Today’s post is by guest blogger Chaplain Mike.

Here on Internet Monk, Michael has made no secret of the fact that he is a huge fan of pastor, author, and professor Eugene Peterson. And I am right there with him in my admiration of Peterson’s writings.

If you would like to go back and read some of what Michael has said about the man and his writings, here are some posts from the iMonk archives about Peterson:

March 4, 2005
August 22, 2007
January 31, 2008
Sabbatical Journal I
Sabbatical Journal continued
Sabbatical Journal conclusion

Though best known in popular circles as the author of The Message paraphrase of the Bible, it is Peterson’s earlier works on what it means to be a pastor and his devotional books and Bible studies that I have long loved and treasured as encouragements for my spiritual life and ministry.

The other day I received my copy of Eugene Peterson’s new book, Practice Resurrection: A Conversation on Growing Up in Christ. In this work, Peterson has his readers contemplate the message of Paul’s letter to the Ephesians to help us learn what it means to, “grow up to the full stature of Christ.”

This is the final book in Peterson’s “Conversations on Spiritual Theology” series. Each book is deeply insightful and well worth reading. The other four are:

1. Christ Plays in Ten Thousand Places: A Conversation in Spiritual Theology
2. Eat This Book: A Conversation in the Art of Spiritual Reading
3. The Jesus Way: A Conversation on the Ways that Jesus Is the Way
4. Tell It Slant: A Conversation on the Language of Jesus in His Stories and Prayers

I plan to put up several posts on what Eugene Peterson has to say in Practice Resurrection. I hope you will join the conversation.

[Continue reading]

From our friends at St. Peter’s Anglican Church in Tallahassee, FL, here is another of their excellent teaching videos. In this one, Father Michael Petty leads a class on the meaning of the Eucharist in the Anglican liturgy.

St. Peter’s also makes notes available to use while watching. Download notes here. (MOD: With regard to downloading the notes, clicking the link on St. Peter’s page will take you to another link at the bottom of the page. Right click (or Ctrl-click for Mac) to download the PDF file.)

Instructed Eucharist from St. Peter’s Anglican Church on Vimeo.

In our continuing discussion on issues related to the Scriptures, Chaplain Mike re-runs this classic IM post today. (from Dec, 2008)

Hey look! If you read carefully, you will even find another “Bible = loaded gun” metaphor!

Oh. We’re not talking about interpreting the Bible? Well….I am, so deal.

I usually just don’t say anything when I hear Biblical interpretation leave the road and head for the ditches. But doggone it, there’s some fairly basic stuff here that could be very helpful to those of you who genuinely love the Bible.

So in no particular order…

[Continue reading]

The comments to the three previous posts have featured a variety of responses and reactions to the idea of “Gospel-less” sermons, teaching, testimonies, etc. I am happy for those of you who are in churches where this is unthinkable, but I assure you that here in the Bible belt, this is not an illusion, particularly at the ground level of the most basic understanding of what is being said or proclaimed.

For example, it is not unusual for me to hear sermons with no specific reference to the scriptural, creedal or commonly articulated central ideas of the Gospel. God is generic. The Christian life is “living for God.” The mission of the Christian is either public morality or “being a good witness.” The Bible is a collection of proof texts.

The internet theological class usually is careful to be in a church where all the proper bases have been touched and the theological content is high. But for many other Christians, the Gospel content of a Joel Osteen or the Prosperity preachers seems quite appropriate. Osteen has even said that traditional Gospel content is offensive to what he is trying to do. One can listen to the prosperity preachers or culture warriors for weeks and not hear a clear, cogent articulation of foundational content. Moralism, legalism, cultural religion and shallow sentimentality prevail. [Continue reading]

I’ve been trying to emphasize the Gospel as the foundational content of the Christian life for many years. While I’ve worked at fresh articulations of the Gospel, there are a lot of familiar articulations of the Gospel that show up in my preaching and teaching with high school students and the adults in chapel and in my classes.

For example, these are four different Gospel articulations that I’ve used repeatedly in speaking and teaching. They are not definitions or creeds. They articulations that summarize and balance the content of the Gospel as I understand it. It’s language I want my hearers to hear frequently. Sometimes in phrases. Sometimes in whole sermons or lessons.

Announcement: The Gospel is the glad announcement that God himself, through Jesus, has done everything necessary to rescue his broken world and save its broken people from judgment and ruin. All persons are invited to believe this glad announcement, to be forgiven and to become a disciple of Jesus who is King and Lord. [Continue reading]

The apparent crisis in giving the Gospel its right and Biblically healthy place in evangelical Christian faith exists on several levels.

First, there is the level of scriptural definition. While I can answer the question “What is the Gospel?” it is the Biblical material that should form my definition. Before I give some simple Gospel articulations, what are the Biblical sources of Gospel definition?

Does the Bible give a definition of the Gospel? Or is the Gospel a theme that connects alll of scripture, yielding definitional material and language, but also context, meaning and significance for many other things? [Continue reading]

In a recent sermon, I said that I was deeply concerned about the understanding of the Gospel that I hear among adult Christians and especially preachers. I was not just making noise. With every passing year, I’m amazed that the level of Gospel understanding seems to be lower and lower among Christian adults. This isn’t just a failure to hear the Gospel in the terms and definitions I prefer. No, it is an ever lowering articulation of the Gospel, a replacement of the Gospel with other concerns and, perhaps most distressing of all, a replacement and confusion of the Gospel-centered mission itself.

I expect that this emphasis on my part will not endear me to some people, mostly on grounds that I am failing to see the significance of things like moral issues, behavior change and political causes. I’ve come to the point that I realize a discussion of the Gospel is going to have a predictable shape:

1) We all know the Gospel. It’s basic.
2) Once you’ve preached or taught the Gospel, then you need to deal with other things.
3) If you are constantly trying to bring the Gospel to the forefront as the main concern, you’re missing the importance of things like behavior change and obedience. [Continue reading]

REMINDER: Commenters should remember that the future interview segments will cover many topics.

A few days ago I asked Catholic blogger and philosopher Bryan Cross to do an interview here at IM on the subject of Christian Unity. Bryan blogs at Principium Unitatis. Bryan is a prolific writer and was gracious to do the interview. He’s given me enough content for several posts, so I am going to divide the interview into three parts. In part one, Bryan will talk about his journey from Pentecostal to Calvinist to Anglican to Catholic. Then I’ll post his answer to my first question on his personal passion for Christian unity.

Bryan is a patient teacher and apologist. Obviously, many IM readers will disagree with parts of his presentation while others will applaud. Having given articulate Lutherans and Anglicans space this year, I want to give Bryan time to talk about his personal mission of promoting church unity and reunion in the Catholic Church.

Some of you may want to read Bryan’s response to the “All the Romery People” piece at Mockingbird.

Thanks for coming to Internet Monk.com for this interview, Bryan. Take a couple of paragraphs and tell us your basic story, what you are doing now and about your family.

Thanks Michael for the invitation. I’ve enjoyed reading Internet Monk.com for the last couple years. I’m grateful for the opportunity to contribute to it in this way. [Continue reading]

A few Catholic oriented items here at IM, freely borrowing from other blogs.

I’m going to surprise a lot of you with an interview post with Catholic blogger Bryan Cross, writer at Principium Unitatis. I’ve often been a bit snarky to Bryan, but when it comes to the subject of Christian unity, he’s really an eloquent and optimistic Catholic voice. Read his blog bio and you’ll see he’s had a fascinating journey. I’ll be asking him questions about the recent Anglican arrangement and the overall issue of Christian unity.

Bryan’s blog was the original source for some excellent lectures by Ave Maria University professor Dr. Lawrence Feingold. His current collection are portraits of the Early Church Fathers. Dr. Feingold is an outstanding teacher, whether you agree with him or not. The entire series on The Church and Israel is outstanding Catholic teaching.

Fr. Walter Barron has a review of Alastair McGrath’s Christianity’s Dangerous Idea and a discussion of the issue of Church authority. [Continue reading]

UPDATE: Just banned a commenter. The admonition to “stop wasting my time” and “leave the SBC” was unacceptable. New commenters- read FAQ section 10 please.

For the past two years, I’ve been trying to get a single question answered:

What are the actual historical evidences, before Zwingli, for the Baptist view of the Lord’s Supper?

I’ve asked this question high, low, in-between and everywhere I could get a hearing.

Long story short: No answer. If there are evidences, then someone needs to write a book, asap. It’s long overdue.

Now let’s be clear what I am saying and not saying. My reading of the New Testament is deeply shaped by my Baptist upbringing, and it’s hard for me to read anything in any discussion of the Lord’s Supper that isn’t a version of the Zwinglian position. Baptists, at their best, such as in the Second London Baptist Confession, articulated a view quite similar to the language of John Calvin: in the Lord’s Supper, we feed on Christ by faith. As I have demonstrated in past posts here at IM (See the Baptists category), I believe there are many confessional resources in the history of Baptists to articulate a richer, deeper theology of the Lord’s Supper than what is commonly heard from Baptist pulpits: a deconstruction that virtually has taken the supper out of church life and the discipleship experience of most American Baptist Christians. [Continue reading]

Revelation 12:10 And I heard a loud voice in heaven, saying, “Now the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our God and the authority of his Christ have come, for the accuser of our brothers has been thrown down, who accuses them day and night before our God.

Jesus is the constant mediator. Jesus is the constant advocate.

Satan is the constant accuser.

The law of God also accuses our conscience. And the grace of God in the Gospel, Jesus himself, answers the law’s thunderings.

Satan has plenty to work with in the law, and in my life and yours. It is no wonder he accuses us “day and night” before God.

Have you thought what the devil would do if he took to the pulpit of a church? [Continue reading]

UPDATE: A great intro to Luther is “Luther for Armchair Theologians” written by Steven Paulson, a speaker at the recent Mockingbird Conference. Also, New Reformation Press has lots of Lutheran theology resources at 10% off right now.

Apparently, by the email count, I’ve said something right.

Earlier in the day, Blue Raja and I had a discussion at the Boar’s Head Tavern about an earlier post where I quoted a Semi-Pelagian IM commenter. It’s discouraging to read that the atonement “opened the door” for us to now live a life worthy of the Kingdom of God. As I usually do, I expressed my despair at these kinds of “living to please God” systems of salvation and the blatant dishonesty they encourage and despair they induce.

So here was one of my replies.

The Gospel was never good news for me until Luther helped me see that life could continue to be tragic. I never worry about abundant life doing more than the occasional appearance in the present. I’m content with Christ in the shadowlands if he guarantees to raise me from the dead and bring me home.

This keeps coming back to me from readers who say it’s hit home with them, and where can they find more.

Before I talk about finding more of that, let me assure you that I responded to the Lutheran altar call a very long time ago. [Continue reading]

NOTE: Despite the fact that this post is law, you should still read it

I want to talk about a specific problem in preaching and teaching: the problem of preferring law over Gospel.

I consider the primary problem with preaching and teaching in my Southern Baptist tradition these days to be an obsession with (or addiction to?) preaching the “law.” To put it mildly, it’s brutal out there. In many churches and ministries, you’re getting clubbed into putty with the law and hearing slightly less Gospel than what you’d get in fifteen minutes of country music, all courtesy of a preacher who has no excuse not to know better.

I’m using the simple Lutheran “law/Gospel” division here: all of scripture is either what God commands/demands under penalty or what he promises/provides freely by grace. This is law and Gospel. “Do” or “Done.” Moses or Jesus. God the accountant older brother or God the Father of the Prodigal. Advice or announcement. Sinai or the cross. Threat or comfort. Blessing or curse. You do it or else. God did and praise.

If you get this, Luther said, you are a theologian even without the degree. So if you don’t know this, learn it, and if ou learn it, use it. Go to New Reformation Press and get you some Rod Rosenbladt or, if you’re up for it, the book by Walther. (Lutherans can make suggestions for the rest of us on this.) [Continue reading]

6: 9 Don’t you realize that those who do wrong will not inherit the Kingdom of God? Don’t fool yourselves. Those who indulge in sexual sin, or who worship idols, or commit adultery, or are male prostitutes, or practice homosexuality, 10 or are thieves, or greedy people, or drunkards, or are abusive, or cheat people—none of these will inherit the Kingdom of God. 11 Some of you were once like that. But you were cleansed; you were made holy; you were made right with God by calling on the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God. -Paul the Apostle, First Letter to the Corinthians

I’ve always been encouraged that there is so much discussion of the Gospel in the Christian blogosphere, but I’ve been disappointed where most of that discussion has focused. I’m sure there’s a great need to clarify the differences between Piper and Wright on the nature of justification, but I doubt that the church on the corner has many people walking in the doors who particularly care. (Oh, I know that the theologians among us can tell us why they should care, but the theological class has never suffered from a lack of confidence in the significance of their particular areas of interest, yours truly included.) [Continue reading]

I’ve got a new hot button. I experienced it this week and I think it’s best to warn the general public that until I make some progress in sanctification, pushing this button could result in an ugly scene.

(Before I say this, I know there are a bunch of books on this subject and I’ve read some of them. I could just recommend a good book, but I need to get this off my chest.)

My new hot button is “You need to pray until you find God’s will.”

First of all, I believe in God, and I believe he has a will. I believe God sovereignly runs the universe pretty much like the Westminister/Second London Confessions say, though I have absolutely no idea what that means other than God is in control in a way I can’t understand and am not capable of understanding. (My brain is too small.) It’s an assertion, and as much as I know God only in Jesus, it’s a comfort. [Continue reading]