Chris-tocentric.com

Yesterday was a special day as I had the privilege of presenting Holy Ground to leaders of Smithtown Gospel Tabernacle, the church that I initially attended 15 years ago when I came to Christ. If there is any church in the country with an overwhelming majority of former Catholics, it is Smithtown. Not only is their leadership the salt of the earth, they laughed harder than any other congregation at my Vito’s Christmas Dinner video.

This evening I’m scheduled to speak at North Port Baptist, another fine church with a long, rich history. Please pray that Christ would be exalted.

My Dad and I have a long tradition, when we get together of  watching action-packed movies—nothing too violent, but enough testosterone to make it interesting.

So last night, with popcorn on our laps, we turned on his large screen and watched Clash of the Titans. Since it was late at night by the time it finished, I went to sleep thinking about how different this film was compared to the 1981 version that I recall from childhood. In particular, the main difference, besides better special effects, is in the theological disposition and attitude of the main character, Perseus. Simply put, the new Perseus is entirely deluded. He is the secular humanist par excellence, claiming to operate on his own strength and cleverness, apart from Zeus, when in fact he is dependent on the gods every step of the way.

The original Perseus gladly received gifts from his father Zeus, not only weapons like his sword and his horse Pegasus, but his very nature and abilities as a demigod. The 1980’s Perseus demonstrated courage and valor, but he did it with a certain amount of devotion and appreciation for his father. The new Perseus, on the other hand, has a personal vendetta against the gods, including his father, so deep that he consciously and explicitly disrespects them and scorns their help.

When the Stygian Witches tell Perseus that he is destined to die at the hands (or jaws) of the terrifying Kraken, he defies their prophecy asserting that he will create his own destiny. You can almost hear Sinatra’s, I Did It My Way, playing in the background.

Everyone likes a hero who displays courage and conviction. The new Perseus, however, tends to be so arrogant and disingenuous about the nature of his identity and abilities, that his integrity is compromised and, in my eyes at least, his appeal is lost.

Going to sleep last night, I was struck by the extent to which we, the Church, can potentially be deluded into behaving self-sufficiently. I am afraid that sometimes I resemble the new Perseus more than the old.  

Pastor Tim Augustyn of The Orchard Church, Arlington Heights, Illinois, has written a review of Holy Ground for Themelios Journal. You can read it –here- from The Gospel Coalition Website, if you like.

When God wants to drill a man
And thrill a man
And skill a man
When God wants to mold a man
To play the noblest part

When He yearns with all His heart
To create so great and bold a man
That all the world shall be amazed,
Watch His methods, watch His ways!

How He ruthlessly perfects
Whom He royally elects!
How He hammers him and hurts him
And with mighty blows converts him
Into shapes and forms of clay
Which only God can understand.

How He bends but never breaks
When his good He undertakes
How He uses whom He chooses
And with mighty power infuses him
With every act induces him
To try His splendor out –
God knows what He’s about.

-Author unknown.

HT: Ray Ortlund

This weekend I have the privilege of officiating at the wedding of a lovely couple. Tonight was the rehearsal and tomorrow is the “big day.” It has me thinking about the significance of marriage in today’s culture.

Following is an insightful quote from Pastor David Holloway concerning the enduring nature of marriage (By the way, the good looking bride and groom pictured here are Angela’s cousin Leslie and her husband Charlie). 

David Holloway is vicar of Jesmond Parish Church, Newcastle, England, and one of the founders of the Christian Institute, a charity which provides a biblical viewpoint on contemporary ethical and moral issues. Reinforced by government legislation and social attitudes, British society is increasingly anti-marriage. During a sermon in 2000 on Hebrews 13:4, Holloway called for a reversal of this trend, arguing that marriage is a structured relationship, a gift from God, and should be honored by all.

God is involved in a marriage . . . [M]arriage is something socially recognized and supported by society—at least that happens in healthy societies. Marriage is not [just] a “relationship”—that is a fatal flaw in modern thinking. Marriage is the structure . . . within which a lifelong relationship takes place. It is the marriage that enables the relationship to thrive. Relationships go up and down—that is the nature of human emotions. Marriage is a state of life that is there whatever the nature of the relationship. It is to under gird the relationship . . . Marriages don’t go up and down. Relationships do, but not marriages.¹

Footnotes:

¹ David Holloway, “Men, Women, and God,” Jesmond Parish Church Website, September 29, 2000,

If you happen to be in the Los Angeles area on October 2, join us in Costa Mesa! 

Of all the sights that I observed in Italy during my recent visit, this one from the central dome of the Cathedral in Florence was the most breathtaking. Let me explain why.

You’ll notice the words displayed by the angel at the very top above Jesus’ head. It says in Latin “Ecce Homo,” which is translated in English “Behold the Man.”

“So Jesus came out, wearing the crown of thorns and the purple robe. Pilate said to them, "Behold the man!" (John 19:5).

Notice what Giorgio Vasari and Federico Zuccari, creators of this fresco, have done. They took the words of Pilate used of the Suffering Servant and applied them to the risen and glorified Jesus, of the One who now lives and reigns, the One before whom all of humanity will bend the knee and confess that he is Lord. WOW!!

Think about that for a moment. Ecce Homo

The author Anne Rice, best known for her vampire novels before she returned to the Catholic Church twelve years ago, recently made waves when she posted the following announcement on her Facebook page:

“Today I quit being a Christian. I’m out. I remain committed to Christ as always but not to being “Christian” or to being part of Christianity. It’s simply impossible for me to “belong” to this quarrelsome, hostile, disputatious, and deservedly infamous group. For ten . . . years, I’ve tried. I’ve failed. I’m an outsider. My conscience will allow nothing else.”

To which she later added:

“As I said below, I quit being a Christian. I’m out. In the name of Christ, I refuse to be anti-gay. I refuse to be anti-feminist. I refuse to be anti-artificial birth control. I refuse to be anti-Democrat. I refuse to be anti-secular humanism. I refuse to be anti-science. I refuse to be anti-life. In the name of . . . Christ, I quit Christianity and being Christian. Amen.”

Quite a lot of ink has spilled (much of it virtual) since Rice’s statement went public. One can now view CNN video interviews in which Rice explains her position (one and two), read articles from noted media outlets such as the LA Times, Salon.com, First Things, Huntington Post, and, of course, peruse any of the gazillion comments on the blogosphere.

Having  personally corresponded with Rice over the last year, I have followed her story with interest. In what follows I would like to offer four lessons that have occurred to me, lessons that apply to everyone, but especially to evangelicals.

1.) We Speak as Christians.  Frankly, I have been a bit embarrassed by the amount of uncharitable vitriol expressed by some of us in the “Christian” community. For instance, one blogger writes:

“I’m tired of Anne Rice.  I’m not impressed with her as a writer, and I find her efforts to publicize her religious mutations a sign of gross conceit.  The attention others have given her “de-conversion” exaggerates her importance as a public figure and creates the impression that her reasons for leaving the church are profound.  Really, folks.  Do you care that much about this woman?”

There are certainly occasions to be direct. I’m a born and bred New Yorker; I love when people shoot straight. But the above quote is surely not an appropriate way to communicate, especially before the world on behalf of Christ. Paul’s words to the Corinthians are worth remembering at this point:

“Love is patient and kind; love does not envy or boast; it is not arrogant or rude. … it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice at wrongdoing, but rejoices with the truth. Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. Love never ends (1 Cor 13:4-8).”

We must never forget that when we speak truth, according to the Apostle Paul, we necessarily do it in love (Eph 4:15).

2.)  Fidelity to One’s Conscience. Maybe it’s just because I’m a Protestant that when I read Anne’s words, “My conscience will allow nothing else” used in reference to moving out from under religious authority, I think of Luther’s defense at the Diet of Worms. You’ll remember Luther’s statement before Emperor Charles V.

“Unless I am convinced by the testimony of the Scripture or by clear reason (for I do not trust either in the pope or in councils alone, since it is well known that they have often erred and contradicted themselves), I am bound by the Scriptures I have quoted and my conscience is captive to the word of God. I cannot and I will not retract anything, since it is neither safe nor right to go against conscience. [He then added in German] Here I stand. I can do no other. God help me! Amen.”

The crucial difference between Anne and brother Martin is the authority to which their respective consciences clung. Imperfect as he was, Luther, nevertheless, sought to base his life and teaching upon Scripture. Therefore, leaving Christianity was not an option. Likewise, we must keep our consciences tethered to biblical truth. 

3.) What is Our Ecclesiology? How do we evangelicals give an answer for the ecclesial hope within us, or, stated more simply, what role does the church play in our life of faith?

It’s interesting how Anne’s departure from the Catholic Church is ipso facto a departure from Christianity. This is entirely common, by the way, among many of us who have been raised in the Catholic Church. As I told the Protestant friend who first invited me to her church, “Why would I switch golf clubs to imitation knockoffs when I own Big Berthas?”

What I want to call attention to, however, is the opportunity that we have to think carefully about our corporate identity. We may not express our view of the church in the same terms as Anne Rice, but if you look at our involvement in our congregations or look at our prayer life, we find that the degree of individualism is really not quite different.

4.) Log Removal. I wonder, have we Christians paused for a single moment to consider why Anne Rice is so exercised? With reference to her protest about the church being anti-feminist, anti-Democrat, anti-science, and anti-gay, for instance, do we have any measure of culpability?

I’m  not for a moment suggesting that we dial down our commitment to biblical teaching; but I wonder if at times there is maybe a margin for improvement in the way that we communicate such ideas. Are we, for instance, consistently speaking the truth in genuine Christian love?

Whatever the answer might be in the final analysis, the humility of Christ would have us first pause and consider the log in our own eye before we seek to deal with the speck in someone else’s.

*******

If you would like, you can hear me discuss this topic tomorrow at 3:30pm CT on Moody Radio’s Chris Fabry Live.