John Mark Hicks

Two new electronic journals, one named Kingdom and the other named Missio Dei, have published their inaugural issues.

Kingdom is published by the Bible faculty of Freed-Hardeman University. Its masthead quotes Romans 14:17, “For the Kingdom of God is righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit.”   Ralph Gilmore, Distinguished Professor of Bible and Philosophy at FHU, is the editor. The intent of the journal is to publish academic articles of theological and religious significance written by “FHU students, faculty and/or alumni, although not necessarily limited to them.”  Ralph, in his introductory editorial, hopes the journal will be “Christ-centered, kingdom-centered, text-centered and service-centered in academic environment designed for spiritual growth through critical thinking.”

Missio  Dei is edited by four young missional church-planters and scholars. They are Nathan Bills (ThD student at Duke University), Charles Kiser (church planter in Dallas, TX), Greg McKinzie (missionary in Arequipa, Peru), Danny Reese (Missionary in Huambo, Angola) and Jason Whaley (Missionary, Wollongong, Australia). They were are at one time or another students in some of my classes at Harding University Graduate School of Religion. The purpose of the journal is to “provide a medium for exploring the rich tradition and ongoing practice of pariticipation in the mission of God among the churches of the Stone-Campbell Restoration Movement.”

I wish both of these journals great success and long life.

Daniel Sommer (1850-1940), a graduate of Bethany College and the heralded successor of Benjamin Franklin among northern conservatives, lived and worked among congregations of Churches of Christ who were more open to the public voice of women than their southern counterparts.  In particular, at least in the article below, Sommer is quite explicit about the “priviledge” of women to publicly read Scripture and exhort the congregation in their worship assemblies.  Southern congregations, particularly in the Tennessee Tradition of David Lipscomb and James A. Harding, opposed any public reading and exhortation of women in the assembly.  In this the northern conservatives, often more “right-wing” than the southerners, are more progressive (or biblical?) than the southerners. In fact, the Tennesee folk are one the “extremes” to which Sommer refers.

Daniel Sommer, “Woman’s Religious Duties and Privileges in Public,” Octographic Review 44.34 (20 August 1901) 1,

Extreme begets extremes in all departments of life, and at all angles of religious thought. As a result we are requested to write in regard to woman’s public religious duties and privileges.

What woman is divinely commanded to do is no doubt her duty regardless of what any human being may think or wish, approve or disapprove. That she is commanded to become a Christian just as publicly as the circumstances of her obedience may suggest is admitted by all who read the New Testament aright, also by many others. That woman is likewise commanded to worship publicly as a Christian is likewise admitted by all who think seriously on the subject. Thus we need not quote scripture on the subject, nor reason thereon in any measure or degree. Moreover, that it is the woman’s duty as a Christian to obey the scripture which says, ‘I suffer not a woman to teach nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence,” (1 Tim. 2:12), is likewise admitted, as well as the reasons which Paul gives for such restrictions.

But what do these restrictions embrace? Here is the only question to be decided and this is not difficult if we be unbiased. Certainly they do not restrict women in regard to her worship, and thus she is not restricted in regard to communing, singing, and praying in public. Any reasoning which will prevent woman from praying in public will prevent her from communing and singing.

But may a woman who is a Christian in good standing arise in a congregation and publicly read in audible tones a portion of scripture without comment? The answer to this depends on whether reading is in the New Testament called teaching. In 1 Tim. 4:13 Paul says, “ Till I come give attendance to reading, to exhortation, to doctrine.” The revised version gives the word “teaching” instead of “doctrine.” This ought to settle the question and enable all to understand that a woman may without comment read any part of the Bible publicly without thereby becoming a public teacher. But when a woman comments on scripture, applying and enforcing its meaning, she then and there becomes a public teacher and falls under condemnation of Paul’s restriction.

But may a woman teach a class in this meeting house without falling under condemnation? The question is troubling some congregations. Its answer depends on whether Paul’s restriction on women in regard to speaking did or did not refer to the public congregation when assembled. In 1 Cor. 14:34, 35 Paul says, “Let your women keep silence in the churches…For it is a shame for a woman to speak in the church.” The translation called “Living Oracles” gives us “congregations” and “congregation” in the foregoing scriptures, and this is correct. The “silence” which Paul enjoined on woman was therefore in the “congregation” when assembled, and in regard to teaching and authority. But teaching a class, especially a class of children, in a meeting house does not conflict with such restriction. Therefore, we conclude that it is woman’s privilege to teach a class in a meeting house.

Woman is the first divinely ordained teacher of children. She is made thus by nature, and God is the author of nature. Besides, Timothy’s mother and grandmother are honorably mentioned in connection with the mention that is made of the faith that was in him. (2 Tim. 1:5.)  Finally, aged women are required to be teachers of young women. (Titus 2:3-5.) Yet they must do such teaching in such manner and circumstances of Paul’s restriction. But that restriction simply forbids a woman being a teacher in the public congregation and forbids her usurping authority over the man. Up to this restriction woman may go; beyond this restriction she should not go.

But as exhortation and teaching are different the question arises, May a woman exhort in the public congregation? This question is sometimes asked, and should be answered. In response thereto we state that where Paul had “no command” of the Lord he simply gave his “judgment” as one that had “obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful.” (1 Cor. 7:25.) We do the same, and our “judgment” is that if a sister in good standing wishes to arise in a congregation and offer an exhortation it is her privilege to do so, but let her be careful not to become a teacher. She should simply exhort on the basis of what has been taught, or on what is generally understood in the assembly, and at all times, both publicly and privately, she should avoid usurping authority over man. This needs to be emphasized, especially in the United States, where woman is so highly praised that, in many instances, she forgets the word of God, and becomes a dictator.

But may not a woman lead a woman’s prayer meeting or even preside at the Lord’s table when no mean are present who are capable of so doing? Here again we have no command but our “judgment.” A woman’s prayer meeting is not the kind of “congregation” of which Paul was writing in 1 Cor. 14^th chapter. It is not a public assembly. Neither should an assembly of women on the Lord’s day to break bread be thus regarded. Men—godly men—are divinely intended to be the public teachers, and regulators of established congregations, and the public preachers to build up congregations. But with these exceptions, women—godly women—are privileged, and, in most particulars, are duty bound, to be partakers with godly men in their religious work. Priscilla helped her husband to teach a preacher named Apollos the way of the Lord more fully (Acts 18:24-26), and they were among Paul’s “helpers in Christ Jesus.” Rom. 16:3. But this does not mean that Priscilla was a public teacher or a preacher. All that she is reported as having don could have been accomplished by her without one public speech.

The foregoing paragraphs are submitted to our readers, not as an exhaustive discussion, anticipating all possible objections of gainsayers, but as sufficient to indicate the public duties and privileges of godly woman [sic] in the public congregation.

R. C. Bell (1877-1964) attended the Nashville Bible School from 1896-1901. James A. Harding took Bell with him as a faculty member at the newly founded Potter Bible College in 1901. Later Bell would teach at several different colleges among Churches of Christ and eventually ended up at Abilene Christian College as a beloved teacher.

In 1959, Bell was asked to give a lecture on “A Lifetime Spent in Christian Education” and he used the opportunity to lament the shift among Churches of Christ that distressed him. In his autobiographical article in the 1951 Firm Foundation he had warned that the church needed a new infusion of the kingdom theology of James A. Harding in order “to save [it] from chaning divine dynamics to human mechanics” (“Honor to Whom Honor is Due,” Firm Foundation 68 [6 November 1951], 6). Now, in his closing years, describes what is lacking among Churches of Christ in 1959.

Below is the whole speech, but I wanted to highlight what I think is the essence of his point with the following selection taken from different parts of the speech:

Especially, [Harding’s] soul-kindling faith in God as a personal Friend matched the wave length of my eager, hungry heart. I caught his contagious enthusiasm for God as a Father who personally identifies himself with each of His own, and for the Holy Spirit as a Comforter who personally resides in and empowers every Christian, slowly enough.  However, [his] conception of Christianity as “a divine-human encounter,” in which immediate spiritual communion between God and man is established and perpetually maintained, gradually, became also my conception of Christianity.

I also knew that in such vital matters as Christians being crucified to the world and the world’s being crucified to Christians (Gal. 6:14), and as Christians really believing with all their hearts that the Holy Spirit was working personally in them to help their infirmity, to pray unutterable prayers for them, and to make all things work together for their good (Rom. 8:26-28) so that they, ever mindful of the Lord’s presence, might be anxious about nothing, praying in everything, thankful in anything, and possess “the peace of God, which passeth all understanding” (Phil. 4:5-7), the primitive church was not being fully restored. In short, I knew that church of which I was a member was not identical in all things with the church of the New Testament.

With more and more lived faith, as the years passed and I myself increased in spiritual stature, I taught, first, that the personal presence and conjoint working of the “Three-personal God” (Father and Son and Spirit) in and through cooperating Christians is at the very heart of Christianity; and second that Christianity, primarily, consists, not in what Christians do for Christ, but in what Christ does for Christians.

When Christians fail to make use of the sanctifying portion of Christianity, as though it were an optional adjunct instead of the built-in essential which it is, they harden into harsh, unloving, unloved, self-sanctifying, unlawful legalists and defeated Pharisees, biting and devouring one another as the Galatians were doing (Gal. 5:13-15). A man’s unchristian self-effort to justify himself no more certainly leads to arrogant self-righteousness than does the same kind of effort to sanctify himself.

His emphasis on a personal (relational) dynamic is at the heart of what Bobby Valentine and I have called the “Tennessee Tradition.” He stresses what God does for us rather than what we do for God. He emphasizes a sanctification of life that is rooted in a divine-human encounter rather than located in a correct form. He hopes for a sanctified Christianity rather than an unloving legalism.

I believe Bell laments the shift among Churches of Christ from the Tennessee themes of his young adulthood to the Texas themes of his old age. Something, he feels, was lost. It was present in his mentor Harding and in the early institutions of the century (Nashville Bible School and Potter Bible College). He fears, however, it might be lost now. or at least marginalized.

Read his speech and feel his pain but also recognize his deep relationship with God and fervent faith in the God who can work redemption in our hearts and in/through our churches.

The following text was scanned and edited by Bobby Valentine, my good friend and co-author. I thank him for sharing it with me and now with you. The text is from Things that Endure: Third Annual Lectureship, Lubbock Christian College (Jackson, TN: Nichols Brothers, 1960).

“A LIFETIME SPENT IN CHRISTIAN EDUCATION”

 R. C. BELL

 At the age of eighteen years, three years after becoming a Christian, I enrolled as a student in the Nashville Bible School, Nashville, Tennessee, in 1896. That School grew directly into David Lipscomb College, and less directly into a score of other colleges, several of which, though now dead as colleges, yet speak.

 As an example of this deathless life of Christian education, the Shorts, the Scotts, the Merritts, the Reeses, and the Lawyers, most of whom have become two-generation families of missionaries in Africa, received the inspiration for their life-work in Western Bible and Literary College, Odessa, Missouri, and in Cordell Christian College, Cordell, Oklahoma, two schools that ceased to function as schools years ago. Then, think of the good in the world today that has its roots in Thorp Spring Christian College of our own state before her doors were closed.

 Under the teaching and daily influence of such men as David Lipscomb, James A. Harding and J. N. Armstrong, dedicated men serving God as school teachers, I soon began to see that Paul’s characterization of some who would hold a form of godliness, but deny the power thereof described me. Especially, Brother Harding’s soul-kindling faith in God as a personal Friend matched the wave length of my eager, hungry heart. I caught his contagious enthusiasm for God as a Father who personally identifies himself with each of His own, and for the Holy Spirit as a Comforter who personally resides in and empowers every Christian, slowly enough.  However, Brother Harding’s conception of Christianity as “A divine-human encounter,” in which immediate spiritual communion between God and man is established and [p. 105] perpetually maintained, gradually, became also my conception of Christianity. I shall ever be thankful unto the Sovereign Master of the mysterious sea of life for launching my life before the earthly voyage of this Man of God was over.

 This fuller understanding of Christianity changed the axis of my life and turned my world upside down. The revolution in my life with its new scale of values was similar, except that I had nothing to lose, to the revolution that Paul’s becoming a Christian made in his life. After naming seven fleshly things of which Jews were exceedingly proud, Paul declares that he no longer has “Confidence in the flesh,” but considers the things which were once all-important to him to be gainfully exchanged for Christ, for whom he suffers the loss of all things and counts them but refuse (Phil. 3:5-8). That Paul’s and Harding’s interpretation of Christianity, which I have up to my measure labored over a lifetime to impart to students, would have ever been mine, had I not attended the Nashville Bible School, is doubtful.  In any event that is where my revolution occurred.

 That the Gospel which Paul and Harding preached and practiced does so revolutionize lives was demonstrated in a family I knew sixty years ago. When the time came for the third son in that family, whose two older brothers had attended the Nashville Bible School, to go to college, his father, an “elder” in his congregation, said that, since Brother Harding had already ruined two of his boys, he wanted the third boy to go to another college.

 While I was at the Nashville school, the idea of teaching the Bible in such a school, in the Providence of God, as a life work grew steadily upon me. As I did not know, then, so well as I know, that I was better fitted by nature for this type of work than for exclusively preaching, the final decision did not come easily. All the while, I was praying God to guide my thinking, feeling and deciding, and I have never doubted that He did so. Consequently, when Brother Harding started another college at Bowling Green, Kentucky, named Potter Bible College, and asked me to become a member of [p.106] his faculty, I took his invitation as God’s opening a door for me. Religiously and gratefully therefore, I began in this manner a lifetime spent in Christian education in 1901 to continue until my retirement from the faculty of Abilene Christian College in 1951 – an even half century.

 I entered upon this work with the twofold conviction that the movement to restore Primitive Christianity was not fully materializing: first, because Christ was not being exalted to the position of solitary pre-eminence and dominant centrality as life-giving, all-pervading personal Savior that He occupied in His church when it was first inaugurated; and, second, His church, inasmuch as the Flesh and the Spirit “Are contrary the one to the other,” needed less Flesh and more Spirit – that is, less man and more God. May I add candidly and modestly that I began this work in the hope of helping to make the church of the twentieth century more like the church of the first century.

 Of course I knew that in such essential matters as there being but one church, as baptism being for the remission of sins, and as singing being the only music, the primitive church was being restored. But I also knew that in such vital matters as Christians being crucified to the world and the world’s being crucified to Christians (Gal. 6:14), and as Christians’ really believing with all their hearts that the Holy Spirit was working personally in them to help their infirmity, to pray unutterable prayers for them, and to make all things work together for their good (Rom. 8:26-28) so that they, ever mindful of the Lord’s presence, might be anxious about nothing, praying in everything, thankful in anything, and possess “The peace of God, which passeth all understanding” (Phil. 4:5-7), the primitive church was not being fully restored. In short, I knew that church of which I was a member was not identical in all things with the church of the New Testament.

 With more and more live faith, as the years passed and I myself increased in spiritual stature, I taught, first, that the personal presence and conjoint working of the “Three-personal God” (Father and Son and Spirit) in and through cooperat- [p.107] ing Christians is at the very heart of Christianity; and second that Christianity, primarily, consists, not in what Christians do for Christ, but in what Christ does for Christians. What Christ with divine insight and foresight, and with anxious heart, said to correct the misplaced joy of the Seventy when they returned to Him rejoicing that the demons were subject unto them, namely, “Rejoice not that the spirits are subject unto you; but rejoice that your names are written in heaven” (Luke 10:20), continually became deeper and richer in meaning to me. Without this cardinal Christian truth which Christ impressed upon the Seventy, Christianity cannot properly function and fulfill itself. Christians, know that only Christ can write their names in heaven and that they can do nothing apart from Him so as to deserve credit for themselves, choose to let Him live in them to express Himself by doing Christian things in and through their surrendered personalities and bodies (Gal. 2:20).

 Across the years of my teaching in our Christian colleges, thousands of young people of the onrushing, swelling stream of humanity, often from two, sometimes from three, generations of the same family, still in the susceptible time of life, passed through my classes. As a teacher can never tell in which students the seed he scatters will “Spring up and grow, he knoweth not how,” I considered everyone one of these students, without respect of persons, a seedbed entrusted by parents and God to my sowing. A Christian teacher sows the word of God in hope, wherever, he may, both morning and evening, for he knoweth not “Whether this or that, or whether they both shall be alike good.”

Of course some of the seed I sowed fell by the wayside, some on rocky ground, some among thorns, some upon “Good ground, and yielded fruit, some a hundredfold, some sixty, some thirty.” These good-ground hearers, a goodly number as pioneers in remote lands among strange peoples, many more, very many more, as evangelists, located preachers, elders, deacons, teachers of classes, business men, professional men, and all the rest, certainly including the self-effacing, godly women [p. 108] – unmarried, wives, mothers—are all, according to their respective personalities, talents, circumstances, and fidelity, wells of living “Water springing up unto eternal life.” Probably, this host of Christian men and women now scattered over the face of the earth, during our close associations as students and teacher, helped me more than I helped them. With what ecstasy, we shall at last bring in our ever increasing harvest of souls to become a part of the “Great multitude, which no man can number, out of every nation and of all tribes, peoples and tongues!”

 If students seemed but little interested sometimes in what I was trying to teach them, and apparently were not getting much into the heart of things, I was encouraged and strengthened to continue the teaching, kindly, patiently, hopefully, when I recalled that I subconsciously received good seed into my soul in Nashville that brought forth Christian fruit in future years. Yea, that seed is even now “Living and active … and quick to discern the thoughts and intents of the heart.” Many times have I with joy seen this experience of mine repeated in my students, a fact to which they freely testify.

 For just about half of the time I have spent in our colleges, I received no regular salary. Throughout the first eighteen years, and during some years since, my income was meager—even insufficient to meet the necessary expenses of my family. But this income, supplemented by what I received for preaching appointments on Sundays and evangelistic meetings during summer vacations, was ever a competency. We could have scarcely known this competency, however, had not my wife been a frugal, self-sacrificing homemaker and help meet in all things. She and I were happy classmates under Brother Harding his last year at Nashville, and, knowing the economic situation involved, planned our lifework together that year. Never has a husband and father had more unselfish help and encouragement from his wife and children to give himself wholly to his work than I have had. Mrs. Bell and I together share the esteem of former students and other friends, and together we hope to share Christ’s reward through all eternity.

 [p.109] As the subject the committee assigned me, “A Lifetime Spent in Christian Education,” does not exclude the years of my retirement, I wish to say, a few words about this period.  God, I believe, closed my classroom door eight years ago, and as He is not to be limited to miracles in religion any more than He is in nature, opened, superhumanly but without miracle, another door to me. I beg you, brethren, to feel brotherly toward me when I tell you that I have wondered whether there is not another analogy between God’s giving retirement to Paul in prison that he might write his elevated “Prison Epistles” and His giving me retirement that I might try to teach these same four Epistles through the Press.  Men who know God expect Him to do such things. Asked Mordecai of Esther, who had become queen of Persia by “good luck” as men say, in a national crises when only her perilous, dauntless deed could save the Jews from destruction, “Who knoweth whether thou art not come to the kingdom for such a time as this?” (Est. 4:14).

When the late, beloved G.H.P. Showalter, Editor of the Firm Foundation, whom I had written that I had time and disposition to write some for his paper, kindly encouraged my writing, I began “Studies” in some of the Books of the New Testament, which I had been teaching for many years in college. After Brother Lemmons became Editor of the magazine, he graciously continued to publish my “Studies,” and continues to do so even until now. These “Studies,” since being printed in the Firm Foundation as separate articles, have been collected and published by the Firm Foundation Publishing House as booklets, or in the case of Romans as a book. I am truly grateful to these two good men for enabling me to continue my lifetime business of teaching God’s word. With this writing, two weekly Bible classes which I have continued to teach in the College Church, and other duties, I have been busy and happy.

 “Let one more attest

I have lived, seen God’s hand through a lifetime,

And all was for best.”

 Now, may a veteran make some suggestions for Christians [p. 110] in general by calling attention to some constitutionally Christian truths. When God purposed and wrought to redeem the sin-unk world, He was too wise and too good an Economist to include anything the vast Enterprise did not need. His work is never either deficient or redundant. It takes all of Christianity as God made it, therefore to justify, to sanctify, to spiritualize and to glorify Satanically deluded and deflowered humanity. As it takes the blood of God’s Son to justify men by washing away their sins, even so it takes the power of God’s Spirit to continue the redemptive work by sanctifying those who have been justified so that they may not continue to sin. To break the stranglehold of sin from Adam onward (Rom. 7:17-24), to lead upward out of the power and practice of sin unto the lofty “Sanctification of the Spirit” (2 Thes. 2:13), “Without which no man shall see the Lord” (Heb 2:14) as far transcends the utmost human reach as does to justify alien sinners by remitting the guilt and the penalty of their sins to begin with. Sanctification and holiness are by grace in the same way that justification and pardon are by grace. It matters not where men start in to save themselves by law, they “Make void the grace of God.” Indeed, Christianity all the way, from its beginning on earth unto heaven is all by grace. To add the principle of law with its inevitable meritorious works anywhere along the way implies that, inasmuch as men can save themselves, “Christ died for nought” (Gal. 2:21).

 When Christians fail to make use of the sanctifying portion of Christianity, as though it were an optional adjunct instead of the built-in essential which it is, they harden into harsh, unloving, unloved, self-sanctifying, unlawful legalists and defeated Pharisees, biting and devouring one another as the Galatians were doing (Gal. 5:13-15). A man’s unchristian self-effort to justify himself no more certainly leads to arrogant self-righteousness than does the same kind of effort to sanctify himself.

 But when Christians repent deeply enough to lose all “Confidence in the flesh,” to renounce all unchristian self- [p. 111] help, and in profound contrition to make use of all of Christianity, they grow into loving, compassionate, lawful, gracious, spiritual, Christian men and women. Because “Love is the fulfilling of the law” (Rom. 13:10), Christianity is God’s perfect way of making mature, lawful men. Behold, God as amazingly proficient Philosopher, Metaphysician, Psychologist and Psychiatrist!

 Does not Christ teach in His story of the “Good Samaritan” that zealots of law have no “compassion”? Can men without compassion have the mind of Christ, or of Paul? The best demonstration of how these respective religions of Law and of Grace work out in life is the hard, touch, cruel, cold-blooded Saul under law becoming the compassionate, gracious, gentle, warmhearted Paul under grace—the last bit of legal ice melted into tears, and as emotionally saturated and tender as a  good woman.

 Finally, my brethren, to give disproportionate importance to what we are doing for Christ as compared to what He is doing for us, thereby upsetting the inherent relationship between the divine and the human elements of Christianity, is, I fear, a more common and deadly perversion of the Gospel than we realize. There was the perversion that Christ corrected in the Seventy, and that Paul, knowing that in effect it made Christianity just another legal religion in which Christians try to earn merit and security before God by directly obeying law in their own natural strength, wrote the book of Galatians, with its stern warning against falling “Away from grace” (Gal. 5:4) to crush. This basic distortion of God’s Christianity, with its powerful, bewitching appeal to human pride and self-sufficiency, was departure enough from the Christian religion of grace and life toward the obsolete Mosaic religion of law and death to alarm Paul to his depths. And this enticing heresy, in modern dress, can just as subtly and effectually corrupt the only Christ-centered religion on earth today, with the power to forgiven sins and make men holy, into another of the countless, man-centered religions too “weak and beggarly” to take away sins, as it effected this corruption in its ancient [p. 112] Galatian dress. Here lurks an exceedingly insidious danger for any Christian, anywhere, anytime.

 Not until we cease trying to sanctify ourselves by misguided self-help, can we ever attain unto the “Sanctification of the Spirit.” Paul says that he had to die to law as a means of salvation before God could save him by grace (Gal. 2:19). Sanctification by legally meritorious works and moral character, and sanctification by Gospel grace and forgiveness are mutually exclusive—they simply will not mix. We must make our choice between the two, but the choice of either annuls the other. “But if it is by grace, it is no more of works: otherwise it is no more of grace” (Rom. 11:6). God made Christianity to work in this way, and it will not work in any other way. 

 Only God knows how much of the fleshliness, lukewarmness [sic], and lack of “Righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit” (Rom. 14:17), with their accompanying discouragement, fear of missing heaven at last, backsliding and despair among us today comes from our vain striving to do that which God never intended we should attempt to do in our own sin-corroded, disabled nature. Our very nature is against us; we must be born again of the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his” (Rom. 8:8,9).  When we, believing that “The things which are impossible with men are possible with God,” cooperate with God by freely using His freely given superhuman love, wisdom, and power, we shall be contributing to the restoration of Primitive Christianity.”

James A. Harding, the namesake of Harding University and co-founder of Lipscomb University, placed as much emphasis on giving, tithing and trusting in God’s provisioin as he did any other topic.  The sin of covetousness is idolatry and it “hurts the church more than any other,” he wrote.  We hate the extreme, but we tolerate the subtle when it is the “chief end and aim in life” to make money, where someone “comes to meeting with tolerable regularity, lives well, dresses well, and gives about two percent of his income publicly to the Lord’s cause” but thinks of making money ten times more than anything else.  Such a man “trusts in money” and “he heaps it up” because he does not trust God to take care of him or his family (“Two Dreadful Sins that are Very Prevalent,” Gospel Advocate 29 [1887], 658).

Not money, but the kingdom was Harding’s central concern. How one holds their wealth and how one treats the poor are as significant to discipleship as any other value. He was not opposed to making money, but he advised loaning it to the Lord. “If Christians are wise,” he wrote, “they will be diligent in business; and then, when they have money, they will use it with a free hand in ministering to widows and orphans, in caring for the poor, in having the gospel preached, or to sum it all up, in lending it to the Lord” (“Scraps. Wealth and How to Use It,” Gospel Advocate 26 [1886], 674). Indeed, Christians should think of their careers as not only participating in the kingdom of God but also that their income is for the sake of the kingdom of God.   “If every Christian in the world would run his business, whatever that may be, solely for the advancement of God’s kingdom; if he should consider himself as being in the world simply and solely for that purpose, what a wonderful change we would have in the world” (“Three Contradictory Theories,” The Way 3.1 [4 April 1901] 4).

Harding was a firm believer that every follower of Christ ought to give “at least” ten percent of their income to helping the poor and helping others proclaim the gospel (“The Churches and the Societies—A Contrast,” Gospel Advocate 25 [1883], 794). Harding practiced what he preached. In 1902 Harding testified that some thirty years previous he had decided to tithe and that over those years he had increased the percentage “eleven times” (“Scraps,” The Way 4 [10 April 1902] 10). L. C. Sears, Harding’s grandson, tells us that “in later years [the Hardings] were giving 65 percent of their income” to the kingdom of God (“J. A. Harding,” in Harding College Lectures 1967 [Austin: Firm Foundation Publishing House, 1967], 74).

His “Bible Reading on Giving,” which is rooted in some specific testimonies from Scripture, has added power because it aries out of the life of family who embodied the principles taught therein. He published it several times, but for the first time in The Way 3 (January 26 1899) 10-12 which was one of his first articles in his newly founded periodical.  The lengthy article is provided below.

     The topic class of the Bible School recently had for the subject of the day: “The Bible Doctrine of Giving.” We will endeavor to reproduce the lesson here as an example of what we do in that class and what will appear from time to time in the The Way. As we read the rich promise of God to those who give, nothing but a lack of faith will prevent us from becoming more generous and whole-hearted in his service.

     1. Abraham paid tithes to Melchisedec.  “And he blessed him, and said, Blessed be Abram of God Most High, possessor of heaven and earth; and blessed be God Most High, which hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand. And he [Abram] gave him a tenth of all.” (Gen. 14:19,20, R.V.; read the entire chapter; also Heb. 7:10.) From this we learn the custom of paying tithes was at least four hundred years older than the law of Moses. It was incorporated in that law, but was recognized as a righteous thing to do for hundreds of years before. The Arabs, the Greeks, the inhabitants of Sicily and those of the Roman province of Asia, the Carthaginians, Phenicians [sic], and many other ancient nations, especially those of the East, paid tithes. Among the Mohammedan States is I practiced to this day. Many Christians regularly give the full tenth of their incomes to the Lord; some of them, much more than this. The law of Moses required a tenth to be given to the Levites; and, as it appears, a second tenth was to be expended at Jerusalem at the annual feasts for feeding the poor. If every member of the church of God would give one-tenth of his entire income to the Lord, what an abundance we would have for attending to our poor and for spreading the gospel! Abraham’s giving did not impoverish him; he grew richer and richer; and no man of his day was so highly honored and blessed by the Lords.

     2. “And Jacob vowed a vow, saying, If God will be with me, and will keep me in this way that I go, and will give me bread to eat, and raiment to put on, so that I come again to my father’s house in peace; then shall the Lord be my God, and this stone, which I have set up for a pillar, shall be God’s house; and of all that thou shalt give me I will surely give the tenth unto thee.” (Gen. 28:20-22). When Jacob made this vow, he was going from his father’s house, with no property but the staff in his hand; when he returned twenty or forty years later, he was rich in wives, children, herds, flocks, and servants—so rich that he considered it a little thing to make his brother a present of five hundred and eighty animals, including goats, sheep, camels, kine, and asses. He did not lose anything by giving a tenth.

     3. “Honor the Lord with they substance, and with the fist fruits of all thine increase; so shall they barns be filled with plenty, and they vats shall overflow with new wine.” (Prov. 3:9,10.) Here is a positive promise that if a man will honor the Lord in giving, as he ought to do, he shall be blessed with an abundance—a promise that all believers in the Bible are assured was most fully kept in Old Testament times; but many are not so fully assured that it holds good now, and hence they are afraid to give. Many  Christians, according to their own confessions, give but trifling sums for the support of the religion of Christ, not as much as they spend for coffee or tobacco or for some secret society or for a pleasure trip to Niagara. Some will spend more for a piano for their children than they will give in five years for the cause of Christ.  Surely they do not believe the promise holds good now; but we will see about that when we come to the quotations from the New Testament.

     4. “There is that scattereth, and in increaseth yet more; and there is that withholdeth more than is meet, but it tendeth only to want. The liberal soul shall be made fat; and he that watereth shall be watered also himself.” (Prov. 11:24,25, R.V.) It pays to please God. He who is generous and liberal in ministering to others, who does to others as he would have them do to him, pleases the Father, and the Father will not fail to bless him most abundantly here and hereafter.

     Jesus says: “Verily I say unto you, There is no man that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or mother, or father, or children, or lands, for my sake, and for the gospel’s sake, but he shall receive a hundredfold now in this time, houses, and brethren, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and lands, with persecutions: and in the world to come eternal life.” (Mark 10:29,30, R.V.). So Jesus spoke then, and he changes not. He is “the same yesterday and to-day, yea and forever;” and he who does not believe it is as much as an infidel, it seems to me, as he who does not believe “He that believeth [10] and is baptized shall be saved.” Every word of God is true, one as true as another; every promise of God is good, and any one of them is just as certain to be fulfilled as any other as any other one when the conditions have been complied with. When one takes God at his word and acts on his promise; when he is liberal and grows in liberality, the fulfillment of the promises greatly strengthens his faith till he can say in full assurance by faith: I know that God “is, and that he is a rewarder of them that seek after him.” Such faith becomes like knowledge, and is called knowledge in the Bible.

     5. “He that hath pity upon the poor lendeth unto the Lord, and his good deed will he pay him again.” (Prov. 19:17, R.V.) Sam. Jones, I believe it was, who, in commenting upon this passage, said: “If you like the security, come down with the cash.” If a man gives to the poor in the name of the Lord, he lends to the Lord; and who can believe that with such a loan in his possession the Lord would let that man suffer from want? Even a kind, just man would promptly pay a debt, if he could, if he were to see the lender pressed hard for the money. Especially would he be prompt in returning it, if it had been loaned to him in sympathy when he himself was in some straits. If men are thoughtful and generous in such things, is not God infinitely more so? Many a man has refrained from giving to the poor when they needed help badly, or from contributing to the Lord’s cause when a fine opportunity for doing good thereby presented itself, because he was afraid he would come to want if he should spend his money in that way. What a mistake! That is the very way to lay up money so as to be sure to have it at hand ready for use when you really need it. It is right to be wise and discreet in giving, but be sure to give.

     6. “Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you: for every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened. Or what man is there of you, who, if his son shall ask him for a loaf, will give him a stone; or if he shall ask for a fish, will give him a serpent? If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your Father which is in heaven give good things to them that ask him? All things therefore whatsoever ye would that men should do unto you, even so do ye also unto them; for this is the law and the prophets.” (Matt. 7:7-12, R.V.) It is sometimes said that Jesus does not argue; the he simply states his case on his own authority without giving reasons to convince the understanding of his hearer. But notice how fine and strong the argument is here, and how logical the conclusion. Men who are weak, sinful, and selfish give good things to their children, when they ask for them; how much more, then, will the infinitely good, strong, wise, and unselfish Heavenly Father give good things to his children? It is only necessary that they should ask him in faith, with a confidence and affection similar to that which they feel to their earthly fathers. A kind, earthly father will withhold no good thing from his affectionate, obedient child that he can in righteousness give to him; so the Heavenly Father withholds no good thing from them that walk uprightly. Notice also how clearly the conclusion follows from this argument. Inasmuch as God’s child can get what he needs, when he needs it, by asking for it, he can afford to give freely to other that need; so Jesus says, in conclusion of this paragraph: “All things therefore whatsoever ye would that men should do unto you, even so do ye also unto them.” And this is what it is to love your neighbor as yourself. Do you believe what Jesus says here, my brother? If you do, you will act upon it; if you do not act upon it, you do not believe it.

     7. “Give, and it shall be given unto you; good measure, pressed down, shaken together, running over, shall they give into your bosom. For with what measure ye mete it shall be measured to you again.” (Luke 6:38, R.V.) Here the Savior teaches not only that we should give, but that we should give abundantly; for even as we give to others, so also will men give to us; God will see to it that it shall be so; he gives to us through men. Man a man is poor and has a hard time, and devotes nearly all of his time and thought to making a living, and makes a poor one at that, simply because he is close and niggardly and fearful. If he would take God at his word and begin at once, with a cheerful heart, to give a liberal pr cent of his income to the Lord’s cause, his affairs would brighten up at once.  Do you doubt it? And what will become of you if you live and die doubting Christ? The beautiful story of the Shunammite woman (see 2 Kings 4:8-37; 8:1-6) illustrates how God deals with the generous-hearted who do good to his servants. This woman saw that Elisha was a man of God, and, at her suggestion, she and her husband built a room for [11] him “on the wall” and furnished it, that he might turn in at any time as he passed to and fro. As a result of her kindness, God gave her a son, and when her property had been lost to her and her son by their long absence on account of a famine, it was all returned to her again, with all the fruits of it from the time of her departure till she returned. This is not an exception; it is simply an illustration of the rule.

      8. “But this I say, He that soweth sparingly shall reap also sparingly; and he that soweth bountifully shall reap also bountifully. Let each man do according as he hath purposed in his heart; not grudgingly, or of necessity; for God loveth a cheerful giver. And God is able to make all grace abound unto you; that ye, having always all sufficiency in everything, may abound unto every good work: as it is written, He hath scattered abroad, he hath given to the poor; his righteousness abideth forever. And he that supplieth seed to the sower and bread for food, shall supply and multiply your seed for sowing, and increase the fruits of your righteousness; ye being enriched in everything unto all liberality, which worketh through us thanksgiving to God.” (2 Cor. 9:6-11, R.V.) Let us notice carefully the lessons to be drawn from this passage.  Paul was exhorting the Corinthians, as he had before taught them, and the disciples of Macedonia and Galatia, to give to the poor saints in Judea. The land of Palestine was greatly troubled at this time. The troubles that culminated in the destruction of Jerusalem, and in the awful miseries that afflicted the Jewish people at that time, were already distressing the people; business was interrupted, agriculture interfered with, and the Hebrew Christians were poor and poorly prepared to stand the famine.

     (a) In exhorting the  Gentile Christians to contribute to their wants, Paul teaches the following lessons:

     (b) Giving in God’s service is not squandering the means for your own support in old age or sickness; it is rather a sowing from which you may expect to reap a big harvest, when the need comes, if you have sown liberally.

    (c) If a man gives little, he will receive little; if he gives much, he will receive much.

    (d) Each one should give cheerfully as he chooses to give, and not at the dictation of another; for God loves a cheerful giver.

    (e) God is not only able to supply you abundantly with all that you need, but, when you do liberally and cheerfully give in his service, he will supply and multiply your seed for sowing, and he will increase the fruits of your righteousness, so that you shall be enriched in everything, and your liberality shall cause many thanksgivings to go up to God.

     My brother, do you believe this doctrine? Then you will give liberally, and, as your faith grows, you will give more and more. You will not long be content with giving a tenth; soon you will give fifteen cents on the dollar—then twenty, twenty-five, thirty, thirty-three and one-third, thirty-five, and so on; for you will find that the more you give, the more you will have to give, and the more good you can do, and the more the name of God will be glorified in you. As Solomon says: “The liberal soul shall be made fat; and he that watereth shall be watered himself.”

     9. “Be ye free from the love of money; content with such tings as ye have: for himself hath said, I will in nowise fail thee, neither will I in any wise forsake thee. So that with good courage we say, The Lord is my helper; I will not fear: what shall man do unto me? Remember them that had rule over you, which spake unto you the word of God; and considering the issue of their life, imitate their faith. Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, and to-day, yea and forever.” (Heb. 13:5-8, R.V.)  This is a good passage and one that we need to meditate much upon. “Be ye free from the love of money.” As an illustration of what it is to love money to the very greatest degree, consider the following incident:  While waiting at a railway station, a few nights ago, I overheard a man say to another: “My greatest pleasure is in making money; and my next greatest pleasure is in keeping it.” What a worshiper of Mammon! With him money was far above every other God. Never before had I heard a man so openly and boldly announce himself a money worshiper, an idolater, an utterly selfish man. Perhaps there are not many as bas as he proclaimed himself to be; but there are many people who love money, who hoard it, who are misers without knowing it. Many others are selfish and spend money rather for their own pleasures than for the cause of Christ. The miser takes pleasure in making money and in keeping it; even self-denial and pain become pleasures to him when they enable him to make and keep money. The Christian should take pleasure in making money by honorable diligence that he may spend it for Christ; self-denial and pain should give him pleasure when he realizes that thereby he is advancing the cause of Christ. As the chief pleasure of [12] the ardent Mammon worshiper is to make and keep money, so the chief pleasure of the child of God should be to advance the cause of his Master in every way that he can. With him the all-important thing should be the service of Christ, the glorification of his name, the extension of his kingdom, the salvation of his people; this devotion should be so far first in his heart that all other interests are as nothing in comparison with it. God help us to be real Christians.

      This passage teaches that the Christian need not concern himself about how he will come out, if he is thus free from the love of money, and content with such things as he has, for the apostle reminds us that  God has said: “I will in no wise fail thee, neither will I in any wise forsake thee.” And Jesus, long before this letter to the Hebrews was written, had said: “Seek ye first his kingdom, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you;” and the Master was talking about our temporal needs—food, raiment, and such things—when he said it. Then the apostle exhorts these Hebrew Christians to remember the ancient worthies who had the rule over them, and who spoke unto them the word of God; and he tells them to consider their lives, to observe how they terminated, and to imitate their faith. He wants us to consider Abraham, Moses, Joshua, Samuel, David, Jeremiah, Daniel, and the great host of heroes of the former days, and to live lives of faith and self-denial like they did.  Are you afraid to do it? Do you fear that such a life would not turn out so well for you? Then he reminds you that Christ has not changed; he is the same being they served—just as strong, just as wise and good and loving, just as considerate of his servants as he ever was, “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and to-day, yea and forever.” He just as positively tells us under the new covenant the he will give us temporal blessings as he spoke it to them under the old covenant; his assurances that he will hear and answer prayer now are just as full and complete as they were then. All that is lacking is that we should believe now as those grand servants of God believed then, and the blessings will be poured out upon us in abundance.

      I have quoted, in this article, as I do generally, from the Revised Version. If you will compare the quotations with the same passages in the Common Version, you will see how much stronger and clearer some of them are in the Revision.   J.A. H.

John T. Lewis (1876-1967), a 1906 graduate of the Nashville Bible School and largely responsible for church planting in Birmingham, Alabama, in the first half of the 20th century, penned an interesting tract in 1952 entitled “The Lord’s Supper and the Lord’s Day.” It reflects on the correlation of the Lord’s Supper and the Lord’s Day (Sunday).

His tract offers a specific insight into the beginnings of Sunday night offerings of the Lord’s Supper. The tradition throughout the 19th century within Stone-Campbell churches was to gather around the table and share the Supper in the mornings (sometimes in the mid-afternoon).  It was not–with any frequency–an evening event.  But this changed in the early 20th century.  Here is Lewis’ perspective on the change (p. 11).

That practice began in Nashville, Tennessee, during World War I. One of the congregationas there, I do not recall now which one it was, began carrying the Lord’s supper over till the night services for the benefit of those who had to work on Lord’s day. Lots of brethren objected to it.  Brother C. M. Pullias was living in Birmingham at that time and I know he was opposed to it then. However, the practice has become almost a universal custom among the churches of Christ today, and many think that the congregations that do not have the Lord’s supper on Sunday night are made up of cranks. We have never tried to have the Lord’s supper at night where I preach. If a member cannot meet with the brethren on ‘the Lord’s day,’ I do not think he needs to worry about ‘the Lord’s supper,’ because I do not believe you can have one without the other.

We might surmise from this suggestion that, as far as Lewis knew, offering the Lord’s Supper on Sunday evening was an early 20th century innovation situated in the context of World War I.  It might have started as a way of accomodating those who worked in shifts as factories and plants worked around the clock for the sake of war production.  Since shift work prevented some from attending on Sunday morning, it was also offered on Sunday evening. This may be the origin of the near universal practice–in my experience–of Sunday evening offering of the Supper that was unknown in the 19th century. It became part of the culture and liturgical practice of the Churches of Christ and it was an innovation to accomodate workers.

Lewis believed the Sunday morning assembly–the Lord’s Day assembly–was for the purpose breaking bread. In Acts 20:7, the preaching was “incidental or a secondary matter–that is the way it should always be when we ‘come to gether to break’ bread” (p. 11). “But,” he writes, “our ‘gathering together’ on Sunday night is to hear preaching and the Lord’s supper becomes a secondary matter, and in many places it is taken in a bakc or side room, after the meeing has been dismissed” (p. 12).

Lewis thought this inappropriate at two levels.  First, it severed the link between Lord’s Day and Lord’s Supper since the morning assembly is the gathering designed for the observance of the Lord’s Supper.  He also held a conviction, just as James A. Harding did, that the Lord’s Day is from sunset Saturday to sunset Sunday.  Thus, an evening Supper on Sunday night is not the Lord’s Day.  Second, he thought the practice of a “side room” partaking of the Supper lowered the significance of the Supper and people now viewed the Supper “like the Cathoics” in the sense “they have attended mass and it [didn’t] make any difference what they [did] the rest of the day” (preface ).

Lord’s  Supper controversies have been with us for a long time…and will continue to be.  Alas.

One of David Lipscomb’s incessant emphases was that the poor were God’s special concern.  The Cholera Epidemic of 1873 provided an opportunity for the church to serve the sick, dying, and needy, especially among the poor which included the African-American community.

In 1873 the population of Nashville was 25,865. Cholera first appeared in 1873 in the city prison on May 6. Some prisoners had just returned from western Tennesee where they had been working on the railroad. A significant number of prisoners fell ill and the first death outside the prison walls occurred on May 25.  Between June 7 and July 1, Nashville recorded 244 “white deaths” and 403 “colored deaths” (The Cholera Epidemic in the United States, 143-157) and close to a 1,000 died in the epidemic. This means that something like 1 out of every 25 people died in Nashville that summer.

David Lipscomb, though he lived ten miles outside the city limits, remained in Nashville to assist the sick.  His buggy carried the women of the Roman Catholic “Sisters of Mercy” as well as the Dominican order to their destinations and he himself cared for the sick and dying, including African-Americans.

Lipscomb was disturbed that so many people fled the city rather than staying to minister to the sick and needy.  Below are two articles that apperaed in the Gospel Advocate that summer.  The first (July 17, pp. 649-653) rebukes those who fled on the ground a strong theological argument and describes some the efforts in the city to care for the sick.  The second article (August 21, pp. 774-776) responds to an anonymous critical response to Lipscomb’s article.

The first letter is lengthy but well worth the read. It was a memorable moment in the history of Nashville as well as in the life of David Lipscomb. In this moment ecclesiological differences were transcended by acts of mercy across economic and racial barriers.

First Article

The story of the division of “The Christian Church of McGregor” in McGregor, Texas, near Waco, is of particular significance for several reasons. Organized on August 25, 1883, it divided on September 23, 1897. The division resulted in two groups: “The First Christian Church of McGregor” and “the Church of Christ” (the capital letters are conservatives own self-designation). The conservatives changed the locks on the building and prevented progressives from meeting in it. The progressives filed suit which was ultimately decided in favor of the progressives by the Supreme Court of Texas. This is a division initiated by the conservatives. The story is told in W. K. Homan’s The Church on Trial or the Old Faith Vindicated (1900) which contains court transcripts.  You can read the court decision here.

But, historically and theologically, the most interesting aspect of the division was the prominence of the rebaptism issue. G. A. Trott (1855-1930), who would later become one of the editors of the Firm Foundation in the first decade of the 20th century and then one of the founders of the The Apostolic Way (1913) which promoted the non-class viewpoint, played a prominent role in the division and the court case. Trott was one of three who secured the building with new locks. Trott, who was the preacher for the church, had only come to the city eighteen months prior and had been appointed an elder of the “The Christian Church of McGregor” without a congregational vote (Homan, pp. 51, 93-94).

The rebaptism question, whether one must believe that baptism is for salvation (“for the remission of sins”) in order to be scripturally baptized, was one of the significant issues in the division and in the court trial. Some were refusing to admit into membership those who had been previously immersed on faith in Christ. Elder R. M. Peace stated at the trial that “if one should present himself for membership in the church of which I am an elder, stating that he believed baptism to be because of the remission of sins, and not for an in order to the remission of sins, I would not regard him as a Christian” (Homan, p. 52). Peace explained that they “would receive persons baptized by preachers of other religious bodies, if they had been immersed for the remission of sins—that is, if they believed at the time of their baptism that baptism was for the remission of sins.” And though his lawyers were Baptists, Peace further remarked that “We do not recognize Baptists as Christians” (Homan, p. 50).

What becomes obvious in this trial is that the rebaptism issue was applied as a test of fellowship by Trott and others. Under cross-examination, Trott made this very clear as the extended quote below demonstrates (Homan, pp. 54-55).

I belong to the Church of Christ. I do not belong to the Christian Church…I would not hold membership in a church were such things are practiced music, missionary societies, conventions, etc. I regard all who engage in such things as in sin. I agree with what is called the Firm Foundation faction…..It is the view of those called the Firm Foundation faction that no one has been scripturally baptized unless he understood at the time of his baptism that baptism is for, that is in order to, the remission of sins. They do not regard as Christians those who did not so understand and believe at the time of their baptism…I do not regard Baptists, Methodists or Presbyterians as Christians, because they have not been immersed for the remission of sins—that is, with the understanding on their part that baptism is for the remission of sins. Should I find persons holding membership in the church who did not believe at the time of their baptism that baptism is for the remission of sins, I would insist upon withdrawing from them—that is, excluding them from the church. It is a fact that I found three such persons in the church at Rising Star, Texas, where I preached, and I advised the church to exclude them, and they were excluded on the sole ground that at the time of their baptism they did not believe that baptism is for the remission of sins.

Trott locked the doors of the building against the progressives partly because they would admit people to the church whom he did not believe were Christians and partly because they supported a visiting Christian Church evangelist, B. B. Sanders, in a recent revival. Up to that point, the church had not used the organ or participated as a corporate body in the conventions and societies, though some members did as individuals (for which they were rebuked but not excluded). The court case was largely argued in reference to the rebaptism question, though other issues were present and the practice of the “innovations” quickly emerged after the division of the church into two groups.

Historically, this points to the intense convictions held by some on the rebaptism question and their divisive—even sectarian—nature. Were David Lipscomb and Trott to serve the same congregation as elders, the church would divide because Lipscomb would admit those immersed upon faith in Jesus whereas Trott could not hold membership in a congregation that did such.

Rebaptism was a fellowship issue in the divisive discussions between what became the Churches of Christ and the Disciples of Christ or Christian Church in Texas. It was not a divisive issue between those two groups in Tennessee.

Created materiality is good; indeed, it is very good. It is not simply good in an ethical sense but delightful and wondrous. God created the world as a temple in which to dwell, a place where God and humanity would enjoy each other, delight in the wonder of the world, and rest within it.

Materiality, rather than something to be discarded in the end, was designed as a means by which finite, material humans would participate in the communion of God’s life. Creation was not an addendum or a secondary reality but the reality through which humans would experience God and become like God.

But, alas, creation is now broken. It is still good, but broken. It is enslaved, infected with chaos, and subjected to frustration. Nevertheless, creation still performs its role–it is a means by which we participate in the life of God. We still experience God through creation as, for example, when we experience the beauty of God’s creation. We experience God in the little things of creation as well as in its majestic views. Yet, creation is broken. It is filled with pain, hurt, tragedy and death. It is frustrating and we yearn for liberation as creation itself groans for renewal and redemption.

Despite its brokenness, God affirmed the goodness of creation through the incarnation. God became flesh–material. The Son became part of the creation itself, lived within the creation and experienced the Father through creation.

More than this, the Son became new creation. He inaugurated new creation as the new human who was raised from the dead and seated at the right hand of God. The Son is new creation, the new Adam, the new human.

This is where the sacraments become a meeting place between the old and new creations–an encounter moment where God offers humans living in the broken, old creation an experience of the new creation through the exalted Jesus.

The Eucharist is bread and wine, but it is more than bread and wine.  It is not “regular” meal. We may experience God through any meal–whether it is the nightly family meal, the church pot-luck or thanksgiving dinner! Old creation is still good and is still a medium of God’s presence in the world. But the Eucharist is more.

The Eucharist is the experience of new creation. The bread and wine of the old creation become means by which we experience the reality of the new cration. It is still bread and wine–created materiality is not annihilated–but it is also a participation in the reality of the new creation through the presence of Christ.  Whether we think of that presence in the bread, through the bread or at the table is inconsequential to my point here. The Eucharistic meal is a new creation meal that does not annihiliate materiality or creation. Rather, it transforms it, liberates it and brings it to its telos (goal).

Baptism is water but is more than water. It is not a “regular” dip in water. We may experience God in the shower or through a warm, long hot bath.  Old creation is still good and is still a medium of God’s presence in the world.  But Baptism is more.

Baptism is the experience of new creation. The water of the old creation becomes a means by which we experience the reality of the new creation. It is still water–created materiality is not annihilated–but it is also a participation in the reality of the new creation through our union with Christ. In or through Baptism we participate in the eschatological death and resurrection of Jesus. We rise from the watery grave to live as new creatures; participants in new creation. Baptism is a new creation bath in water that does not annihilate materiality or creation. Rather, it ushers us, by the Spirit, into the reality of the new creation where we are raised to sit with Christ in heavenly places at the right hand of God.

Assembly is the gathering of people but it more than a mere gathering.  It is not simply a group of people “hanging out.” We may experience God through hanging out with friends, even going to ballgames and playing in God’s good creation. Old creation is still good and it is still a medium of God’s presence in the world.  But Assembly is more.

Assembly is the experience of new creation. The gathering of God’s people within the old creation becomes a means by which we experience the reality of the new creation. We are still living here in this broken, old creation but through that gathering of material creatures we participate in the reality of the new creation through union with the eschatological assembly of God around the throne of God. Through Assembly we enter the holy of holies as a community and join the community that is already and eschatologically gathered there. We participate in the Sanctus of the angels and join the heavenly chorus, singing, “Holy, Holy, Holy.” Neither our materiality nor our creatureliness is annihilated. Rather, through creation we participate in new creation as the Spirit of God takes us into the throne room of  God just as John was lifted there “in the Spirit” in the Apocalypse.

The Eucharist, Baptism and Assembly are meeting places.  They are places, by the promise of God, where God meets us in this old, broken creation in order to experience–to taste, to get a glimpse of–the new creation. They are moments of both authentic participation in the new creation as well as anticipations (hope) of the fullness of new creation.

Through the sacraments, God authentically communes with us and promises that one day the brokenesses of creation will pass away and all creation will be liberated and renewed.

This is why I love the sacraments–they are gifts of God through which we experience new creation and anticipate the new heaven and new earth. They are injections of hope in a broken world, previews of coming attractions, and proleptic experiences of what is to come.

The “Examen Prayer” is a form of Ignatian spirituality derived from St. Ignatius of Loyola, the founder of the Jesuit order.  The practice is older than Ignatius but he gave it the present form.

I have been using Ignatius’ practice for some time now.  I have found it extremely helpful.  I had used other forms of this, particularly from the Alcoholic’s Anonymous Big Book (quoted below) in my spiritual recovery from workaholism.

In spiritual recovery, I found Steps of Transformation: An Orthodox Priest Explores the Twelve Steps by Father Webber Meletios (trained in psychology and an Orthodox priest) wonderfully refreshing. Here is a book that combines the insights of 12 step programs with biblical text shaped by the spirituality of Orthodox theology. This is a rich combination filled with theological reflection on spiritual disciplines, spirituality and recovery.

The Examen Prayer, however, is something I have recently begun to use and I was motivated to do so by the example given in Elaine A. Heath’s The Mystic Way of Evangelism.  Below is how I practice it, and some further resources.

One more point: I think it is particularly important for men since it focuses on emotion and feeling which are the widows to our souls but which windows we males often keep closed or shut off from others. This examen opens those windows to God and thus enables us to reflect on them and share them with others (especially our wives!) or closest companions in the journey of life.

Preparation

Centering Silence: get into a relaxed position, settle your spirit and focus your mind/heart by prayerfully repeating a phrase or line from Scripture.

“Show me the way I should go, for to you I lift up my soul” (Psalm 143:8).

Prayer Path:

1. Recognize that you are in the presence of God and pray for illumination: “Lord, I believe that at this moment I am in your loving presence. Please help me understand myself today and see you in my life.”

2. Review the day with gratitude: “God, I thank you for your many gifts. Help me appreciate your blessings.”

Be concrete and specific. Where have you experienced the goodness of the Lord today? Review the day to see where God has been present throughout the day. Failings will emerge in your review as well.

3. Pay attention to the feelings that surfaced in your review of the day.

Reflect on the feelings, both positive and negative, you have experienced today. Acknowledge the range of feelings that emerge out of the various circumstances of the day. Feelings fill our day and illuminate our hearts.

4. Choose one of those feelings and pray from it: “God, having examined my day, I give thanks for your gifts and ask your forgiveness for my failings. I have felt ____ today and give me grace to see you in this feeling and what it means.”

Is there one emotion or feeling that stands out to you? Explore this emotion—what was its origin, meaning and effect? How did it affect your day? Express spontaneously the prayer that emerges as you attend to this feeling as it appeared during the day.

5. Offer a prayer of reconciliation and resolve: “Lord, as I look forward to tomorrow, I renew my commitment to follow you. Show me how to become the person you want me to be.”

As you review the day to come, what feeling emerges as you look at the coming tasks. Fear? Doubt? Joy? Regret? Whatever it is, turn it into a prayer for help, healing or thanksgiving.

6. Conclude: The Lord’s Prayer.

Resources:

Ignatian Spirituality – a Jesuit site that describes, models (with video and audio presentations) and explains the Examen spiritual practice. This site also has multiple links to other resources.

Examen.Me – a practical application site where you can process the examen through a guided journaling online and export your entries to your computer.

The AA Big Book (p. 86) suggests something similar meditative strategy for those recovering from addiction–we are all recovering from the addiction to sin:

When we retire at night, we constructively review our day. Were we resentful, selfish, dishonest or afraid? Do we owe an apology? Have we kept something to ourselves which should be discussed with another person at once? Were we kind and loving toward all? What could we have done better? Were we thinking of ourselves most of the time? Or were we thinking of what we could do for others, of what we could pack into the stream of life? But we must be careful not to drift into worry, remorse or morbid reflection, for that would diminish our usefulness to others. After making our review we ask God’s forgiveness and inquire what corrective measures should be taken.

On awakening let us think about the twenty-four hours ahead. We consider our plans for the day. Before we begin, we ask God to direct our thinking, especially asking that it be divorced from self-pity, dishonest or self-seeking motives. Under these conditions we can employ our mental faculties with assurance, for after all God gave us brains to use. Our thought-life will be placed on a much higher plane when our thinking is cleared of wrong motives.

This weekend I am conducting a retreat on the topic of my previous three blogs (When We Assemble…). It will involve three presentations, one on each blog topic. I am also providing resources for small group discussion of the presentations, though the first is a private meditation. These are simple and basic, but hopefully helpful.

Session One: What We Do For God, or Loving God When We Assemble

Private Meditation

Text:  Reflecting on either Psalm 116 or Luke 7:36-50, walk through these questions.

What am I and what are my needs?
What has God done for me? Make a gratitude list.
How do I approach God in worship?
What do I offer (bring) God in worship?

Session Two: What We Do For Each Other, or Loving Each Other When We Assemble

Group Discussion

Text: 1 Corinthians 14:1-5,13-19, 22-26

What are some of the loving practices of the Corinthian assembly or what practices does Paul recommend for the sake of love?
What are some of the disruptive practices of the Corinthian assembly?
How do we love each other in practical ways when we assemble?
In what ways is love diminished by some assemblies?
What steps might we take to increase the love in our assemblies?

Session Three: What God Does For Us, or God Loving Us When We Assemble

Group Discussion

Text: Zephaniah 3:9-20

What does God do in this vision of the future?
What is the response of the redeemed remnant?
What does God feel—God’s emotional life—in response to the presence of the redeemed? What is God’s experience of our worship?
What do you envision God doing during our assemblies? How does this affect your experience and attitude toward assemblies?