The Vows of a PCA Minister

1. Do you believe the Scriptures of the Old and New
Testaments, as originally given, to be the inerrant Word of
God, the only infallible rule of faith and practice?

2. Do you sincerely receive and adopt the Confession of Faith and
the Catechisms of this Church, as containing the system of
doctrine taught in the Holy Scriptures; and do you further
promise that if at any time you find yourself out of accord with
any of the fundamentals of this system of doctrine, you
will on your own initiative, make known to your Presbytery
the change which has taken place in your views since the
assumption of this ordination vow?

3. Do you approve of the form of government and discipline of
the Presbyterian Church in America, in conformity with the
general principles of Biblical polity?

4. Do you promise subjection to your brethren in the Lord?

5. Have you been induced, as far as you know your own heart,
to seek the office of the holy ministry from love to God and a
sincere desire to promote His glory in the Gospel of His Son?

6. Do you promise to be zealous and faithful in maintaining the
truths of the Gospel and the purity and peace and unity of
the Church, whatever persecution or opposition may arise
unto you on that account?

7. Do you engage to be faithful and diligent in the exercise of all
your duties as a Christian and a minister of the Gospel, whether
personal or relational, private or public; and to endeavor by the
grace of God to adorn the profession of the Gospel in your
manner of life, and to walk with exemplary piety before the
flock of which God shall make you overseer?

8. Are you now willing to take the charge of this church,
agreeable to your declaration when accepting their call?
And do you, relying upon God for strength, promise to
discharge to it the duties of a pastor?

A Minister's Prayer

O my Lord,

Let not my ministry be approved only by men,

or merely win the esteem and affections of people;

But do the work of grace in their hearts,

Call in thy elect,

Seal and edify the regenerate ones,

And command eternal blessings on their souls

Save me from self-opinion and self-seeking;

Water the hearts of those who hear thy Word,

That seed sown in weakness may be raised in power

Cause me and those that hear me

To behold thee in the light of special faith,

And hereafter in the blaze of endless glory;

Make my every sermon a means of grace to myself,

And help me to experience the power of dying love,

For thy lood is balm,

Thy presence bliss,

Thy Smile heaven

Thy cross the place where truth and mercy meet

Look upon the doubts and discouragements of my ministry

And keep me from self-importance;

I beg pardon for my many sins, omissions, infirmities

As a man, as a minister;

Command thy blessing on my weak, unworthy labors

And on the message of salvation given;

Stay with thy people

And may thy presence be their portion and mine

When I preach to others let not my words be merely elegant and masterly,

My reasoning polished and refined,

My performance powerless and tasteless,

But may I exalt thee and humble sinners.

O Lord of power and grace,

All hearts are in thy hands

All events at thy disposal,

Set the seal of thy almighty will upon my ministry.

-from Valley of Vision (A Minister's Prayer) pg 338

On Grief

I've worked as a Chaplain in a Hospital for about a year and have been present for, by my count, about 50 deaths. In processing and attempting to glean some spiritual fruits from the contemplation of death and the finitude of life I have not found very many good resources. I do have a new appreciation for the book of Job, Psalms 13, 22 and 88 and Ecclesiastes. The one exception of a good book outside of the Bible is "Facing Grief." This book was originally titled "A Token for Mourners," written by John Flavel. This English minister experienced the death of a child and his first wife, second wife and third wife. Flavel is one of the few to capture what I have seen with parents: "To bury a child, any child, rends the heart of a tender parent; for what are children, but the parent multiplied? A child is a part of the parent made up in another skin."

Flavel was a man acquainted with grief and so a man whom those in grief can expect not only a true and faithful voice, but one that is appropriately gentle. "Facing Grief" both affirms the necessary place for grief in the lives of believers as well as warning against excessively entertaining grief. As a person experiences the death of a loved one, Flavel gives comfort to the believer and warning to the unbeliever. It took me a while to find something, but if one is looking personally or has been asked for a book on grief, Flavel's book is a great one, especially after the shock has passed and the heavy-hearted reflections begin.

The first paragraph:

"To be above the stroke of passions is a condition equal to angels; to be in a state of sorrow without the sense of sorrow is a disposition beneath beasts; but duly to regulate our sorrows and bound our passions under the rod is the wisdom, duty, and excellency of a Christian. He who is without natural affections is deservedly ranked among the worst heathens; and he who is able rightly to manage them deserves to be numbered with the best of Christians. Though when we are sanctified we put on the divine nature, yet, till we are glorified, we put not off the infirmities of our human nature."

Facing Grief - John Flavel - wtsbooks.com

Facing Grief - John Flavel - Amazon.com

What I learned from DTS (and what I didn't learn)

Dallas Theological Seminary has a reputation. Most Protestants in the United States have heard of it and have some opinions about it. Many positive, many negative. Of course, in this world little is either all good or all bad. A year after graduating from seminary as I labor within the church and in hospital life as a Chaplain, and I have had a little time to reflect back on what I believe I was given in seminary that was helpful, what I was given that was not helpful, and what was noticeably absent. I have changed since I entered, entering as a "non-denominational" Christian looking to teach in a school, and exiting as Presbyterian, recently licensed and serving as a Chaplain, looking to pastor in the church.

This is not an advertisement for, nor a tearing down of the seminary, but rather a personal reflection on what was useful about the seminary experience as it related to being thrown into the ministry experience.

First, the positive:

1) Language and Exegetical tools

No one leaves DTS with a Th.M. without knowing Greek and Hebrew grammar and why making a case for the meaning of a text only in the English is unacceptable in the academic world (or sometimes, even in the world of the pulpit, for right or wrong). Although this was a struggle and certainly not the most fun part of seminary, it is a necessary cross for every minister to bear. DTS certainly offered me this in spades.

2) Theological Framework

Six courses in Theology (101-Introduction, 102-Trinitarianism, 103-Anthropology, 104-Soteriology, 105-Sanctification/Ecclesiology, 106-Eschatology) made sure we at least received an introduction to many of the topics we will encounter in Scripture and Theology. I was surprised, when interacting with those in an ecumenical environment, that a solid theological language was not a priority at many other seminaries (with the local exception of Westminster Dallas/Redeemer).

3) General Biblical Knowledge

Although I complained that some of the Bible courses seemed like Bible Trivia prep, the characters and important events and geography of the Bible were seared on my mind. This often helps connect stories of personal experience to the Scriptures. It set the stage for the life-long study of Biblical Theology.

Second What I Learned that was not helpful

4) Value for the Facts over the Pastoral. (A false Facts vs Pastoral dichotomy)

I had professors that I otherwise adored who seemed to revel in giving the "hard answer" over the comfortable answer. This isn't necessarily bad. Sometimes this was a needed way to shock us into telling the truth rather than just what people want to hear, to be prophetic and not just therapeutic. However, sometimes this was the equivalent to giving a snake when our congregation asked for bread. Pastors should be able to speak the truth in love, not merely smack people with truth. The Truth is pastoral, there is not a balance or a choice, but a marriage, and divorce on either side is not helpful.

Finally, what I wish I learned (what was absent and I have had to learn on my own):

5) Worship.

Anything about Worship. The nature, the order, theories about worship. A definition even. Something other than a value of the "experience" of worship. Also what would have been helpful is how to put together a worship service, what are the elements (heck, what "elements" are in worship would have been helpful). The exception to this would be the Spiritual Formation department's classes (which are not required) that did focus on the formative aspect of worship.

6) Pastoral Care.

Not basics in Pastoral Counseling. Counseling classes almost exclusively focused on pre-martial counseling, with some attention to getting sinners to stop sinning. Pastoral Ministry classes were focused on preaching and evangelism. Not much required on suffering, how to listen, how to analyze both theologically and psychologically, nothing on the value of "shutting up," or even being there/present.

7) a coherent theology of sanctification -

I took 3 or 4 courses where sanctification was a major component. When you get 3 evangelicals together, it seems you will have 4 models of sanctification. None of the models seemed to have as much in common with Scripture as it did with revivalistic American evangelicalism. It seemed like those who drank in the classroom sanctification material ended up with a higher life or even semi-charismatic spirituality. Unfortunately, little seemed to be said about the role of the community or the church in spiritual formation. (again, exception with the Spiritual Formation Department, whose classes -again- are not required. Most of my practical views on sanctification have come from John Owen.)

Finally) a focus on the Gospel

The organizing construct seemed to be getting as much info on theology and the bible as possible. The shining exception would be classes I took with Dr. Svigel, where he consistently made Christ the center of all theology, whether Eschatology, Ecclessiology or Bibliology. I loved once hearing him take exception to Piper's title of his book: "God is the Gospel." No, Christ his person and work are the Gospel. [I think Piper believes that, but the book title doesn't flesh that all out] I was thankful for this, but wish it was the consistent focus of the seminary and course structure.

Conclusion

Currently, I am in an environment where other ministers have gone to various other seminaries. What I note in comparison is I believe I was given a wonderful preparation in exegesis, knowledge of biblical material, and an ability to engage theology critically and deeply (I would judge that preparation as superior to most of the seminary backgrounds I encounter). However, I was given very little preparation for pastoral care, engaging humbly and humanly with another person (rather than a book), or preparation to talk to suffering people with a mind towards spiritual care. Some professors took an interest in integrating the pastoral into the theoretical (I would cite Dr. John Hannah and Dr. Barry Jones as shining examples) but the course direction itself did not have these things in mind.

I appreciate the cultivating of the mind and languages I received, but have realized I have entered a new classroom of the real world. In this classroom, knowing the reality of the Greek text is important, but so is knowing the reality of the fallen world, the human soul, and the joys and griefs of this world, and the Glory of God as revealed in the face of Jesus Christ. In this course of study, however, I don't think anyone will hand me a paper at any point, while I am still alive, that claims that I have graduated.

New Book on the Pastor-Theologian

"The Pastor as Scholar and The Scholar as Pastor"

I haven't read a word of this book beyond the cover, but from the looks of it, the book addresses one of my big soap box issues, namely, that every Pastor must be a Theologian, and every Theologian must be a Pastor. Theologians who do not realize their responsibility to the church merely play with theology as a toy and point of arrogant jewelry to show off their inflated sense of importance. Every Pastor who does not realize their responsibility to careful and accurate theology endanger the souls and growth of their congregation from their own laziness or dangerous disregard for the skill to use their scalpel in being a physician of souls. This title, by two men I have some measure of respect for, is going on my wish list.

Original Sin, Pastoral Care, and the Courage to Speak Truth

I've met a similar scene multiple times: I enter a room where a mother is holding a small, blanket-wrapped package. The room is thick with grief; the mother crying and the husband with a look of stress on his face. I am there to talk about what they want to do with the remains of their miscarried child. It was in those moments that some of the discussions I had earlier in some seminary classrooms came back to mind, much to my displeasure and a bit to my anger.

In two theology classes, two different professors brought up the subject of infant death and salvation. In both professors, the doctrine of Original Sin loomed large, sufficient to damn from the moment of birth. When asked about infants that die, one replied, “I know you won't like it, but you have to have the courage to say that they are sinful, without faith, and therefore, under any criteria we can measure, condemned.” The argument was that if you allow for one instance of salvation without faith, you are soon on the road to universalism, then atheism, all over the question of if infants that die are damned.

The question I asked then was about 2 Samuel 12, where David's son dies at seven days old (a day before circumcision). When informed of the death, David replies “Can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he will not return to me.” (2 Samuel 12:23) I was then informed that was a bad text to use, partly because the son died for David's sin and David was merely talking about the place of the dead, and judgment occurs later, where we would assume they will be parted again with David heading heavenward and the infant, towards damnation. The answer seemed at the time a poor one, for it seemed to dismiss rather than explain the reaction of David. Who would be happy to briefly see their child again before they are ushered off to hell? Was that David's relief?

Here, I stood before a woman and father who had just lost a child, even before seven days. They did not care to hear about my former professor's “courage” in declaring the probable damnation of their child or dismissal of David's source of hope. The pastoral comment I often told believers was, with that most inappropriate text rolling around my mind, was something along the lines of: "though he won't return to be with you, know you will go to meet him someday."

My first professor may not be happy that I used the very text he warned us not to use, but he wasn't in the room. I do remember the same discussion in another class with a bit of a different answer from my other professor. He said faith seems to be what the Scripture always tells us we ought to have to be assured of salvation. Yet, salvation also involves God's election/choice and his grace. This other professor ended the question by saying he wouldn't answer the question definitively, because it wasn't his decision to make. Original Sin is sufficient to damn, God's grace is sufficient to save.

The question seems not to be between “courage” and "weakness" but between presumption and humility. The second seems much more appropriate for pastoral care. It is also where the Westminster Confession comes out where in Ch 10.3 it states: “Elect infants, dying in infancy, are regenerated, and saved by Christ, through the Spirit, who worketh when, and where, and how he pleaseth:” No observable faith is mentioned and I don't think the Westminster Confession is an inclusivist document or on the road to universalism because it allows for salvation without observable faith. God needs no permission or logical justification from us to save whom he will, whether we see faith, or give the child the sign of the covenant.

Indeed, Jesus often seems to welcome children and especially the children of believers well before they have an observable faith by which to respond. Mothers bring, carry even, babies to Jesus to touch/bless (Luke 18:15-17). Fascinating to me is that Jesus did not reject these little heathens. He did not ask the mothers to delay until they had faith and could be proven disciples, but just blessed the babies as these mothers wanted. Would we wish to say that Jesus lacked the courage to correct these mothers in their ignorant theology which valued the children of believers as blessable and valuable, and as belonging to the kingdom of heaven?

David's words about going to his son were spoken before his son was circumcised, before his son had observable faith, and with a hope that was unexplainable if he thought his son to be damned. The same man who declared his culpability from conception (Psalm 51) also declares his hope for his son (2 Samuel 12). And when walking into a room of grieving parents, when being a pastor to those parents that lose children, I can't say that God saves all children. But I can't say God damns them either. I can say: David had a hope, Christ welcomed the children of believers and we are called to trust God's goodness and election. These together give me a strong inclination to share David's hope for the reunion of believers and their departed infant children.

A Reflection: The Pastor and the Theologian

Problem: An Academic Theologian chaffing under the requirement to be confessionally, theologically orthodox at a Christian Seminary when studying academic subjects.

Problem: A pastor that sentimentalizes his sermons with no regard to theological content.

Attempted Answer in Axiom: Every theologian must be a pastor, and every pastor must be a theologian.

Both of these problems are weeds from the same rotten soil: The loss of the concept of the pastor-theologian. Today, seminaries and Christians will divorce the academy and the church. One can argue that one is academically focused, and therefore should be free from the limits of orthodoxy. Another can argue they are going into ministry and thus are not as concerned with theology as they are with people.

Both of these people have divorced what should not be divorced. Every theologian should be a pastor, and every pastor should be a theologian. The theologian has a responsibility to orthodoxy, not mere learning. The pastor has a responsibility to right teaching, not merely people.

The theologian who is not a pastor is often arrogant, self-directed, and enamored with novelty and notoriety. The pastor who is not a theologian is often intellectually lazy, a poor shepherd of the mind and injurious as often as nurturing to his flock. The academic-only has no regard for the spiritual life of the flock, and kicks at all authority put over them, be it the confines of orthodoxy or the severe judgment that awaits them from God. The pastor-only chaffs at real authority that is given to them, rejecting their authority over the flock and thrives on sentimentality, taking offense at any challenge to the rightness of their feelings.

However, the academic theologian will always be too proud to submit to the authority of Scripture and the church, and the pastor-only will always be too proud to admit their deficiencies in feeding the flock. Both can only be changed by the humiliation and convicting work of the Spirit. May they both be brought to repentance that we might worship God truly with our mind. May we be brought to repentance when we reject correction of our hubris against the limits of orthodoxy and the high call to the office of pastor-elder.

Reformed Pastor: Sermons must first be preached to one's self

Richard Baxter gave a series of talks to pastors in England from Independent, Presbyterian and Anglican Churches. They were intended to address the manner in which a pastor should be reformed by the Scriptures and God in order to form his congregation. Here is a selection of one imperative for pastors:

"Content not yourselves with being in a state of grace, but be also careful that your graces are kept in vigorous and lively exercise, and that you preach to yourselves the sermons which you study, before you preaching them to others. If you did this for your own sakes, it would not be lost labour; but I am speaking to you upon the public account, that you would do it for the sake of the Church, When you minds are in a holy, heavenly frame, your people are likely to partake of the fruits of it. Your prayers, and praises, and doctrine will be sweet and heavenly to them. They will likely feel when you have been much with God: that which is most on your hearts, is like to be most in their ears. I confess I must speak it by lamentable experience, that I publish to my flock the distempers of my own soul. When I let my heart grow cold, my preaching is cold; and when it is confused, my preaching is confused; and so I can oft observe also in the best of my hearers, that when I have grown cold in preaching, they have grown cold too; and the next prayers which I have heard from them have been too like my preaching. We are the nurses of Christ's little ones. If we forbear taking food ourselves, we shall famish them; it will soon be visible in their leanness and dull discharge of their several duties. If we let our love decline, we are not like to raise up theirs. If we abate our holy care and fear, it will appear in our preaching; if the matter show it not, the manner will. If we feed on unwholesome food, either errors or fruitless controversies, our hearers are like to fare the worse for it. Whereas, if we abound in faith and love and zeal, how would it overflow to the refreshing of the congregations, and how would it appear in the increase of the same graces in them! O brethren, watch therefore over your own hearts: keep out lusts and passions, and worldly inclinations; keep up the life of faith, and love and zeal: be much at home and be much with God. If it be not your daily business to study your own hearts, and to subdue corruption, and to walk with God – if you make not this a work to which you constantly attend, all will go wrong, and you will starve your hearers; or, if you have an affected fervency, you cannot expect a blessing to attend it from on high. Above all, be much in secret prayer and meditation. Thence you must fetch the heavenly firethat must kindle your sacrifices: remember, you cannot decline and neglect your duty, to your own hurt alone; many will be losers by it as well as you. For your people's sakes, therefore, look to your hearts. If a pand of spiritual pride should overtake you, and you should fall into any dangerous error, and vent your own inventions to draw away disciples after you, what a wound may this prove to the Church, of which you have the oversight; and you may become a plague to them instead of a blessing, and they may wish they had never seen your faces. Oh, therefore, take heed to your own judgments and affections. Vanity and error will shyly insinuate, and seldom come without fair pretences: great distempers and apostasies have usually small beginnings. The prince of darkness doth frequently personate an angel of light, to draw the children of light again into darkness. How easily also will distempers creep in upon our affections and our first love, and fear and care abate! Watch, therefore, for the sake of yourselves and others.

But, besides this general course of watchfulness, methinks a minister should take some special pains with his heart, before he is to go to the congregation: if it be then cold, how is he likely to warm the hearts of his hearers? Therefore, go then specially to God for life: read some rousing, awakening book, or meditate on the weight of the subject of which you are to speak, and on the great necessity of your people's souls, that you may go in the zeal od the Lord into his house. Maintain in this manner, the life of grace in yourselves, that it may appear in all your sermons from the pulpit, - that every one who comes cold to the assembly, may have some warmth imparted to him before he depart."

-Richard Baxter. The Reformed Pastor. Pg 61-63

What is a Call Anyway?

How does one discern a call? Pastor Tim Keller, in his Q&A session, gives a helpful answer:

Download audio

Parable of the Sower: Some Thoughts.

The parable of the sower (Matthew 13:1-23)

Mat 13:18-23 "Hear then the parable of the sower:
[SOIL 1] When anyone hears the word of the kingdom and does not understand it, the evil one comes and snatches away what has been sown in his heart. This is what was sown along the path.
[SOIL 2] As for what was sown on rocky ground, this is the one who hears the word and immediately receives it with joy, yet he has no root in himself, but endures for a while, and when tribulation or persecution arises on account of the word, immediately he falls away.
[SOIL 3] As for what was sown among thorns, this is the one who hears the word, but the cares of the world and the deceitfulness of riches choke the word, and it proves unfruitful.
[SOIL 4] As for what was sown on good soil, this is the one who hears the word and understands it. He indeed bears fruit and yields, in one case a hundredfold, in another sixty, and in another thirty."


1) Seeds on the Path

The seed never takes root. The seed touches the hearer, but is immediately taken away, forgotten. The hearer is apathetic. They sit under the preached Word and think about what's for lunch. WHY NO FRUIT?: “Never understood.” Never considered. Though details of life, finances, stories, their own self-interests are worthy of their thought and mental energies, the importance of the words of their Creator and God are things of indifference.

2) Seeds on the rocky ground

The person takes hold of the word “immediately” and with “joy.” This may be an emotional conversion. Emotion is not bad. This phrase of receiving with joy is used elsewhere positively. Yet here, it is not directed emotion. They have no root in them. Most commentators like to play on Christ being called “the root” and point out, Christ is not the root of this person's emotion or point out there is nothing but the emotion to sustain it. WHY NO FRUIT?: Hardship. Trial. The acceptance of the word was based on a false premise. It was excepted in emotion, therefore when the happy times are gone, so is the supposed faith. It is not rooted in truth, but shallow. This is a man of the moment.

3) Seeds among the thorns

This is one that hears, but this is no barren field. There exists something there already: thorns. WHY NO FRUIT: The plant is choked out. The interesting thing is the last soil was plagued by hardship, but this is plagued by “the cares of the world and the deceitfulness of riches.” Not bad times, but good times. Not pain, but pleasure. What was there before survives, but what is planted latter loses out.

4) Seeds on good soil

This one hears, believes, and does care to actually listen, understand and consider the message, has no shallow merely emotional reaction, no previous growth of thorns that is not uprooted. This bears fruit, though not the same for every plant. Some 30, some 60, some 100.

Lesson for the disciples:

The seed will drop and different responses follow. The disciples have seen this when Jesus teaches. They have seen this when they were commissioned to teach on their own. The fact is now lodged in their minds. Now that they know this, they are to learn why.

Paul tells us that the Gospel is the power of God unto salvation. If one does not believe, the disciples would be tempted to doubt the message. Maybe something else will sell. Look at the big churches, Osteen, etc. maybe their message is better because they have larger responses. No. Non-reception is no indication of the truth of the message and the faithfulness of the disciples in preaching it.

The disciples were commissioned with a very specific job. Their job was to preach the message. Their job was not to make people believe. Their faithfulness and success was not based on the number of people that believed. Their success was determined on their faithfulness to scatter the seed, know and preach the message.

Martin Luther on the parable of the sower:

“Here we see why it is no wonder there are so few true Christians, for all the seed does not fall into good ground, but only the fourth and small part; and that they are not to be trusted who boast they are Christians and praise the teaching of the Gospel; ... All this is spoken for our instruction, that we may not go astray, since so many misuse the Gospel and few lay hold of it aright. True it is unpleasant to preach to those who treat the Gospel so shamefully and even oppose it...What business is it of mine that many do not esteem it? It must be that many are called but few are chosen. For the sake of the good ground that brings forth fruit with patience, the seed must also fall fruitless by the wayside, on the rock and among the thorns; ... For wherever the Gospel goes you will find Christians. "My word shall not return unto me void" (Is. 55:11).”

Did you read and understand that middle sentence? “What business is it of mine that many do not esteem it?” Luther knew his job. Not the response, but the message.

LESSON: Preach the Gospel, share the gospel, knowing that the response is not our job.

In explaining this, I am going to try and maintain two truths explained here in tension. So let me explain both before judging.

Lets also answer the difficult question: Which of the soils are saved?

A perspective from an article in a Christian periodical: “The Lord divides the responsiveness of people in four categories. One group rejects Christ and never comes to faith. A second group comes to faith and then later falls away from Christ. A third group comes to faith and maintains their Christian profession till the end, but have limited fruitfulness in their Christian life. And a fourth group maintains their Christian profession to the end and bring forth much mature fruit.”

Their conclusion: “The first group is lost, the last three soils are saved.”

The justification of saying this?

The last three soils "received" or believed in the narrative. If salvation is by faith, then those who believe are saved.

Then we must ask: is it Biblical to say one can believe in a sense and not be saved? Don't we believe in salvation by faith alone? If one can believe and not be saved, does one then argue for salvation by works?

Consider:

Jas 2:19 You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe--and shudder!

Demons believe. Are they saved? Of course not.

James speaks of a dead faith and that “that faith will not save you.” The opposite of dead non-saving faith is living saving faith. Our theology and how we view the world requires us to have a category of false profession, of dead non-saving belief. Of a person that has something of a faith, but is not finally saved. James says, there is a type of faith that “will not save him.” It is not true saving faith. This is the faith of demons, and juxaposed to the faith of the saints.

How do you tell the difference between the faith of demons and the faith of the saints? What is the evidence?

Matt 12:33 "Either make the tree good and its fruit good, or make the tree bad and its fruit bad, for the tree is known by its fruit."

This is the same thing James says. The distinguishing outer quality is the fruit. If there is fruit, it is saving faith. If there is no fruit, there is no saving faith. And this is what is difficult in saying, because then it sounds like works are required. Don't we believe in “faith alone”? That's something I have struggled with. Because we know Paul says it is not by works, but faith apart from works. I think it would help to remind ourselves of the pure free gracious offer of the gospel, and where works come in. A good way to think about salvation is by two different aspects:

Payment and Renewal
Purchase and Renovation
Justification and Sanctification.

The work of God in our lives is two fold. Some call it the duplex gratia. It is essential to distinguish these two, but not to separate them. One: God redeems us by the merits of Christ, no works of our own. Two: God changes us by the Spirit, causing us to do works consistent with New Life. The work God does in us is not payment. The payment is not dependent on our works. Justification is an event with no work from us. [The Catechism calls it an act of God Q33]. Sanctification is a process, done to us resulting in us doing good works. As Ephesians 2:10 says, “we are God's workmanship created for good works” - the Catechism calls this a work of God Q35].

Another way it has been described is that we are saved by faith alone, but the faith that saves is never alone. For God NEVER Justifies a sinner, without also beginning the work of Sanctification. Paul says all who God justifies, He also glorifies, (Romans 8:30) and sanctification is not an option along that course, and sanctification bears fruit, evidencing the goodness of the tree.

TRUTH 1: ONLY THE FOURTH SOIL, THAT BEARS FRUIT, IS SAVED.

Now follow me with another truth we must keep in tension. I will illustrate this with an example:
Let me give two models:

The First is called a Christian. That person is involved with other Christians. They even teach others true things about Christ and have a long time they profess to be a Christian. This persons profession is dealing in finances and eventually, with the cares of this world the person gives up their Christianity instead seeking money without really understanding that he can't have both. [Sounds like a Soil 3 person, caught up in the deceitfulness of riches, the soil that seems to have the most hope of accompanying Soil 4 in salvation]

The Second is called a Christian. That person does the same as the first, is involved with other Christians and is bold and teaches others about Christ. This person even seems a little over zealous. Then, when a troubling time comes, the person can't stand it and out loud, something the first person didn't really do, says “I never was a Christian.” [Sounds like a Soil 2 person, coming on tribulation]

Who was the first person I described? The person that looked like soil three, the one we hold out hope for, is Judas Iscariot. The second person, the one that looks like soil two, that we have little hope for? That's Peter.

The next parable in the text is of the wheat and tares. When good crop grows up with bad, servants ask if they should uproot the tares (the bad) out of the field of good (the wheat). The Master replies:

Mat 13:29 But he said, 'No, lest in gathering the weeds you root up the wheat along with them.

Tares and wheat look very similar. It is very hard to tell the difference. In identifying someone as good, they may be bad, and in identifying one as bad, they may be good. Our job is not to be the final judges of the genuineness of someone's faith. We are poor fruit inspectors.

TRUTH 2: TRUE CHRISTIANS MAY LOOK LIKE THE OTHER SOILS

The lesson of the parable is to spread the message indiscriminantly, not to be an expert on who is which soil. We may perceive someone looks like the other soil. Our job then is not to infallibly cast judgments on their eternal state, but work to bring them back. We are commanded to comfort or rebuke a brother in trial or sin, (personally, and as the church with church discipline) BECAUSE we don't know. If they were saved as soil 2 or 3, why bother? Also on the other side, if they can be certainly judged as lost as soil 2 or 3, why bother? This is the reason we place people under church discipline and even excommunicate them from the church, to let them know the seriousness of their situation, to give an opportunity for the Spirit to work and renew the Peters of the world to repentance, bringing them to a place of repentance.

Ultimately, the only One that can guarantee a good soil, a prepared place for the gospel is God by His Spirit. As William Cowper wrote ina hymn on the parable of the sower:

Father of mercies we have need
Of thy preparing grace;
Let the same hand that gives the seed,
Provide a fruitful place.

What is the difference between those that hear and those that don't?

1Co 4:7 For who makes you to differ? And what do you have that you did not receive? And if you received it, why do you boast as if you did not receive?

The message, not the response is our job. The One that gives growth, that makes the one who hears to differ from those that do not, is God, not us.

Doctrine Matters

Out of Ur, published this comic today:


The message seems clear: doctrine doesn't help in bad times. That sentiment is opposed to everything I believe about Christianity and ministry. I imagine the same scene as above, a parishoner calling the pastor, explaining he has cancer and a week to live, and asking "so what were those 4 steps to a victorious happy life?" It immediately reminded me of a post that Jay Bennett wrote a while back. Bennett wrote about an experience to explain about how to measure success in Christian Ministry:

I was out of the office one afternoon making hospital visits with pastor Ron Williams. We visited a long-time member of PCPC at a rehabilitation hospital. He was an elderly man, probably in his 80's, suffering from an intestinal blockage. He was weak, confined to his bed, and had been near death multiple times. As a former lawyer, he was a man of many words. Several times he expressed his appreciation to us for just being there to listen to him talk. As we listened, I was struck by the joy this man had. Even in the midst of great suffering and the imminent threat of death, he had a sweet spirit of thankfulness and gladness. He was content in Christ.

As we left his room that day and walked back to the car, I remember telling Ron what an encouragement it was to witness God's work in this man's life. I believe very few people reach the latter stages of life and endure that level of suffering with contentment. Most become bitter and depressed. This man's joy in the midst of great suffering was a clear testimony of God's unassailable love for him. This is ministerial success: contentment in the midst of suffering. It is reserved for those whom God has chosen to inseparably unite to his Son by faith.

As it is written, “For your sake we are being killed all the day long; we are regarded as sheep to be slaughtered.” No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us. For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord (Romans 8:36-39).