With repentance and conviction over our own personal and corporate sin, particularly for having stirred dissension with a premature motion delivered after Monday night’s meeting, the Session has met and deliberated further on the issues before our church. Having considered the breadth of the situation and our unified desire for the peace and purity of the church, the Session does hereby revise the purpose of the called congregational meeting to begin addressing the myriad of issues brought before us, including Jean F. Larroux, III, but we are not recommending the dissolution of the pastoral relationship with him at this meeting. Furthermore, we are in need of, thankful for and desirous to have further prayer from the congregation in all our deliberations.

SUBMITTED BY BOB GREENMAN, CLERK

The Session will meet again on Monday evening, November 21st and greatly desire your prayers and support for a continued spirit of unity and peace as we begin to make plans for addressing the myriad of issues before us. The called congregational meeting will be held on Sunday, December 4, 2011, in the sanctuary of Southwood Presbyterian Church commencing at 12:30 p.m.

God is at work. His Spirit is moving to bring forgiveness and healing. I personally urge you to work toward, pray for and labor after unity, charity and peace. Let your love be known among all men.

“The fact is, a lot of preaching these days has been unwittingly, unconsciously seduced by moralism. Moralistic preaching only reinforces our inner assumption that our performance for God will impress him to the point of blessing us. A Christian may not struggle with believing that our good behavior is required to initially earn God’s favor; but I haven’t met one Christian who doesn’t struggle daily with believing—somehow, someway— that our good behavior is required to keep God’s favor.

So many contemporary sermons strengthen this slavery to self. “Do more, try harder” is the constant refrain. “Here is what you need to do; you’re not doing it, so get out there and do it.” Many sermons today provide nothing more than a “to do” list, strengthening our bondage to a performance-driven approach to the Christian life. It’s all law (what we must do) and no gospel (what Jesus has done).

The world insists that the bigger we get and the better we feel about ourselves, the freer we become. Absorbing this narcissistic assumption, the modern church is all too often guilty of producing worship services that are little more than motivational, self- help seminars filled with “you can do it” songs and sermons. But what we find in the gospel is just the opposite. The gospel is good news for losers, not winners. It’s for those who long to be freed from the slavery of believing that all of their significance, meaning, purpose, and security depend on their ability to “become a better you.”

Moralistic preaching is stimulated by a fear of the scandalous freedom that gospel grace promotes and promises. The perceived fear is this: if we think too much and talk too much about grace and the radical freedom it brings, we’ll go off the deep end with it. We’ll abuse it. So to balance things out, we need to throw some law in there, to help make sure Christian people walk the straight and narrow.

It’s part of a common misunderstanding in today’s church, which says there are two equal dangers Christians must avoid. On one side of the road is a ditch called “legalism”; on the other is a ditch called “license” or “lawlessness.” Legalism, they say, happens when you focus too much on law, on rules. Lawlessness, they say, happens when you focus too much on grace. Therefore, in order to maintain spiritual equilibrium, you have to balance law and grace. If you start getting too much law, you need to balance it with grace. If you start getting too much grace, you need to balance it with law. This dichotomy exposes our failure to understand gospel grace as it really is; it betrays our blindness to all the radical depth and beauty of grace.

I believe it’s more theologically accurate to say that there is one primary enemy of the gospel—legalism—but it comes in two forms. Some people avoid the gospel and try to “save” themselves by keeping the rules, doing what they’re told, maintaining the standards, and so on (I call this “front-door legalism”). Other
people avoid the gospel and try to “save” themselves by breaking the rules, doing whatever they want, developing their own autonomous standards, and so on (“back-door legalism”).

In other words, there are two “laws” we can choose to live by apart from Christ: the law that says, “I can find freedom and fullness of life if I keep the rules,” and the law that says, “I can find freedom and fullness of life if I break the rules.” Either way, you’re trying to “save” yourself, which means both are legalistic because both are self-salvation projects.

So what some call “license” is just another form of legalism. People outside the church are typically guilty of break-the-rules legalism, while many inside the church are guilty of keep-the- rules legalism.

The biggest lie about grace that Satan wants the church to buy is the idea that it’s dangerous and therefore needs to be kept in check. By believing that lie, we not only prove we don’t understand grace, but we violate gospel advancement in our lives and in the church by perpetuating our own slavery. The truth is, disobedience happens not when we think too much of grace, but when we think too little of it.

As a pastor, one of my responsibilities is to disciple people into a deeper understanding of obedience—teaching them to say no to the things God hates and yes to the things God loves. All too often I’ve wrongly concluded that the only way to keep licentious people in line is to give them more rules—to lay down the law. The fact is, however, the only way licentious people start to obey is when they get a taste of God’s radical, unconditional acceptance of sinners. Grace alone melts hearts and changes us from the inside out. Progress in obedience happens only when our hearts realize that God’s love for us does not depend on our progress in obedience.

A “yes, grace—but” disposition is the kind of fearful posture that keeps moralism swirling around in our hearts and in the church. Subtly, the force of that falsehood gets transferred into sermons in which the driving dynamic is to get Christians behaving properly. Those messages appeal to our self-centered hearts, which are proudly pleased to latch onto such teaching.”

Order @ Crossway.org Ebook $9.99, Hardcover $18.99

Taken from Jesus + Nothing = Everything, Crossway Books 2011, pp.49-52, used without permission

I guess I’m just trying to understand where you think those disciplines fit into our Christian Life.  I’m confused since the majority of the time you mention studying the word, memorizing scripture, prayer, etc. it is in the context of a bad thing:  doing those to solely in an attempt make us acceptable to God.  Undoubtedly there are those that do, but many more who do them for the right reasons.  I know you can’t mean that those disciplines are unimportant since scripture unambiguously teaches us that we are required to do those in order to grow. 

I think I understand where you are going, but as a result of your ridiculing (my perception) and painting the traditional disciplines of the church, as well as the evidences of most signs of righteous living and moral behavior, in a negative light whenever you bring them up, you have, rightly opened yourself up to valid criticism with regard to your teaching of sanctification. 

-SW MEMBER (name withheld, but the letter was signed)

DEAR SW MEMBER-

I am out of town for a couple of weeks. Ironically, I am writing a book that deals with some of the very same things you’ve asked about. I’m going to give you a VERY INCOMPLETE response, but such a thoughtful question deserves more than, ‘Sorry, I’m out of the office.’

Basic premise: In Galatia the CHRISTIANS, who became such by FAITH ALONE were beginning to subtly REST IN their own acts of obedience for their acceptance before God. For them the PARTICULAR work they rested in was CIRCUMCISION. Remember, these were people who were ALREADY converted, engaging in behavior that was Biblically commanded and the danger was that they were beginning to base their standing with God; his acceptance and his love for them on their BEHAVIORAL OBEDIENCE i.e. circumcision RATHER THAN in Christ Alone.

Transition: Fast forward 2,000 years to Huntsville. In order to make legitimate application of the principles in Galatians to us today we have to ask a parallel question: WHAT THINGS (duties, actions, works of obedience) do people who have ALREADY BEEN CONVERTED tend to rest in/trust in for their day to day standing with God; his acceptance and his love for them and in doing so, LIKE THE GALATIAN CHURCH betray FAITH ALONE in CHRIST ALONE. Obviously, circumcision is out. No one is going home to Hampton Cove thinking, “If I circumcise my children according to the Abrahamic Covenant then we will really be ‘sold out’ for the Lord.” There are some denominations where there are things ‘on the books’ if you will that would lend themselves to very clear application i.e. the view of some churches on on Baptism. That is a slam dunk. They teach baptismal regeneration and as such are a perfect example of Paul’s prohibition.

So here’s the exegetical dilemma: Do I stand in the pulpit and beat up on those churches for their views on Baptism or do I ask deeper questions about our own behavior seeking to find areas where WE, REFORMED EVANGELICALS tend to violate the same PRINCIPLE but perhaps in different ways. That has been my aim. Remember circumcision was not something BAD that they cooked up, it was something GOOD which God gave to Abraham and his children that had ‘taken on a whole new life’ because of the trust and rest that BELIEVERS were placing in it.

Soooooo, where does that leave us? At this point you should have already connected the dots. What GOOD, God-given things do we at Southwood tend to do ‘for God’ but ultimately have a tendency to rest in/find our worth in? The answer is clear. It is the so-called spiritual disciplines and the so-called ‘means of grace.’ We tend to rely on Christ Alone for our ULTIMATE acceptance before God, but on a day to day basis those GOOD things become the ‘field reports’ used to gauge the health/sickness of our relationship. It just isn’t so. All of those things: Prayer, Bible Study, Quiet Times, Accountability groups, Mission trips, etc. can be VERY GOOD THINGS but when we rest in/trust in those things then they become more like CIRCUMCISION than acts of true Christian piety.

I could/should insert here a list of diagnostic questions to help identify motives and root causes for behavior and when those ‘good’ things become bad. (I will do that more in the future) Ultimately it is all going to come down to the heart and WHY we do what we do. It is telling that Paul who argues so vehemently AGAINST circumcision in Galatians and in Acts later on in Acts actually CIRCUMCISES Timothy. That is either the height of hypocrisy or something else. The reason for circumcising Timothy was to avoid being a stumbling block to the Jews where they were going to minister next. That is SO VERY instructive. When CIRCUMCISION was trusted in/rested upon for worth/identity and value then it was from the DEVIL, but when THE SAME EXACT BEHAVIOR was treated as morally neutral behavior THEN it was profitable to the furthering of the Kingdom.

I hope this helps a bit. Understanding that grid you should go back and listen to some of the messages that bothered you the most. I think you will find that what I am saying here is consistent with the application made. With regard to criticism, it is part of the job and I don’t mind it from you or anyone else. It really provides an opportunity to speak more clearly, provide further clarification and to make sure that we are certain about where we are disagreeing without being disagreeable.

P.S. I loved your use of ‘unambiguously teaches’....AMEN! I just happen to think that the Bible UNAMBIGUOUSLY teaches both the value of embracing those things and the danger of resting in them!

Blessings,
Jean

James Parker, our lead musician sent me the text of this song last week. Of all the songs ever written about either I am convinced that this would be a favorite of both. I could definitely see the Younger Brother in Luke 15 writing a song like this if the story had been set in modern times…

George Jones and Jesus are two heros of mine.
One is only human but the other one divine.
When I could not find a friend I found out that I had two.
George Jones and Jesus pulled me through.

When a man is on the bottom he may not cry for help.
But he needs to know he’s not alone in hell all by himself.
Those songs old George was singing they some how eased the hurt.
And Jesus did not turn me out when a bar room was my church.

Chorus:
George Jones and Jesus are two heros of mine.
One is only human but the other one divine.
When I could not find a friend I found out that I had two.
George Jones and Jesus pulled me through.

The possum ain’t no savior, but he never claimed to be.
And Jesus hung out with a crowd of trouble souls just liked me.
Now you can’t find a George Jones classic, in a big black book of hymns.
Oh but I’m living proof that Jesus saves in a smoky place like this.

Chorus:
George Jones and Jesus are two heros of mine.
One is only human but the other one divine.
When I could not find a friend I found out that I had two.
George Jones and Jesus pulled me through.

George Jones and Jesus….

See Also: Martin Luther posts 95 theses. (2011). The History Channel website. Retrieved 8:25, October 19, 2011, from http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/martin-luther-posts-95-theses.

THE 95 THESES by Martin Luther

  1. When our Lord and Master Jesus Christ said, “Repent” (Mt 4:17), he willed the entire life of believers to be one of repentance.

  2. This word cannot be understood as referring to the sacrament of penance, that is, confession and satisfaction, as administered by the clergy.

  3. Yet it does not mean solely inner repentance; such inner repentance is worthless unless it produces various outward mortification of the flesh.

  4. The penalty of sin remains as long as the hatred of self (that is, true inner repentance), namely till our entrance into the kingdom of heaven.

  5. The pope neither desires nor is able to remit any penalties except those imposed by his own authority or that of the canons.

  6. The pope cannot remit any guilt, except by declaring and showing that it has been remitted by God; or, to be sure, by remitting guilt in cases reserved to his judgment. If his right to grant remission in these cases were disregarded, the guilt would certainly remain unforgiven.

  7. God remits guilt to no one unless at the same time he humbles him in all things and makes him submissive to the vicar, the priest.

  8. The penitential canons are imposed only on the living, and, according to the canons themselves, nothing should be imposed on the dying.

  9. Therefore the Holy Spirit through the pope is kind to us insofar as the pope in his decrees always makes exception of the article of death and of necessity.

  10. Those priests act ignorantly and wickedly who, in the case of the dying, reserve canonical penalties for purgatory.

  11. Those tares of changing the canonical penalty to the penalty of purgatory were evidently sown while the bishops slept (Mt 13:25).

  12. In former times canonical penalties were imposed, not after, but before absolution, as tests of true contrition.

  13. The dying are freed by death from all penalties, are already dead as far as the canon laws are concerned, and have a right to be released from them.

  14. Imperfect piety or love on the part of the dying person necessarily brings with it great fear; and the smaller the love, the greater the fear.

  15. This fear or horror is sufficient in itself, to say nothing of other things, to constitute the penalty of purgatory, since it is very near to the horror of despair.

  16. Hell, purgatory, and heaven seem to differ the same as despair, fear, and assurance of salvation.

  17. It seems as though for the souls in purgatory fear should necessarily decrease and love increase.

  18. Furthermore, it does not seem proved, either by reason or by Scripture, that souls in purgatory are outside the state of merit, that is, unable to grow in love.

  19. Nor does it seem proved that souls in purgatory, at least not all of them, are certain and assured of their own salvation, even if we ourselves may be entirely certain of it.

  20. Therefore the pope, when he uses the words “plenary remission of all penalties,” does not actually mean “all penalties,” but only those imposed by himself.

  21. Thus those indulgence preachers are in error who say that a man is absolved from every penalty and saved by papal indulgences.

  22. As a matter of fact, the pope remits to souls in purgatory no penalty which, according to canon law, they should have paid in this life.

  23. If remission of all penalties whatsoever could be granted to anyone at all, certainly it would be granted only to the most perfect, that is, to very few.

  24. For this reason most people are necessarily deceived by that indiscriminate and high-sounding promise of release from penalty.

  25. That power which the pope has in general over purgatory corresponds to the power which any bishop or curate has in a particular way in his own diocese and parish.

  26. The pope does very well when he grants remission to souls in purgatory, not by the power of the keys, which he does not have, but by way of intercession for them.

  27. They preach only human doctrines who say that as soon as the money clinks into the money chest, the soul flies out of purgatory.

  28. It is certain that when money clinks in the money chest, greed and avarice can be increased; but when the church intercedes, the result is in the hands of God alone.

  29. Who knows whether all souls in purgatory wish to be redeemed, since we have exceptions in St. Severinus and St. Paschal, as related in a legend.

  30. No one is sure of the integrity of his own contrition, much less of having received plenary remission.

  31. The man who actually buys indulgences is as rare as he who is really penitent; indeed, he is exceedingly rare.

  32. Those who believe that they can be certain of their salvation because they have indulgence letters will be eternally damned, together with their teachers.

  33. Men must especially be on guard against those who say that the pope’s pardons are that inestimable gift of God by which man is reconciled to him.

  34. For the graces of indulgences are concerned only with the penalties of sacramental satisfaction established by man.

  35. They who teach that contrition is not necessary on the part of those who intend to buy souls out of purgatory or to buy confessional privileges preach unchristian doctrine.

  36. Any truly repentant Christian has a right to full remission of penalty and guilt, even without indulgence letters.

  37. Any true Christian, whether living or dead, participates in all the blessings of Christ and the church; and this is granted him by God, even without indulgence letters.

  38. Nevertheless, papal remission and blessing are by no means to be disregarded, for they are, as I have said (Thesis 6), the proclamation of the divine remission.

  39. It is very difficult, even for the most learned theologians, at one and the same time to commend to the people the bounty of indulgences and the need of true contrition.

  40. A Christian who is truly contrite seeks and loves to pay penalties for his sins; the bounty of indulgences, however, relaxes penalties and causes men to hate them—at least it furnishes occasion for hating them.

  41. Papal indulgences must be preached with caution, lest people erroneously think that they are preferable to other good works of love.

  42. Christians are to be taught that the pope does not intend that the buying of indulgences should in any way be compared with works of mercy.

  43. Christians are to be taught that he who gives to the poor or lends to the needy does a better deed than he who buys indulgences.

  44. Because love grows by works of love, man thereby becomes better. Man does not, however, become better by means of indulgences but is merely freed from penalties.

  45. Christians are to be taught that he who sees a needy man and passes him by, yet gives his money for indulgences, does not buy papal indulgences but God’s wrath.

  46. Christians are to be taught that, unless they have more than they need, they must reserve enough for their family needs and by no means squander it on indulgences.

  47. Christians are to be taught that they buying of indulgences is a matter of free choice, not commanded.

  48 Christians are to be taught that the pope, in granting indulgences, needs and thus desires their devout prayer more than their money.

  49. Christians are to be taught that papal indulgences are useful only if they do not put their trust in them, but very harmful if they lose their fear of God because of them.

  50. Christians are to be taught that if the pope knew the exactions of the indulgence preachers, he would rather that the basilica of St. Peter were burned to ashes than built up with the skin, flesh, and bones of his sheep.

  51. Christians are to be taught that the pope would and should wish to give of his own money, even though he had to sell the basilica of St. Peter, to many of those from whom certain hawkers of indulgences cajole money.

  52. It is vain to trust in salvation by indulgence letters, even though the indulgence commissary, or even the pope, were to offer his soul as security.

  53. They are the enemies of Christ and the pope who forbid altogether the preaching of the Word of God in some churches in order that indulgences may be preached in others.

  54. Injury is done to the Word of God when, in the same sermon, an equal or larger amount of time is devoted to indulgences than to the Word.

  55. It is certainly the pope’s sentiment that if indulgences, which are a very insignificant thing, are celebrated with one bell, one procession, and one ceremony, then the gospel, which is the very greatest thing, should be preached with a hundred bells, a hundred processions, a hundred ceremonies.

  56. The true treasures of the church, out of which the pope distributes indulgences, are not sufficiently discussed or known among the people of Christ.

  57. That indulgences are not temporal treasures is certainly clear, for many indulgence sellers do not distribute them freely but only gather them.

  58. Nor are they the merits of Christ and the saints, for, even without the pope, the latter always work grace for the inner man, and the cross, death, and hell for the outer man.

  59. St. Lawrence said that the poor of the church were the treasures of the church, but he spoke according to the usage of the word in his own time.

  60. Without want of consideration we say that the keys of the church, given by the merits of Christ, are that treasure.

  61. For it is clear that the pope’s power is of itself sufficient for the remission of penalties and cases reserved by himself.

  62. The true treasure of the church is the most holy gospel of the glory and grace of God.

  63. But this treasure is naturally most odious, for it makes the first to be last (Mt. 20:16).

  64. On the other hand, the treasure of indulgences is naturally most acceptable, for it makes the last to be first.

  65. Therefore the treasures of the gospel are nets with which one formerly fished for men of wealth.

  66. The treasures of indulgences are nets with which one now fishes for the wealth of men.

  67. The indulgences which the demagogues acclaim as the greatest graces are actually understood to be such only insofar as they promote gain.

  68. They are nevertheless in truth the most insignificant graces when compared with the grace of God and the piety of the cross.

  69. Bishops and curates are bound to admit the commissaries of papal indulgences with all reverence.

  70. But they are much more bound to strain their eyes and ears lest these men preach their own dreams instead of what the pope has commissioned.

  71. Let him who speaks against the truth concerning papal indulgences be anathema and accursed.

  72. But let him who guards against the lust and license of the indulgence preachers be blessed.

  73. Just as the pope justly thunders against those who by any means whatever contrive harm to the sale of indulgences.

  74. Much more does he intend to thunder against those who use indulgences as a pretext to contrive harm to holy love and truth.

  75. To consider papal indulgences so great that they could absolve a man even if he had done the impossible and had violated the mother of God is madness.

  76. We say on the contrary that papal indulgences cannot remove the very least of venial sins as far as guilt is concerned.

  77. To say that even St. Peter if he were now pope, could not grant greater graces is blasphemy against St. Peter and the pope.

  78. We say on the contrary that even the present pope, or any pope whatsoever, has greater graces at his disposal, that is, the gospel, spiritual powers, gifts of healing, etc., as it is written, 1 Co 12[:28].

  79. To say that the cross emblazoned with the papal coat of arms, and set up by the indulgence preachers is equal in worth to the cross of Christ is blasphemy.

  80. The bishops, curates, and theologians who permit such talk to be spread among the people will have to answer for this.

  81. This unbridled preaching of indulgences makes it difficult even for learned men to rescue the reverence which is due the pope from slander or from the shrewd questions of the laity.

  82. Such as: “Why does not the pope empty purgatory for the sake of holy love and the dire need of the souls that are there if he redeems an infinite number of souls for the sake of miserable money with which to build a church? The former reason would be most just; the latter is most trivial.

  83. Again, “Why are funeral and anniversary masses for the dead continued and why does he not return or permit the withdrawal of the endowments founded for them, since it is wrong to pray for the redeemed?”

  84. Again, “What is this new piety of God and the pope that for a consideration of money they permit a man who is impious and their enemy to buy out of purgatory the pious soul of a friend of God and do not rather, because of the need of that pious and beloved soul, free it for pure love’s sake?”

  85. Again, “Why are the penitential canons, long since abrogated and dead in actual fact and through disuse, now satisfied by the granting of indulgences as though they were still alive and in force?”

  86. Again, “Why does not the pope, whose wealth is today greater than the wealth of the richest Crassus, build this one basilica of St. Peter with his own money rather than with the money of poor believers?”

  87. Again, “What does the pope remit or grant to those who by perfect contrition already have a right to full remission and blessings?”

  88. Again, “What greater blessing could come to the church than if the pope were to bestow these remissions and blessings on every believer a hundred times a day, as he now does but once?”

  89. “Since the pope seeks the salvation of souls rather than money by his indulgences, why does he suspend the indulgences and pardons previously granted when they have equal efficacy?”

  90. To repress these very sharp arguments of the laity by force alone, and not to resolve them by giving reasons, is to expose the church and the pope to the ridicule of their enemies and to make Christians unhappy.

  91. If, therefore, indulgences were preached according to the spirit and intention of the pope, all these doubts would be readily resolved. Indeed, they would not exist.

  92. Away, then, with all those prophets who say to the people of Christ, “Peace, peace,” and there is no peace! (Jer 6:14)

  93. Blessed be all those prophets who say to the people of Christ, “Cross, cross,” and there is no cross!

  94. Christians should be exhorted to be diligent in following Christ, their Head, through penalties, death and hell.

  95. And thus be confident of entering into heaven through many tribulations rather than through the false security of peace (Acts 14:22).

  Note: This document was originally made available to the Internet by Bob Van Cleef (revc@garg.campbell.ca.us). I don’t know him, but you ever meet him, tell him, “thanks.” This document was converted to HTML format by Jonathan Hall Barlow.

‘God says, ‘Be holy, for I am holy.’ The young preacher quoted the
words of Leviticus with such fervor that I had little doubt he really
expected us to live up to this command for untarnished righteousness.
Yet, as my eyes scanned those seated between the pulpit and my pew,
I wondered if he recognized the true challenge in his words:

• On the front row were two sisters; both divorced in the past
year. One had recently confided to friends that her loneliness
since her marriage had driven her into sinful relationships with
other men. The second sister had found more frequent solace
in alcohol that trapped her in a horrid cycle of depression that
made her treat her kids cruelly, making her feel guilty, and
causing her to drink again to escape her guilt.

• Behind the sisters were a successful businessman and long-term
elder who had engineered the ouster of the previous pastor with
a combination of biblical proof-texting and political intrigue. The
elder’s wife, seated next to him, had conducted a skillful phone
campaign that created enough questions about the pastor’s
credibility to disarm any defense he tried to make.

• In the same pew was a young mother trying to manage two
out-of-control preschoolers. Simultaneously she was ignoring
disgusted glances from the nearby elder while glaring daggers
at her own husband to motivate him to discipline the children.

• Directly in front of me a teenager sat at the opposite end of
the pew from his parents as a geographical statement of what
he felt about his relationship with them since he had been
grounded for ignoring curfew the previous night.

• Ultimately my attention rested on me, the seminary professor
who had been moody with his family for days because of a letter
from a stranger that had criticized his work.

My eyes and my heart testified there was not a sinless person among
us. Yet the preacher seemed oblivious to our obvious faults. He said it
again, ‘Be holy, for God is holy’ (see Lev. 11:44, 45; 19:2; 20:26; 1
Pet. 1:16).

Does God really expect us to be holy as he is? He is infinitely pure.
I am an imperfect person. So is everyone about me (see Ps. 14:1-

3; Eccles. 7:20). His standard seems either to ignore human frailty
or to impose certain failure. We must make sense of this command
for perfect righteousness lest our hearts harden into a shrugged, ‘Get
real,’ or break into sobbed, ‘I can’t do it.’

VISIONS OF HOLINESS

How does God enable us to meet his requirement of holiness? An
answer lies along the path of John Bunyan’s famous travelers in the
children’s version of Pilgrim’s Progress that out family has read after
dinners (which have had their own share of imperfect behavior).

Late on their journey, Bunyan’s pilgrims discover a wonderful mirror.
There is nothing unusual about the front of the glass. However, on
the back of the mirror appears an image of the crucified Lord Jesus.
Everyone who looks in the mirror’s face sees an ordinary reflection
that includes the blemishes and scars that always accompany our
humanity. Yet anyone who observes these same persons from the
reverse side of the mirror sees only the glory of the Son of God.

The amazing glass from Pilgrim’s progress pictures the answer to how
we can be holy in this life. Our holiness is not so much a matter of
what we achieve, as it is the grace our God provides. Grace is God’s
willingness to look at us from the perspective that sees his holy Son in
our place.

God can certainly see the faults and frailties reflected in the mirror
of our lives. Still, he chooses to look at those who trust in his mercy
through the lens that features the holiness of his own child in our
place. As a consequence he loves and treasures us as much as if we
had never sinned.

Many years ago, the preacher Phillips Brooks explained –G-R-A-C-E as
God’s Riches At Christ’s Expense. The acrostic beautifully expresses
how the blessings of God, which Jesus alone deserves, are mercifully
passed to us as a consequence of his suffering and dying for our sin.
When we trust that Christ’s work, rather than our own achievements,
is the basis of our righteousness, then God mercifully grants us the
riches of his love that only Jesus deserves. God looks at us as though
we are as holy as his own Son, and treats us as lovingly despite our
many imperfections.

Most Christians cherish the beauty of the truth that God viewed us
through the lens of Jesus’ goodness when we claimed him as our

Savior. We trusted that Christ’s death paid the penalty for our sins,
and that we were made right with God – justified – not by our own
holiness but by trusting in the holiness he provided. Just as objects
look red when viewed through a red lens and green when viewed
through a green lens, we believed that when God looked at us through
Jesus he viewed us as his own child.

Belief in his provision of grace, whereby God chose to view us as
his beloved through no good of our own, became the greatest joy
of our souls. What robs many believers of this joy, however, is a
misunderstanding of how God continues to view us after we have
received the grace that justifies us.

After initially trusting in Christ to make them right with God, many
Christians embark on an endless pursuit of trying to satisfy God with
good works that will keep him loving them. Such Christians believe
that they are saved by God’s grace but are kept in his care by our own
goodness. This belief, whether articulated or buried deep in a psyched
developed by the way we were treated by parents, spouses, or others,
makes the Christian life a perpetual race on a performance treadmill to
keep wining God’s affection.

While the Christian life can be characterized as a race (see Gal. 5:7;
2 Tim. 4:7; Heb. 12:1), we persevere on the course God marks out
for us not by straining to gain his affection but by the assurance that
he never stops viewing us from the perspective of his grace. God
continually offers us unconditional love and encouragement that our
status as his children does not vary even though our efforts do.

When I see my son’s energy flag in his cross-county meets, I shout
encouragement to revive his resolve and keep him going. I know
intuitively that threats or expressions of frustration would sap his
strength for the long race ahead (and the many races to come) even if
my pressure were to spur him on for the moment.

God is a better father than I, and his encouragement rings more
powerfully, wisely, lovingly, and continually in his children’s souls.
We race in the confidence that his grace does not cease just because
we have faltered. Grace becomes not only the means by which God
once justified us, it is also the means by which we are continually
encouraged and enabled to serve him with undiminished delight.

Since grace is the means by which we find the joy that gives us
strength, it is vital that we refine our vision of how God views us.

Whether our lives will be typified by joy or by despondency depends
largely on the perspective from which we view ourselves. Will earth’s
or heaven’s perspective dominate our vision?

The first purpose of this book is to make heaven’s view so clear to
us that we will never stop seeing ourselves as God sees us. For if
we cannot lift our eyes from an earthly perspective, then we will so
focus on our weaknesses and stumbles that the race to please God
will be misery. But if we remember that God is the lifter or our heads
(Ps. 3:3), then we will raise our eyes to see the affections in his own.
When we see that his regard for us does not waver, then his grace
will quicken our steps, strengthen our hearts, and delight our souls to
carry on.

Special thanks to Bob Bradshaw who recommended this book to me!

William Romaine, who was one of the leaders of the eighteenth-century revival in England, wrote, “No sin can be crucified either in heart or life unless it first be pardoned in conscience…. If it be not mortified in its guilt, it cannot be subdued in its power.” What Romaine was saying is that if you do not believe you have died to sin’s guilt, you cannot trust Christ for the strength to subdue its power in your life. So the place to begin in dealing with sin is to believe the gospel when it says you have died to sin’s guilt.

Thank you Jerry for reminding us that we live by FAITH ALONE, by believing what is true as the basis for behaving like it is true!

If you haven’t listened to Sunday’s sermon you probably need to do that right now. You can access that file by clicking on the title. The message is entitled, “He likes me…He likes me NOT…” Secondly, download the paper and then, as always, post your comments, questions and concerns right here!

The paper begins with the question I received…

One of the required reading pieces for the officers class is the Westminster Confession, so I’ve been going over it.  Yesterday when you were preaching I was having a tough time reconciling your words with Chapter 17 point 3 of the Confession and tying it all together.

“Nevertheless, they may, through the temptations of Satan and of the world, the prevalence of corruption remaining in them, and the neglect of the means of their preservation, fall into grievous sins; and for a time, continue therein; whereby they incur God’s displeasure and grieve his Holy Spirit, come to be deprived of some measure of their graces and comforts, have their hearts hardened , and their consciences wounded; hurt and scandalize others, and bring temporal judgment upon themselves.”

It’s the incurring God’s displeasure part and grieving his Holy Spirit which I didn’t hear from you yesterday and I’m having a hard time making the leap from the Confession to your sermon.

I went to the small group questions you post hoping they would shed a little light, but I’m still wrestling…  When you have time, any additional thoughts you have would be appreciated.

Good question.

First things first: when you say something, you can’t say EVERYTHING. Often sermons can die the death of a thousand disclaimers. I don’t do alot of disclaimers. Part of that is really good and intentional because it spurs you on to study and wrestle personally. But, part of that can be aggravating to the person in the pew because it leaves too many stones unturned and too many nuances left to be teased out. So, thank you for the question and the opportunity to explain.

The premise of the sermon was simply this: if we truly embrace and understand the doctrine of imputed righteousness then we must admit and relish in the fact that our fundamental ‘position in Christ’ as believers is one of acceptance, love and adoption. When Paul says in Romans 8 that ‘there is therefore now NO CONDEMNATION for those who are in Christ Jesus’ he is talking about believers in the present tense right now. Reformed theology has often referred to the imputed righteousness of Christ as ‘positional righteousness’ meaning that my ‘position’ before God in Christ is righteous and secure. It is a nuance used to describe the ‘already and not yet’ of what I see at work in my flesh, but what I know to be declared true about me in Heaven. I am declared to be righteous in Christ, but I see a demonstration of unrighteousness in my flesh. Theologians would say that our ‘position’ in Christ is fundamentally secure, but that our sanctification involves the mortification of the sinful flesh and the vivification of the Spirit so as to reflect ‘in real life’ who we have already been declared to be in Christ. I’d call this the ‘working out of your salvation’ that is spoken of in Scripture.

DOWNLOAD the entire paper here…

It is an odd thing to tell your own story, especially when you aren’t sure who will be reading it. But, I have been asked to share my tale with honesty so I will give it my best attempt. To start at the beginning would be reaching too far back. It would begin on the day of my birth which I assume was a warm evening in the late spring of 1979. So, I will jump ahead 20 years to the day I truly saw myself for the first time. On the evening of February 7, 2000 I found the end of me which turned out to actually be the beginning. I was midway through my junior year of college when I find myself sitting in shock on the bathroom floor of my fiance’s college apartment with a positive pregnancy test in my hand. We had been engaged for about 8 weeks and based on my best guess we were about 8 weeks along. It was at that moment when I realized that everything I thought I knew had suddenly changed.

You would think that the greatest struggle would have been dealing with the responses from others, but God spared us the fights and resentments that often flow from families in a moment of crisis. Instead, I found that my greatest crisis was within. I realized that I no longer knew who I was. You see, up until then I was always the “good girl”. Frankly, in my own mind I was one of the best girls. I grew up with a long line of gold stars next to my name. My gold stars weren’t just for achievements at school either. I was earning gold stars for Jesus! I was a leader in my youth group, chaired the True Love Waits campaign, volunteered with community organizations, made my Junior Miss platform abstinence, and loudly rebuked all my friends when they fell into one of the deadly sins such as underage drinking or premarital sex. I truly thought that I was strong enough and spiritually mature enough to avoid this type of sin. Yet, somehow it had crept in, and there I was completely broken knowing that the sin I had tried most to hide was soon going to be evident to the world. 

What I discovered over those next few days was grace, true grace, the kind that gives you the strength to roll out of bed when you can’t even stand the sight of yourself. This grace is only found when you finally see the depth of your own sin. You see, I had been a believer nearly all my life. I had rarely missed a Sunday service or youth retreat. I had experienced many heartfelt moments of spiritual renewal and awakening, but I had never felt the unabashed, unending depths of Jesus’ love for me. It was there all along but I had missed it, because I had never really seen my sin. God had to reveal my deepest, darkest best hidden sin to the entire world before I was able to see it in myself.

This realization of my own sin came from the encouragement of our pastor at the time. He encouraged me to move past seeing my sin as an act that had taken place and to dig deeper to see the root of all sin in my heart. What I began to see for the first time, is that Christ had died to redeem me not only from the sinful acts that I committed, but from the sinful nature in me, the root of every sin that lurked in my heart just waiting for the opportunity to be revealed. Even worse, I realized that my greatest sin was the prideful love that I had for myself. I knew with confidence that all the good works I had ever credited to myself were filthy rags. I saw that I had done all the right things for all the wrong reasons.

At the time, I had thought that all my good works were my obedience to God, but those achievements and works were really about my glory and the favor I was trying to earn from God instead of the free grace I had been given in Christ. I realized that I had been living by own standard of righteousness. As long as I measured me in my own eyes, then I didn’t look too bad. However, when God showed me my heart, I saw myself measured against His standard then I knew Jesus was my only hope. Suddenly, I felt for the first time that because of Jesus, I had no less favor in God’s eyes when I was unmarried and pregnant than when I had been teaching bible study or leading worship as the “good girl”. With this truth secure in my heart, I was truly set free. I began to feel for the first time in my life that my walk with Christ was really not about my actions at all. It wasn’t about what I was doing or not doing, but it was about my heart before the Lord. It was about abiding and believing that my righteousness could only be found in the blood of Christ. This new found freedom compelled me to genuine obedience and works which flowed out of a longing to walk in a manner worthy of the grace I had received. Through Christ alone, I found that He had already accomplished the very things I was striving to do or not to do so I was able for the first time in my life to abide in Him and rest in His amazing grace. I had been set free, no longer bound to my image of being the good girl, but free to become a woman of grace who finds her value and significance in the cross of Jesus not in the eyes of the world.

Can I get an amen?