Clues to the power of secularism

Why is secularism so corrosive to the Christian faith?

Rival worldviews present their credentials to the quiet chambers of our hearts. Every time we are saved by a miraculous new cure the spirit of the age whispers "See, I bring you life." Every time our cell phone contract expires and we joyously celebrate the tasty new jewel that takes pictures, keeps my schedules, lets me talk to almost anyone, anywhere, that goes for days without recharging, someone whispers, "follow me and you will see wonders."

This world that science explores and technology applies is made by God. Each bit of its glory should point to its author but false gods are clever at forging checks. Secularism is so powerful because it is so deeply connected to the stuff of which we are made. Monsanto delivers better than Baal. The chariots of Lockheed Martin/Boeing far exceed the chariots of Marduk.

CS Lewis in chapter 11 of "The Great Divorce" has a great things to say when he contrasts the power of a mother's love gone corrupt vs. lust.

"There is but one good, that is God. Everything else is good when it looks to Him and bad when it turns from Him. And the higher and mightier it is in the natural order, the more demoniac it will be if it rebels. It is not out of bad mice or bad fleas you make demons, but out of bad archangels."

God and Tyranny

There is a paradox that I was pondering a few weeks ago in sermon prep.

All tyrants want to be in some respect like God. They want to be all knowing, so they establish secret police and spy on people. They want to be all powerful, to control people, and they want to be everywhere, so they put up statues of themselves all over the place like Saddam or Turkenbashi. Tyrants really want to destroy diversity. In Iraq men all wore mustaches like Saddam. Tyrants want everyone to think alike, talk alike, hold to the party line.

God, however, has all these things, but does not act like a tyrant. Just look around. If God wanted to be a tyrant the world would look very different, and in fact some of us would welcome some of the changes.

Tyrants want to be like God in everything except character. God has want tyrants want except his character. Our fall was a grasping after tyranny. Our walk of redemption is a seeking after his character.

CS Lewis has a great piece from the Screwtape letters: (remember you have to read it as one demon writing another)

To us a human is primarily food; our aim is the absorption of its will into ours, the increase of our own area of selfhood at its expense. But the obedience which the Enemy demands of men is quite a different thing. One must face the fact that all the talk about His love for men, and His service being perfect freedom, is not (as one would gladly believe) mere propaganda, but an appalling truth. He really does want to fill the universe with a lot of loathsome little replicas of Himself --creatures whose life, on its miniature scale, will be qualitatively like His own, not because he has absorbed them but because their wills freely conform to His. We want cattle who can finally become food; He wants servants who can finally become sons. We want to suck in, He wants to give out. We are empty and would be filled; He is full and flows over. Our war aim is a world in which Our Father Below has drawn all other beings into himself; the Enemy wants a world full of beings united to Him, but still distinct.

Screwtape letters, pg. 46

Born

I think we can go three ways on the "born" issue.

1. All of us are born right.
2. Some of us are born right.
3. None of us are born right.

Option 1 is romantic but doesn't seem to be true on any level. How many babies are born with how many problems. We are learning by genetics that we are in fact "born" with a great many things. We really don't know. If you embrace option one you wind up saying things like "God wanted your child to be born disfigured or crippled by that debilitating defect or disease." Do we really want to go there?

Option 2: This leads to eugenics. Nazis opt for 2. Count me out.

Option 3 seems to be the most true and the most helpful. We are all born broken, we are all just broken in different ways. Sometimes our brokenness is obvious, sometimes it is hidden. Things get even more squirrelly when you mix it with society. Sometimes society blesses some defects and calls them blessings and abhors others calling them curses. We never get it right.

I believe the Bible teaches that we are all born broken and in need of grace. The grace, however, isn't content to leave us in our brokenness, but puts us on a path to wholeness (Eph 2:10). We won't arrive at full wholeness on this side of the grave. At the same time God's grace is so deep, so powerful, so mysterious, so unrelenting that God sometimes even uses our brokenness to create unique tastes of his glory for his own pleasure. Don't ask me to explain it, I can only point to it from time to time. :) pvk

Secularism

I don't think any of us have any real clue how deeply we have been impacted by secularism and how compromised our perspectives are from it.

I find the OT example of Israel struggling with Baal worship to be very helpful with all of this. Why were the Baals as well as the other pagan deities such a constant temptation for the Israelites? We don't own up to it fully when we don't go beyond the Sunday School lesson that basically says "How stupid they were to worship stone and wood!" The Israelites and their neighbors obviously didn't imagine that their gods were really encased in the little statues. The worship and veneration of these statues were an instrumental means to connect to these spiritual deities in order to achieve some economic, political, social, and/or military advantage in the world. Baal will make your crops grow. Baal will give you sons. Baal will help you defeat your enemies. Cut a deal with Baal and you will have life.

The idolatry of secularism is the elevation of the instrumental/created realm into the ultimate. Crops grow because we can do the chemistry. Marriages work because we can do the therapy. Prosperity comes because we have economics. Health can be assured because we have the medical technology. Security can be assured because we have the military budget and the expertise. Family financial security can be assured with some combination of the proper education, economic discipline, and financial plan. These gods are reinforced every day by all of us and "proven" by the fact that the way it works can be demonstrated and replicated. It is the scientific method applied to life. That is our culture, our society, the gods in which we put our trust, church or no church.

What makes secularism so difficult is that these instrumental forces are indeed real and effective. Save your money and you will (likely) have more than the guy who didn't save. Eat right, don't smoke, exercise and you will (likely) live longer. The idolatry is in found in the elevating this to the ultimate. The system doesn't work, however, because where as the instrumental is powerful and real, it is not ultimate. Not all those who have vast riches live to see their barns completed. Not all those who make all the right moves with their spouse evade divorce. It is Romans 1 all over again with taking the creation and worshipping it. I don't think we in the church have any real clue how to separate this out and live in this pervasively instrumentalist world and resist the subtle messages that these instrumental forces in our lives are not ultimate.

When it comes right down to it what do we really trust in? I think, myself included, really trust in the instrumental forces: medicine, money, police, armies, locks, doors, therapists, social welfare, and on down the line. Having secured for ourselves the security in life we desire we then move forward to pass the time with our amusements. This is how we live in the secular west, churched, unchurched, Christian, Muslim, buddhist, new ager, etc. Secularism is our Baal. pvk

Tech stuff

A couple of tech things I'm interested in:

The MiniMac looks just too cool. I've always had a bit of Mac envy but have been tied to PCs by cost and software investment. I'm increasingly annoyed at the rising percentage cost of Windows for the PC. You can now build a machine for almost nothing but still have to dig deep for the Windows license. Linus is cheap but I'm invested in Windows software. The MiniMac is just he kind of machine my wife is looking for: cute, cheap, works, small. As my PCs multiply I'm also tired of large beige boxes. This minimac is too cool.

I'm also playing with Grouper at http://grouper.com . This is a quick and cheap way to access home from work and visa versa. Laplink wants 10 bucks a month. Grouper is free. I don't have a lot of things I need to do but there always seems to be something at home that I need from work or visa versa. I've installed the software on both machines and it works flawlessly. pvk

Something I wrote 5 years ago, still true

Facets of the Fall: Limitation

One of the reasons I so enjoy doing my Sunday School class, which is a serial study of the Synoptics is because it affords me time to do more indepth study of the Gospels. Many things you just kind of brush over as you go and don't really learn. When you have to teach it, however, you have to dig in and learn it.

Last week I had to teach on the Pharisees' demand for a sign in Mark 8 and Matthew 16. You can find the studies I wrote on the church website on the Gospels Bible Study pages under January 16 and 23, 2005. There are many ways in which the demand or temptation of the Pharisees was wrong, but the one that I really saw this time was the issue of human limitation and our perceived source of misery in this world.

When God made us, he gave us much but he didn't give us everything, because that was him. He made us in his image, born to rule as steward over his creation, but only as steward or regent, not full kingship because that belongs to God alone. We were made to be limited. Limited in knowledge, limited by time and space. We are great, but limited in power and authority. Eve (and assumedly Adam) felt this limitation and it was on this point that the devil had a way into Eve's heart. The devil knew the pang that Eve felt in recognizing her limitation because it was Satan's rebellion against limitation that drove him to rebellion as well. So Satan challenges addresses Eve's angst and enhances the options presented to her by the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. This tree will relieve Eve of her limitation and open up new vistas for her. She takes the bait only to realize that there are greater evils than limitation, and now she knows them all too well.

We only recognize misery because deep in our hearts, apart from experience, the seeds of Adam's once experienced purity remain. The deception of our hearts, however, leads us to imagine, as Eve did, that the source of our misery isn't rebellion, but limitation. We fantasize that if we only had more power, more money, more time, more energy we could surmount the perceived sources of our misery and create for ourselves a perfect world, our chosen existence. The State of California imagines that an extra 30 billion a year would solve our problems. The Federal government imagines that either increased revenue or reduced entitlements would somehow restore us to the power and comfort we desire. More troops would bring peace and success to our endeavor in Iraq, more education would fix the social problems that plague the land, etc. The irony of our deception, of course, is that we are the richest, most powerful nation on earth and still it isn't enough.

Lessons from Job

Tsunami Preaching

I, like many, are continuing to mull over tsunami and the conflict in American evangelical circles in terms of how to think about it. Some evangelical preachers have waded into this imagining that this is an appropriate time for these people to hear a message of judgment. For many others this response feels wrong but they can't quite put words to the why it is wrong. I'm in that party.

All who preach or pronounce are given responsibility over and for what they say and do. Do you want to quote the Bible? You get to decide what you want to quote. There will be plenty of texts about compassion and helping and plenty about judgment. Which will you go for?

Let's first clarify a few things. Victims of a tsunami are not in any different category than victims of cancer or heart disease. God's judgment is no more and no less displayed in this tsunami than it was in the attack on the WTC in NYC. The contrast between these two events is telling. After the attacks there were nice evangelical pictures of Jesus standing between the buildings somehow acting like a loving, caring diety. Sometimes the less than careful words concerning the tsunami communicate to others (often non-believers) that God pushed the waves ashore, ripped babies out of mother's arms, crushed husbands, wives, sons and daughters against trees and washed them out to sea to drown. The difference between the two pictures is critical because it is the difference of community.

When it comes to judgment preaching few out do the Old Testament prophets. They are the standard. It is important to note, however, that in the majority of cases the prophets spoke to their own people, and in many cases they themselves shared in the price paid for Israel and Judah's rebellion. Just read Jeremiah. The prophets, although they were called, got what the people got, and then some.

Where do we go wrong in responding to the tsunami with texts of judgment and condemnation? It isn't because those texts aren't valid, it is because we are not in the middle of the pain WITH THEM. Everyone knows it is cheap and easy preach judgment on others from in our well constructed homes, with safe water on tap and our children playing safely in the other room. It is cheap and easy to suggest to the couple who just tragically lost a child that his is all the will of God and things will be OK. It is also wrong. Not because we don't believe in a sovereign God, but because the timing of our words does not communicate love.

Exploring Blogging and RSS

OK, I'm slow but I learn. Quick link from a blog with an interesting idea about pastors and blogging: http://theoblogical.org/dlature/stories/2002/08/14/pastorBlogs.html

Piper on the Tsunami

Let me first say that John Piper is a pastor that I greatly respect. I think his preaching and his ministry have been a tremendously positive influence in the American church today and I praise God for him, his writings, his agenda and his ministry.

His reflections on the tsunami, however, give me pause. http://desiringgod.org/library/fresh_words/2005/010505.html 

Why do I feel uncomfortable with Piper's proclamation here?

Maybe I'm too tainted by secularism. Maybe I'm not fully in submission to the idea of God's right to give and take life as he chooses.

Another idea is this. Piper rightly says "The point of every deadly calamity is this: Repent.", but that is also the point of every majestic sunrise or healthy birth. The point of every funeral is also "repent" but when and how do we carry that message. THAT is the difficulty. The message and invitation of "repent" can be presented by tragedy or beauty.

In using the occasion of this tsunami, or any other experience of great communal loss, one has to carefully judge what message to send. In reading this I hear more than just "The point of every deadly calamity is this: Repent.". To be fair, these words are fair and true, but context communicates as much as content. Sometimes you only have time to make one statement that leaves an overriding impression, and one must chose carefully what the statement should be.

When the woman caught in adultery is brought to Jesus, we can fairly say the point of that calamity is "repent", yet even "repent" wasn't the main thing Jesus wanted to say at that point. Even with the passage the Piper quotes here, I think Jesus' main message is really "don't presume to know more of the mind of God than he has revealed to you by meddling in speculation as to the judgment of God in the misfortune of others. Rather than enjoying the sweet treats of speculating about someone else's sin, worry about your own!" Applying this to the tsunami should probably yield a lot of sober self examination among Christians rather than finger pointing and condemnation.

Calamities like these put all of us on a stage because the world is waiting for us to react. Falwell declared after 9/11 that the attacks demonstrated God's protection was off our great land because of the sins of abortion and homosexuality. It is interesting to note that the WTC were not symbols of abortion or homosexuality but rather economic hubris and empire.

I don't envy high profile pastors like Piper and others whose statements get published and read far and wide. We are all judged by our words and deeds. It's very tough. I'm sure Piper will stand by these words. I'm not sure I would want to say what he says at the same time in the same way. pvk

"The Product"

The big complaint coming from many is that you can't change the marketing without changing "the product" and I think they are very clearly on to something and I semi-agree. My point is that this is nothing new. The Christian "product" has changed numerous times. Follow the understanding of the term "salvation", look at its different aspects and you will see that different cultures, peoples and times understand "salvation" in different ways. I believe all of these ways are present in Scripture and in fact "salvation" is large enough to include all of these things (that I will list, not every conceivable thing) and that is part of the reason for Christianity's "success" in terms of a world religion. Most orthodox versions of Christianity will recognize most or all of these aspects, but will tend to prefer one of them as "the product" that they are in fact naturally marketing because they are feeling this aspect to be especially pertinent to their situation.

1. Christus Victor: Christ defeats Satan and overcomes the demonic realm that has been plaguing humanity through animism and paganism throughout history all over the world. You can find churches and cultures that emphasize this aspect. They range from animist tribes, syncretistic RC flavors in the third world that never shed tribal animisms and the like. Some brands of Pentecostalism see the gospel through this aspect. There is ample Biblical support for this understanding of "salvation". Gustaf Aulen has a book by this title on the subject.

2. Substitutionary Atonement: Salvation keeps us out of hell. Medieval RC and the Reformation clearly major in this avenue. It gets refined and marketed very shrewdly in Evangelism Explosion by greeting the one who answers the door "If you were to die tonight do you know where you would go?" Talk about an American product! We put it right on the table and look to make the sale. We find expressions of this in the Puritans, in the Wesleys, in Edwards, etc. Calvin, being a fine lawyer carefully dissects the process and the system. The church's major fights revolve around who is atoned for and how.

3. "Abundant Life"/ Sub Atone/ Willow transition: of course following the text in John 10:10. Eternal Life not (just) as a quantitative description (time) but a qualitative description. The message clearly was around but Willow picked up on it quickly. They realized that in an increasingly secular society the fear of hell (the need) no longer motivated people to come to church. They needed a new need to satisfied. They recognized (as Christianity always has) that godless living in fact proves to be miserable, and Christ filled living is joyful, especially buoyed by wisdom which reduces the clutter and damage of worldliness. If you listen to Hybels at the conferences he himself is still a Substitutionary Atonement guy (showing his rejected by still latent CRC roots). The main missional motivation in almost all of his talks that I hear, and he repeats it often is saving people from eternal damnation. The "hook" (since secularism removes the old Evangelical staple of fear of hell) is abundant living and that's were Willow (and its followers) make the assault or the "pitch" if we stick to the marketing metaphor. Willow is really a transitional stage I believe because at its core it is really "Substitutionary Atonement" (check out the Contagious Christians curriculum's Gospel presentation) yet it addresses the challenge that deep secularism and agnosticism has brought to the church in the West. First we make them Christians bringing them in for abundant life, then we give them the bad news (hell) after they have already embraced the Good News, because hell is easier to take and definitely more believable when you've got assurance you're not going there. Once you are convinced of hell and that your friends and neighbors are in danger of it you are primed for mission work.

4. Abundant Life/ Pomo purists: Pomos rebel against Willow and company and go deeper into the Abundant Life camp. Since we aren't quickly going to arrive at agreement or resolution of afterlife issues (deeper agnosticism) we focus on joy based obedient living of community and Christian obedience. We turn away from the consumeristic culture (usually selectively), turn away from the rat race and live life Jesus' way in radical discipleship (or at least try). Eternal life is a way of living. Hell isn't a worry because we still know about Substitutionary Atonement and embrace it, but the facet of the gospel front and center is discipleship.

The Product in each case appears different: release from bondage to spiritual tyranny, escape the fires of hell, and entry into a life of joy. The Gospel clearly teaches all three, yet it is the cultural context that dictate which comes to the fore and which gets primary expression as "the Product". It's also easy to see why the groups fight. It's also easy to see why they shouldn't. We are richer for all of the traditions and the gospel advances because it can address multiple felt needs. Want another example of it? Do a close comparison of Matthew, Mark and Luke and you will see that this is nothing new. pvk

Why use Powerpoint in Preaching

Your story makes an exceedingly important point. There isn't anything specifically Christian about mere moral behavior. I use "mere" with some fear and trembling because there is little "mere" or "common" about it. It is rare enough to be exceptional.

Morality, however, as you will recognize, has its own degree of conceit about it. Morality as most of us can observe is a fairly relative standard. If you watch "The Sopranos" you discover that even Tony's gang has their own standard of morality. Everyone in prison can point to someone further down the way that fails to come up to their moral standard. Most folks who pass through my office are quick to detail for me the ways that they have some moral leg up on whomever they decide is further down the moral pecking order than themselves.

Even if we look at someone like you described who is on societal standards above average. What can we say about them? Have they contributed to the pollution of the planet through the kind of wasteful living we are all guilty of? Have they participated in an economic system that has advantaged the wealthy and the powerful while disadvantaging the weak? Have they paid tax money that has gone to the buildup of arms and the killing of non-combatants in countries around the world?

Perhaps you can find someone (depending on any chosen political/religions/ethical matrix) that truly leads an examplary life. Perhaps they refuse to buy a car because of the devastation it causes the environment. Perhaps they live very simply and spend even less so that they give all they can to help the poor. Perhaps they recycle absolutely everything and live in community among the poor. Will they still be found blameless? Most people I have known who have attempted to approximate such righteousness tend to be very aware of their own failings. Those who weren't tended to be proud about their frugality and simplicity and therefore simply switched some failings for others.

We do, in fact I believe, all wind up with Paul confession that there are none who are truly righteous. All of us fail to meet the mark.

Few would argue that perfection in terms of human conduct is non-existent. What will determine how we view this reality, however, will be larger, deeper worldview concerns. I'm going to post this so that I know it posts and then continue on another post.

Good article on the God/Tsunami puzzle

Picked this up from a poster on Voices written by a theologian from the Orthodox tradition. http://www.opinionjournal.com/taste/?id=110006097

CS Lewis on God and Satan's Agendas

One of my favorite Lewis quotes from Screwtape Letters. Remember this is a senior demon's remarks to his apprentice so you have to kind of read it in reverse:

Spiritual Disciplines

It is clear, both from Jesus' sermon and what we know that there are benefits and pitfalls surrounding Spiritual disciplines or practical piety. Two motives are clearly out of bounds: thinking acts of piety give us standing, status, or leverage with God, and using public acts of piety to gain reputation before others for ourselves. The first is basic paganism and the second is really taking God's name in vain. A third misuse might be called spiritual adventurism. This would be seeking spiritual experiences simply for their own sake as entertainment or amusement to alleviate boredom. The affluent, bored and jaded will probably fall into this category.

Why should Christians practice fasting, prayer, meditation, study, etc.? I think we should do so to pursue the command to love the LORD your God with our heart, soul, mind and strength. We are constantly being exhorted to put to death, put away, don't indulge, etc. our sinful nature and live in the Spirit. Mortification is the word traditionally connected with this behavior. Unlike justification, mortification is an area that we are commanded to put our effort into: actively, aggressively, responsibly. It's complement is vivification, putting on the new creation given by the Spirit. We put off the old and put on the new. This is clearly co-laboring with the Holy Spirit but few of us will deny that we bear responsibility in this spiritual labor.

Most of us realize that our work at holiness is full of half-efforts and failures. Dallas Willard (and John Ortberg following him) draw the distinction between training and trying. Mere intention alone seldom will yield the kind of results we desire in most areas of human endeavor. My desire to get off my butt and run a marathon will not yield good results. You'll very quickly find me walking. If, however, I go into training, after a few months of determined, persistent effort I may in fact be able to complete a marathon with some respectable time for a man my age. Willard and Ortberg are basically saying that we do this in all kinds of areas of our lives but most of us do little or none of this when it comes to mortification and vivification.

When spiritual disciplines are understood to be buying status with God they become idolatry and paganism. When they are used to gain reputation before others they lure us to take God's name in vain and become labels of our spiritual immaturity. When they become spiritual entertainment for the bored and jaded they are empty. When they are employed as training in righteousness they can be helpful aids to growth in spiritual maturity.

Spiritual disciplines are in fact not simply esoteric practices scrounged out of writings from desert fathers and such, many of them are common to many of us:

Daily prayer and devotional reading

Weekly church attendance