The
Congregation’s Ministry to the Congregation:
Four
Essential Aspects
Ezekiel
36:22-26 Matthew
18:1-14 1Peter
1:23
-2:3 1 Timothy
6:6-12
I:
-- First
of all, the congregation is a nursery
for the newborn. Peter
writes, “Like newborn babes, long for the pure spiritual milk, that
by it you may grow up to salvation; for you have tasted the kindness
of the Lord.” (1 Peter 2:2-3) When
Peter addresses certain Christians as “newborn babes” he isn’t
finding fault at all. He
isn’t saying that newborn babes shouldn’t be newborn or
shouldn’t be drinking pure spiritual milk.
In everyday life nobody faults a baby for being a baby; nobody
faults the 3-month old because he isn’t 30 years old.
It’s normal for a baby to be a baby and be treated like a
baby; it’s wonderful to see a baby eager
to drink pure milk.
Several times in Matthew’s gospel Jesus angrily denounces
those who make things difficult for the “little ones”.
“Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to
sin; it would be better for him if concrete blocks were tied to his
feet and he were pitched into
Lake
Ontario
.” Ten seconds later
Jesus, still upset, lets fly again.
“See that you do not despise one of these little ones...it is
not the will of my Father in heaven that one of these little ones
perish.” The “little
ones” Jesus speaks of over and over and concerning whom he’s so
very protective; these “little ones” aren’t 5-year olds; the
“little ones” are adult men and women who happen to be new in the
faith; the “little ones” are adults -- 30, 45, 60-years old -- who
have only recently “bonded” with Jesus Christ.
As old as they might be chronologically, they are yet spiritual
neonates. They need milk,
milk only for now, so that they may develop spiritually.
Jesus never faults them for being mere “little ones”.
On the contrary, he deems them so very precious that he
guarantees the severest retribution to anyone who inhibits in any way
the spiritual growth of the newest disciple.
The babes-in-Christ have to be nursed.
And the church is the nursery for newborns.
What
do we expect from a nursery, any nursery?
What would we expect if we were taking our own child to a
nursery?
[1]
Safety; safety first of all; safety above everything else. Safety
is so very crucial within the congregation if only because danger
abounds without it. Think
of the most elemental confession found on the lips of the earliest
Christians; “Jesus is Lord.” But
early-day “little ones” (and not-so-little ones) clung to this
truth when “Caesar is lord”
was being screamed at them every day.
When political authorities sneered, “We’ll show you who’s
lord. We’ll show you in
the coliseum where wild animals haven’t yet learned that Jesus is
Lord; we’ll show you in the mines in whose damp darkness you are
going to spend the rest of your lives; we’ll show you on unpopulated
islands where you are going to be exiled until you rot” -- when this
happened our Christian foreparents could only gasp out three simple
words. And centuries
later, when it was announced throughout
Germany
that “Hitler ist Fuehrer”, the same faithful cry went up from the
same faithful few. What
those who dislike saying “Jesus is Lord” seem not to understand is
that to say “Jesus is Lord” is to say something about him,
to be sure, but not only about him; it’s also to say something about
us who utter it (by the
grace of God we have been admitted to truth); it’s also to say
something about the world
(the world is not the
kingdom
of
God
but is riddled with falsehood, treachery and turbulence at all times).
In the midst of all the talk today about spirituality (how I
wish we’d return to talking about faith, because “faith” always
implies “Jesus Christ”) we must always remember that not all the
spirits are holy. Unholy
spirits are always ready to infest and infect.
In many hymnals the words of the old hymn, “Jesus loves me,
this I know, for the bible
tells me so” have been changed to “Jesus loves me, this I know, and
the bible tells me so”. The
change of wording indicated that scripture is no longer acknowledged
as the source and norm of our knowledge of God; at best scripture can
only reflect what we think we can learn of God elsewhere.
This is paganism.
Therefore the members of a congregation must ensure that there
is safety in the congregation. It’s
crucial that the congregation be a nursery where “little ones” are
safe; crucial that this
congregation be a nursery where “pure spiritual milk” is kept
unsoured; crucial that this congregation nourish -- and never cause to stumble -- those
“little ones” who have “tasted the kindness of the Lord” and
who want only to become spiritual adults.
[2]
Speaking of nourishment, nourishment is plainly the second thing
we look for in a nursery. After
all, babes remain in a nursery for quite a while; they have to be fed
while they are there or else they won’t thrive.
Babes don’t get fed once; babes get fed small amounts
frequently; babes get fed small amounts so very frequently that
“frequently” amounts to “constantly”.
They absorb nourishment cumulatively; the more they are fed, the
greater their capacity to absorb; the greater their capacity to absorb,
the more they are fed. Plainly
there’s an incrementalism at work in the nourishing of babes.
Let’s remember that however sophisticated most people are (and
nearly everyone is sophisticated in at least one area of life), more
often than not they are babes in Christ, “little ones”.
The nursery has to ensure nourishment.
Pure spiritual milk must always be ready-to-hand.
[3]
As much as safety and nourishment must be found in a nursery, so
must affection. Everyone
knows of the experiments -- and the conclusions of the experiments --
concerning babies who were picked up and those who were left crying;
babies who were cuddled and those who were isolated; babies who were
caressed and kissed and cooed to and those whose physical needs were
attended to unfeelingly. Everyone
knows the difference it made to the babies at the time, and more
tellingly, what difference it came to make to the same person, now an
adult, years later. Everyone
knows that affection warming an infant makes the profoundest difference
to the adult’s self, the adult’s self-esteem, self-confidence,
resilience and adventuresomeness.
It’s no less the case in the nursery of faith.
The babes among us have to be safeguarded, yes; nourished, yes;
but always and everywhere cherished.
Affection is as essential as food.
II:
-- The
congregation isn’t nursery only; it’s also a school
where we are to be taught. Schools
exist for teaching. Which is
to say, someone has to be taught,
and something has to be taught. Frequently
we hear it said, “Faith is caught, not taught.”
It’s said as though it were self-evidently the soul of wisdom.
But it isn’t self-evident; neither is it the soul of wisdom.
At best it’s a half-truth.
The half-truth -- “faith is caught” -- is true in that faith
is a living relationship with a living person, not an intellectual
abstraction. “Faith is
caught, not taught” is a half-truth true
in that no relationship of person-with-person can ever be reduced to a
teaching. But it’s only a half-truth in that unless something
is taught -- in fact, unless much
is taught -- the person whom the truths describe can never be known.
Those who insist that faith is caught, not taught; why do they
never ask themselves why Jesus taught day-in and day-out throughout his
earthly ministry? Jesus
spent more time teaching than doing any other single thing.
Shouldn’t this tell us something?
At the very least it should tell us that events are not
self-interpreting. No
event in world-occurrence is ever self-interpreting.
Jesus could never merely do
something and then assume that everyone who observed him took home the
correct meaning of what he had done.
Quite the contrary: he always assumed that they weren’t
going to take home the correct meaning of what he had done unless he
told them. Prior to his
death and after it Jesus taught
any who would listen the meaning of his death.
If he hadn’t taught them the significance of his death they
would assume that his death meant no more than the deaths of the two
criminals crucified alongside him; no more than the deaths of miscreants
whom the state executes. Not
only would people not take home the correct meaning of Christ’s
activity; they would certainly take home the wrong meaning.
There’s a story about Francis of Assisi that warms everyone’s
heart; it may or may not be a true story about St.Francis, but in any
case it’s a story that I don’t like.
A fellow-friar asked Francis to join him in preaching outdoors
throughout the city. Francis
consented, and then added, “But before we preach we are going to walk
through the city.” When
they had finished walking through the city the fellow-friar asked him,
“But when do we preach?” “We
just did”, replied Francis, “we just did.”
Oh, it’s a honey-sweet story dripping with sentimentality, but
it’s only half-true. The
half-truth, of course, is that the preacher’s utterance and the
preacher’s life ought to be consistent.
Fine. But no
person’s life, not even a saint’s (Francis), not
even Jesus Christ’s unambiguously declares the gospel!
If Christ’s life had bespoken the truth unambiguously, why
would he have bothered to teach?
The mistake Francis is said to have made in
Italy
Mother Teresa never made in
India
. When Mother Teresa was
awarded a Nobel Prize a Yugoslavian journalist (Mother Teresa was
Yugoslavian herself) asked her why she rescued throwaway babies every
night from garbage cans and took them to the Sisters of Charity
orphanage. Mother Teresa
didn’t say, “Need you ask
why?” She didn’t say,
“Isn’t why I do it obvious?
The meaning and motive of what I do; isn’t it all self-evident?” Instead
she replied in her trademark, measured manner, “I rescue throwaway
babies for one reason: Jesus loves me.”
To be sure, it was only a one-sentence reply.
None the less, she knew she had to say
something to interpret her action to the journalist.
We always have to be taught.
We have to be taught answers to life-questions inasmuch as the
answers are important; crucial, in fact.
And if the answers are crucial, so are the questions.
Think of the questions, of some of them:
*Who
is God? He’s the creator.
However, scripture also insists God is the destroyer.
What does this mean?
*Why
is it that Jesus describes his most intimate followers as possessed of
the tiniest
faith?
*Why
do Christians regard as normative for faith and life an “older”
testament that is five times longer than the “newer”?
Why do we need the older at all?
What would happen if we set it aside?
*Why
is it that the only physical description of Jesus that the apostles
furnish is the fact that he was circumcised?
*Why
did our Hebrew foreparents regard idolatry, murder and adultery as the
three most heinous sins? Why
do we modern degenerates regard murder as criminal, adultery as trivial,
idolatry as nothing at all, and none of them as sin?
Jesus assumed that truth
isn’t self-evident. Jesus
assumed, in other words, that the meaning
of the most obvious event isn’t obvious at all.
Jesus assumed that we always have to be taught.
The congregation is a school in which Christ’s people are
taught.
III:
-- The
congregation is also an army that fights. Christians
today aren’t ready to hear this. We
don’t mind being a nursery or a school; but an army! an army that
fights! Aren’t we
followers of the Prince of Peace? Aren’t
we called to be peacemakers?
I have noticed that those who are repelled by any suggestion that
the congregation is an army are repelled by the notion of fighting.
I have noticed too, however, that the same people who abhor any
Christian reference to fighting will fight instantly if Canada Revenue
Agency gets their income-tax assessment wrong (or is suspected of
getting it wrong). They will
fight instantly if their child is awarded a low grade on a
school-project. They will
fight instantly as soon as they hear that their employer has plans to
alter working conditions or compensation or holidays.
After all, their cause is right and therefore righteous.
How much more is at stake when the truth of Jesus Christ collides
with the falsehoods of the evil one.
How much more is at stake when someone is victimised and rendered
a casualty in the midst of that spiritual warfare she was never even
aware of -- or may have been aware of.
No wonder Paul picks up the metaphor of soldiering and urges the
congregation in
Ephesus
to put on the whole armour of
God: shield, shoes, helmet, breastplate, sword. (Eph. 6:10-17)
There’s nothing God-honouring about being an unnecessary
victim.
No wonder too that Paul reminds young Timothy that soldiering
entails hardship, sacrifice, singlemindedness, “training in
godliness”. No wonder he gathers it all up by urging the young man
always to “fight the good fight of the faith.” (2 Tim. 2:3-4; 1 Tim.
6:12; 4:7) We can’t fight
unless we have first trained!
Training? Many
church-folk today see no point to training just because they see no
virtue in fighting. They
think that conflict is always and everywhere sub-Christian because
non-loving. And they are
wrong.
(i)
In the first place our Lord leaves us no choice: if we are going
to be disciples then we are going to be soldiers in that conflict which erupts the moment his flag of truth
is planted in the citadel of a hostile world.
Since the master was immersed in conflict every day, what makes
his followers think they won’t be or shouldn’t be?
(ii)
In the second place those who regard all conflict as
sub-Christian because unloving fail to see that spiritual conflict
arises on account of love’s energy.
God is love; Jesus is
the Incarnation of God’s nature; Jesus is immersed in conflict every
day just because love is resisted every day, love is contradicted every
day, love is savaged every day. What
kind of love is it that won’t persist in the face of opposition?
won’t contend to vindicate the slandered and relieve the oppressed?
won’t fend off every effort of lovelessness to victimise and abandon?
Love that won’t persist and contend; love that refuses to fight
is simply no love at all.
(iii)
In the third place the most love-filled heart knows that there is a place for godly resistance.
There is a time and a place to dig in our heels and stiffen our
spine in the name of Jesus Christ. When
Martin Luther, grief-stricken at the horrible abuses in the church of
his day, finally stopped weeping and decided to do
something, he discussed what he planned to do with Professor Jerome
Schurff of Wittenberg University. Schurff
was professor in the faculty of law.
He was one of the brightest stars in the
Wittenberg
U.
firmament. Professor Jerome
Schurff agreed with Luther that the abuses were dreadful.
Schurff, however, was aghast at what Luther planned to do.
“Don’t do that!” he cried, “You’ll renders us all
targets here; we’ll all be in trouble in
Wittenberg
. The authorities will never
put up with it!” “And if
they have to put up with it?” Luther replied, “if they have
to?”
To live in the company of Jesus Christ is never to relish
conflict for the sake of conflict; but it is to share his conflict.
To live in the company of Jesus Christ is to share love’s
struggle in the face of un-love’s aggression.
IV:
-- The
congregation is also a hospital for the wounded. When
the apostle Paul discusses the different ministries to be exercised in
any one congregation he mentions healing. (1 Cor. 12)
If healing is to be exercised within the congregation, then the
congregation is a hospital.
We must be sure to understand that there is no shame in being
hospitalised just because there is no shame in being wounded.
The fact that we are wounded simply confirms the truth that we
are soldiers in Christ’s army and have recently been on the front
lines. Spiritual conflict is
no less debilitating than any other kind of conflict.
One military facility for the battle-worn is the Rest and
Recreation Centre. “R&R”
centres are not merely for military personnel who have broken a leg or
fractured a skull; “R&R” centres principally accommodate those
who have been under immense stress, are frazzled, and need to move
behind the front for a while in order to recuperate.
During the last great war all submarine crews were given as much
time off to recuperate as they spent on patrol.
A month-long patrol at sea was always followed by a month’s
rest ashore. No one ever
suggested there was something shameful in the men’s need for rest.
Rest. Jesus invites
us, “Come to me, all who labour and are heavy-laden, and I will give
you rest.” (Matt. 11:30) “Rest”,
however, has a special force in scripture; “rest” in scripture
doesn’t have the modern sense of “vegging”, utter inactivity.
Rest, rather, has to do with restoration.
“Come to me, all who are bone-weary and worn down and frazzled
and fractured and frantic; come to me, for with me there is
restoration.”
We should note that our Lord’s winsome invitation, “Come unto
me...”, isn’t really an invitation at all; it’s a command.
“Come”, “you come”, “you come now” -- it’s plainly
an imperative; he commands us
to come to him for restoration. To
say that it’s a command is to say there’s no option here.
We must go to him for
restoration, just because he knows that his soldiers are beaten up, and
once beaten up aren’t much use until restored.
In other words, providing hospital care for Christ’s wounded is
as much the congregation’s ministry to the congregation as is being a
nursery where newborns are nurtured, and a school where learners are
taught, and an army where soldiers are trained and in which they fight
the good fight of the faith until that day when we say with the apostle,
I have fought the good fight,
I have finished the race,
I have kept the faith.
Victor
Shepherd July
2006