, the Church becomes more specific. It is during Lent that I am told that I am not to eat meat, seafood with a backbone, eggs, or cheese, that I am not to drink milk or wine, and that I am not to use olive oil in cooking or for personal anointing (there are some exceptions). It is during Lent that I am told that I should go to worship, if at all possible, on Wednesdays, Fridays, Saturdays, and Sundays. But, that does not include the first and the last week of Lent.

During the first and last weeks of Lent, I am requested, if at all possible, to be at worship every day of the week. During the first week of Lent, the Canon of Saint Andrew is prayed from Monday through Thursday, with frequent prostrations (like what you see in tapes of the Middle East). One of our 9-year-old girls kept count and proudly informed us on Thursday night that we had done 297 prostrations during those four days. On Friday and Saturday, there is a special services, so that Saturday we are actually at church morning and evening. The last week of Lent is Holy Week, in which our schedule also becomes being at the church every day.

You see what I mean about becoming mini-monks. This is a time when I give up some of my individuality in order to become a “communitarian” believer. And, I know that as I am doing this, it is not only I, but it is us, here in the USA, around the world, and back through the centuries. In Lent, my individual choice is actually to become less individual.

In fact, among the Orthodox, we counsel you to not add other disciplines to your Lenten discipline without the specific permission of your priest or your spiritual father. Why? Because it is all too easy to fall into the thinking that the more you do, the more you please God. Lent is not about convincing God that you are spiritual. We have already all proven that we really are not, and more than once at that! No, Lent is about entering a time of spiritual training of spiritual retreat–at least as much as one who must earn a living, support a family, etc., can do–in order to grow in your understanding of God, in your understanding of self, and in your understanding of the Church.

If anything, we will sometimes (but not frequently) counsel you to not follow the full disciplines. When is that? When you are sick and have medical necessity, when you are pregnant, when you are nursing a child, etc., etc. And, at the end of it, there is no special reward for those who have kept every jot and tittle of the fast. In fact, we are required to listen to Paschal sermon of Saint John Chrysostom every Pascha (Easter), and have been for centuries. Why? Because it preaches grace. I will finish with a quote from part of his sermon, and you will see what I mean.

Enter all of you, therefore, into the joy of our Lord, and, whether first or last, receive your reward.

O rich and poor, one with another, dance for joy!
O you ascetics and you negligent, celebrate the day!
You that have fasted and you that have disregarded the fast, rejoice today!
The table is rich-laden: feast royally, all of you!
The calf is fatted: let no one go forth hungry!
Let all partake of the feast of faith. Let all receive the riches of goodness.
Let no one lament their poverty, for the universal kingdom has been revealed.
Let no one mourn their transgressions, for pardon has dawned from the grave.
Let no one fear death, for the Saviour’s death has set us free.

Today two of our Gangstas weigh in on the value of keeping the Church Year.

• Rev. Angie Gage is an associate pastor in a United Methodist church in Arkansas.
• Rev. William Cwirla is a Lutheran pastor (LCMS) and one of the hosts of the excellent podcast, The God Whisperers.

Today’s Question: THE LITURGICAL YEAR
Many churches use the Christian calendar as a pattern for organizing their ministry and approach to spiritual themes throughout the year. Even churches that are not traditionally liturgical are using elements of the Christian year in their ministries now. In your tradition, how much does the Christian calendar inform and order your church’s practice?

Rev. William Cwirla (Lutheran, LCMS)

We Lutherans are heirs to the liturgical customs of the western catholic tradition by way of the Reformation.  While we recognize that there is no divinely mandated calendar of worship in the new testament as there was in the old (Romans 14:5; Colossians 2;16), we do recognize the value of an ordered system of celebrations for highlighting various aspects of God’s work of salvation in Christ.  And so, like so many other things catholic, Lutherans keep the liturgical calendar.

The liturgical calendar is driven by a system of readings for each Sunday called the “lectionary.”  Each Sunday has assigned readings from the Old Testament, the NT epistles, and one of the synoptic gospels.  I’m not going to go into the nuances between the so-called “one-year historic lectionary” and the modern “three-year lectionary.” Just as the Orthodox have their old and new “Calendarists,” so we Lutherans have our one and three-year lectionaryists.  We still manage to agree on the date of Easter.

The western liturgical calendar is built around three major feast/festival cycles – Christmas/Epiphany, Good Friday/Easter/Ascension (“Cross and Resurrection” in the early church), and Pentecost.

Christmas/Epiphany deals with the Incarnation and Manifestation of Christ in the Flesh.  “And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth; we have beheld his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father.”  (John 1:14).  Good Friday/Easter/Ascension focuses on the death, resurrection, and ascension of our Lord Jesus Christ.  “Behold the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world.”  (Jn 1:29).  Pentecost is concerned with the activity of the glorified Christ who sens the Holy Spirit to give breath and life to His Church’s proclamation of His salvation.  “When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come.” (John 16:13).

These three feasts each generate a “season,” a period of time that follows, and a preparatory  fast, a period of time that precedes it.  Each season also has its own character determined by its Scripture readings, the hymns chosen to reflect those readings, and devotional practices and pieties, such as fasting, feasting, Advent wreaths, etc.  Color is also used symbolically in adorning our churches.  For example Advent is purple, denoting Christ’s royalty; Christmas, Epiphany, and Easter are white, symbolizing Christ’s divinity; Pentecost is red for the fire of the Holy Spirit.  The “ordinary time” following Pentecost is green, denoting the growth in sanctification worked by the Spirit through the Word and sacraments.

You might think of church year in terms of the Trinity – Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.  (I thank John Pless for this, though I’m not certain it originates with him.)  The season of Advent/Christmas/Epiphany is the season of the Father who sends the Son on His mission of incarnation to save the world from Sin and Death.  The season of Lent/Easter/Ascension is the season of the Son, who lays down His life and takes it up again as the sacrificial Lamb and Savior.  The season of Pentecost is the season of the Holy Spirit, who is the breath and life of the Church as the Body of Christ in discipling mission to the world.

The church year is an annual pilgrimage, beginning with the anticipation of Christ’s coming in glory (Advent), going through His incarnation (Christmas) and manifestation (Epiphany), contemplating our sinfulness (Lent) in view of Christ’s sacrifice (Good Friday), His victory over death (Easter), His ascension to glory at the right hand of the Father by which our humanity is glorified in Him (Ascension), and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in the last days (Pentecost) as we wind our way to the Last Day and the consummation of all things.  In other words, the entire work of our justification and sanctification in Christ is rehearsed every year – from incarnation to glorification.

Sprinkled throughout the year are various commemorations of saints and minor festivals.  But I’m way over my word limit.  So permit me a personal word.  I love the church year.  For me, it’s like the changes of the weather and foliage with the seasons.  I’ve lived it my entire 53 years as a baptized believer; I’ve preached it for the last 18 years as an ordained pastor.  The church year rescues us from the tyranny of the urgent to proclaim the urgency of the kingdom and its coming in Christ.  We’re rescued from the pressures of being relevant to hearing the relevance of both the teaching of Christ and Christ’s teachings.  Every year is a pilgrimage through the revelation of Jesus Christ for us and for our salvation.

Blessed Advent to all.  Come, Lord Jesus!

Rev. Angie Gage (United Methodist)

I absolutely love the Christian Calendar.  I tend to celebrate it more than our secular calendar.  I guess one might say I am an odd duck because I celebrate the less celebrated Holy Days.  I find them exciting, even in the midst of them being somewhat mundane to most people.  I know people celebrate in a large way days like Christmas  and Easter, but I celebrate Baptism of our Lord Sunday, Transfiguration Sunday, Epiphany Sunday and others.  The days of the Liturgical Year speak to me personally within my faith life.  They are also significant as to how I order the spiritual themes that I study personally throughout the year.

In my first two churches, I was the only pastor.  I followed the Revised Common Lectionary for my preaching schedule.  By using the RCL, I was able to closely follow the Christian Calendar for the liturgy and celebration of worship in the churches.  I also liked doing this because it aided in the hymn selection in which the hymns would match the scripture and central theme of the sermon.  There are resource materials within my denomination that assist in this process of hymn selection.  By matching the scripture and hymns together with the aid of the RCL and the Christian calendar, I feel that the congregations were able to get a more grounded experience in worship and deeper understanding of the message from God within our worship experience, realizing that God can work beyond the message of which I was aware.

Being an associate pastor now has changed how I approach the Christian Calendar in regards to worship and study.  The senior pastor with whom I now work typically preaches in series.  It has been an adjustment, but refreshing and reassuring as I discovered that in the midst of series, he is traditional in the following of the Christian year.  We just ended the year with Christ the King Sunday and begin a new year with the First Sunday of Advent.  I still have the freedom to order my ministry around the Christian calendar and use it as a source to offer new studies within my church.  At this time, I am offering to my congregation and others a Daily Devotional for Advent.  This is a devotional that I have authored.  I currently plan to continue to write more devotionals that coincide with the Christian year.  I feel that as we teach and lead according to the pattern established by the Christian calendar, we offer yet another teaching and window into the gospel message of Jesus Christ.

The United Methodist Church has a long standing tradition of following the Christian year with the Liturgical calendar.  We are a Liturgical Church.  Our General Board of Discipleship is even given charge to provide the resources that we need in order to celebrate the Liturgical seasons.  They provide learning opportunities, print resources, and other advice to the church to insure that in our worship, we have what we need in order to celebrate the Liturgical seasons.  Walk into our sanctuaries and you will see the colors of the liturgical year, the stoles that our ordained clergy wear are made in the liturgical colors (as well as other designs), most of our weekly bulletins have the reminder of what day of the Christian Year it is.  We follow the Liturgical calendar.

Following the Christian calendar allows us to provides unique worship experiences focused around the birth, life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.  The Christian calendar provides a structure for churches to follow that will allow the people to see the gospel unfold in a significant and moving way.  It is also an educational opportunity for the people to seek greater understanding of what God has done for us through Jesus Christ and the power of the Holy Spirit offered to us.

While many churches/denominations do not use the Christian calendar, I feel that they are missing out on something.  I recently was in a discussion with a few young adults regarding the Christian calendar.  It amazed me to find that there are people who did not realize there was a Liturgical season in which we prepared for the celebration of the birth of the Christ Child (Advent) or a season for preparation of the celebration of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ (Lent).  The people I was in a conversation with were under thirty.  They were fascinated with the idea of Advent and Lent and wanted to know more.

With so many churches straying from the traditions of the church, I think it is important, even in the midst of our modern culture, to maintain the integrity of the Christian year and teach it to our people.  Thematic, Series, or Lectionary, whatever the preaching style may be, there is still opportunity to include the Christian calendar beyond simply Christmas and Easter so that God’s children are able to grow in their faith and understanding in what is a new way to some, and a familiar way to many.

I caught some of our Gangstas at very busy times in their lives and ministries, so today we hear from four of them.

Who are the Gangstas?

• Father Ernesto Obregon is an Eastern Orthodox priest.
• Rev. Joe Boysel is an Anglican (AMiA) priest and professor of Bible at Ohio Christian University in Circleville, Ohio.
• Dr. Wyman Richardson is a pastor of a First Baptist Church (SBC) and director of Walking Together Ministries, a resource on church discipline.
• Alan Creech is a Roman Catholic with background in the Emerging church and spiritual direction.
• Rev. Angie Gage is an associate pastor in a United Methodist church in Arkansas.
• Rev. William Cwirla is a Lutheran pastor (LCMS) and one of the hosts of the excellent podcast, The God Whisperers.
• Rev. Daniel Jepsen is the senior pastor of Franklin Community Church, an evangelical non-denominational church.

Today’s Question: SPIRITUAL DIRECTION
Traditionally, one role of the minister in the church has been to give spiritual direction to individual members of the congregation for their spiritual growth and formation. How extensively are ministers in your tradition and church involved in this? Do you have a specific approach that you follow?

Fr. Ernesto Obregon, Orthodox
Among the Christian groups, I would argue that spiritual direction has been most highly developed and most consistently practiced among the Orthodox. Let me do something I rarely do for this forum, let me list a couple of quotes to show the importance of spiritual direction among the Orthodox.

The following words are from Metropolitan Kallistos Ware, an English Orthodox bishop:

One who climbs a mountain for the first time needs to follow a known route; and he needs to have with him, as companion and guide, someone who has been up before and is familiar with the way. To serve as such a companion and guide is precisely the role of the ‘Abba’ or spiritual father whom the Greeks call ‘Geron’ and the Russians ‘Starets’, a title which in both languages means ‘old man’ or ‘elder’. …

This figure of the Starets, so prominent in the first generations of Egyptian monasticism, has retained its full significance up to the present day in Orthodox Christendom. ‘There is one thing more important than all possible books and ideas’, states a Russian layman of the 19th Century, the Slavophile Kireyevsky, ‘and that is the example of an Orthodox Starets, before whom you can lay each of your thoughts and from whom you can hear, not a more or less valuable private opinion, but the judgement of the Holy Fathers. God be praised, such Startsi have not yet disappeared from our Russia.’ …

What entitles a man to act as a starets? How and by whom is he appointed?

To this there is a simple answer. The spiritual father or starets is essentially a ‘charismatic’ and prophetic figure, accredited for his task by the direct action of the Holy Spirit. He is ordained, not by the hand of man, but by the hand of God. He is an expression of the Church as ‘event’ or ‘happening’, rather than of the Church as institution.

I, myself, have a spiritual father, another priest who knows my life and whom I trust to give advice. Various people think of the Orthodox as purely liturgical folk, but when it comes to spiritual fathers, we get downright charismatic. The Orthodox, like the Roman Catholics, have the sacrament of confession, but it may surprise you to find out that not all Orthodox priests have permission to hear a confession. We take spiritual direction so seriously that being ordained is not sufficient, in and of itself, to approve a person to hear confessions and to give spiritual guidance. Rather, giving guidance to people is taken so seriously that it is not an automatic right given to anyone.

What does qualify someone to be a “starets”? I have no simple answer, that is what it means that a “starets” is a charismatic figure. But, I can tell you that a starets will not deny the Ecumenical Councils and that their life will be a holy life. Those priests who are approved to hear confession are but fill-ins or “supply pastors” for a starets.

Thus your “average” Orthodox actually goes to their local priest to receive guidance for their life, in confession and in private talks and counseling. But, in theory, all of us Orthodox should be asking God for a spiritual father who could give us the guidance that will help us on the road to holiness. There are no set rules for how a starets interacts with someone he (or she) is guiding. In passing, the West has also had starets. Check the history of Brigid of Ireland.

Alan Creech, Roman Catholic
First of all, from a Catholic perspective, as one who is not a Priest, a Monk (not officially anyway), an Abbot (any more) or anything ordained or the like, the whole business of Spiritual Direction would seem to be “one of our things.” You would think, right? Maybe not, but I would think, and a lot of people would think. Very often when we hear or read the term, it is in or from a Catholic source – and very often from the monastic arena. So, all Catholics have an assigned “Spiritual Director” right? Awesome! Uh, wait – not hardly. No. Not even close. I’m taking a guess (educated from reading, my own experience, observation, etc.) that most, or a good number of average, every-day Catholic Christians don’t have a clue what a Spiritual Director is, what one does, or that they would ever need such a thing as “Spiritual Direction.” Believe it or not – I’d bet big money that I’m right on this.

Now, if you’re a Deacon, a Priest, a Monk, a Brother or Sister in some Order or another? Absolutely. You’re going to be fairly well acquainted with the practice. You probably either have or are (maybe both) a Spiritual Director. But, and I think this is very unfortunate, very likely you receive this direction from another Cleric or “vowed Religious” (a not necessarily ordained vowed member of a religious Order such as the Franciscans, or the Benedictines, or the Jesuits) and, also very likely, you are giving direction to another Cleric or vowed Religious. For some reason, and no, this is not always true, hear me saying that, the common “laos” – the “people” of a parish community, the lay folk, aren’t seen as needing this level of guidance in the spiritual life. Why is that? Well, I could probably go on and on, and on about that, but this is not the time or place. I will say this: There is a definite demarcation line between the “Religious” (vowed people in Orders, remember), the Ordained, and regular Christian folk. There is still – still – an attitude that if you’re reeeeaaaalllly going to be a hard-core, serious Christian, a real spiritual person, you’ll be a Deacon, Priest or Religious. Otherwise, don’t worry about it too much. Unfortunate.

I know, I know, I already hear the outcry: “In MY parish, in MY diocese, etc., we have a HUGE emphasis on everyone being a deeply transformed, spiritual person! Everyone prays the Liturgy of the Hours every day and we all have Spiritual Directors!” OK, great, but it really isn’t that common, and that’s too bad.

Spiritual Direction itself – what is it really? Is it something you need a degree to do? Do you have to be officially stamped? Do you need to have a collar or a monk’s cowl on to be of service like this to other members of the Body of Christ? Let me answer those questions: No, No, and let’s see… No. Spiritual Direction should be a part of a Pastor’s “job.” It should possibly be, in my opinion, the main part of the Pastor’s job. It is helping, as one who is mature in the Faith, those who are perhaps less mature (not necessarily) to navigate their life in Christ – “the spiritual life.” Using the Wisdom given by God through the Holy Spirit, to help facilitate the molding of this person into the Image of Christ. It’s “spiritual.” It is, if you will, “charismatic.” It’s not necessarily something you learn to do in a class, although you might certainly be able to learn this and that about how to be a Spiritual Director from others.

In the Catholic context, we have the Sacrament of Reconciliation – “confession.” There may be smatterings of Spiritual Direction that goes on in that setting, but that’s not really what it’s for. It may be connected to that, but it should more often, probably, happen in a different context. Spending time with someone, getting to know them, having a relationship with the person in order to know what’s going on in their life, the twists and turns, decisions and lack thereof, etc. Allowing the Holy Spirit to speak to you about this person and being able to translate that to them in a way that helps them understand what “direction” they need to go in next. Not telling them everything to do and not to do. Not culty sort of, “and now you need to buy a white Buick” stuff – that’s just goofy. It’s leading them to Christ, to the Center. It’s “Discipleship.” I’ve heard this role called a “Discipler” in some Christian contexts. Discipler, Spiritual Director, really the same thing.

Unfortunately, and this is getting long, most Pastors in our Catholic context, and in most other Christian contexts that I know of, don’t have enough time to be real Spiritual Directors to their parishioners. There are too many people, too much to do, not enough time. That should change. How? I have plenty of ideas, but nobody’s really asking me, so there you go. One thing I’ll repeat before shutting down here, though, is this: You shouldn’t have to be an ordained person to be a Spiritual Director. You shouldn’t feel you need to have an ordained person as a Spiritual Director if you need one. It shouldn’t be a big “official” thing. It should be a bit more organic and relational. I believe it works best that way. And again, I hope anything I’ve said here actually answers the question and makes sense in some way to someone. Peace to all in this house.

Joe Boysel, Anglican
My first pastoral training came through reading John Wesley and Eugene Peterson. They were my mentors before I even knew for sure that I was going to be a pastor. Other early influences included N.T. Wright, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, and an OT professor in my undergrad years, M. Steven McGuire. Looking back, what I see in all these men was a commitment to spiritual direction. Some were more aware of what they were doing than others, but they all communicated regularly that their core belief about ministry included leading people into a deepening spiritual life as the telos of all ministry. It’s fascinating as I think about it, all these men live or lived in a continual tension between the academy and the parish.

When I went to seminary, I took a class in spiritual formation under Reg Johnson (Asbury Theological Seminary). Reg began to teach us about practices and disciplines of spiritual formation. He taught us about St. Ignatius of Loyola and Julia of Norwich and St. John of the Cross, and we also read Richard Foster and Dallas Willard. I discovered a whole body of literature out there and a world wherein people sought what I had intuitively thought Christianity was about; viz., a developing inner life. I suppose that those early teachers put a prejudice in me that individual Christians can and must “grow in grace” (as Anglicanism likes to say) such that I’ve never strayed too far from that conviction.

When I had an opportunity to write a dissertation, it was only natural for me to focus on spiritual formation. I studied the effect that the liturgy of the Holy Eucharist – through its dual emphases of Word AND Table – had on the spiritual lives of people. The conclusion of my research confirmed that this “principal means of grace” (another Anglican phrase) does indeed lead people to a continual deepening of their relationship with God and therefore a qualitative improvement in their spiritual lives.

How then do I go about doing spiritual formation? Subversively, as Peterson explicitly taught me to do (see his book The Contemplative Pastor). It’s what shepherds do, because if the sheep knew how long and rocky and difficult the path that lie ahead was, they’d never venture very far. But when the sheep discover green grass and still waters along the way, they are encouraged to keep following. Speaking less figuratively, then, I don’t always tell people my plans. Instead, I invite them to do what religious people do: study the Bible, pray, and fellowship. But my intention is precise: I do not want my people to be content with the quality of their spiritual lives. I want them to want more of God, more of his grace, more of his holiness; all the while encouraging them to fully enjoy the genuine freedom they have in Christ.

Of course, some people want to be directed. In these cases, we practice the disciplines together and I lay out specific goals for them to work towards. We read a lot. We fast. We pray. We employ the disciplines and we do so in the spirit of the disciplines. The truth is I love it when someone comes along and discovers this life and wants it for themselves. But it’s also true that I’ve seen people grow and develop into mature Christians without them ever knowing that I had a secret pastoral agenda that went way beyond providing religious services to religious consumers.

In a small compilation of essays on hermeneutics (Gospel and Spirit: Issues in New Testament Hermeneutics) Gordon Fee mentions a colleague receiving a note from a former student, who, upon entering full-time pastoral ministry, wrote her former professor to say, “I have come to realize that above everything else the ministry is hermeneutics.” While I don’t disagree about the overall importance of hermeneutics, I do think this insightful comment falls a bit short. Ministry is spiritual direction, which is fully dependent upon hermeneutics. Or, one might say, “All ministry is the ministry of reconciliation which is also called spiritual formation.”

Rev. William Cwirla
Spiritual Direction?  Hmmmmm.  This one is going to be hard for this die-hard Lutheran.  The term “spiritual direction” is not native to the Lutheran lexicon for at least a couple of reasons.  First, we believe that things “spiritual” are things of the Holy Spirit, who works through the preached Word and administered sacraments.  So, if you want “spiritual direction,” come and hear the Gospel of Jesus and eat and drink the Supper of His Body and Blood and you will have all the direction you’re going to need.

Second, the word “direction” suggests a “director” as in one in charge, perhaps in the way of a coach or master who takes you under his or her wing to guide you in your “spirituality.”  Again, very un-Lutheran.

Lutherans have a long and checkered history with various forms of Pietism, some of which involved the tutelage of the “spiritually mature” reminiscent of so many “discipleship” programs.  This led to all manner of abuses of power and control, often to the detriment of faith, as our own CFW Walther attests of his experiences with 19th century German Pietism at the University of Erlangen.  Lutherans are rightly quite wary of any kind of spiritual direction that does not revolve around the Word and the Sacrament.

My experience with “spiritual direction” and “directors” is second hand, resulting from my hanging out at retreats with the Benedictines of St. Andrew’s Abbey in Valyermo, CA.  I am aware of their workshops and programs involving spiritual direction and have spoken with their spiritual directors, but really know nothing more than that.  The closest thing to spiritual direction that I’ve encountered in Lutheranism is Stephen Ministries, a lay Christian care program that emphasizes prayer and individual ministry among the laity.

If pressed to speak of “spiritual direction” within a Lutheran framework, I would first point to ongoing pastoral care, especially in consideration of private confession and absolution.  Here, the pastor, as a physician of the soul, serves somewhat in the capacity of a spiritual director, though not necessarily in a directive or formalized way.  If you ask for spiritual direction from me as your pastor, I would most likely encourage you to the regular worship in hearing the Gospel and receiving of the Sacrament, frequent use of individual confession and absolution, daily devotional reading of the Scriptures along with edifying readings from the church fathers including our own Luther, Chemnitz, Gerhardt, and others, and prayer, guided by a decent prayer book such as Starck’s Prayer Book or Johann Gerhard’s Daily Exercise of Piety.

Secondly, I would point to what our Confessions call the “mutual consolation and conversation of the brethren,” that is, the conversation and encouragement among Christians.  This happens on a more or less ad hoc basis, as people are placed side by side in community, frequently within their vocation, and have opportunity to converse and pray together.   This is not a “director/directee” relationship, but a familial conversation among the various members of the Body of Christ.

I might wish I had more to write on this topic, but then I’m glad I don’t.

Who are the Gangstas?

• Father Ernesto Obregon is an Eastern Orthodox priest.
• Father Joe Boysel is the rector of Holy Trinity Anglican Church in Hudson, Ohio (AMiA). He was formerly a professor of Bible and Preaching at Ohio Christian University.
• Dr. Wyman Richardson is a pastor of a Baptist Church in Georgia (SBC) and director of Walking Together Ministries, a resource on church discipline.
• Alan Creech is a Roman Catholic with background in the Emerging church and spiritual direction. (Alan was unable to join us for this post.)
• Rev. Angie Gage is an associate pastor in a United Methodist church in Arkansas.
• Rev. William Cwirla is a Lutheran pastor (LCMS) and one of the hosts of the excellent podcast, The God Whisperers.
• Rev. Daniel Jepsen is the senior pastor of Franklin Community Church, an evangelical non-denominational church.

Today’s Question: PASTORAL CARE AND VISITATION

We have had many posts on Internet Monk lamenting the decline in pastoral visitation and the overall practice of pastoral care in the church. In your tradition and church, how do you handle this aspect of ministry? What part is played by the ordained ministers, and what systems are set up in your church to make sure caring needs in the congregation are met?

Rev. William Cwirla, Lutheran
Pastoral visitation is the topic is where most pastors’ eyes turn downcast, and like the publican praying in the temple, they must beat their breasts and say “Lord, have mercy on me, a sinner.”

I come from a tradition that has a venerable history of pastoral visitation.  You can read about it from the giants like GH Gerberding (The Lutheran Pastor) or CFW Walther (Pastoraletheologie).  The Lutheran concept of the pastor is one of “Seelsorger,” a physician of the soul.  Just as house calls by the family physician were once a vital part of ongoing health care, so the home visit by the pastor was, and still is, considered an essential component of pastoral care.  The Lutheran pastor is expected to be in the homes of his people on a regular basis, especially at times of sickness and distress.  He is also expected to visit in the hospital and nursing home, and to bring the Sacrament of Christ’s Body and Blood to those who are too frail to come to church.

GH Gerberding describes the pastoral visit well in his book The Lutheran Pastor (1902):  “A true pastoral call has a pastoral aim.  It’s first aim is to win the confidence and love of everyone visited, of the whole family, including servants, or of the individual, if the visit is to him.  The pastor knows that, without the confiding love of those whom he desires to benefit, he can do nothing.  Neither can he know his people before he has won their confidence.  His further aim is to do good to everyone thus visited.  With kindly, tactful treatment he should lead them to open their hearts and the manner of life to him.  He should know their spiritual estate, their personal relation to the Saviour.  He does not expect all this at the first call.  It may require many interviews:  with some more, with others less.  He would give instructions, counsel, encouragement, or warning as each case may requires.  Every such visit ought to leave behind inspiration, courage, and resolution for a better life.  After each pastoral visit the impression left should be that a man of God has been in the house.” (Gerberding, 388).

Most Lutheran congregations, my own included, have a board of elders or deacons, lay assistants to the pastor, who help with the task of visitation.  Some larger congregations with several pastors on staff have one who is responsible for visitation.  Typically shut-ins are visited once or twice a month; members are visited once a year or more.  This is pretty much the Lutheran standard – some pastors are more diligent, other less so.

Unfortunately, house calls by the pastor are in danger of going the way of house calls by the family doctor.  Sadly, I have noticed that my visitation has diminished greatly over my 18 years at one parish.  There are a variety of reasons for this.  Our modern lifestyle is not as conducive to visits as it once.  Congregations are less community-oriented.  Half my congregation commutes from a distance.  Time for visits is greatly reduced by commuting and work hours and busy family calendars.  The “mega-church” mentality of the pastor as “leader” rather than “bishop of souls” has invaded the thinking even of the most faithful of pastors, to the loss of what I believe was once a great pastoral practice.

Too often, people associate a pastoral visit with either some crisis – a grave illness or death in the family, for example, or some kind of serious matter of church discipline in the way of Matthew 18.  I recall visiting a man in the hospital on the day he was being released.  Someone in the elevator spied my collar and said with a serious look, “Are you going to visit someone from your parish, Father?”  I said, “Yes.”  He said, “Is he dying?”  I said, “No more than any of us.  But for now, he’s on the mend and going home today.  I’m just here to see him off.”  He seemed genuinely surprised.

I am greatly encouraged and inspired by many of my younger colleagues who are endeavoring to restore regular pastoral visitation in our congregations.  I appreciate the Orthodox practice of visitation during the season of Epiphany for its intentionality.  I don’t know how that practice is going in the communion, but I think the idea of intentionality beyond need or crisis is important.  I am working with my elders to establish a more regular practice in our congregation, which includes some measure of accountability and encouragement.  I have found that when pastoral visitation languishes, so does the rest of my ministry including preaching and teaching.  The “care of souls” is not learned from books.  As Gerberding points out, the fruits of pastoral visitation are not always immediate, but the long term benefits are always worth it.

Rev. Joe Boysel, Anglican
I remember watching an episode of Spongebob Squarepants with my boys one time when Gary (the pet snail who is kind of like a cat…trust me on this) started acting exceptionally strange. Everyone in Bikini Bottom (that’s the town) was convinced that he had contracted a “zombie disease” until a doctor happened by and discovered that what was really bothering Gary was a huge splinter in his…well…paw (I know snails don’t have paws, but you’ll have to watch the show to understand). This cartoon series often has an Aesop Fable vibe and the moral of this particular episode was that often a perfectly reasonable explanation exists for unusual (or unfriendly) behavior, if only someone will stop and take a closer look.

The people in the church whose job it is to take a closer look are called pastors.

Of course, it isn’t just the grumpy or antisocial parishioner that needs special attention. All Christians need pastoral care. In fact, I think that it’s important to give attention to metaphor which describes the work of the clergy. “Pastor” reflects the work of one who cares for sheep. Following the metaphor, then, the only way for a pastor or a shepherd to know the health of the sheep (a metaphor for people) is by taking the time to inspect each one in close proximity. Unfortunately, this cannot happen in 13 seconds on Sunday at the back door of the church.

It has been my practice, therefore, to visit every one of my parishioners in their home (or at mine) at least once a year. The reality, however, is that this kind of soul care is not sexy work; it’s a toilsome industry that often distracts from more energizing pursuits, and worse, often leads to pastoral fatigue. Still, there’s no way that I’ve found to get to know people intimately apart from simply sitting down with them over a coffee or a tea. In this setting, I can discover a lot about the person. In fact, I’m at a loss for methods of developing an affinity for people apart from personal contact. The simple fact remains that loving relationships require face time.

Still I suppose the question remains as to whether a pastor should want to develop an affinity for the people in his or her charge. Perhaps some would argue that a pastor should maintain an emotional distance from the people. While there may be some merit to those arguments, it does not much sound like the ministry of the Good Shepherd to me. And insofar as the ministry of the under-shepherds reflects the ministry of the Good Shepherd I should not think that affective distance in any way improves one’s ability to minister.

Martin Luther once said, “Unless your heart toward the sheep is like a mother toward her children – you will not be fit to be a pastor.” Yes, people are difficult. And, yes, the more you get to know them the more maintenance they require. And, yes, the more time one spends across a table sharing stories and directing souls the less time he or she will have to work on increasing the size of their congregation. But I think developing an affinity for one’s congregation stand as a large part of the makings of a faithful priest.

Rev. Angie Gage, Methodist
I have recently changed ministry settings. Within the United Methodist Church, we have a “call” system in which we submit ourselves to the authority of our area Bishop to make appointments to local congregations.  I have moved from being the solo pastor in a mid-sized church to being an Associate Pastor in a large church.  I have also served a small congregation.  The role of pastoral care in regards to pastoral visitation is much the same in these types of congregations, but I have found them to be quite different at the same time.  One thing that I have found common with all of my ministry settings is that we live in a very different world today than we did in the 1950s.

Today, pastors have to be aware of many factors.  Male pastors can no longer safely visit females who are by themselves.  Female pastors cannot visit males who are alone.  We have become a society in which we can’t even do something as basic as a pastoral visit without being aware of the potential of being placed in a position in which allegations of inappropriateness can occur.  We also have seen that pastors take advantage of being in a situation where their own behavior is not monitored.  We have become a litigious society in which everyone seems to be afraid.

The very nature of our current state of society has also changed how the informal visitations occur.  Previously, a pastor would just drop by at his/her convenience.  The one being visited didn’t expect a call ahead of time.  They welcomed the pastor into their home.  There are some things that are incredibly different.  In my previous church, I had a young man ask the following, “Why don’t you just drop by for dinner?”  At one point in time, this was a little more common for pastors to do.  People are busier now than they used to be, even pastors.  What had been a standard isn’t any longer as clergy families have gotten busier as well.   Too often the only time to visit some families is during the time that everyone else considers “family time.”  Clergy families appreciate spending time with their own families, just as members of the congregation do.  Since clergy no longer just “drop by” in the evenings due to their own family obligations, one possible solution would be for parishioners  to invite the clergy and his or her family into their homes.  This would create a greater sense of relationship between the clergy family and the family of the parishioners.

But enough of my ranting and rambling.  Pastoral visitation and care is essential; however, it is not only the responsibility of the pastor.  Within my current church, we have a lay pastoral care ministry which consists of dedicated people who visit shut-ins weekly, take communion to them, deliver special treats to them a various times during the year.  These people go out and realize that the ministry of the church is not just to be done by the pastors but is also the responsibility of the laity.  Clergy are expected to empower the laity.  It is nice to see it actually in place and working great.  As clergy, we are still expected to do the visitation.  However, because of these dedicated individuals who understand that they are also ministers, the responsibility is shared in a way that opens the door to clergy doing visitation, but not as intensely as some expect it to be.  Expectations on clergy are overwhelming at times.  Lay Pastoral Care programs can help in the responsibilities of the church to visit others.  God doesn’t call just clergy to visit the sick, the shut-ins, the disenfranchised, the weak.  God calls us all to do this work.  Clergy or Laity, we all share in this responsibility.

Dr. Wyman Richardson, Baptist
While I think I can safely say that Richard Baxter would not be pleased (try reading The Reformed Pastor if you feel just really great about your pastoral care efforts!), and while I have never felt that my own efforts in this arena were commendable, I do value pastoral care and visitation and I see it as an essential component of pastoral ministry.  Even while admitting my own shortcomings in this area, I want to eschew the often creative efforts that some pastors take to try to avoid pastoral ministry.

Some friends were telling me that a new pastor was called to serve their congregation.  After being voted in, he said to the congregation, “Let me be perfectly clear:  I’m a leader, not a shepherd.”  Translation: I will preach and cast vision (whatever that’s supposed to mean!), but I will not visit you. Other efforts include a pitiful retreat into corporate terminology (“I’m the CEO of the church.”), an attempt to box yourself inside your pulpit (“I’ve been called and gifted to preach, not to visit.”), an appeal to busyness (“Sorry, there’s no way I can visit people.”) and a whole host of other dodges.

But here’s the thing:  pastoral care is hardwired into the pastoral vocation.  Pastors must care for their people.

Why?  Because a proper Christology all but demands it.  Any pastor presuming to serve the people of God simply must go to and among the people of God with a lived-out gospel of care. To do any less is to be unfaithful to our Shepherd and King.  How we do so might be debated.  That we do so seems to me beyond debate.  What we are for our people is determined by what Christ is for us.  At the very least, this means caring for the people of God with the grace of God.

How do we do so?  To begin with, accessibility.  We must be accessible to our people.  Unlike one famed pastor in Atlanta, we cannot refuse to allow our people to touch us (the pastor in question refuses to shake hands with his congregants).  A good bit of pastoral care is simply being there in such a way that the people can see you and come to you.

And, of course, there is the active pastoral visitation ministry of going out:  hospitals, nursing homes, homes, etc.  This is where many pastors – myself certainly included – struggle.  It is hard to do what we should.  But here’s the thing:  the perfect is not the enemy of the good, and just because we cannot be everything doesn’t mean we cannot be something.

Furthermore, I do not believe it is a dodge to say that one of the most important steps a pastor can take in establishing a healthy ministry of pastoral care is the careful organization and structuring of the church to care for one another.  In my tradition – and, more specifically, in the church I pastor – this fleshes itself out most notably in small group care.  My church shines in this, and I’m forever humbled and challenged by it.  I have been challenged to care better by simply observing how the people I have been called to pastor care for one another.  It is truly a site to behold!

So I, for one, do try, though I want to be so much more.  But I cannot envision pastoral ministry outside of pastoral care, believing as I do the latter to be inherent to the very definition of the former.

Fr. Ernesto Obregon, Orthodox
Pastoral visitation is a contentious issue because it goes to the heart of the argument of what it means to be a pastor and to the expectations that congregations have of their pastor. I realize that there are many complaints about pastoral visitation. Yet, I do have a friend who is both a pastor and has been an editor of a major publishing house. I do not have the freedom to use his name, but he says that the rate of pastors dropping out of the ministry in the USA is at an all time high. They are not making it to retirement, but are giving up in despair.

That despair comes from the outsize expectations that we have of pastors today. We want that pastor to be there in the office every day. We want that pastor to visit people every day. We want that pastor to be involved in the community. We want that pastor to evangelize and bring people in. We want that pastor to lead more than one weekly bible study or other meeting. And, by the way, we want that pastor to be present at the meetings of the various church organizations. We want that pastor to visit the hospital and to baptize, marry, and bury. It is no wonder that the Roman Catholics went to mandatory celibacy for their priests. In the midst of these outsize expectations, I must sadly admit that what tends to be cut first is visitation.

Thus, I would caution that as we speak of pastoral visitation, we need to make sure that we are not having a set of expectations based on a model that worked in previous centuries, but is not fully applicable today. Having said that, there is a need for pastoral visitation. Among the Orthodox, we are required to visit every home at least once a year, and generally in January to February. The Blessing of the Homes in January to February is an annual opportunity to make sure that every home is visited by one of the priests in the church. Interestingly enough, there is no other set requirement than the once a year visit. On top of that, of course, are the unscheduled visits, such as illness, death, new members, etc. But these visits are in the context of a once a year requirement. An Orthodox priest is also expected to run a Saturday evening service, a Sunday morning prayer service, a Sunday main service, and the feast days. By the time you throw in the other expectations, this does tend to fill up that 40 to 50 hours a week. But, at least it is a reasonable manageable schedule. In my case, I make sure to visit the once a year and then the fill-ins, as necessary.

Rev. Daniel Jepsen, Non-Denominational Evangelical
I think two main issues are involved when speaking of pastoral care.  First, pastoral care means helping people through the difficulties or trials of life.  Second, it also means an ongoing relationship of spiritual help and encouragement, with the goal of helping that person become more Christ-like.

The idea that this kind of care is primarily the domain of ordained clergy is, in my view, mistaken.  Personally, it would be both arrogant and naïve to think that I can give personal spiritual direction to 200 people.  As the only ordained minister in our church, I have a key role in both the areas mentioned above, but the bulk of the work will be carried on by others.  We take seriously the priesthood of all believers.  To us that means that we are all commanded to “bear each others burdens” (Galatians 6:2) and to “confess your sins to each other and pray for each other” (James 5:12).

To help people have an opportunity to minister in this way, we emphasize small groups.  Most of these groups meet three evenings a month, and consist of 12-15 adults. The normal agenda consists of three things: informal fellowship, a bible study with personal application questions, and praying for each other’s needs.  The Bible study goes deeper into the text and topic of the morning sermon, and is designed to help people apply the spiritual truths to the needs and issues of their own lives, (aided by the community of the small group).

This group is also the first to help out in times of great need or crisis.  They will provide meals or other practical help for the one in need, and will pray for the situation.  Usually the small group leader will try to visit.

In our church, about 70 percent of the adults are active participants in the small group meetings.  Those who are not active are still assigned a small group, and the leader asks one of the active members to keep up to date with a person who is not active for the purpose of prayer and help.

What is my role as pastor in this area?  First, I am active in helping train the small group leaders and meeting with them.  Second, after I finish writing a sermon, I also write the bible study with application questions for the small groups to use that week.  Third, if an individual or family expresses a great need or crisis situation to the group, the leader will call me if my assistance would be helpful (either to give advice to the leader or to visit the person in question).  Fourth, in cases of hospitalization or the death of a loved one, I always visit (sometimes several times).  I do this because for many people I have a special role as their spiritual leader (even if I have mixed feelings about the appropriateness of that title or role).  Also, of course, I have a lot more flexibility in my schedule than the small group leaders during the day.  Finally, I try to begin my week going through the church directory and thinking if there are any members who would be helped by my prayers, phone call or visit.

Who are the Gangstas?

• Father Ernesto Obregon is an Eastern Orthodox priest.
• Rev. Joe Boysel is an Anglican (AMiA) priest and professor of Bible at Ohio Christian University in Circleville, Ohio.
• Dr. Wyman Richardson is a pastor of a First Baptist Church (SBC) and director of Walking Together Ministries, a resource on church discipline.
• Alan Creech is a Roman Catholic with background in the Emerging church and spiritual direction.
• Rev. Matthew Johnson is a United Methodist pastor.
• Rev. William Cwirla is a Lutheran pastor (LCMS) and one of the hosts of the excellent podcast, The God Whisperers.
• Rev. Daniel Jepsen is the senior pastor of Franklin Community Church, an evangelical non-denominational church.

Today’s Question: THE GOSPEL
On Internet Monk, we try to make the point that the Gospel is not simply a message we proclaim to non-believers but a message that Christians also need every day. In your tradition and church, how do you make sure the Gospel remains central in your preaching and practice?

In this post, we’ll hear from Fr. Ernesto, Wyman, Bill, and Dan.

Fr. Ernesto—
In order to “make sure the Gospel remains central in your preaching and practice,” I must have an inner idea of what the Gospel is in order to know what it is that I wish to maintain central. For me the key Scripture verses that keep my preaching and teaching centered are from the Gospel according to Saint Luke:

The Spirit of the LORD is upon Me,
Because He has anointed Me
To preach the gospel to the poor;
He has sent Me to heal the brokenhearted,
To proclaim liberty to the captives
And recovery of sight to the blind,
To set at liberty those who are oppressed;
To proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD.
Then He closed the book, and gave it back to the attendant and sat down. And the eyes of all who were in the synagogue were fixed on Him. And He began to say to them, “Today this Scripture is fulfilled in your hearing.”

We are called to obey our Lord who said, “Peace to you! As the Father has sent Me, I also send you.” So, I too must “proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD,” which includes preaching the Gospel (to the poor), healing the brokenhearted, proclaiming liberty to captives, sight to the blind, and liberty to those who are oppressed.

But, how do I keep myself centered? There are several things I do. The ones familiar to most of us are prayer and Scripture reading. For us Orthodox, it is a helpful aid that we have daily and Sunday lectionaries that take us through vast parts of Scripture. Many churches and para-church groups have developed reading patterns to try to ensure that we do not just read what pleases us and makes us feel good and encourages us, but also read what displeases us, what frightens us, what calls us to account, and what leaves us in the dirt in broken repentance for our many sins and offenses.

But, we Orthodox also have patterns of prayers. These morning and evening prayers tend to keep us focused on God’s goodness, our repentance, our duty to him, and our love relationship with him. But, more than that each day we have a saint (or saints) that we remember and a couple of prayers that remind us of why that person was great. Along with that there is usually a short one paragraph reading that gives us an overview of the saint(s)’s life. This is especially important because it shows us how people in history have interpreted Scripture and Holy Tradition in order to live out their lives in practical obedience to God. The great stream of the Church, properly appraised, gives us the guidance that keeps us from odd or tendentious interpretations and behaviors. A priest is required to maintain the reading and prayer disciplines.

But, let me talk a bit about myself. The previous paragraphs are standard Christian thought. I also read a lot, and I mean a lot. I read Church Fathers; I read people like John Bunyan; I read C.S. Lewis. The more I am willing to read the great Christian writers, the more that I catch a glimpse of that great stream of the Church that helps keep me centered and able to respond appropriately to God. I am more convinced than ever that writers such as G.K Chesterton (Roman Catholic), Fyodor Dostoyevsky (Orthodox), C.S. Lewis (Anglican), etc., are correct when they encourage us to read fiction, fantasy, etc., whether or not it is overtly Christian, for I have many times seen the solution to a theological conundrum more clearly in a fiction story than in reading many theological tomes. Sometimes, I have understood more clearly the complaints about Christians by reading secular fiction than by any other mean. I urge you all to read and to read broadly.

Finally, there is something we must all do in order to keep ourselves centered on the Gospel, and I do mean must do. We get too caught up in worrying about whether works will earn our way to Heaven. Please drop that argument. I find that without works I lose my way in realms of theological speculation or in the depths of fictional worlds which have little connection to making sure that I keep the centrality of the Gospel in my preaching and practice. Our Lord came to the poor, the brokenhearted, the captives, the blind, the oppressed. I need to keep my hands dirty if I really wish to keep Gospel centered in my preaching and practice.

Some of my fondest memories are some of my most difficult memories. My work overseas and my work in the inner city kept my hands dirty. I buried toddlers who would have never died in the USA. I worked with indigenous people (in missions) who could barely speak Spanish. I buried teenagers in the USA who were shot in drug violence. I watched teenaged girls in the inner city refuse sound advice and get pregnant. But, I also watched churches grow, a school get started, an orphanage begin, a new indigenous work (and a bishop who rode a mule in blue jeans) with new church plants, teenaged girls who did listen and are now sound married mothers, teenaged boys who grew up and now have sound jobs. People have been baptized, chrismated, and brought into Life. You see, my hands are dirty and my nails are broken, but it is those works that, along with Scripture, lives of the saints, readings from great Christian writers, and even secular readings, help to keep me centered on the Gospel of Our Lord Jesus Christ.

Rev. Wm. Cwirla—
I would begin my response concerning the Gospel by quoting the apostle Paul in Romans:  “For I am not ashamed of the gospel: it is the power of God for salvation to every one who has faith, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For in it the righteousness of God is revealed through faith for faith; as it is written, “He who through faith is righteous shall live.” (Romans 1:16-17).

This verse is very near and dear to my heart, as it is my confirmation verse, the verse given me on the day I confessed the faith of my Baptism as my own.  I don’t know if the pastor who assigned me this verse was being prescient or prophetic regarding my later calling as a pastor and a preacher, but it remains for me a great summary verse of my vocation as a minister of the Gospel.

The Gospel is a powerful Word; it is “the power of God for salvation.” It is not simply a message to be communicated, nor is it only a piece of news to be conveyed.  It is the very power of God to save, a power contained in words preached and heard, a power released “from faith to faith.” It is the power of God to create faith and the power of God to sustain faith.

The Gospel is a revelatory Word, making known the mystery of the righteousness of God that comes not through our works of the Law, as no one will be declared righteous in the sight of God by works of the Law (Romans 3:20) but through trust in the accomplished work of Jesus Christ, who by His Blood is the atoning sacrifice for the sin of the world (Romans 3:21-24).

The Gospel is a forensic Word, justifying the ungodly and declaring the sinner to be righteous before a righteous God, not with his or her own righteousness achieved by works of the Law, but with the perfect righteousness obtained once and for all by the perfect life of Jesus Christ under the Law and His unblemished sacrifice on the cross for the sin of the whole world.  “For we hold that a man is justified by faith apart from works of law.”  (Romans 3:28).

The Gospel is a personal Word of salvation, delivering the once and for all work of Christ to the individual.  Christ on the cross is “Christ for all,” embodying all of humanity under the judgment of God, bearing the collective sin of the world in His Flesh.  Christ in the Gospel is “Christ for you,” the hearer.  “Faith comes from what is heard, and what is heard comes by the preaching of Christ” (Romans 10:17).  In the Gospel preached and heard, Christ for all is delivered as Christ for you.  The words “for you” require all hearts to believe; and theses words create and sustain the faith they require.

For this reason, the Gospel properly preached is preached in personal terms: “For you, sinner.”  Not simply “Jesus Christ died for the world” nor “Jesus Christ died for sinners in general” but “Jesus Christ died for you.” This is the power of God for salvation, the Word that reveals and declares that Jesus died for you specifically and personally, that He was put to death for your trespasses and raised for your justification, that were you the only sinner in the world, He would nevertheless have become Man, lived perfectly in your place, and died under His own Law so that in Him you would be saved.

Baptism, as a form of the Gospel, also preaches in personal and individual terms, joining one to the all-atoning death and life of Jesus (Romans 6:4) in a new and spiritual birth “from above” (John 3:5) as does the Lord’s Supper, placing into one’s own mouth the very sacrificial Body and Blood of the Lord Jesus Christ who gave HIs Body and Blood for all on the cross.  Christ for all is Christ for you.  No doubt about it.

Whether poured, eaten and drunk, or preached, the Gospel is the power of God to create and sustain saving, justifying faith.  For this reason, it is to be preached to the unbeliever that he might believe, and to the believer that he might continue to believe. For this reason also, the Gospel must predominate in the Church’s preaching, for it is God’s proper work to justify sinners for Jesus’ sake.

Dr. Wyman Richardson—
I greatly appreciate this question, if for no other reason than to agree with you that the gospel is much more than the introduction to the Christian faith.  Some Christians have a very stunted understanding of the gospel in which they make the words “the gospel” conceptually synonymous with “getting saved” (to use the parlance of my own tradition).  But that’s a bit like saying that the word “love” is conceptually synonymous with the words “the reason two people get married.”

It’s not, of course, that the gospel isn’t inextricably bound up with salvation.  It is!  It’s just that it’s not only that.  Just as love is not only the foundation of a marriage, but also it’s daily fuel, so too the gospel is that great and grand truth which we receive for salvation as well as the daily, sustaining impetus of the Christian life.  The gospel isn’t first grade.  Rather, it’s first grade and a PhD (to push the analogy).  You don’t move past the gospel into “the deeper Christian life.”  Rather, you rest in the gospel and, as you walk with Jesus, grow deeper into it.  The gospel is the arena of the entire Christian life, not merely the doorway into it.

So in our church we’ve tried to create a kind of “gospel culture” by speaking of it faithfully (as opposed to speaking of it merely in the reductionist terminology mentioned above).  For instance, our church is working alongside some other churches to create a Christian food pantry in our community that will minister to the community through ministering to people’s needs.  I’m trying to couch this effort in our own church as a gospel-duty, or a gospel-privilege, rather.  It’s not, in other words, mere “outreach.”  It, and things like it, is really the gospel in action.  All of this was said a long time ago by St. Francis, of course, in his famous dictum, “Preach the gospel all the time and use words only when necessary.”

We also try to flesh this out didactically in and through the teaching ministry of the church. So, for instance, I try to be a gospel preacher in showing how the gospel is the mold for all of scripture and permeates the Bible from beginning to end.  I note as well that our Senior Adult Minister, Horace Keen, has been taking his group through Greg Gilbert’s helpful What is the Gospel?, which is an interesting and good thing to do even for senior adults.

So in this way, and others like it, we’re trying to envision “the gospel” as the hub from which all other ministry efforts emerge.  They simply cannot exist independent of that hub, and their full import cannot be grasped unless the connection between our efforts and the gospel are consistently articulated and stressed.

Rev. Daniel Jepsen—
I remember a wake-up call I got from another pastor a few years ago. He was describing a service he had been a part of, in which he and another pastor, after analyzing it, said it would have been “a good Jewish service”. What he meant by this was not to slam Judaism, but to point out that the worship and songs could have fit right into a religious service that did not recognize Christ’s work on the cross. In other words, it focused on God’s goodness and how to live wisely and virtuously in this world. But it was not centered on the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

I call this a “wake-up call” because God used it as something that forced me to evaluate the services I design. As pastor of a non-denominational evangelical church, I find the lack of denominational strictures and forms a very freeing thing, but one that can too easily be mishandled. It is no accident that churches like mine are often the first to follow the trends and fads of the current religious scene, or degenerate into some form of “this is what I like” liturgy.

How, then, do I try to make the gospel central in my preaching and practice? At my best, I do two things.

• First, as I write the sermon, I actively seek God’s answer to the question, “What difference does the cross make here?” If the answer is, “not much”, then I revise the sermon. My goal is that the cross both inform and transform each sermon.

• Secondly, I seek to structure the rest of the service around this answer. This means the choice of songs, public scripture readings, special music, or other elements. In our case, I have been moving away from most of the songs being sung before the sermon. I tend to put most of them after the sermon, and to form them as a response to what (hopefully) God said to us in that sermon.

Let me give you an example of this. This summer, I preached through some of the Psalms, and Psalm Eight was on my list. Now, this Psalm is only nine verses long, and could easily form the basis for a sermon on the dignity of man or something like that. I broke it into two weeks.

The first week we focused on the nature of God in relation to man, specifically His kindness to us and ennobling plan for us. The response to this is that we find our true place only in worship and submission to Him. So the first worship song focused first on the goodness and kindness of God. The second focused on the ultimate display of His kindness and goodness to us, the cross. The next song or two then were songs of repentance and commitment, based upon his great love for us. Between the sermon and the songs we had communion, since this seemed the best place to honor it.

The second week, we looked at the Psalm again, but this time focused on Jesus as the only one who fulfilled the role God had in mind for humanity, and how, because of Jesus’ perfect life and vicarious death, we can now be united to Him in fulfilling humanities role as God’s representatives over creation. I think the main song in the time of response was, “In Christ Alone”, though we added one or two others to represent our response to this.

I am not saying this way is perfect. I was saved in a Baptist church, and I know little of how the more “high church” traditions operate (which is one reason I love this website). But as a pastor who finds himself in a non-denominational church with a lot of freedom (too much?) this is how I try to keep the gospel central on Sunday morning.

Who are the Gangstas?

Father Ernesto Obregon is an Eastern Orthodox priest.
Rev. Joe Boysel is an Anglican (AMiA) priest and professor of Bible at Ohio Christian University in Circleville, Ohio. (Ask him about famous alumni.)
Dr. Wyman Richardson is a pastor of a First Baptist Church (SBC) and director of Walking Together Ministries, a resource on church discipline.
Alan Creech is a Roman Catholic with background in the Emerging church and spiritual direction.
Rev. Matthew Johnson is a United Methodist pastor.
Rev. William Cwirla is a Lutheran pastor (LCMS) and one of the hosts of The God Whisperers, which is a podcast nearly as good as Internet Monk Radio.
Eric Landry is the editor of Modern Reformation Magazine. In addition, he is a PCA church planter in southern California.

Here’s this week’s question: How do you preach Acts 4:32-5:11 (Ananias and Sapphira) without becoming an Old Testament legalist or obscuring the Gospel?

UPDATE: Commenter Louis says: “Fr. Ernesto sees God as above morality. Boysel interprets the event legalistically–God has the right to smite you if you sin once (or perhaps, sin against the Holy Spirit). Richardson thinks God smacked them down for getting too uppity (too Pharisaical). Cwirla brings up the issue of primitive communism–enforced, apparently, by the Holy Spirit–and thinks that such slayings were a regular occurrence. Landry blames their situation on the devil. May I suggest that none of these interpretations show Christianity, or God, in a particularly good light.” What do you think?

Father Ernesto/Orthodox: This question rather surprised me, as even before being Orthodox, I never saw the incident of Ananias and Sapphira as having anything to do with the Old Testament or with law versus grace. To me the key Scripture is “Didn’t it belong to you before it was sold? And after it was sold, wasn’t the money at your disposal? What made you think of doing such a thing? You have not lied to men but to God.”

First, Saint Peter states that the money belonged to Ananias and Sapphira. Second, even after they sold the property, Saint Peter says that it was their choice as to whether to donate the money or not. There is no Old Testament law involved in either of those statements. There also was no community mandate that had to be obeyed. It was a purely free-will decision. However, when they presented only part of the money as though it were the full money, they lied to the community and to God. What is the sermon lesson? If you lie to God and to His Church, God always has the option to execute judgment.

Saint Paul says, “What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! For he says to Moses, ‘I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.’ It does not, therefore, depend on man’s desire or effort, but on God’s mercy. For the Scripture says to Pharaoh: ‘I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.’ Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.”

It is God’s choice when to have compassion and when not to have compassion. We are fearfully wrong if we forget that. There is a reason why it says that fear is the beginning of wisdom.
But, this brought another question up in my mind. Does the Reformation idea of Law and Gospel imply that God is not allowed to judge and to execute that judgment? And a second question, does the Reformation idea so separate the Old Testament from the New Testament that God is not allowed to set rules in the New Testament?

But, when we look at the New Testament, there are multiple examples that give evidence to the contrary. In Acts 13, Saint Paul pronounces judgment upon Elymas and he is struck blind by God. In 1 Corinthians 11, Saint Paul says that some are sick and some sleep because they misjudge the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper. And, in that same chapter, Saint Paul makes clear that he does “not praise” them because they have failed to keep what Saint Paul has received and then delivered to them. That is, there are rules for worship which they were expected to keep. In 3 John, Saint John says that when he goes to visit, he will bring public correction to Diotrephes. These are but some of the possible examples.

All too often we emphasize the discontinuities between the Old Testament and the New Testament. But, this is one of the areas of continuity. In both the Old Testament and the New Testament, God chooses to either have mercy or to execute judgment. It is certainly true that the proportion of mercy to judgment has apparently changed. But, it is not true in any way that the God of the Old Testament was a judgmental God while the God of the New Testament is a merciful God. That was declared to be a mistaken conception a long time ago.

There is no problem of Law and Gospel, nor any problem of Grace in this passage. It is the same God, yesterday, today, and tomorrow.

Joe Boysel/Anglican: My first reaction to Michael’s question is that my answer is going to be woefully inadequate. Frankly, this discussion requires more of me than I have time to give. And, since this is a question of Scriptural interpretation as a backdoor to expose my theological proclivities, it deserves ever more careful exegesis! You’re a crafty one, Michael Spencer, crafty I tell you! Still, even the most careful exegetical method will inevitably conflict with a myriad of theological positions (perhaps even my own!) and will likely raise the ire of many people. In other words, my answer is going to cause someone (probably many!) to get peeved, and I loathe the idea of getting into passionate debates on two fronts (theological and exegetical) with such inadequate preparation on my part. OK, disclaimer finished!

While I believe that exegesis should be free of theological input, this question presumes – as I intimated above – a doctrinal interpretation of the passage through the very nomenclature used to frame the inquiry. So, let’s start with theological predicates and face the real question head on. The basic assumption here rests upon the notion that conformity to some legal standard (even a biblical one, like the 9th Commandment) purports at least some conflict with the “gospel.” Indeed, the question assumes a very Lutheran framing of the categories of “law” and “gospel,” to which I do not necessarily ascribe. Accordingly, I believe that human beings are indeed culpable for their sins, and sin is by definition a violation of the moral law of God. Therefore, theologically speaking, I find no doctrinal tension in my affirmation that Ananias and Sapphira – both, presumably, baptized Christians – faced temporal and, likely, eternal punishment for their decision to lie to the Holy Spirit. In other words, I affirm that a baptized Christian may turn (apostatize) from the faith and face the judgment of God. Indeed, I see many contemporary instances of apostasy within my own Anglican tradition and, frankly, wonder how these persons can act with such bold disregard for the truth in light of Scripture passages such as this one!

So, does my interpretation dilute the nature of the gospel? I think not. I agree that an individual finds her or his place in God’s rescue plan only by grace through faith in Jesus Christ. However, I do not think that it syllogistically (nor exegetically) follows that once someone becomes engrafted into the covenant community, that such membership permits (or even encourages) antinomianism. Indeed, once a part of the covenant community the individual finds a radical change already at work in their life, together with the means of grace which will lead him or her into a thoroughly transformed life. In fact, I think that this fundamental change (i.e. sanctification) is itself an integral part of the Good News; namely, that God’s salvation includes changing people from the inside out. Thus, while a person may, following baptism, turn from God and go back to a life of rebellion, I do not believe they are destined to do so.

Of course, this raises all sorts of questions about the security of an individual in God’s salvation, not to mention the obvious reality of sin in the life of a believer. Yes, I can already anticipate the pushback. Nevertheless, I guess I’m saying, perhaps it’s not such a good thing to be so presumptively secure. Perhaps Luther’s dictum: “Sin boldly, but believe more boldly still” is not such good advice after all. Rather, the security to which I would direct my parishioners is more like the security my children experience in our home: they know their parents will show an enormous amount of tolerance toward their errors and lapses of judgment based upon our love for them. However, that forbearance is not a license to disregard the rules of our home. Being a member of our family comes with copious amounts of mercy (as any house with four boys must!), but there is also an expectation of obedience. In fact, I think our sons well understand that love without law is not really love. Likewise, salvation without holiness is not really salvation.

Wyman Richardson/Southern Baptist: The story of Ananias and Sapphira does indeed present challenges to ministers and laypeople alike. It can, for instance, wrap us in a cloak of suffocating terror. R. Kent Hughes points out that Donald Grey Barnhouse would never let his congregation sing the third stanza of “At Calvary” (Now I’ve giv’n to Jesus everything / Now I gladly own Him as my King / Now my raptured soul can only sing / Of Calvary!) because of the story of Ananias and Sapphira! He also points out that Spurgeon skips the text in his “sixty volumes of the Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit anthology Twenty Centuries of Great Preaching.”

Yet, there is no reason for either evasion or legalism when dealing with this text. Furthermore, the story is not at odds with the gospel.

At its heart, the story is about pretention, pride, arrogance, and trying to appear to be more than you are in the economy of God and among the people of God. It was the sin of Ananias and Sapphira that smacked of Pharisaism: putting on a show when the reality of your heart is far from what you are projecting. It was the sin of Ananias and Sapphira that threatened to obscure the gospel: by pretending to give more than they had given they were trying to turn from grace and climb the ladder of ostentatious but empty works once again.

Above all else, the story is about the holiness of God. The gospel cannot be understood without the holiness of God and legalism cannot thrive under a proper understanding of it. The deaths of Ananias and Sapphira trumpet the singular fact that God’s holiness will not be obscured by human posturing. I think we see the same reality at work in Paul’s discussion of the Lord’s Supper in 1 Corinthians 11 where he says in v.30 that hypocritical posturing at the table of the Lord is so blasphemous it can lead to your being removed from the scene.

The gospel, properly understood, heightens our sense of the holiness of God, for God’s holiness lay at the root of the cross itself. Yet, so does His astounding mercy and grace, as evidenced, I would point out, by the countless episodes in scripture where those who committed worse sins than Ananias and Sapphira were spared the punishment these two received.

The story of Ananias and Sapphira is an exceptional but nontheless consistent display of the holiness of God intended to remind the blood-bought church of the seriousness of sin. And, as Tom Oden has said, “only those who take sin seriously take forgiveness seriously.” Paradoxically, it heightens our understanding of mercy and grace by showing us that God restrains such punishments in the majority of cases, giving His people time to repent and call upon His name. The gospel is not antithetical to appropriate, reverential fear (“Work out your salvation with fear and trembling.”), only to the kind of fear that a slave might have towards a master he deems unstable, capricious, and cruel (“For you did not receive the spirit of slavery to fall back into fear, but you have received the spirit of adoption as sons…”).

Indeed, I suspect our understanding of the gospel would be diminished somewhat without the story of Ananias and Sapphira.

William Cwirla/Lutheran: How to preach Acts 4;32-5:11, iMonk asks. It certainly is a challenge! This is perhaps one reason that the liturgical custom is to preach on the assigned Gospel text for the Sunday, thereby ensuring that the words and works of Jesus hold sway. Nonetheless, the text, as part of Holy Scripture, has been written for our learning and must certainly be taught.

The first thing to note is that Luke is writing a descriptive and selective history of the beginnings of the church. In fact, the word “church” is first used here at 5:11. It is descriptive of what happened not necessarily prescriptive for the church at all times. The early experiment in social communism on the part of the early Jerusalem church did not carry forward. Still, the care of the early Christians for each other certainly serves as a fine example of the love that flows from a living faith in Christ.

The generosity of Barnabas is set in sharp relief against the the duplicity of Ananias and Sapphira. Again, this is an accurate, descriptive account of what happened among the first Christians. The apostles are thereby established in their office. To lie to them is to lie to the Holy Spirit (5:3). “You have not lied to men but to God.” This is the same Spirit who guarantees the word of the apostles as the authentic Word of God and who works through the office of the holy ministry to deliver the gifts of Christ’s sacrificial death to the believer. It is consistent with Jesus’ own words concerning those He sent: “He who hears you, hears me” (Luke 10:16). This obviously has a Law/Gospel polarity to it.

We should not presume in this episode that Ananias and Sapphira were damned. This is likely no different than those who “fell asleep and even died” in Corinth as a result of their inappropriate eating and drinking of the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11). This was God’s temporal judgment (krino) to avert ultimate condemnation (katakrino) with the unbelieving world, a part of God’s discipline of His children whom He loves (Heb 12). We are here reminded that a healthy fear of the Lord goes hand in hand with a living faith in Christ. In this sense, 5:11 is key: “Great fear seized the whole church and all who heard about these events.”

One must wonder aloud today, considering what goes on in many of our Christian churches (Lutheran included!), whether the modern church has the same sense of holy fear as did the first Christians. “Therefore let us be grateful for receiving a kingdom that cannot be shaken, and thus let us offer to God acceptable worship, with reverence and awe, for our God is a consuming fire” (Heb 12:28-29).

Eric Landry, PCA Presbyterian: The New Testament is not without its warnings against unbelief and apostasy, and the church does well to heed them. In his commentary on Acts, Will Willimon helpfully points out the contrast between Barnabas and Ananias/Sapphira. Barnabas is filled with the Spirit to give of his possessions to the infant church. Ananias is filled with Satan. The same Holy Spirit who broke the bonds of death at Easter has broken the bonds of greed at Pentecost and beyond. The faithful preacher must present this narrative in all it’s Law-filled power. But the preacher cannot leave the text without returning to the theme of the Holy Spirit’s work in Barnabas’ life. The Holy Spirit enables Barnabas to do something that cuts against the grain of common sense and our natural inclinations. As we wrestle with unbelief and idolatry in our lives, we need the power of the Holy Spirit to unmask the idols of our own hearts–idols that are just as dangerous to us as they are to Ananias and Sapphira! The Gospel takes us by the shoulders and arrests us with the announcement that God in Christ has broken the power that wealth and security had over us. The question that each of us must answer is, do we believe? For those who do, the judgment of God against idols of every kind has been laid against Christ. For those who do not (even within the covenant community), the threat of judgment is real and oft-repeated in Scripture.