Talking about music is like dancing about architecture… Rotating Header Image

July, 2009:

James 5:13-20 Sermon Audio

Here is the audio from the sermon I preached last Sunday – my first ever on a Sunday morning.

The sermon was based on James 5:13-20 and the title of the was “The Prayer of a Righteous Person”

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

(Direct download

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

. Right click, then “Save As”)

If you would like to see some discussion that happened in preparation for the sermon, click here.

I’ll post the notes and some thoughts about sermon prep (with pictures) in a while.

John Stott Endorses Twitter (kind of…)

stott-library-twitter.jpg

Consider this quote from his masterpiece on preaching, “Between Two Worlds: The Challenge of Preaching Today“:

“Consider the time and trouble we give to composing a message we want to send by cable [read: "Twitter"]: because the number of words is severely limited, we go over it again and again, changing a word here, adding or deleting a word there, until we are sure not only that we shall be understood, but also that we shall not be misunderstood. The same should be true of sermons.”

Sermon Prep: James 5:13-20

I’m preaching this week – my first time here at AEMMC. I have my thoughts and ideas loosely together but I always love to hear from the gallery. So have at it. Write about the entire text, one verse, of a section of verses.

Here is the text:

James 5:13-20 (ESV)

13Is anyone among you suffering? Let him pray. Is anyone cheerful? Let him sing praise. 14Is anyone among you sick? Let him call for the elders of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord. 15And the prayer of faith will save the one who is sick, and the Lord will raise him up. And if he has committed sins, he will be forgiven. 16Therefore, confess your sins to one another and pray for one another, that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous person has great power as it is working. 17Elijah was a man with a nature like ours, and he prayed fervently that it might not rain, and for three years and six months it did not rain on the earth. 18 Then he prayed again, and heaven gave rain, and the earth bore its fruit.

19My brothers, if anyone among you wanders from the truth and someone brings him back, 20let him know that whoever brings back a sinner from his wandering will save his soul from death and will cover a multitude of sins.

“Fair-minded Criticism Is One of Life’s Best Pleasures”

(HT: Justin Taylor)

David Powlison’s article, “Does the Shoe Fit?” (Journal of Biblical Counseling [Spring 2002]: 2-14) is probably the best piece I’ve seen on how to think about criticism. (The article is not online, but is available on the JBC CD-ROM.) Here’s an excerpt:

“Fair-minded criticism is one of life’s best pleasures, an acquired taste well worth the acquiring. Someone who will take you seriously, understand you accurately, treat you charitably, and who then will lay it on the line is a messenger from God for your welfare (whether or not you end up completely agreeing). There is nothing quite like being disagreed with intelligently, lovingly, and openly: “Faithful are the wounds of a friend” (Prov. 27:6). If I only listen to my allies, or to yes-men, clones, devotees, and fellow factionaries, then I might as well inject narcotics into my veins. The people of God are a large work in progress. To engage and to interact with critics is to further the process—in both of our lives. We ought to offer to others the kind of criticism that is such a pleasure to receive.

Whenever we disagree with others our goal ought to be fair-minded, knowledgeable, constructive criticism (tinged with mercy, attentive to perceived strengths as well as perceived failings, openly receptive to reciprocal criticism). We all know this when doing marriage counseling. Jesus’ log-and-speck analysis and His call to clear-seeing helpfulness dig to the roots of every marital conflict. But we often ignore the log-and-speck in other spheres of controversy—or when in the midst of our own marital conflicts! Whether we write, teach, or converse, we often either succeed or derail based on the manner in which we deliver the matter. May we do as we would like it done to us.

Critics, like governing authorities, are servants of God to you for good (Rom. 13:4). He who sees into hearts uses critics to help us see things in ourselves: outright failings of faith and practice, distorted emphases, blind spots, areas of neglect, attitudes and actions contradictory to stated commitments, and, yes, strengths and significant contributions. God uses critics to help us. Even if I think that a criticism is mistaken, I shouldn’t leap too quickly to the defense. Is there something I am doing or saying (or not doing and not saying) that makes that particular misinterpretation plausible? Am I too easily misunderstood? Do I leave implicit or understated something that needs to be made explicit? Does my attitude or tone or way of treating people send a mixed message? Do I ride my hobby horses? Am I not answering some important question that this person is asking? Am I not addressing some important problem that this person cares about? In my experience, the answer to these questions is usually Yes.”

The Way Forward

 http://www.goshen.edu/news/pressarchive/photos/08_McLaren_DeepShift.jpghttp://christianaudio.com/images/FreeDesiringGod_large.jpg

(part 3 of a miniseries on the emerging church – see part 1 and part 2)

Unfortunately, both sides (Emerging and mainstream) suffer from rejecting the other. Some of the old guard resists new life, ensuring the continuation of their own slow death. The emerging generation discounts the contribution of the previous generation – largely on the basis how little life change it sees – and thereby denies itself access to a great repository of solid theology and a heritage of belief.

One side needs to talk more about global issues while the other side needs to guard their theology a bit more.

I had the wonderful opportunity about a year ago to be at Brian McLaren’s “Why Everything Must Change” conference one weekend and being in Minneapolis at John Piper’s “Desiring God” conference the next. There was something at both that wasn’t at the other; there was something missing at both that the other addressed.

At WEMC, belief in the gospel was either buried under a torrent of concern for global humanitarian issues, or redefined as being the concern for those issues. These are not inappropriate or unimportant concerns.

At Desiring God ‘08 there was no mention of a current global issue at all. It was all gospel, all theology, all talk. I left there with my theological beliefs strengthened, which is a good thing. But where is the concern for global suffering and injustice? Connect the dots for us: how does this theological clarity lead us into a biblical concern for the poor and the action that must follow?

In my opinion, the best thing an organization like DG can do to stem the flow of young people going to the theologically unsteady regions of the EC is to talk more about practical application of the great truths they teach. In Piper’s own words, he does not “aim to be immediately practical but eternally helpful.” I think he should reconsider this and try for both.

A full gospel is both theological and social; it is belief and action.

Songs of Mourning and Celebration

Written at the back of the sanctuary during the song service for Peter Dyck (March 29, 2009):

It is a tradition among our people to gather and sing on the evening of someone’s death. Songs are sung in both German and English from old, worn black (German) or green (English) hymnals that have inhabited our pews for decades. With only a piano to accompany the singing, the combined voice of God’s people in this place is the loudest instrument in the room.

These informal, agenda-free gatherings don’t need to be initiated – it is assumed that when one of the saints passes, the living saints gather to sing. Singing, the reading of scripture, and sometimes sharing are the only things that will happen; there is no agenda, no “service plan”, no sermon, and no offering.

As we sing “It Is Well With My Soul” I hear four harmonious parts rising from assembly. We are here to mourn the passing and celebrate the life of Mr. Peter Dyck, a man I know by reputation more than anything else. I knew of him when I was a child, but having only recently returned to this body of believers, I have missed a lot of their history.

By all accounts, that is not the common experience of those in attendance. I have heard it said in many ways that Peter Dyck was a pillar in this church – a member, an elder, a lay pastor. I have heard him described in the most respectful of terms: a mentor, a pillar, and a man who was faithful to the gospel – regardless of the cost. As I begin my own journey as a pastor in this body of believers, I hope to earn the honor of having the same things uttered at my own funeral.

Joining in Similar Sorrow

But why the response of singing to all of this? Music is connected to emotions. Music is cathartic – yes, even without drums, bass, guitar, and volume at 11. On a day when it is sometimes difficult to speak, to come up with new words to say, the familiar words of these songs, put deep into our hearts early in our lives, flow out of us, but with a strange, fresh relevance. It is a well-know fact (by me especially, as a songwriter) that more often than not, songs are written during times of great sorrow, sadness, and darkness. And sometimes we don’t understand the words of a song until we can join the author in a similar sorrow.

Singing together is also a foretaste of eternity. One component of our heavenly praise will be singing around the throne. This creates for those of us who are left behind a sense of the greater reality that our passed loved one is now experiencing.

But I observe that in this room, in the sanctuary where I spent the first 10 years of my life that people don’t sing like they used to. It seems to me that people once sang much louder, that they filled room with song – not with pitch perfect performance, but with vigor and enthusiasm and confidence. And now it seems that a lot of people have forgotten how to express themselves in song.

Nonetheless, when someone is torn from the fabric of the church body, singing dresses the wound and prepares it for healing. When all these voices are joined together, the one newly absent voice hardly seems absent. Still, this is the loudest singing I’ve heard since I came back here.

The service ends with the song “My Jesus, I Love Thee” and a congregational prayer – “Our Father, who art in heaven…”

After the service, the family stands at the sanctuary exit where they are embraced and consoled by those in attendance. I remember all of this happening when my grandfather died – he too was a member of this community.

I remember wanting my sorrow to be private, not wanting to share my trauma with anyone else. But eventually I joined in the singing and I remember shedding a lot of tears. I’m sure this was very good for me.

What is the Emerging Church?

The “EC” (Emerging Church) is not a denomination. It has no creed or doctrinal statement. It has no charter or by-laws. It has no president or board of directors.

picture-9.pngThe “EC” is a term used to describe a movement that is already happening – or, in some cases, has already happened. The “EC” is the church that is rising (emerging) from the ashes of inaction. That’s too broad a brush of course, since not all churches can be successfully accused of inaction, but in general terms, the EC is comprised of people – some with doctrinal clarity, some not – who are not content with simply knowing – there must be doing as well.

 ”Emerging” and “Alternative”

An analogy from the music industry might be helpful. In the early 90’s we had an explosion of what we called “alternative” music. This was music that was either on the fringes or completely different than the hit music of the time – which would classified as the “mainstream”. Alternative music was created and then flourished because of great dissatisfaction with the current state of the music industry. What “the industry” was producing was mostly lifeless, weak, and ineffectual music. Eventually “alternative music” became very popular, and because of this fact it ceased to be “alternative” and became “mainstream”.

In the same way the “Emerging Church” is in large part a reaction to the “mainstream” of (mostly) the North American church. The North American church – like the music industry in the late 80’s – has become too weak, lifeless and ineffectual to capture the hearts and minds of the emerging generation of Christians. But these terms need to be transitory and flexible; once something is mainstream, it can no longer be the alternative to the mainstream; once the new generation has emerged, it can no longer reasonably be called “emerging.”

The mistake we seem to be making is we’re trying to call something “emerging” after it has already emerged, just like we continued to call something “alternative” after it became that which it started out as the alternative to. “Alternative” mistakenly became a genre within the music industry. “Emerging” and “Emergent” are becoming genres of Christianity. This too is a mistake.

Defining a Generation

The emerging generation is comfortable with the book of James: If works do not result from faith, then faith is dead. In James’ words – faith without works is like a body without a spirit.

We see lots of professed belief, but too little faith that results in, and is verified by works.

We see a lot of dead bodies, and we’re running away from them.

emerging church

____________________

Other writing on the Emerging Church that you might find helpful:

Ed Stetzer on The Emerging Church

McKnight: “McLaren Emerging”

John Piper on “Emerging”, “Emergent”, and “Missional”

“Faith Undone”: A Tabloid Treatment of the Emerging Church

Faith Undone: The emerging church - a new reformation or an end-time deceptionI was given a book recently called “Faith Undone: The emerging church – a new reformation or an end-time deception” by Roger Oakland. This is an “anti” book. By that I mean its sole purpose is to tell you, with a good amount of hyperbole, about the many, many things the author is against.  In this case, all of those things are related to what the author sees as the “Emerging Church” (EC).

I have actually seen this book before, and I did a deep skimming of it and saw it for what it is: a tabloid-style, pick-and-choose hatchet job on people who, while not executing perfectly, are valuable leaders in today’s North American church.

Books like this are basically supermarket tabloid gossip rags without the pictures. To put it more bluntly:

This is a strange sort of theological pornography for people who see their calling as hunting heresy by identifying leaders with theological weaknesses (some perceived, some real) and telling others about what they’ve found.

That itself is not an unbiblical pursuit, but taken to the level of out-of-context tabloid journalism it becomes sin.

This is not to say there is no truth in Oakland’s book. I can agree with and affirm many of the things in the book; the problem is that there is page after page after page of short quotes followed by commentary. There are even quotes of reporters who say something about somebody and these are taken as damning evidence against the person who is the target.

Rick Warren in particular (not surprisingly) takes a beating throughout the book. As a side note, in the way that Oakland perceives the EC, grouping Rick Warren in with the EC  is a bit ridiculous, kind of like claiming that John Piper and Joel Osteen are kindred spirits and are going to be sharing a pulpit at some point in the near future.  Rick Warren does big; the EC is mostly about regionalized, contextualized solutions.  Rick Warren works on a global scale; the EC is about incarnational witness. The EC is (mostly) anti-megachurch; Rick Warren IS the megachurch.

But I’m with Ed Stetzer on this; we need both. We need big solutions and big churches and small solutions and small churches. Which is why in one sense the EC can be very broadly defined as every church that is not dying due to lack of activity.

Even Dan Kimball, who apparently committed the sin of asking non-believers what their perception of “church” is is mocked for daring to suggest that the American church might be able to have a more authentic testimony. Gasp. How can he say this?!?! I can’t think of any examples of American Christian leaders who have disgraced the name of Christ in very visible ways. This is the type of behavior, mostly on a smaller scale, that Kimball explores.

I’ll close with a quote from C.S. Lewis. In Mere Christianity (p. 118):

Suppose one reads a story of filthy atrocities in the paper. Then suppose that something turns up suggesting that the story might not be quite true, or not quite so bad as it was made out.

Is one’s first feeling, ‘Thank God, even they aren’t quite so bad as that,’ or is it a feeling of disappointment, and even a determination to cling to the first story for the sheer pleasure of thinking your enemies are as bad as possible?

If it is the second then it is, I am afraid, the first step in a process which, if followed to the end, will make us into devils. You see, one is beginning to wish that black was a little blacker. If we give that wish its head, later on we shall wish to see grey as black, and then to see white itself as black. Finally we shall insist on seeing everything — God and our friends and ourselves included — as bad, and not be able to stop doing it: we shall be fixed for ever in a universe of pure hatred.

I think that a book like this is exactly what the Lewis quote above is about.

Liveblogging the EMMC NatCon – Post Index

Part 1 – The”Emerging Church” issue

Part 2 – The “Emerging Church” response

Part 3 – Day summary

Part 4 – A few words about Glen Soderholm

Part 5 - A few words about David MacFarlane

There will be more spin-off posts based on these so stay tuned.

John Piper on “Emerging”, “Emergent”, and “Missional”

John Piper has a handle on what these terms mean, and shows it in this post. I’m not in total agreement with his analysis but pretty close. The point is, he has taken the time to investigate and, as usual, comes out ahead of guys like MacArthur in showing some balance and compassion where its due.

Highlights:
Emergent seems to be a reaction—among younger believers primarily, 20- and 30-somethings—to several things. In my judgment it’s not a very healthy reaction, though I can understand why it might happen. [MK - in addition, Emergent is centered around a specific site/organization]

Emerging might be used by some people—like Mark Driscoll—to describe a proper reaction that is taking place against some of the negative things going on in the church, but a reaction that doesn’t throw away the doctrines.

So be careful, when you’re talking emerging or emergent, to know which group you’re talking about.

The word “missional” is kind of the “in” word today. And a church that is missional tends to be a church where everything is thought about in terms of making an impact on people around the church who are not Christians. You design everything to think that way. And I think that is a good thing.
___________________________________

I’m working on a longer post of my own thoughts about this that I will try to get up later today.

Piper is not the only one defining the terms this way. I could have used various other modern church figures to make my point, but part of my current mission is to tear down people’s perceptions of Piper as cog in the old world who is interchangeable with the current crop of strident hyper-fundamentalists (not to mention any names – oops, I already did in the opening paragraph).

In my experience, having watched, engaged in, and written about the movement, this is the way the terms are defined and understood by others who have done the same.

Defined this way, I think we can all comfortably call ourselves emerging. Yes?

***You might find this post about a book being co-authored by Brian McLaren and John MacArthur of some interest as well. :-0