Are You Haggard?

Pastoral Letter to the Springs Reformed Church (RPCNA):

I write to you today in the most somber of moods. In light of the recent fall of Ted Haggard, it is truly, a time to weep…a time to mourn (Eccl. 3:4). Many biblical principles come to mind at a time like this…

Therefore let anyone who thinks that he stands take heed lest he fall. (1 Cor. 10:12)

Keep watch on yourself, lest you too be tempted. (Gal. 6:1)

Do not be deceived: God is not mocked, for whatever one sows, that will he also reap. (Gal. 6:7)

Examine yourselves, to see whether you are in the faith. Test yourselves. Or do you not realize this about yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you?— unless indeed you fail to meet the test! (2 Cor. 13:5)

You who boast in the law dishonor God by breaking the law. For, as it is written, “The name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you.” (Rom. 2:23-24)

…many more passages could be, and probably should be, added here. Yet, as I think of you all during this time, and consider some of the public statements and public reactions that have surfaced, I have a particular concern that I wish to address with you in this letter. In Mr. Haggard’s letter to the New Life congregation, he stated:

“Through the years, I’ve sought assistance in a variety of ways, with none of them proving to be effective in me…When I stopped communicating about my problems, the darkness increased and finally dominated me.”

On Monday, Nov. 6th, United Press Independent writer, Julie Bogart caught this statement as well, quoting it in her article entitled: “Scripture little help for Haggard’s sex addiction”. She goes on to say,

“What if evangelicals admitted that breaking bad sex habits is beyond the scope of its ability and is not a promise in Scripture?...When people say that Haggard should have been more honest with himself, I want to say that evangelical theology is guilty for his dishonesty. The promises are lies. They make a mockery of leaders who depend on the promises and find no relief. What else does a pastor do but lie when the practices he preaches don’t work for him?” (emphasis added)

We cannot simply respond to this by saying, “Well, we’re all sinners.” Yes, that is true, but that has already been stated by Michael Jones, Haggard’s accuser! As Christians we must have more to say than the unbeliever who brought Haggard down!

More than simply having something to say, what do you do with Mr. Haggard’s statement and Ms. Bogart’s contention? Have you tried it all and none of it has been effective in you either? Does this resonate with you? How do you respond to the charge that, “The promises are lies”? When you examine your own life, are you Haggard/haggard? What advantage is it to be a Christian? Of what value is your baptism?

Paul addresses these questions effectively in the midst of a similar discussion in his day:

Then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the value of circumcision? 2 Much in every way. To begin with, the Jews were entrusted with the oracles of God. 3 What if some were unfaithful? Does their faithlessness nullify the faithfulness of God? 4 By no means! Let God be true though every one were a liar… (Rom. 3:1-4)

You see, one man’s lapse does not nullify the promises of God. In fact, if everyone on earth who claimed the name of Christ fell from grace, this would still not nullify the promises of God: Let God be true though every one were a liar! Mr. Haggard’s fall has opened God up to the charge of lying. Ms. Bogart has clearly seen this and states clearly: “The promises are lies”.

But neither Ms. Bogart nor Mr. Haggard, nor most of the Evangelical world, understand what the promises of God are, and particularly what He has promised in the area of our deliverance from sin. It is most telling that in Mr. Haggard’s letter, he never once mentioned explicitly, nor even implicitly, our Lord Jesus Christ. What he articulates in his letter and describes about his struggle with sin is in fact a Christ-less religious experience.

But the Bible tells us of a God who really saves sinners: A Father who has predestined us to be conformed to the image of His Son (Rom. 8:29), a Son who gave His life for us to save us from our sin (1 Jn. 3:16), and a Spirit who not only raised Jesus from the dead, but who also works just as powerfully in us to mortify sin within us (Rom. 8:11). The great divide between biblical religion and the religions of the world is the contrast between faith in Christ and works—between grace and human effort.

The hard fact that many of us will sooner or later need to swallow is that modern Evangelical Christianity is not biblical Christianity. Evangelical Christianity offers gimmick after gimmick for people to try, in order to overcome their sins—accountability groups, certain kinds of devotional exercises, deliverance ministries, etc. But God promises us the absolute efficacy of His Son to deliver us from the penalty and power of sin:

He is the source of your life in Christ Jesus, whom God made our wisdom and our righteousness and sanctification and redemption. (1 Cor. 1:30)

What are you to do to be sanctified? The same thing that you did to be justified—Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ:

Therefore, as you received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk in him, rooted and built up in him and established in the faith, just as you were taught, abounding in thanksgiving. (Col. 2:6-7)

Are you Haggard/haggard? Are you also struggling with besetting sin? Has the current situation made you question the promises of God? Are you distraught because you have tried to change yourself, but have utterly failed? Heed Christ’s call to you today (Matt. 11:28):

Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.

Affectionately in Christ, Pastor David Reese

The Amish & Islam

The recent tragedy of the Amish schoolgirl killings has brought into the public eye a clear difference between Islam and Christianity that I hope will not be lost on the world. We are constantly told that those perpetrating the violence in the name of Allah are "extremists" of the Muslim religion...Well, the Amish are the Christian "extremists"! In saying this I am admitting that they are not mainstream Christianity, but I do find it absolutely striking that "extremism" in Christianity manifests itself in passivism...this in contrast to "extremism" in Islam manifesting itself in mass murder and terrorism.

The following action of the respective "extremist" groups is quite telling as well. The Pope quoted an ancient source saying basically that Islam is violent. In response, Islamic "extremeist" (actually high-up officials in major-player nations), issued death threats calling for his execution and retaliated by attacking other Christians. A crazed madman invades a schoolhouse in a Christian community and shoots and kills 5 young girls. In response, the Christian "extremeists", issued statements of forgiveness and sought to help and comfort the widow and children of this madman...

Now, I should explain why I consider the Amish "extremists". They are so because they have gone beyond (or below) the teaching of the Bible, and created an idocencratic religious expression of Christianity that is not biblical. You see, the Amish are extreme passifists. The hard truth in all of this is that no Amishman would have sought to defend the schoolgirls--jump the gunman, hit him, fight him off--had he had the opportunity. In other words, an Amishman would just stand there and watch (and probably pray) as violent crimes and criminal acts are carried out against you, me...even his own family.

The Bible calls us to defend our neighbor...to do everything in our power to preserve our own and others lives. In other words, self-defense is righteous. Watching as others are killed or maimed is not biblical...no matter how stiking and touching this might seem today in a world gone mad.

But there is something in both religions respectively that set the trajectory of their extremist. You see, the fact is that Christian extremist err on the side of passivism...Islamic extremists err on the side of mass murder. Christianity is a religion of grace and forgiveness...Islam is a religion of law and retribution. This is not to say that Christianity is without law-the law actually defines the sin from which we must be saved-but if there was a law given that could give life, then righteousness would have come by the law.

This is a sad story and I have only compassion for the Amish during this time. Furthermore, some of the public exposure of their actions has been God glorifying. In God's providence, there wasn't an Amishman there to "do" anything. The trajedy happened. And, in such stark categories, the contrasts between Christianity and Islam have been made clear by our "extremist."

R. Scott Clark & Confessional Orthodoxy

Dr. Clark of Westminster Seminary in Escondido, CA has an excellent set of lectures availible on the internet addressing the need for American Protestants to return to their roots and again be "confessional" churches. Dr. Clrak can speak for himself and so avail yourself to these talks at:


http://www.sermonaudio.com/search.asp?SpeakerOnly=true&currSection=sermonsspeaker&keyword=Dr%5EScott%5EClark

Ray LaMontagne

By far, one of the best, new American singer-songwriters is Ray LaMontagne. He was born in New Hampshire, but he seems to be from everywhere. He has a very different approach to music and writing, and his product manifests this. A biography on his website states:

"LaMontagne does not consider himself an entertainer; he writes, records, and performs his music and hopes that, in so doing, sheer passion and music will triumph. 'I always just express myself,' he says. 'I just kind of let them go, my songs. There are songwriters and musicians out there who are entertainers. They have so much fun. I envy that sometimes. They're having such a great time.'"

His music is simple and Dylanesque, and his voice is absolutely unique...it hurts to listen to sometimes, not because it is poor, but because it is so full of emotion. Just as Van Gogh's paintings demand thought and involvement, arresting the looker and forcing him to consider the message, so it is with LaMontagne's songs. These are complex poems filled with emotion, pain, questions, reflections, etc. and it is impossible to simply turn his music on as background filler noise. Again, the biography on his website states concerning his latest album,

"LaMontagne's voice — battered, bitter and beseiged, devastated and uncomprehending — remains central and alive..."

His latest album is, musically speaking, amazing. Till The Sun Turns Black is intricate and...for lack of a better word...beautiful.

I know nothing of his personal religious or philosophical beliefs, but as a general rule, don't look to artists for either. On his first album Trouble he disappointingly quoted from the book, The Last Temptation of Christ, but it is unclear what his point was. The quote mentions that God will always pardon singers...Again, he is a songwriter and singer...not a theologian.

If you are looking for a break with the normal trash that is perpetually pumped out of today's industry studios and then forced onto the masses, LaMontagne will not disappoint. His website is:

Blaise Pascal

I have always been impressed with the thoughts (i.e. "Pensees") of Blaise Pascal (1623-1662). I am again reading his "Thoughts", and while they are not always accurate (he defended Jansenist doctrine), there are a lot of excellent comments made by him on a variety of topics (e.g. on the depravity of man). One of my favorite quotes ("Thoughts") of his comes from his first chapter, "Thoughts on Mind and on Style" #10:

"People are generally better persuaded by the reasons which they have themselves discovered than by those which have come into the mind of others."

In his chapter on "Morality and Doctrine", Pascal speaks very much like a Federal, Law/Gospel Calvinist:

"The law imposed what it did not give. Grace gives what it imposes." (522)

"All faith consists in Jesus Christ and in Adam, and all morality in lust and in grace." (523)

Perhaps my favorite quote is:

"Jesus Christ is a God whom we approach without pride, and before whom we humble ourselves without despair." (528)

The Divine Right of Church Government

Most people today do not think about Church Government, nor do they think it is an important concern for the Christian. But, contrary to popular sentiment, Church Government is one of the most important parts of the Christian Faith. Jesus told His disciples that the leadership of His Church would not be like the leadership in the world (Matt. 20:25-28), and Paul tells us that after Jesus ascended on high He poured out gifts upon His Church, "...the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the pastors and teachers..." (Eph. 4:11).

One of the most helpful books ever written on the subject is The Divine Right of Church Government by a variety of some godly pastors in London in the middle of the 1600s. It is a defense of presbyterian church government and a refutation of both Erastianism and Congregationalism. For a limited time it is availible for $11.95 from Naphtali Press:



Get it while you can, as when it goes out of print again, it may be unavailible for a long time.

Christmas & The Christian

Since the man-made celebration of Christmas fell on the Lord's Day this past year, I thought it would be helpful to our congregation to speak on the subject, and I did so on the Lord's Day eveing prior to the 25th. I believe that there is much more to say on the subject, but I have tried to put forth principles by which we can think through this session. The lecture is availible to listen to here:

http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?currSection=sermonsspeaker&sermonID=12260517538

I believe that you can celebrate and take part in some of the festivities of this seasonal time in a non-religious manner, without violating either the general principles of the Word nor the RPW. Outside of the church and on a personal level, we as a church do allow for latitude in our people's involvement and participation. We have attendees who are adamantly opposed to any participation at all, and we have others that are some-what inclined to be involved at differing levels. Since it is outside of the worship of God, we do not think that the RPW is the question at this point, but rather the more broad principles of God's Word. We all agree that Xmas has pagan and Papist origins, but also believe that things can outgrow their origins and become removed to the point of becoming adiaphora. As I alluded to in the John 10:22-23 teaching, 1 Cor. 10 seems to be a helpful passages in navigating these issues. The meat under consideration was killed and became meet by way of pagan sacrifices to idols. Yet Paul is teaching that it is just meat to Christians. If it is an issue of stumbling a brother or in the eyes of some who really consider it sacrificial meat...do not partake. While much of the festivities of this season began in the same way as the meat in 1 Cor. 10, they are not evil in and of themselves ( e.g. taking time off work, giving gifts, family get-togethers, feasting, etc.). Along these lines then, we grant latitude to one another and seek each others edification. These are the principles that guide our actions on this matter outside of the congregation and worship. We do not understand the entire season to be a man-made religious holiday...in fact we do not acknowledge it as a 'religious holiday'. As I mentioned in the teaching it is viewed more as 'happy' time...not 'holy' time.

The Necessity of Observation in Metaphysics and the Impossability of Erasing

This post and the next are merely musings in fields that I do not have any expertise in. I just wonder/wander about (stuff), and think it is worth writing down in the hope that someone who is an expert in the field might pick it up and go with it or else show me the impossability of the thesis. These will be short and unelaborated upon...

If metaphysically, something must be observed to actually exist (see quantum physics), then I wonder about the "impact" of the observer on reality. If there is some kind of "impact", I wonder if there would be some way to detect and measure the impact. In other words, like a path in the woods, that which is well traveled will exist long after it is no longer traveled. In fact, ancient trade routes are even now being mapped from infrared satellite imaging since the impact of their making was significant, their reality could not ultimately be 'erased'. Thus I wonder if we will not be able to read impact of all sorts some day. Like an event that happened in a room: Could we reconstruct it based on the impact of observing beings that were there? Could it be that we can never actually erase reality, but rather we only layer it on? Could we peel back layers of reality in a certain specified area and actually re-see the earlier reality?

It seems that everything from crime scene investigation, to historiography would be impacted by this ability, and thus nothing done in secret would be able to remain hidden. Although I wonder if this theory is possible, and even think that it is, I do not at all think that it impacts the reality of the supernatural and the eschatological judgement of God when He, by the working of His own supernatural power, will expose reality for all to see as He judges the thoughts and intentions of every man. Just because I can, via radio wave or cable or satellite, see what is going on on the other side of the world right now, this is not even in the same category as the omniscience of the God of Scripture.

Semper Reformanda and the New Anti-Church Movement

We are fast approaching something of a crisis when it comes to the traditional notion of 'church'. More and more, people are opting to walk away from the established 'church' and choosing instead to 'be the church', meeting in their homes with just their family or, with the more compromising among this group, a small band of like-minded expatriots.

While there is variation in the orginizing prinicple of the particular groups or individuals that have chosen this route (e.g. Apocoplyptic self-identifications, a desire to be like the 'early church', a return to some prestine time of ecclesiological 'attainments', etc.), a radical principle is shared across the board. That radical principle is a bastard version of semper reformanda, which we have seen before, and whose trajectory is headed in the same destructive direction. Let me first define it, then vindicate my claim that we have seen it before, and finally 'prophesy' as to the future.

Semper reformanda is a Reformation era principle. While its origins are somewhat suspect, its principle has enjoyed currancy within the Reformed Church, along side its more stalwart relations, the Five Solis: Sola Scriptura, Sola gratia, Sola fide, Solus Christus, and Soli Deo gloria. Semper reformanda is actually part of a larger phrase which goes, Ecclesia reformata semper reformanda dia vox Deo (The Church Reformed, always reforming, according to the Word of God). The point is that, the church has been reformed and yet it is still in the process of being more and more conformed to the Word of God. Essentially, semper reformanda is phrase indicating the ongoing need for sanctification, not endless doctrinal revision. Today when one cries semper reformanda it is usually at the expense of semper reformata. Today, rather than indicating an acknowledgement of the need for continued sanctification-bringing practice into conformity with belief-it is an attempt to legitimize doctrinal renovation by an appeal to history. In this regard, those who weild it today show they are mere children of the enlightenment seeking to impose their new theological musings by means of power; the power of a tradition that they are repudiating.

We have seen this before. This is nothing more than a baked-over, Radical-Reformation in the Anabaptist tradition. Claiming, and apparently reading, the Bible only, these modern naives have learned nothing from history and so are repeating it. This they would see as their badge of honor. Who is truer to the principle sola scriptura than they? Let's go back to the Bible and reconstruct the faith according to a simple, non-predjudiced, objective method of everyday Christians reading their Bibles. By this method we will bypass the corruption of the academy and can be assured that we are in the light, for surely we are not like them. If I had a dollar for every group that has begun on such a supposidly high ground... We are them and they are us.

The stage of history is strune with 'groups' once Christian. When the Bible-only method of theologizing is adopted the biblical method is abandoned, and error is inevitable. The Bible tells us to honor our father and our mother. The Bible tells us that if we neglect our father and our mother under the guise of pursuing righteousness, we are wicked, not righteous. The Reformers-those identified as the Magesterial Reformation-with their Bibles as the ultimate authority, honored the real and delegated authority of the Church's tradition. They cautiously and patiently and within the bounds of the church, submitted to the Word of God. The Anabaptists-those identified as the Radical Reformation-rejected church authority and tradition, held historical theology in contempt, and ultimately rejected the Word of God. The legecy of Socinians, Quakers, Arminians, etc. speak clearly to this trend.

The modern anti-church movement is a kindred soul to the Radical Reformation. As more and more people reject the church today for their particular idiosyncratic 'thing', they begin the march into oblivian only stopping now and then to have their visas stamped at the station of various former errors. They will die. But the church will remain...still not as beautiful as she will be when He whose she is perfects her finally. But nontheless alive and well because of her Him who loved her and gave Himself for her.

The Law/Gospel Contrast & Worship

A most basic principle of hermenuetics is the Law/Gospel contrast. The Law/Gospel contrast is primary to Reformed theology and vital to a proper interpretation and application of the Bible. In our day, there is a radical shift in thinking about the Law/Gospel contrast among supposedly "reformed" scholars and teachers. While this radical shift is largely due to a desire to combat antinomianism (lit. anti-lawism), which is rampent in modern evangelicalism, the shift itself is radically antinomian. While desiring to enforce the Law, the modern, so-called "reformed" teachers and scholars have actually lowered it and are destroying it.

By denying the Law/Gospel contrast, the new teaching equates them. Thus if the Law is going to be "good news" or Gospel, it must be do-able. Thus the high standard and terror of the Law is lowered and it is redefined to be requiring something closer to good intentions, rather than actual perfection. Not only does this new, low view of the Law ultimately destroy the Gospel, it necessarily must infect and change worship practice.

What a person believes concerning his salvation will determine how he views worship.

If salvation is by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone, then worship, which is glorying in our redemption, will necessarily be confined to that which God alone has called for. In other words, those who believe that they have not contributed to their salvation, will also not seek to contribute to the worship of God. Worship parallels the Gospel in this regard.

With this introduction, notice how Calvin draws these two issues together as well and shows how the logical outworking of a faulty understanding of the Law necessarily results in a faulty understanding of worship:

"Since men have turned aside from pure and holy obedience to God, they have discovered that good intention was sufficient to approve everything. This was to open the door to all superstitions. It has been the origin of the worship of images, the purchase of masses, the filling of churches with pomp and parade, the running about on pilgrimages, the making of vows by each at his own hand. But the abyss here is so profound that it is enough for us to have touched on some examples. So far is it from being permitted to honour God by human inventions, that there would be no firmness nor certainty, neither bottom nor shore in religion: everything would go to wreck, and Christianity differ in nothing from the idolatries of the heathen."

Who Were The Covenanters?

I pastor the Springs Reformed Church in Colorado Springs, CO. We are part of the denomination of the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America (RPCNA). Our history goes back to 17th century Scotland and the reformed heritage known as the "Covenanted Reformation". Those who held to the principles of the Covenanted Reformation came to be known as the "Covenanters".

Who were the Covenanters and what wre the issues? The follow link is to a website that is helpful as an introdution to the Covenanters.

http://www.covenanter.org.uk/index.html

Below is off of the covenanter.org website in answer to the question: Who were the Covenanters?:

Simply stated, the Covenanters were those people in Scotland who signed the National Covenant in 1638. They signed this Covenant to confirm their opposition to the interference by the Stuart kings in the affairs of the Presbyterian Church of Scotland. The Stuart kings harboured the belief of the Divine Right of the Monarch. Not only did they believe that God wished them to be the infallible rulers of their kingdom - they also believed that they were the spiritual heads of the Church of Scotland. This latter belief could not be accepted by the Scots. No man, not even a king, could be spiritual head of their church. Only Jesus Christ could be spiritual head of a Christian church. This was the nub of the entire Covenanting struggle.

The Scots were, and would have been, loyal to the Stuart dynasty but for that one sticking point, and from 1638, when the Covenant was signed, until the Glorious Revolution - when Prince William of Orange made a bloodless invasion of Great Britain in 1688 - a great deal of suffering, torture, imprisonment, transportation and executions would ensue. King Charles I had introduced the Book of Common Prayer to Scotland in 1637 to the fury and resentment of the populace. He declared that opposition to the new liturgy would be treason, and thus came about the Covenant.

There followed a period of very severe repression. Ministers with Covenanting sympathies were "outed" from their churches by the authorities, and had to leave their parishes. Many continued to preach at "conventicles" in the open air or in barns and houses. This became an offence punishable by death. Citizens who did not attend their local churches (which were now in the charge of Episcopalian "curates") could be heavily fined, and such offenders were regarded as rebels, who could be questioned, even under torture. They could be asked to take various oaths, which not only declared loyalty to the king, but also to accept his as head of the church. Failure to take such an oath could result in summary execution by the muskets of the dragoons, who were scouring the districts looking for rebels.

The persecutions became more frequent and cruel on the Restoration of Charles II in 1660. As time went on more and more ordinary folk became involved, and skirmishes and battles took place against Government troops. In 1678 the Government raised an army of 6,000 Highlanders, who had no love for the Presbyterian lowlanders. This army swept through the west and south of Scotland, looting and plundering. They remained for many years, quartering themselves on the already impoverished Covenanters.

There are many books that have been written which are moving testimonies to the struggles and battles of the Scotch Covenanters. The stand tall as historical examples of how men should live...and how men should die.

Barbie Meets Jesus: Part 2

The following is from my good friend Jack Smith at the Banner of Truth. Commenting on the "Barbie Meets Jesus" article he writes:

I think this may be the same company that introduced the (and I shiver as I write this) bobble-head Jesus, Moses, and David dolls at the (another shiver) Christian Booksellers Association convention last year. There was also a (shiver) God action figure dressed in a white robe with white shoulder length hair. He apparently takes steroids and is a weight lifter.The last figure I mentioned comes bubble packed with an AK-47. I would encourage ... prayers ... for the abominable state of (shiver) Christian publishing. The only vendor that I'm aware of that has been rejected from participating at the CBA trade show was a manufacturer of(shiver) Christian lingerie. CBA was quite proud of themselves for taking this noble stand.

Maybe if we can get Barbie to wear some of the new "Christian" lingerie she could pass for a Christian and we could then have her come and address the CBA convention next year!

Barbie Meets Jesus

The subject above is the headline in the "Inside the Beltway" section of the April 26 Washington Times. The text of the article is below:

The Beverly Hills Teddy Bear Co., creators of dolls such as Shrek and the Grinch Who Stole Christmas, announces a new line of interactive Bible characters that promise to entertain children while engaging them in Bible stories. "It's always been on my heart to do this, and now we finally have the right talent and right people to make a doll line of the greatest people ever to walk the earth," says David Socha, founder of the company and creator of the Messengers of Faith dolls. Initially, dolls depicting Jesus Christ, David, Moses, Esther and Mary are being produced, with additional Biblical characters to be released in the future.

If we can't get kids to believe in Jesus, at least we can get them to play with Him...?

The Pope and the Press

The following is from an entry that was posted on a discussion list I belong to. I think it is excellent and really hits the nail on the head as to the differences between Protestantism and Catholicsim:

Gene Edward Veith wrote a good article on the Roman church here:

http://www.worldmag.com/subscriber/displayarticle.cfm?id=10558

What I liked about it is that in just one short article he wrote three things that the media and many evangelicals simply miss:

1) The RCC's media savvy is precisely because they are this-worldly:

"Many evangelicals are probably envious, thinking no way are we ever going to get this kind of good press. Roman Catholicism—with its image-centeredness, visible worldwide institutions, and externalized rituals—is certainly more media-friendly than Protestantism, which is Word-centered, decentralized, and internalized. The media is oriented to celebrities, and in the pope they have one. "

2) The RCC is not conservative but incredibly liberal and relativist on the thing that matters most:

"In one area, the late pope was not traditional at all. By emphasizing that good works are the fruit of God's grace, he had many Lutherans and evangelicals thinking that Catholics now agree with them on justification by faith. But the pope applied this principle to other religions, as well. If Muslims and Hindus demonstrate good works, that must be a sign of God's grace. Now, Catholics are teaching that not just other Christians but believers in other religions can be saved, even apart from conscious faith in Jesus Christ. This ecumenical theology tallies well with relativism, making Catholicism palatable to our new polytheistic culture."

3) The RCC, for all its pomp and show, does not in the end have the full Gospel:

"But though the pope was eulogized for all of his good works, the prayers begged God to let him into heaven, calling on Mary and the saints to intercede for him. Sadly missing was the liberating gospel of salvation through faith in the free forgiveness won by Christ alone."

May god help the church to recognize her "other-worldliness' and may we walk by faith and not by sight.

Geneva Still Standing Tall

While many protestants are falling all over themselves to show how accomodating they are in the wake of the death of Pope John Paul II (e.g. Doug Wilson giving his condolenses to Roman Catholics during a worship service, President Bush attending Mass in honor of the deceased Pope), it is refreshing to hear that the city of Geneva will not capitulate to the current, universal love-fest, by lowering their flag to half-mast in respect for the Pope. The following is the Reuters story:

GENEVA (Reuters) - Geneva, the birthplace of Calvinism, will once again mark its distance from the Vatican and not fly flags at half-mast for the funeral of Pope John Paul.

The city, where John Calvin introduced his austere version of Protestantism in the 16th century, said it would make no exception to a local rule that flags be only lowered for the death of a Swiss citizen.

"There is just no precedent of this sort in Geneva," said head of the local council Martine Brunschwig Graf, referring to calls for Geneva to go along with the rest of Switzerland in a gesture of respect for the Pontiff, who died on Saturday.

Calvin was a major figure in the Protestant Reformation and under his influence Geneva renounced papal authority, abolished mass and closed down monasteries in 1536.

Hopefully the day will dawn soon when Protestants will not be afraid to stand tall in the face of ecumincal peer-pressure and Geneva's example will once again influence the nations.

Sabbath Snow

I pastor a small church (the Springs Reformed Church-RPCNA http://www.springsreformed.org in Colorado Springs, CO) and today we have a 'snow day'. That is, this morning we have blizzard-like conditions and since we have folks that travel over an hour to get here, we decided that the safest thing to do is to cancel our services this morning.

It is a bit odd for me to have a 'snow day'. It just doesn't seem right! I study all week and prepare to lead this congregation in the worship of God. This, I know, is significant (2 Tim. 4:1-2), but I still need to keep it in perspective...

...this is the Lord's Day after all! This is God's Day and He controls the weather and He has decided that this Sabbath will be too snowy for this little congregation to gather together for worship. And, He has decided that this preacher will not deliver his sermon today to this people.

Who can know the ways of the Lord? A man plans his ways, but the Lord directs his path. From my perspective I am tempted to interpret today's events in light of 'me'. But there is a whole lot more going on in this world and going on today, than 'my sermon' or even the congregation that I pastor.

Each will take this day, hopefully, from the Lord, accepting His providencial decision to pour forth a blizzard, locking us all up in our homes with our families today.

But this is still the Lord's Day. He still owns it and He still calls us to delight in Him.

As far as I am concerned, I will lead my family in worship this morning and then spend the day with them. In fact we will take this as a reprive from the Lord and a time to spend time with each other and to edify each other.

Among other things (e.g. discussing things with my wife, talking with my girls, wrestling with my boys, etc.), I will sit by the window, cup of coffee in hand, and I will just watch the white come down and blow about...

...I think I needed this Sabbath snow.

Sanctification...Sola Fide?

Sanctification by faith alone? Is that title uncomfortable to you? What is your understanding of sanctification? The fact that sanctification is by faith alone has been misunderstood, abused, and, most of the time, rejected. Reformed Christians have (rightly) worked hard to distinguish between justification and sanctification, arguing that justification is the legal declaration of 'righteous' based upon the meritorious righteousness of Jesus Christ, and not a statement of the actual condition of the believer himself. Yet it seems that while Protestants have worked so hard to keep our works out of justification, that often they have mistakenly thought that since they have kept them far from justification, therefore they can then safely pour them into the catagory of sanctification. Sanctification is the actual infusion of the righteousness of Christ into us, even as justification is the actual imputation of the righteousness of Christ to our account. Francis Turretin says concerning the difference between justification and sanctification,

The former consists in the judicial and forensic act of remission of sin and imputation of righteousness; the latter in the physical and moral act of infusion of righteousness and internal renovation.

In like manner, the Westminster Larger Catechism #77 states concerning this difference:

...God in justification imputeth the righteousness of Christ; in sanctification his Spirit infuseth grace, and enableth to the exercise thereof...

I hope to be arguing in a series herein on Linkin' Blogs, for the biblical and Reformed doctrine of sanctification by faith alone in Christ alone. In the mean time, and keeping with the purpose of this blog, let me suggest a few foundational works that are essential reading on the subject:

John Owen, Sin & Temptation (This is the best work on subject of mortification ever written. It is currently out of print, but one of the books that is contained in this little, abridged volume is availible at the link below)

http://www.sovgracepub.com/sgpbooks/1589600681.htm

Walter Marshall, The Gospel Mystery of Sanctification (This is the best single volume on the whole subject of sanctification ever written. It has recently been republished and is availible at the link below)

http://www.heritagebooks.org/browse.asp?fname=Walter&lname=Marshall

William Romaine, The Life, Walk, and Triumph of Faith (This is an excellent treatment on the whole subject of living by faith. If you try to buy it anywhere else but the link below you could pay over $100...here it is only $15. While at the Reformation Heritage Books site, you may wish to also purchase Romaine's other excellent volume, 12 Discourses on the Law & the Gospel)

http://www.heritagebooks.org/item.asp?bookId=1328

If you can get these and read them, you will be instantly edified and on your way to understanding sanctification, and that it is by faith in Christ alone.

A Breath of Fresh Air

Tired of all the palp that passes for music within Christian circles? Then check out Jason Coghill, a gifted musician from Australia who not only has talent, but also a keen theological mind and a heart for using his gifts according to the Word of God. Bio from his website states:

In 1995 Jason, together with Matthew Jacoby and Rod Gear formed the band Sons of Korah, now an internationally renowned acoustic trio dedicated to composing music to the psalms. Jason left the band to pursue a solo career, composing, arranging and producing recordings of the psalms in various musical and acappella styles. He continues in this and also teaches singing at senior college level.
Jason leads the singing at the Presbyterian Church of Eastern Australia in Geelong, where he is also a deacon. In 2000, at age 28, he graduated from the Reformed Theological College, Geelong, with a Diploma of Theology. Jason is married to Jane who is also a musician currently studying at Melbourne University.

http://www.reformationsongs.com/

Jason has written an excellent essay entitled "Entertain Evangelsim: And never the twain shall meet" (posted on his website) which asks tough questions of the current CCM scene. He argues that specific goals require specific means, and then asks why we have rock concerts if our stated purpose is to evangelize the lost. The Word of God nowhere calls for the employment of music as a means of evangelism...so why are we thinking that our modern Christian rock bands will be an effectual means of bringing salvation to sinners? I commend the essay to you for your careful and prayerful read.

Where does Jason's music fit in? I would suggest it is in the category of edification. Like good theological conversation over a nice meal or a good cup of coffee, Jason's music is both pleasing to the senses and spiritual uplifting. He has worked at setting the Psalms...word-for-word out of the English translations (mostly NIV and NKJV)...to appropriate music so that Christians might hide them in their hearts and have them on their minds.

The style is basically a melodic acoustic-folk...mostly just Jason and his guitar, but also some flute (played by his wife Jane Jacobs), some bass, and some harmonies. Many of my friends who have purchased his most recent CD, "Songs of Deliverance", are saying that it is "the best Christian music" they "have ever heard." I concur with this assesment and I am very picky when it comes to music.

Go to his website, read the mission statement, read the reviews, read his articles... Buy his latest CD and then eagerly await the release of a new one in July.

Fighting Fire With Fire

I recieved an email today from Vision Video advertising a video for "reaching the post-modern generation" (http://www.visionvideo.com/581-8881407-3473423_3907.vhtml). It is entitled, "The Changing Face of Worship", and the information about it states:

Today's Christian churches face the challenge of existing in a postmodern world,

in which all principles are questioned,

all opinions and beliefs are proclaimed equally valid

-if not equally true-

and everything is considered relative.

Throughout North America,

a rapidly growing movement known as 'alternative worship' is addressing this challenge.

This program explores the changing expressions of modern-day worship

as churches use visual arts,

edgy music,

or even a chat room online

to offer experiences that are both

culturally relevant and theologically responsible.

It is pathetic that the church has decided to 'address' the notion of post-modernism, that 'everything...is relative', by accepting that very thesis and applying it to the arena of worship. Worship, which is supposed to be addressed to the infinite, unchanging, eternal, God-wherein we are to be conformed into His image and likeness-is now being purported to be a mirror in the hand of the church to simply reflect whatever the culture around her might dictate. We are more afraid of being irrelevant than irreverant; more afraid of offending the world than offending God. It is abundantley clear that we 'worship' our culture...not our God.

I hope that those who purchase this video will weep and repent at the sad state of the Bride of Christ, as she has played the whore with the world and filmed it for all to see. God have mercy upon us.

The Visible Church & The Outer Darkness

Dr. Richard Bacon's litte book, The Visible Church & The Outer Darkness (Dallas: Blue Banner Books, 1992) is one of the most succinct and helpful compendiums of the Reformed consensus on the issue of seperation. Dr. Francis Nigel Lee endorses it saying, "All true Westminster Calvinists will read Bacon's book with much approval." While the book was originally written as a response to Kevin Reed's monograph, "Presbyterian Government in Extraordinary Times" (1991), it will be relevant and helpful to any interested in the general subject of the nature of the church, schism, seperationism, etc. The book is availible for the amazingly low price of $1.50:

http://www.fpcr.org/catalog/catalog-online.htm