The Christmas Battles

My friend and colleague, Rev. Chris Gordon of the Lynden URC, recently wrote an excellent piece in his blog on the wars that take place around Christmas. He mentions that people are often quicker to defend their right to say "Merry Christmas" than they are to defend the opportunity to worship God on December 25. It will be interesting to see how worship attendance at Reformed churches will be on Christmas afternoon/evening. Here is the excellent article he just wrote.

http://christopherjgordon.blogspot.com/2011/12/christmas-controversy-canceling-worship.html#more

Book Review: Why Johnny Can't Preach

I just finished reading a wonderful book by T. David Gordon with the interesting title Why Johnny Can't Preach. Frankly, before I read the book I thought it was going to be a book about the need for a seminary education prior to ordination as a Minister of the Word. Reading the subtitle likely would have helped my ignorance. The book is subtitled "The Media Have Shaped the Messengers."

This book impressed me for two reasons. First, it impressed me because Gordon gave a spot-on critique of modern preaching and the lack of good, Christ-centered expository preaching. Secondly, it impressed me in the sense of convicting me of some of my own weaknesses in preaching or at least the temptation to fall into a couple of different traps in preaching. In this review I hope to summarize the book and then offer a bit of further analysis from a personal point of view.

The book begins with Gordon, who is a University professor, lamenting the preaching he (and his wife) have sat under in the past 30 years. He gives a number of reasons why the preaching he has heard has made him "disgusted" (page 20). The biggest weakness of sermons he has heard in the past from Presbyterian and Reformed pulpits is the lack of a discernable point of the sermon. Most sermons are an aimless wandering. On page 18 he says, "I would guess that of the sermons I have heard over the last twenty-five years, 15 percent had a discernable point; I could say, 'The sermon was about X.' Of those 15 percent, however, less than 10 percent demonstratably based the point on the text read. That is, no competent effort was made to persuade the hearer that God's Word required a particular thing; it was simply asserted." This is the type of criticism that Gordon has of modern preaching. He claims he is not alone in his assessment and that after many discussions with elders of vacant churches, he found that they sought to call the man who was the best of the worst.

Gordon continues and says that the 7 requisites of Gospel preaching taught by R.L. Dabney 130 years ago are nearly absent today. They are: 1. Textual Fidelity 2. Unity 3. Evangelical Tone 4. Instructiveness 5. Movement 6. Point, and 7. Order. He fleshes these out, but I will allow you to read the book and see for yourself.

He makes three more points defending the thesis that modern preaching is in a world of hurt. He argues that there is a continued desire for briefer sermons. A public speaker cannot keep the attention of an audience, that is fed image after image daily, for a speech of one hour or more. He says, frankly, when the sermon is uninteresting, without a clear point, unity, order, etc. 20 minutes is too long to listen.

Next, he mentions the emergent church movement and its flight from anything "churchy" or "how things used to be done." He says what these churches fail to realize in response to "moribund" churches they have thrown the baby out with the bath water. He says, "What the contemporaneists and emergents have not yet considered, however, is the possibility that such moribund churches are so not because they are doing the wrong things, but because they are doing them incompetently. (page 32)"

Finally, he mentions the lack of an annual review of the preaching in a local church. He claims that ministers do not want to do it and officers do not want to hurt the feelings of their pastors. If you begin to dig deep into the preaching in an annual review, how weak the preaching is might become very clear. He says that the Christian ministry is about one of the only arenas where you will find opposition to an annual review.

In the next section of the book Gordon, after having laid out the problem, digs into the reason that preaching is so poorly done today. The first reason that Johnny can't preach is because Johnny can't read (texts)(chapter 3). This was probably the most interesting chapter to me in light of the culture we live in. Allow me to summarize his point. Today we read for information. People speed read, people pick out important words, etc. People today read the Bible like the newspaper and this is a problem. Gordon claims that if writing lasts beyond the generation it was written, it likely is more becuase of the way something is said than what actually is being said. Take Shakespeare's sonnets...they are read today because of their poetic beauty, not because of their content so much. But, we read today for imformation.

This has also led us to no longer be able to distinguish between what is significant and what is not. In defending this, Gordon cites writers like Neil Postman (Amusing Ourselves to Death) and David Denby (Great Books). Gordon mentions things like an "in-depth" news story is about 5 minutes long at the most, but anything worth looking at closely will certainly take longer than 5 minutes, but that is all the time North Americans will allow before we lose interest.

The second large reason that Johnny can't preach is because Johnny can't write (chapter 4). People rarely write letters anymore. Modern technology has made them nearly obsolete. The telephone was the first to replace writing letters. On the telephone you cannot sense someone's body language and since it is awkward to have silence on the telephone, any gap in conversation is filled in with babble until we are to the point where very little is said over the phone or anytime for that matter. He said that if you took a transcript of a phone conversation it would likely be 5 times as long as a hand-written letter giving the same "important" information. We have changed from a literate (reading and writing) culture to an alliterate one, where the image and sound clip reign.  In the footnote on page 97 he says this about television and distinguishing the significant from the insignificant. "Television-watching prohibits such discernment. One cannot simply regard the significant as more important than the insignificant, and then plop himself in front of a television for two to three hours and evening. The only way the conscience can survive such a colossal waste of human life is for the individual to refuse to entertain the question of the difference between the significant and the insignificant."

In the final chapter of the book, Gordon says that Johnny can learn how to preach (chapter 5). He lists four ways to help improve the situation. First, to conduct and annual review, either among a council or even to enlist members of the congregation anonymously to fill out questionairres. 

The second way is to cultivate a sensibility of reading texts closely. This happens long before a future minister enters seminary. Teach your children to read and read well. Poetry trumps prose in this area.

Thirdly, cultivate the sensibility of composed communication. The art of communication is largely lost, but it can be regained. He suggests ministers join the rotary club or something like that to hone in their speaking skills and listening to professionals speak in an articulate way.

Fourthly, cultivate pre-homiletical sensibilities: Johnny can learn to preach. Here, Gordon suggest that student major in their undergraduate work in English literature rather than Theology or Religion. He encourages the study of pre-WWII lit. Thankfully, Gordon ends with a positive by suggesting ways to improve.

In critique of this book, I have nearly only positive to say. Gordon gets to the point and argues for Christ-centered preaching. He does this in light of preaching which is "moralistic", "how-to", "introspecitve", and "social gospel/so-called Culture War" (pages 78-88). Those 10 pages are worth the price of the book.

As a preacher who preaches twice every Lord's Day, I found this book helpfully critical. I saw myself in some of the criticism. In a day and age where the people of God want their hand held and are want to be told what they can and cannot do, as a minister (who has a mind full of opinions on nearly everything), it is easy to give in and become moralistic/legalistic/or how-to, and then of course, add 2 minutes on at the end that we do this because we love Jesus. Gordon mentions that 2 minutes about Jesus at the end of the sermon will not make up for 30 minutes of moralistic preaching. Right on!

Frankly, just about every minister thinks he is a better preacher than he is. I think some honest evaluation needs to be done. Next month at our consistory meeting my elder will have an opportunity to constructively critique my preaching over the last quarter. My prayer is that it will be helpful for me, for them, and ultimately for the flock I am called to serve.

My biggest issue I had with this book is what was not said, but then again, it is only a 100 page book and he even mentions that he plans to follow it up with other books (e.g. Why Johnny can't sing hymns, publ. 2010).

I have other personal reflections on some of the points Gordon drew out in this work, but I will leave those for my personal journal and maybe share them with my wife.

This is a must-read for everyone who has a genuine care and interest in the heralding of the good news that Jesus Christ came to seek and to save the lost. To use a bit of Romans 10, how can they hear if the preacher cannot preach? Enjoy the read!

Ethics at Reformed Bible College

Here is a write up of a class I am teaching in Aldergrove B.C. this winter/spring.

Reformed Bible College

   How we live as a Christian in this world is always an important question for the people of God. What is the role of ethics, morality, the law, the Ten Commandments, casuistry, and gratitude in our lives? Rev. Swets will be teaching on the Ten Commandments during the winter class for the Reformed Bible College. The class will be weekly on Wednesday nights for a total of 12 evenings. We will be using as a primary text, the Ten Commandments, by Jochem Douma. (Copies of this book will be available for those who do not have their own.) The lectures will aim at establishing, in our Christian ethics, biblical principles which will be applied to every day issues, such as the use of horoscopes, civil disobedience, just war theory, euthanasia, in-vitro fertilization and Christian contentment, among others. 

   Classes will begin weekly, on Wednesday evenings at 7:30, in the Aldergrove church building, starting on January 11. Cost will be $100 per student, $150 for "former students," and $200 per married couple.

We look forward to seeing you this winter. 

Visit us at www.rbcollege.com

Abbotsford Canadian Reformed School Society

For those who might be interested, at an Annual General School Society Meeting for John Calvin School in Yarrow, B.C. those who are in ecclesiastical fellowship with the Canadian Reformed Churches are now eligible to be full (voting) members of the school society. As many said to me last night at the meeting, "this should have happened a long time ago." Since this was a "major resolution" for the society, they needed 75% or more to vote in favor. They got that. I trust that this is in accord with what the URC synod said in 2010 that the churches should seek further local, organic unity with our CanRC brothers and sisters. After the result of the vote announced, there was a round of applause.

For me, this means I will be sending in my application for membership, for which I am thankful.

Sittema: A Modern Day Prophet

Our Council has been working through Rev. John Sittema's book With a Shepherd's Heart. It has been a blessing to see anew our calling as shepherds in the local church. Today, as I was preparing for our meeting tonight, I came across this quote from Sittema in his chapter dealing with Secularism as one of the Wolf's Teeth. Read carefully:

Second, a secular culture is dualistic. By that I mean that it observes a rigid dichotomy between the realms of the sacred and the secular, between the natural and the supernatural, between the here-and-now and the eternal. We all make such distinctions easily; but a secular culture erects and impenetrable wall between them. Different gods rule in each; different laws operate in each; different ethics function in each. [emphasis mine sas] ...The Lord Christ is not allowed to be Lord of all of life; if He is given any position at all, it is only in the "sacred" part. (page 51)

Sittema continues along the same vein, and though he didn't have NL2 Kingdoms in mind, it is breath-taking how those words are so true today applied to that theological system. The implications are so far-reaching, that I think it is even a greater danger than secularism to the church, because it masquerades in "biblical" language.

Same-Sex Marriage Debate

The debate surrounding same-sex marriage made headlines again today in Canada as a gay couple has been barred from entering the U.S. The "couple" has one man who is Canadian, the other is an American. They have been residing in Wisconsin and when they tried to re-enter the U.S. after visiting Canada, the Canadian was barred from entering the U.S. for 5 years. Certainly, the media is sympathetic to this couple.

While residing in Wisconsin, this couple adopted a three year old boy who they are raising amidst their homosexual relationship.

However, as Christians, how should we respond to this? Should the federal government recognize same-sex marriage? The answer is no. The reason why is first of all, because the law of God forbids homosexuality. It is sinful to participate in, desire, and frankly, endorse homosexual relations. Likewise, it should be against the law (and common sense) to allow a homosexual couple, whether "married", male or female, etc. to adopt any child. Is it not unnatural that two men are the "fathers" of a child. Of course, you do not have to be an anotomy professor to figure that out.

It ought to grieve us to see our governments slowly giving into this homosexual agenda. In Canada, same-sex marriage is legal, and this is certainly not pleasing to God. In the U.S., in 1996, the federal government defined marriage as a "union between one man and one woman." Individual states are attempting to overturn that, such as the state of Massachusetts.

Now to where the rubber hits the road. Should the Federal government forbid homosexual marriage? I already answered yes, according to the revealed and eternal law of God. Those who hold to the NL2Kt (natural law, two kingdoms theology), would have to argue that natural law, which is written on everyone's mind, might forbid homosexual marriage. However, do homosexuals realize that the natural law written on their minds forbids their own lifestyles? After all, don't all people have consciences? What about a restraint of sin by the Holy Spirit?

The fact of the matter is that this homosexual couple does not have the ability to rightly interpret "natural law". After all, they are totally depraved and spiritually and morally dead. Seeking to have unbelievers (or even believers) live their lives interpreting "natural law" is like trying to nail jello to the wall. It doesn't work. Okay, so maybe we can agree that unbelievers will not rightly interpret natural law. What about believers? If natural law is, as I have had it explained to me, and as I have heard Dr. D. Van Drunen allude to being, "pretty much the same as the ten commandments", then why did God ever give the 10 commandments. So that Israel would not forget them? How could they? They are written on their minds and there to be used to guide them in living in the world (just not in the church).

This debate about homosexuality is just another example of how the nl2kt leaves one in a quicksand of relativistic sovereignty, giving the the unregenerate power that he does not have, namely, the power to assess and apply the law of God written upon his mind.

The B-I-B-L-E, yes that's the book for me and it should be as well for those whom God has appointed as leaders in this world.

Kuyper- A Modern Calvinist

I recently came across and article written in the Princeton Review in 1921. It was written by Dr. Jan Van Lonkhuyzen. The title of the article was Abraham Kuyper-A Modern Calvinist. I read this article with interest for two main reasons.

The first reason is that Dr. Van Lonkhuyzen is my great-grandfather on my mother's side. I always enjoy reading what he has written a couple generations before me. Dr. Van Lonkhuyzen was a minister in the Reformed Churches in the Netherlands (GKN) and also served in the CRC in a congregation in Grand Rapids and Chicago. This is how my mom's family ended up in Chicago. Most of what Dr. Van Lonkhuyzen has written is still in the Dutch language and non-accessible to English-only readers.

The second reason I read this article with interest is because there has been much discussion recently on Calvinism as a worldview in light of Natural Law Two Kingdoms (nl2k), especially at nl2k expresses itself in some of its more radical forms. I am also reading Dr. David Van Drunen's book Living in God's Two Kingdoms . Van Drunen states as his purpose in writing the book is to offer an alternative to Kuyperianism. Once I finish the book, I hope to write a response to it. Nevertheless, those are the two reasons I was excited to come across this article by Van Lonkhuyzen I had never read before. The article was written shortly after Kuyper was called home to glory in November of 1920. The conclusion of the article summarizes what Calvinism is and meant for Kuyper. Van Lonkhuyzen writes:

BOQ

Was Kuyper a follower of Calvin? Did he teach unmodified Calvinism? He was not a follower of Calvin if by this we mean formal imitation. He seldom quotes Calvin or any other of the Reformed theologians. He did so when it was necessary. He knew that he had grasped the fundamentals of the Reformers. But usually he drew of his own initiative from the fountain of the Word of God. He had the spirit of Calvinism; he revived Calvinism; he enriched Calvinism; he clothed Calvinism in the garment of our time; he applied Calvinism to the needs of our age. Yes, he taught a purified Calvinism.

What is Calvinism? Is it Christianity? It is, but not all Christians are Calvinists. Is it Christianity applied to every sphere of life? It is, but the early Christians also applied their Christianity to every spere of life, still we do not call them Calvinists. Is it a life- and world-view? It is, but it is more than a view, it is not of the mind only but also of the heart; not a doctrine merely, but a life as well.

What is Calvinism? It is Christianity stated systematically; it is Christianity systematized, and systematized to the highest degree--the whole heart consecrated to God, the whole creation brought under God's sovereignty, the world within us as well as the world round about us subsumed under one all-inclusive aim, God's glory. Or, to use that magnificent passage of St. Paul in Romans 11:36, "For of Him and through Him and unto Him are all things. To Him be the glory forever." A Calvinism full of life, full of faith, full of love! Such is the Calvinism I have seen in this man.

EOQ

This was a refreshing drink from the fountain which is worldview Calvinism.