I have two churches that I regularly attend. The one church is located in the area in which I live while the other one is located near where the daughter's family resides. What will be reviewed today is a sermon (click here for the audio link and the Scripture passage) from the senior minister of the latter church, Reverend Steve Constable (click here for short biography). The sermon was given in 2012 and it provided a running commentary on Amos 6 (click here for the chapter or read the chapter from the audio link previously provided).
Why review this particular sermon? This blog is reviewing this sermon because of the Scripture being commented on. For the sixth chapter of Amos is the part of the Bible that best describes America today. And what is sad about that statement is that what best describes America is tragic and it includes many of my fellow religiously conservative Christians.
Amos 6 can be divided into two parts. The first part describes the complacency and apathy exhibited by the Israelites at the time. The second part discusses the Lord's reaction to that complacency and apathy. Historical background for Amos' time can be found at this link. And it is in this background information where we can first spot the parallels between Israel at the time of Amos and America today. Because of their victories and prosperity, both had much to be proud of. And perhaps because of the comfortable lifestyle enjoyed by both, the haves has good reason for not caring about the plight of the vulnerable.
Here we should note the specifics of Amos' description of the people back then. For they lived in luxury, ate well, drank better, enjoyed their own creative ventures, and ignored the real state of their nation as measured by their rejection of God and their neglect of those who were at risk.
And whereas we can easily understand why today's nonChristian Americans might revel in the same way of life as Amos was condemning back then, we need to search for why Christians can join their secular counterparts in embracing the same way of life. For we Christians should be more leery of the comforts of materialism than nonChristians, but such is not the case in too many instances. After all, we have been warned by Jesus against storing up treasures on earth, warned Paul against loving money, and warned by John against loving the world (click here, here again, and there). But we have failed to pay attention and perhaps the following is one reason why that is so. We've been often told that we can ignore the unpleasantries that are coming to the world because we will gain great riches in heaven and experience wonders when we can see God in His fully glory. However, what some infer from that is that we are free to embrace the non-taboo earthly pleasures without reservation because our joy is meant to glorify God.
Anyway, Constable drew some interesting parallels between Israel of Amos' day and today's America as well as making some important points. First, he describes Israel's complacency and its coming conesquences. He describes Amos' first audience as those who were in power and states that, in a democracy, what we should be doing today is to first take our grievances to our leaders. However, getting people to do this depends on how tolerable the injustices one experiences or sees are. So when evil and tyranny are visited on others only, motivating people to stand up to those injustices is problematic. He then lists historical movements in America which didn't begin with the actions of those in power. Instead, they were started by the actions of small groups of what was then powerless people. Thus, no one who lives in a democracy is relieved of their duty to speak out.
Second, Amos talks to people who have a certain misperception of the way things are. Israel's leaders were told that Israel was not operating the way it was designed to. But they responded as if they were in denial of what was wrong. And thus they told the people that things were never better. Those who were well off were all too eager to believe what the leaders said. And just as those who were comfortable embraced denial as a way of seeing their world in Amos' day, so can any of us do the same today. That means that evil does not just exist in our leaders who practice injustice, it can reside in us who are too comfortable to care about what is going on around us.
Third, Amos was speaking to people who were living in the past and took credit for what God achieved. Isn't this the same for Americans today as we point to our past and our victories over others, our standard of living or other achievements? And because the people of Amos' time lived in pride, they could not see their future. That neither the Israel of Amos' time nor today's America can find true security in its past victories. Then note how, according to Amos, God detested the 'pride of Jacob' and Israel's reason for its false confidence. Constable then makes this personal for Christians as he tells us that it isn't until we experience trials that we realize in whom we really trust.
Constable then summarizes what is taught in Amos here. It is about the Israel's rulers and people who refused to change because life was too good for them, their refusal to listen to what was real because what was false ticked the ears, and their insistence on denying the future because of what happened in the past. And though Constable's application to the individual Christian and his/her personal piety may not appeal to nonChristians, he makes valid points that should move us to act as better citizens in a democracy.
Finally, Constable describes three implications he sees from what Amos 6. with only the first two applying to those working for social justice regardless of their religious beliefs. He first asks if we are grieving over the injustices that are happening around us. Here, Constable, without using Francis Schaeffer's words, gives us Schaeffer's warning against making idols out of personal peace and prosperity. And second, he paraphrases Paul when Paul stated that the Church and its Gospel is foolishness to the world.
Again, there is some of what Constable says here that, because it applies to a Christian's personal faith, may not be of interest to nonChristians working for social justice. But much of his sermon on Amos should be used to stir people of all faiths to look to help others and not just live for their own peace and comfort.
www.flamingfundamentalist.blogspot.com
(Only one person pictured is a Christian Fundamentalist. And so which one pictured is not like the others)
Showing posts with label Steve Constable. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Steve Constable. Show all posts
Friday, January 15, 2016
Friday, February 7, 2014
Should Christians Demand Their Rights
It's no secret that religiously conservative Christians are all but absent when it comes to activism especially when it promotes social justice and the rights of others. They are all but absent except for perhaps the abortion and 2nd amendment rights issues. But outside of that, religiously conservative Christians have an aversion to protesting for rights especially for the rights of the disadvantaged in society. There are a number of reasons why but perhaps one of the reasons is what is written in I Corinthians 9. A sermon on this passage (click here) is included and given by Reverend Steve Constable (click here) from Stony Point Presbyterian Church outside of Richmond Virginia.
In his sermon, Constable talks about how the Apostle Paul voluntarily surrendered his rights so that he could better minister to the Corinthian church. And this was done despite the fact that Paul could claim a number of rights that were associated with being an apostle. The list of those rights can be found Scripture passage included in the link to the sermon. In most cases, the Christian reasoning with regard to demanding rights is that they must be surrendered for Christ. And since we are called to evangelize others, being concerned about their rights takes a back seat to evangelism. And a successful result of evangelism would mean that people become Christians who would surrender their rights. Thus, we end up minimizing the rights of others.
At the same time, we have Occupy Wall Street's (OWS) Declaration Of The Occupation Of New York City (click here). Towards the end of that document is the exhortation to all people to exercise their 'power' and rights.
So the question is, who is right here? Is Constable correct in telling us to surrender our rights or is OWS correct in calling us to insist on our rights and those of others? The cop out answer, which will be given here, is that both are right within the context in which they speak. As Constable is reflecting on the history of the Church in general and the Corinthian church in particular, the giving up of rights was done to further the Gospel in a preChristian world and, to an extent, still needs to be done today. It was important back then for Christians to make specific sacrifices to further this new Gospel in the Roman Empire.
At the same time, when one reads the list of grievances listed in the Declaration Of The Occupation Of New York City, it is moral for those in society, and that would include both Christians and nonChristians, to insist that not only their grievances be merely heard, but that they would be acted on in a satisfactory manner.
As Christians, we must think of how the reputation of the Gospel would be hurt if our Gospel is associated with the continuation of the abuses listed in the grievances. These grievances include the illegal foreclosure of houses, the poisoning of food, the channeling of wealth to the rich at the expense of all others, the stripping of rights from employees, and the profiting from torture.
Such an association can be made because we live in a time when there is a transitioning from a Christian dominated society to a post Christian nation. Thus, the Church has had, and sometimes continues to have, a close association with the same people who have wealth and power and who are accused of abusing others. This is why the denial of rights to others might sully the reputation of the Gospel. For if the Church does not renounce its past connections and challenge the status quo, the Gospel could very well be associated with such abuses. And if the reputation and furthering of the Gospel is more important than mere imitation of the Apostle Paul in I Corinthians 9, then perhaps insisting on our own rights and the rights of others might just become a necessary for the Church to practice.
So one of the real obstacles to religiously conservative Christians from becoming involved in advancing people's rights depends on what they see is the focus of passages like I Corinthians 9. Is the main point of this part of Corinthians to get people to imitate how the Apostle Paul denied himself, or is what is most important is his passion for spreading the Gospel in today's world? There will be some Christians who will be too afraid to do anything but imitate. Such imitation is done without understanding because important questions are never asked. As a result, the imitation can amount to nothing more than superstition regardless of the intention.
In a group that is dominated by authoritarianism, imitation is the most likely choice and that is what we see in most religiously conservative Christians. After all, those favoring authoritarianism tend to believe in a world that is simple so that difficult questions need not be asked (click here). Thus, one of the keys to involving religiously conservative Christians in social justice activism in America is to teach them the difference between a Biblical respect for authority from authoritarianism so they can be weaned from the latter. And until that happens, the OWS demand that one's rights be respected and the voluntary surrendering of one's rights as described in Constable's sermon will be seen as mutually exclusive by religiously conservative Christians.
In his sermon, Constable talks about how the Apostle Paul voluntarily surrendered his rights so that he could better minister to the Corinthian church. And this was done despite the fact that Paul could claim a number of rights that were associated with being an apostle. The list of those rights can be found Scripture passage included in the link to the sermon. In most cases, the Christian reasoning with regard to demanding rights is that they must be surrendered for Christ. And since we are called to evangelize others, being concerned about their rights takes a back seat to evangelism. And a successful result of evangelism would mean that people become Christians who would surrender their rights. Thus, we end up minimizing the rights of others.
At the same time, we have Occupy Wall Street's (OWS) Declaration Of The Occupation Of New York City (click here). Towards the end of that document is the exhortation to all people to exercise their 'power' and rights.
So the question is, who is right here? Is Constable correct in telling us to surrender our rights or is OWS correct in calling us to insist on our rights and those of others? The cop out answer, which will be given here, is that both are right within the context in which they speak. As Constable is reflecting on the history of the Church in general and the Corinthian church in particular, the giving up of rights was done to further the Gospel in a preChristian world and, to an extent, still needs to be done today. It was important back then for Christians to make specific sacrifices to further this new Gospel in the Roman Empire.
At the same time, when one reads the list of grievances listed in the Declaration Of The Occupation Of New York City, it is moral for those in society, and that would include both Christians and nonChristians, to insist that not only their grievances be merely heard, but that they would be acted on in a satisfactory manner.
As Christians, we must think of how the reputation of the Gospel would be hurt if our Gospel is associated with the continuation of the abuses listed in the grievances. These grievances include the illegal foreclosure of houses, the poisoning of food, the channeling of wealth to the rich at the expense of all others, the stripping of rights from employees, and the profiting from torture.
Such an association can be made because we live in a time when there is a transitioning from a Christian dominated society to a post Christian nation. Thus, the Church has had, and sometimes continues to have, a close association with the same people who have wealth and power and who are accused of abusing others. This is why the denial of rights to others might sully the reputation of the Gospel. For if the Church does not renounce its past connections and challenge the status quo, the Gospel could very well be associated with such abuses. And if the reputation and furthering of the Gospel is more important than mere imitation of the Apostle Paul in I Corinthians 9, then perhaps insisting on our own rights and the rights of others might just become a necessary for the Church to practice.
So one of the real obstacles to religiously conservative Christians from becoming involved in advancing people's rights depends on what they see is the focus of passages like I Corinthians 9. Is the main point of this part of Corinthians to get people to imitate how the Apostle Paul denied himself, or is what is most important is his passion for spreading the Gospel in today's world? There will be some Christians who will be too afraid to do anything but imitate. Such imitation is done without understanding because important questions are never asked. As a result, the imitation can amount to nothing more than superstition regardless of the intention.
In a group that is dominated by authoritarianism, imitation is the most likely choice and that is what we see in most religiously conservative Christians. After all, those favoring authoritarianism tend to believe in a world that is simple so that difficult questions need not be asked (click here). Thus, one of the keys to involving religiously conservative Christians in social justice activism in America is to teach them the difference between a Biblical respect for authority from authoritarianism so they can be weaned from the latter. And until that happens, the OWS demand that one's rights be respected and the voluntary surrendering of one's rights as described in Constable's sermon will be seen as mutually exclusive by religiously conservative Christians.
Friday, July 12, 2013
Does The Gospel Of Individual Salvation Save Us From The Call To Justice?
I have two pet peeves with the American Conservative Christian Church of which I am a member. My first problem with my fellow believers, especially its leaders, is that they tend to confirm rather than disprove the Left's contention that the Church is just another institution of indoctrination for the maintenance of the status quo for the benefit of those with wealth and power. For a large part, my fellow American Conservative Christians show the charge to be true by their silence in the face of domestic and foreign injustice. There is no movement in this church to change a political-economic system that relies on war and exploitation to thrive. There is no call by this church for those who create, maintain, or benefit from this system to repent. Here, the Church is like a dog that is needlessly confined to its yard by an invisible fence since it ignores the stranger lurking outside anyway.
Part of what feeds this apathy to confront the threat of the status quo is my second pet peeve with the same Church. That is that they preach the Gospel in a way that makes believing similar to clicking the "Add To Cart" for a product one is buying online. The American Christian Church has, for the most part, reduced being a follower of Christ to being a consumer. One believes as a way to purchase after-life insurance and then, because of the free grace being preached, one is free to live the life one wants as long as one does not break certain taboos. This blog has addressed this self-centered consumer gospel in past posts such as Righteouosly Selfish and Is The American Dream A Christian's Nightmare.
We are addressing this pet peeve again in this post by reviewing the sermon, Stop Playing At Meetings (click here for the sermon), given by Rev. Steve Constable, the senior pastor from Stony Point Reformed Presbyterian Church just outside of Richmond, Virginia. In this sermon, which was given on March 4, 2012, Constable, who is originally from England, preached on Amos 5: 14 - 27 and his basic message was to give a moment for pause to those who were comfortable for this is what Amos was doing. Amos wrote during a time of Israel's unfaithfulness to God and their unjust treatment to its vulnerable. Despite their shortcomings, the people felt safe and expected protection from God because of their religiosity.
It is at this point that Constable does us a service as he identifies four groups of people to whom Amos would preach judgment against if he were alive today. Those groups include, religious relativists, Universalists, triumphalists (that is those who believe that all Christians can be healthy and rich), and Evangelicals. But why would Constable include Evangelicals in this list? It is because some of us think that, on one hand, we already have a free get out of God's judgment pass because of our relationship with Jesus but, on the other hand, we live lives of self-indulgence. In other words, many of us Evangelicals could, to our surprise be left behind when the rapture comes. It is by naming this last group as being in danger of wrath that Constable escapes the American Conservative Christian trap of making the Gospel a consumer good to buy or win.
By naming Evangelicals as possibly being in danger of facing God's judgment, Constable gives a gift that keeps on giving for it is the first warning in a long time to us evangelicals that we cannot rest on assumptions, especially that of praying the "right" prayer saves us when we live in whichever way we want.
Constable then follows Amos's wakeup call with 3 real life applications of Amos's commands. The first was to seek God first and that this searching might have an inverse relation with how close we are to the Church. In addition, Constable continues with saying that when you seek God, He might take you to uncomfortable places. For some evangelicals then, God might be leading them to practice activism with atheists who have polar opposite political and world views. For myself, there are several uncomfortable places outside of activism that I might have to consider if I continue to seek God.
The next of Amos's commands that Constable comments on is the one that says "seek good and not evil." This point must be emphasized because for far too many fellow Christians, our salvation liberates us to enjoy consumption without end as long as, what was mentioned before, what we consume is not on a Christian taboo list. We must also be careful not to substitute practicing religion for seeking for God. That is, we are not to replace seeking God with religious causes or the good things in life. Seeking good rather than evil is comes from seeking God. So Constable substitutes a life of service to and reconciled relationships with others as a sign of a revival that comes from God.
Finally, Constable refers to Martin Luther King in Amos's last command to seek justice. Here, he exhorts us to work for justice and mercy for other people in everyday life. And we should also note that though seeking justice is barely mentioned in the sermon, it is still a command and a necessary part of Amos's message to Israel and God's message to us. Individual salvation does not free us from our obligations to seek justice for others.
To those unbelieving peace activists, this sermon might carry little weight. But it serves as a wakeup call for all of us American Conservative Christians who would be more disturbed over our eternal destination than over the committing of sin. That being broken by our own transgressions rather than merely being relieved from where one is not spending the afterlife is a mark of true belief. In saying all of this, Constable serves a powerful wakeup call to shake us out of those worldly comforts we often use as a substitute for fellowship with God. To do what Constable does here requires a delicate balancing act. For we must not shape the Gospel so that it is all too accommodating to the consumer enslaved American while stressing that salvation is through faith alone, not by works, and that faith comes from God.
Though this sermon does not include a call to challenge those benefiting most from the status quo to repent, his message here preserves the Gospel from becoming like any other object to be consumed by an already spoiled people. Such people flock to hear comfortable message that excuse them from serving God and others.
Part of what feeds this apathy to confront the threat of the status quo is my second pet peeve with the same Church. That is that they preach the Gospel in a way that makes believing similar to clicking the "Add To Cart" for a product one is buying online. The American Christian Church has, for the most part, reduced being a follower of Christ to being a consumer. One believes as a way to purchase after-life insurance and then, because of the free grace being preached, one is free to live the life one wants as long as one does not break certain taboos. This blog has addressed this self-centered consumer gospel in past posts such as Righteouosly Selfish and Is The American Dream A Christian's Nightmare.
We are addressing this pet peeve again in this post by reviewing the sermon, Stop Playing At Meetings (click here for the sermon), given by Rev. Steve Constable, the senior pastor from Stony Point Reformed Presbyterian Church just outside of Richmond, Virginia. In this sermon, which was given on March 4, 2012, Constable, who is originally from England, preached on Amos 5: 14 - 27 and his basic message was to give a moment for pause to those who were comfortable for this is what Amos was doing. Amos wrote during a time of Israel's unfaithfulness to God and their unjust treatment to its vulnerable. Despite their shortcomings, the people felt safe and expected protection from God because of their religiosity.
It is at this point that Constable does us a service as he identifies four groups of people to whom Amos would preach judgment against if he were alive today. Those groups include, religious relativists, Universalists, triumphalists (that is those who believe that all Christians can be healthy and rich), and Evangelicals. But why would Constable include Evangelicals in this list? It is because some of us think that, on one hand, we already have a free get out of God's judgment pass because of our relationship with Jesus but, on the other hand, we live lives of self-indulgence. In other words, many of us Evangelicals could, to our surprise be left behind when the rapture comes. It is by naming this last group as being in danger of wrath that Constable escapes the American Conservative Christian trap of making the Gospel a consumer good to buy or win.
By naming Evangelicals as possibly being in danger of facing God's judgment, Constable gives a gift that keeps on giving for it is the first warning in a long time to us evangelicals that we cannot rest on assumptions, especially that of praying the "right" prayer saves us when we live in whichever way we want.
Constable then follows Amos's wakeup call with 3 real life applications of Amos's commands. The first was to seek God first and that this searching might have an inverse relation with how close we are to the Church. In addition, Constable continues with saying that when you seek God, He might take you to uncomfortable places. For some evangelicals then, God might be leading them to practice activism with atheists who have polar opposite political and world views. For myself, there are several uncomfortable places outside of activism that I might have to consider if I continue to seek God.
The next of Amos's commands that Constable comments on is the one that says "seek good and not evil." This point must be emphasized because for far too many fellow Christians, our salvation liberates us to enjoy consumption without end as long as, what was mentioned before, what we consume is not on a Christian taboo list. We must also be careful not to substitute practicing religion for seeking for God. That is, we are not to replace seeking God with religious causes or the good things in life. Seeking good rather than evil is comes from seeking God. So Constable substitutes a life of service to and reconciled relationships with others as a sign of a revival that comes from God.
Finally, Constable refers to Martin Luther King in Amos's last command to seek justice. Here, he exhorts us to work for justice and mercy for other people in everyday life. And we should also note that though seeking justice is barely mentioned in the sermon, it is still a command and a necessary part of Amos's message to Israel and God's message to us. Individual salvation does not free us from our obligations to seek justice for others.
To those unbelieving peace activists, this sermon might carry little weight. But it serves as a wakeup call for all of us American Conservative Christians who would be more disturbed over our eternal destination than over the committing of sin. That being broken by our own transgressions rather than merely being relieved from where one is not spending the afterlife is a mark of true belief. In saying all of this, Constable serves a powerful wakeup call to shake us out of those worldly comforts we often use as a substitute for fellowship with God. To do what Constable does here requires a delicate balancing act. For we must not shape the Gospel so that it is all too accommodating to the consumer enslaved American while stressing that salvation is through faith alone, not by works, and that faith comes from God.
Though this sermon does not include a call to challenge those benefiting most from the status quo to repent, his message here preserves the Gospel from becoming like any other object to be consumed by an already spoiled people. Such people flock to hear comfortable message that excuse them from serving God and others.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)