Here is another poem. This one by John Donne is a powerful description of our need of a powerful gospel, one where a Sovereign God does for us what we cannot do for ourselves, i.e. change our hearts. Donne uses strong imagery to make his point.

John Donne’s Holy Sonnets #14

Batter my heart, three-personed God; for you
As yet but knock, breathe, shine, and seek to mend;
That I may rise and stand, o’erthrow me, and bend
Your force to break, blow, burn and make me new,
I, like an usurped town, to another due,
Labor to admit you, but O, to no end;
Reason, your viceroy in me, me should defend,
But is captived, and proves weak or untrue.
Yet dearly I love you, and would be loved fain,
But am betrothed into your enemy,
Divorce me, untie or break that knot again;
Take me to you, imprison me, for I,
Except you enthrall me, never shall be free,
Nor chaste, except you ravish me.

I came across this poem in The Poetry of Piety: An Annotated Anthology of Christian Poetry, by Ben Witherington III, and Christopher M. Armitage. The commentary on Donne’s poem in this book includes the following:

“Donne clearly expresses that salvation is not a human self-help program. Human nature is fallen, and redemption comes only through drastic action by God. Radical transformation, not mere modification, is required if a human being is to be remade into the image of God. Donne was not an early advocate of the therapeutic model of redemption. Even more sobering the fact that he speaks as a person who is not adamantly opposed to God; rather, he labors to admit God into his life. Even so, drastic action by God is required. In Donne’s view, if one is not enthralled by God, one is the captive of the usurper. There is no middle ground. Reason is seen as no match for the powers of darkness.
This poem strongly suggests that salvation is not just a matter of knowing or even desiring the truth. It is also a matter of willing the good. However, the human will is portrayed as captive, bent, and fallen unless God remolds it, straightens it, and sets it upright. Information without transformation is inadequate. A change of mind is only the beginning; a change of heart is also required.” (p. 15)

I have been waiting (impatiently!) to write something from my reading of On Stories: And Other Essays on Literature , by C. S. Lewis. I recommend this book strongly to people in all sorts of arenas of life. For parents who want to read well to their children and want to choose books well, this is a great book. Various topics are taken up but one recurrent theme is a defense of “fairy tales” and “fantastic stories” for both adults and children. Lewis says repeatedly that any story worth reading as a child is worth reading as an adult and conversely any story not worth reading as an adult is not worth reading as a child!

For the moment I will simply take up Lewis’ comments on the criticism that some imaginative stories might scare children. He writes:

“Those who say that children must not be frightened may mean two things. They may mean (1) that we must not do anything likely to give the child those haunting, disabling, pathological fears against which ordinary courage is helpless: in fact, phobias. His mind must, if possible, be kept clear of things he can’t bear to think of. Or they may mean (2) that we must try to keep out of his mind the knowledge that he is born into a world of death, violence, wounds, adventure, heroism and cowardice, good and evil. If they mean the first I agree with them: but not if they mean the second. The second would indeed be to give children a false impression and feed them on escapism in the bad sense. There is something ludicrous in the idea of so educating a generation which is born to the Ogpu [State Police in the USSR] and the atomic bomb. Since it is so likely that they will meet cruel enemies, let them at least have heard of brave knights and heroic courage. Otherwise you are making their destiny not brighter but darker. Nor do most of us find that violence and bloodshed, in a story, produce any haunting dread in the minds of children. As far as that goes, I side impenitently with the human race against the modern reformer. Let there be wicked kings and beheadings, battles and dungeons, giants and dragons, and let villains be soundly killed at the end of the book. Nothing will persuade me that this causes an ordinary child any kind or degree of fear beyond what it wants, and needs, to feel. For, of course, it wants to be a little frightened.”

Yea and Amen! This counters well the overly sanitized view of life so often pushed on us. These stories do not encourage improper escapism but by stepping aside from our reality provide us with good categories for responding to the scary side of real life by encouraging nobility, courage, etc. in a compelling way. Of course in our day there are those stories written for children which focus on the morbid and wicked in a way that simply glorifies evil. That is a totally different category. Lewis is campaigning for the traditional fairy tale and the sort of book he wrote in the Chronicles of Narnia.

Lastly, I think Lewis would be bothered with our children’s Bible stories which delete the reference to David cutting off Goliath’s head!

Jim Hamilton, at For His Renown, has a great post on questions for a prospective pastor. He frames the discussion by suggesting that the greatest danger facing the church today may come from well meaning pastors who have failed to think clearly and deeply enough about the gospel and thus unwittingly lead the church in imitating the world. This is a well written, substantive, important post and I encourage everyone to read it. Pastors can be challenged and warned by it and search committees, who are so often in desperate need of help, can benefit greatly from it. Pass it on.

Over the last few years I have given some attention to William Cowper and his poetry. I eventually tracked down a fairly inexpensive 19th century copy of his complete poems. I have enjoyed various parts in various ways, but had not worked my way through his long poem, The Task. However, guided by another I looked further along in the poem and found Cowper discussing some errors found in pastors of his day. I was struck by the portion I reproduce here. Wow! What a timely and stinging indictment of arrogance and pretentiousness in preachers. It reminds me a bit of George Truett’s statement about “dandy” preachers. There is still too much of this grandstanding and we dare not imitate it. The language is older and the quote is long, but I found it helpful.

In man or woman, but far most in man,
And most of all in man that ministers
And serves the altar, in my soul I loathe
All affectation. ‘Tis my perfect scorn;
Object of my implacable disgust.
What!–will a man play tricks, will he indulge
A silly fond conceit of his fair form
And just proportion, fashionable mien,
And pretty face, in presence of his God?
Or will he seek to dazzle me with tropes,
As with the diamond on his lily hand,
And play his brilliant parts before my eyes,
When I am hungry for the Bread of Life?
He mocks his Maker, prostitutes and shames
His noble office, and, instead of truth,
Displaying his own beauty, starves his flock!
Therefore, avaunt [away], all attitude and stare
And start theatric, practised at the glass.
I seek divine simplicity in him
Who handles things divine; and all beside,
Though learned with labour, and though much admired
By curious eyes and judgments ill-informed,
To me is odious as the nasal twang
Heard at conventicle, where worthy men,
Misled by custom, strain celestial themes
Through the prest nostril, spectacle-bestrid.
Some, decent in demeanour while they preach,
That task performed, relapse into themselves,
And having spoken wisely, at the close
Grow wanton, and give proof to every eye–
Whoe’er was edified themselves were not.
Forth comes the pocket mirror. First we stroke
An eyebrow; next compose a straggling lock;
Then with an air, most gracefully performed,
Fall back into our seat; extend an arm,
And lay it at its ease with gentle care,
With handkerchief in hand, depending low:

…
And thus it is. The pastor, either vain
By nature, or by flattery made so, taught
To gaze at his own splendour, and to exalt
Absurdly, not his office, but himself;
Or unenlightened, and too proud to learn,
Or vicious, and not therefore apt to teach,
Perverting often, by the stress of lewd
And loose example, whom he should instruct,
Exposes and holds up to broad disgrace
The noblest function, and discredits much
The brightest truths that man has ever seen.
For ghostly counsel, if it either fall
Below the exigence, or be not backed
With show of love, at least with hopeful proof
Of some sincerity on the giver’s part;
Or be dishonoured in the exterior form
And mode of its conveyance, by such tricks
As move derision, or by foppish airs
And histrionic mummery, that let down
The pulpit to the level of the stage;
Drops from the lips a disregarded thing.
The weak perhaps are moved, but are not taught,
While prejudice in men of stronger minds
Takes deeper root, confirmed by what they see.
A relaxation of religion’s hold
Upon the roving and untutored heart
Soon follows, and the curb of conscience snapt,
The laity run wild.–But do they now?
Note their extravagance, and be convinced.

Is this not a problem today? Isn’t showiness and display, gimmick-laden performance more appropriate to the theatre common? Indeed it is encouraged in many circles to “draw them in.” This sort of performance will garner attention and be welcomed on the bigger stage. And yet, just as Cowper says, the crowds may be moved (i.e., they may be impressed, they may shout, they may turn out to see this), but they are not taught, i.e. they do not come to know more of the Word of Christ and as a result are not changed into His image. (Is this part of why church attendance is up but the impact of the church is less?) Further, as Cowper notes, this sort of action actually turns off many who see through the self-centeredness.

At my church we are going through Ken Sande’s The Peacemaker: A Biblical Guide to Resolving Personal Conflict this summer, watching the DVD’s together while some of us also have the book. We are not doing this because there is conflict in the church. Indeed, just the opposite. We typically do some special study on Wednesday nights in the summer, and we decided it would be good for us to consider this material because conflict of various sorts on various levels is a regular part of life.

We are only three sessions (chapters) in, but so far it is exceptional. Sande holds up good, rich biblical doctrine, and then applies it to concrete areas of life where we face conflict (again from things we consider very small to major issues). So many “conflict management” resources are very thin on biblical, theological reflection that they are practically useless. I rejoiced last night as I listened to Sande root the approach to conflict and restoration in the fact that God is in control, that this did not surprise Him and that He is at work to bring about good for His people.

Conflicts always arise and so often they are handled poorly in the church. I would encourage you to consider using this material with your people to prepare yourselves ahead of time so that the Church might be protected and His name glorified in the way His people conduct themselves.

Thunderstorm in Church , Louise A. Vernon
(Herald Press, 1974, 2002), pb., 132 pp.

Here is another biography from Mrs. Vernon. As in the others the story is told from the viewpoint of a child near the key person. This time the child is Luther’s oldest son Hans. The reader learns of Luther’s life as Hans hears the stories from his father and aunt (their nanny) and as Hans overhears discussions of visitors in their home. One does get the feel of how busy the Luther household must have been, challenges of life in that day, and some of Luther’s characteristics.

As in the other Vernon bio’s I was not completely satisfied. First, the move to a child of the featured person is a fine idea here, but I did not care for the overly psychoanalytical approach to this. The key issue in the book is Hans worrying about how he could ever do anything as great as his father. Frustrations with living up to his father and angst about his future work unnecessarily distracts from the story of Luther. Second, while it was obvious that the author was often drawing directly from Luther’s writings, the story moved awkwardly and unclearly. It was clear then that Mrs. Vernon was quite knowledgeable of Luther’s writings and sought to draw directly from them- both commendable aspects. However, these accounts/facts were placed together in an order the purpose of which was unclear. I often found myself at a loss for understanding why the story jumped from one point to another mid-paragraph. Furthermore, one looks in a children’s biography for explanation and clarification. While this book gives facts, these facts are often not clarified but can be misleading or confusing. For example, at one point in describing Melanchthon further, reference is made to his deep love for learning. One might expect any number of examples to be given. However, Mrs. Vernon proceeds to talk about Melanchthon’s interest in astrology and his desire to “cast” Luther’s horoscope! I have no idea about the historicity of this (though it very well may be true), but what is the value of introducing this here in a children’s book? She does have Luther say he is not interested, but there is no real clarity given on this whole realm. This is the worst example, but other similar portions could result in this being a more confusing than helpful read for some.

In summary, this is a decent biography of Luther. I certainly am grateful for anyone who seeks to write a biography of Martin Luther (and other heroes of the faith) for children. One can read this book with profit- provided you are prepared to explain. It is not an easy book to follow though my boys did enjoy it overall. I hope there is a better Luther book for children somewhere.
[NOTE: We are about to begin another Luther book, so soon I hope to give our thoughts on it.]

When writing the post on Pastors as Protectors, I felt sure Luther has spoken to the issue and just this evening I came across this quote:

“A preacher must be a fighter and a shepherd. He must have teeth in his mouth. Teaching is a very difficult art. Paul contends (2 Tim 4:2; Titus 1:9), as does Peter (2 Peter 2), that sound doctrine must be urged and that those who contradict must be answered.”

However, the right sort of “protecting” will be that sort that arises from deep affection for the people, not simply a hankering for conflict. This deep love, “mother love” (1 Thess 2:7) as Luther calls it, is one thing that seems so terribly lacking in ministries today. This quote is great!

“Men who hold the office of the ministry should have the heart of a mother toward the church; for if they have no such heart, they soon become lazy and disgusted, and suffering, in particular, will find them unwilling…. [Luther drawing from John 21 paraphrases the words of Jesus] Unless your heart toward the sheep is like that of a mother toward her children- a mother, who walks through fire to save her children- you will not be fit to be a preacher. Labor, work, unthankfulness, hatred, envy, and all kinds of sufferings will meet you in this office. If, then, the mother heart, the great love, is not there to drive the preachers, the sheep will be poorly served.”

Amen! And may the Lord grant a fresh baptism of this sort of love for the people of God. Then there will be a decrease in the treating of God’s people as merely steps on a ladder and more awareness of them as the people of God “which He obtained with His own blood” (Acts 20:28).

The Man Who Laid the Egg. Louise A. Vernon (Herald Press, 1977), pb. 118 pp.

We are currently in a series of Vernon biographies as you can see. In the basics this one delivers as the others. The reader (and listeners!) is introduced to some of the basics in the life and work of Erasmus. As literature one ought not expect too much.

The story is told from the perspective of Gerhard Koestler, a (fictional) young man coming of age in Germany in the early 1500’s. Gerhard, born to a noble family but orphaned, runs away when his uncle decides to force him into a monastery. Gerhard wants to go to the University to learn and especially to learn the sort of things which Erasmus encourages. Eventually he ends up in the household of Erasmus having opportunity to learn from and observe the great man.

This volume, I think, is more disjointed and harder to follow than the others. There is less natural flow and it is more difficult (for me and then more so for my younger listeners) to keep up with the various characters who appear rapidly and often. In some defense, it must be difficult to construct a biography like this with perhaps little information for constructing a narrative while trying to connect with a younger audience.

The picture of Erasmus which emerges is interesting. In general it is the picture given by J. I. Packer and others- a brilliant man who did much good but in the end was hampered by a certain constitutional weakness and timidity. The author seems to desire to provide a basically positive picture while also dealing with Erasmus’ evasiveness. We are currently reading Mrs. Vernon’s bio of Luther and it is my hunch that her sympathies (like mine) lie more with Luther than Erasmus. It was a bit confusing to my boys at times to figure out whether Erasmus was good or bad. Of course this arises from having only two clearly defined categories- a good starting point, which then has to be developed to handle the nuances of real life. In the end I think they were able to see the parts of Erasmus that we would admire and the parts that we would not. It is important for a parent to know, though, that this sort of clarification and evaluation is not given in the book. So you will need to be prepared to do this yourself.

Lastly, as I mentioned before it would be nice to have a brief note on who is historical and who is not. I was not sure if the printer, Froben, was historical or not though he was mentioned enough that I thought he probably was. Then one night during the time we were reading this book I found on ebay a 16th century copy of a book by Erasmus which stated that it was printed by Froben! That was a fun discovery.

I am currently deriving much benefit and pleasure (not mutually exclusive categories by any means!) from reading essays by C. S. Lewis collected in On Stories and Other Essays on Literature. I hope to write several things arising from reflections on this book. Here though I want to focus on a line from Lewis found in a transcript of a conversation held between him and two author friends. Along the way Lewis brought up the point that a certain person demanded “moral earnestness” but Lewis himself preferred “morality.” He explained:
“I’d sooner live among people who don’t cheat at cards than among people who are earnest about not cheating at cards.”
His response brought appropriate laughter. Indeed we know of situations where people substitute earnestness for something for actually doing that thing. What good is it to say you really care about being honest if in fact you are not honest.

This point, ready for many helpful applications, reminded me of a phenomenon I observed at the SBC. There was great earnestness about “expository preaching.” Quite often expository preaching was extolled and encouraged; and each time such statements were met with enthusiastic applause. However, we rarely if ever saw any example of expository preaching actually being done. I fear we are those who are earnest about expository preaching but not those who are actually doing it. I for one would certainly rather have a pastor who preaches expositionaly than one who was simply earnest about it.

Brothers, it will not do simply to extol expository preaching. We must actually do it. Taking up a certain verse, even verses in order though a book does not itself insure expositional preaching. We must approach a text asking what the text itself (as written by the author) intends to say and we must then apply that message to our people. We simply may not take texts to say what we desire to say- no matter how orthodox the statements we desire to make. Truly expositional preaching is rooted in the idea that in Scripture God speaks inerrantly. Thus, what matters is what the text itself says. Who cares what sort of creative thing you might be able to come up with! It is practical nonsense to extol inerrancy and then ignore what a passage says in context for what you want it to say. Inerrancy becomes irrelevant when the message is more dependent on the preacher’s ideas than the text itself- for the preacher himself is not inerrant! No, we must preach the text and not creative concoctions, dreams, rhetorical flourishes or anything else. Let us not merely be earnest about expository preaching but let us do it.

For more on true expositional preaching see especially this interview with Phillip Jensen, and these other articles from 9 Marks Ministries.

A number of people have asked me how our little girl, now 8 weeks old, is doing. She is doing quite well, and her brothers adore her. Our only problem with the boys is that they all want to always be holding, kissing, touching or helping her. They take much pride in calling themselves her “Mighty Protectors.” In fact this role of theirs was the main topic of conversation as they came to the hospital to see her for the first time. As we have talked over time about the role of men, I have emphasized to them that being a man entails protecting women and children.

Then, in our first day home I overheard Jonathan (our third, 6 yrs old) talking to Benjamin (our fourth, 4 yrs old) while they both peered over the crib at their new baby sister. Jonathan was instructing Benjamin, in his younger child voice, once more on their role as Abigail’s protectors. I listened in as he simply passed on the instruction he has heard. Then, though, Jonathan moved to his own application. He said, What this [being her protectors] means is this: If someone comes in the house to get her - I thought to myself, “We have not talked about this.” He continued, in his attempted baby voice, “If someone comes in the house to get her, this is what we do. We get a metal bat and we take care of them.” It was all simple matter-of-fact. I stifled my chuckle so they would not hear me, and I also thought, “Way to go!” While we had not addressed this specific scenario, he really understood that he was to do what he could to protect his baby sister (I had primarily envisioned protecting her from sharp objects, falls, etc.!).

Now, what does this have to do with the pastorate? Well, just as men in general today do not think often enough about our role as protectors, so also there is a lack of consideration of the pastor’s role as protector. But, this is certainly a key aspect of our role. Paul’s description of the pastor in Titus 1 closes with:

holding fast the faithful word which is in accordance with the teaching, so that he will be able both to exhort in sound doctrine and to refute those who
contradict. (v9)

The reason for this qualification is seen immediately in 1:10f. Pastors need to be the sort of men who can refute false teachers because false teachers are around and they will cause trouble unless they are dealt with. This is also in view when Paul exhorted the Ephesians elders:

“Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood. I know that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; and from among your own selves men will arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them. Therefore be on the alert, remembering that night and day for a period of three years I did not cease to admonish each one with tears’ (Acts 20:28-31)

You cannot serve the church as pastor if you are unwilling to confront error for the good of the church. Those who cower at danger or try to say these issues are not their concern show themselves hirelings and cowards. The true shepherd is willing to give his life for his flock. Surely here we are to imitate the pattern of the Chief Shepherd who said:

I am the good shepherd; the good shepherd lays down His life for the sheep. He who is a hired hand, and not a shepherd, who is not the owner of the sheep, sees the wolf coming, and leaves the sheep and flees, and the wolf snatches them and scatters them. He flees because he is a hired hand and is not concerned about the sheep. (John 10:11-13)

The hireling mentality is too easily encouraged today. The hireling thinks more of his next move, of his reputation, his advancement. The shepherd loves his flock and is ready to die for them. This is not the creating of unnecessary conflict (as some take it). This is love in action, and can only really emerge as we establish close knit community where pastors are not CEO’s or simply hired guns but rather members of the community, the family, who have been called out for service. Brothers, let us protect the church.