March 11, 2009
So then, what is Humility anyway?
If I’m going to be thinking about humility for a while, it seems logical to start off by thinking a bit about what humility is. After all, how can I aim at cultivating humility if I don’t even know what humility is?
C.J. Mahaney gives us a handy definition of humility in his book Humility: True Greatness. According to Mahaney, humility is:
“Honestly assessing ourselves
In light of God’s holiness
And our sinfulness”
There are a number of things I appreciate about this definition:
- It’s dead simple; you could memorize it in about 30 seconds and say it in about 2 seconds, and under temptation, you rarely get longer than 2 seconds.
- It’s all about God and our relationship with him. You couldn’t have this sort of humility if you were a reasonably moral atheist.
- It’s trying to look at what’s going on in our hearts, only secondarily our actions. We’ve all seen (and, if we’re honest, on occasion, all been) that creep who says or does some humble sounding thing, all the while dripping with insincerity. Mahaney’s not trying to make us any more like that sort of person.
Nonetheless, I do feel it’s a bit incomplete. After all, man was originally, morally speaking, perfect. He represented the glory, justice and holiness of God as perfectly as a finite creature could. When it came to honestly assessing himself in light of God’s holiness and his sinfulness, man before the fall had nothing to be ashamed of. Nonetheless, he still had to be humble. C.J. Must know this because he holds that pride was the first sin. While we’re at it, even the spotless, perfect Lord Jesus was “humble in heart” (Matthew 11:–). So, while I agree that God’s holiness and our sinfulness are very important and should be motives for humility, it got to be more than that. What I’d add is some element of an understanding of our creatureliness, the fact that we are not God and are very much not at the centre of the universe, indeed, we depend on him for life and breath and everything. This is the kind of humility that gets David saying “What is man, that you are mindful of him, and the son of man that you care for him?” (Psalm 8:5) So perhaps humility is more:
“Honestly assessing ourselves
In light of God’s glory and fullness
And our utter dependence
God’s holiness
And our sinfulness”
There are just a couple of things I’d add to that. I understand what C.J. was trying to say, but his reflection on whether our children will look back and think “They had humility, they had what mattered” (Page 24) made me a little uncomfortable. A big part of me would love to be remembered for my humility. But I know that within me lies a deadly tendency to try to appear humble so that people will think I’m humble. At the end of the day my better mind would prefer it if those who I leave behind also honestly assess me in light of God’s holiness and my sinfulness – as well as God’s grace. C.S. Lewis’ thoughts on pride (which will probably come up again later on) also highlight the self-justifying nature of pride. That’s to say that when I am proud of my achievements, I’m taking pleasure in the fact, not so much that I’ve done well, so much as that I’ve done better than other people. This kind of self-justification comes as much into our relationship with God as it does with man. It bothers me that by the definition I’ve set up above, a thorough legalist could have a good deal of that kind of humility – and despair! That makes me wonder to what degree the definition describes the Christian virtue of humility, and whether on can be humble and reject the Gospel. I’ve tried to gently introduce that idea below.
Something that occurred to me as I was reading Tim Keller on Humility (also likely to feature later on) made me keen to root humility deeper into the heart, and have humble actions flow from a humble heart. With these tweakings to the definition done, I’ve come up with:
Humility
Is a disposition of the heart:
Which causes us to honestly assess ourselves
In light of God’s glory and fullness
And our utter dependence;
God’s holiness
And our sinfulness
And brings us to
Act, think and feel in light of that
Before God and men.
Ultimately, I’m not sure I prefer my own definition to C.J.’s. What it gains in technical precision, I worry it loses in its serious lack of catchiness. What’s more, there are more things I could say (and will say in other posts), which leads me to suspect that, as with all true virtue (and vice), humility is probably a multifaceted thing which can be approached helpfully from a number of angles. Perhaps at the end of the day, C.J.’s definition helpfully crystallises one of those facets for us.
March 4, 2009
Book Review: Humility: True Greatness by C.J. Mahaney
I’ve been planning to do this book review for several weeks, but just last week Trevin Wax beat me to it. I noticed in his review that he recommends that you make a practice of reading this book once a year (how many books have you been told to do that with?). For what it’s worth, I read Humility: True Greatness this time last year, so in a small way, I’ve kind of started doing what Trevin advises. I don’t regret it for a minute.
There is something inherently healthy about reading C.J. Mahaney’s books. You end up convicted, reassured, challenged and encouraged. I for one am more deeply convicted that I am proud to the core, and that this is profoundly offensive to God. At the same time, I am more assured of the Father’s love towards me in Christ, more filled with admiration for the Saviour who gave his life as a ransom for many, and more hopeful that by the Spirit’s help, I can progressively fight this.
The reason is simple; to borrow a phrase from Tim Keller, the Gospel penny has dropped. Indeed, I’ll wager that over the years a sustained torrent of Gospel pennies has dropped, and the riches of his deep cross centredness are very much on display here. Quite frankly, C.J. Mahaney is obsessed with Christ and him crucified. He can’t let you go two steps without taking you by the hand and leading you back to Calvary; he even puts in an epilogue to remind you one last time. The effect is practical theology at its very best – warm hearted and deeply evangelical.
But it’s not all airy-fairy talk in the abstract – this book is deeply practical. C.J. suggests a whopping 17 concrete things that you can be doing, meditating on and pursuing to weaken pride and cultivate humility in your day to day life. He finds ways to fight pride in places you (well, at least, I) would never have thought of looking. You’ll learn how to spot evidences of grace in others, pursue correction and study sin. It’s enough to have you fighting pride when you get up, humbly going to bed, humbly praying, humbly speaking. By the time you get to the end, you’ll start to wonder whether you’re going to be doing very much other than fight pride.
This is one of the greatest strengths of a cross and Gospel centred approach; it’s uniquely holistic. I don’t know what kinds of temptations you currently struggle with, but a life filled with the Word, with meditation on the attributes of God, on your sin, on the cross, and on Jesus’ return is only going to help you with that. Readers of C.J.’s other books need not worry that he’s traded in the Cross Centred life for the Pride and Humility Centred life, rather he’s explained in a specific way how to live the Cross Centred Life through the oft neglected window of the struggle between pride and humility.
If you’re worrying that this book is going to be dense, or you’re just not really in the habit of reading books, you really have nothing to fear with this one. It’s pretty short (172 fairly small pages in a normal sized font) and clearly structured into three parts with pretty short chapters. C.J. has a gift for explaining things effectively and simply, and has a knack for knowing how to throw in a well chosen quote. In particular, his stuff on Mark 10 will stay with me for a while. You can read this book.
All in all, this book is superb. It doesn’t have the breadth of the Institutes. It lacks the scholarly credentials of a Don Carson. But in its profundity clothed in simple language, its relentless focus on the Gospel, its practical usefulness and its willingness to seriously tackle an area which we as evangelicals have a sad – not to mention disastrous – tendency to neglect, it may be one of the best and most important books on my shelf. I’m sure it will do a lot of good to many people, and am deeply grateful for it. Trevin is right, it deserves reading and rereading.
One of the most enlightening things about rereading a book after a fair length of time (in this case, pretty much exactly a year) is the opportunity it gives you to see what you’ve learnt and what you’ve forgotten. I was ashamed to find out how little of this book I’ve taken in. Of all the things C.J. suggests, I think I may have only retained one or two of them. I know it’s cheesy and what you’re supposed to say and all that, but while I know that pride is a sin everyone has to deal with, I think it’s a particular temptation for me – and not one I’m dealing well with at that.
For that reason, I want to look at the whole issue of humility and pride in a bit more detail over the next few weeks, and the posts here will reflect that. This isn’t me trying to teach you how to be humble. Rather, this is a proud person trying to repent and thinking about that repentance out loud. What you think about all this is as important to me as what I do (after all, our goal is to work towards finding out what the Bible writers think). I hope to be able to bounce ideas off you and get your advice. At the same time, I’m hoping to be able to harvest the insights of other writers on this topic, and I’ll be sharing the results with you. I hope you enjoy reading.
January 27, 2009
Seeing in the New Year, John Wesley Style: Step 4, Receive Christ as Lord
This series has somewhat run away with me. It’s about seeing in the New Year and here I am, adding my update in the last week of January. Well, for what it’s worth, here’s the last bit of Wesley’s Directions, and a couple of thoughts.
This last section is all about receiving Christ as your Lord. Those who give themselves over to sin or the world say “Sin, I am yours” or “world, I am yours”. Christians, Wesley says, must be people who say “Christ, I am yours”. Wesley makes this pretty practical by making two qualifications, both of which were quite convicting for me. If Christ is really your Lord, you’ve got to let him give you your job and your station. You can’t pick an choose. It’s here that you get some of the most well known passages from Wesley, and the only ones which really make it through to a modern Wesleyan covenant service:
“Christ has many services to be done, some are more easy and honourable, others more difficult and disgraceful: some are suitable to our inclinations and interests, others are contrary to both: In some we may please Christ and please ourselves, as when he requires us to feed and clothe ourselves, to provide honest things for our own maintenance, indeed there are some spiritual duties that are more pleasing than others; as to rejoice in the Lord, to be blessing and praising God, to be feeding ourselves with the delights and comforts of religion; these are the sweet works of a Christian. But then there are other works where we cannot please Christ except by denying ourselves, as in giving and lending, bearing and forbearing, reproving men for their sins, withdrawing from their company, witnessing against their wickedness, confessing Christ and his name when it will cost us shame and reproach, sailing against the wind, swimming against the tide, steering contrary to the time; parting with our ease, our liberties and accommodations for the name of our Lord Jesus.”
We are encouraged to go to Christ, saying
“Put me to what you will, rank me with whom you will, put me to doing, put me to suffering, let me be employed for you or laid aside for you, exalted for you or trampled under foot for you, let me be full or let me be empty, let me have all things or let me have nothing. I freely and sincerely resign all to your pleasure and disposal.”
The point is that you can’t call Christ your Lord and then be picky about what he asks you to do. I love studying the Bible, and sharing what I’ve learnt with my Christian friends, I love learning from the greats in church history. I don’t enjoy evangelising my non-Christian friends, working with teenagers, and getting my hands dirty. I want to become the J. I. Packer, the Tim Keller and the Don Carson of Spain, all rolled into one. But can I submit to Christ if he asks me to work with the youth group, be thought a nutter by my peers, never manage to get to Spain and die in obscurity washing the dishes for a small church where few notice what I’m doing? Augustine once said that if you believe the parts of the Bible you like and think are reasonable, all the while discarding the parts you find unpalatable or difficult then it’s not really the Bible you believe, but yourself. It’s the same principle here. If I serve Christ in the fun bits and dodge the messy bits, it’s not really Christ I’m serving but myself.
Much though I found this challenge helpful, I wish there were more of the Cross. Wesley seems to be missing this key part of the Christian’s obedience here. We get “you are not your own” and “glorify God in your body”, but the Bible says “You are not your own for you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body” (1 Cor 6:19b-20). Maybe we’re supposed to assume it from the section on Christ as priest, but what Wesley presents us with here is a crossless, Christless obedience. Combined with (true) warnings such as “when you have understandingly and heartily resigned and given yourself up to him, resolving forever to be at his command, and at his disposal, then you are Christians indeed and never until then. Christ will be the saviour of none except his servants” I have to start asking whether Wesley’s theology of repentance differs greatly from Islam. Christians repent because of the glory of God and his inherent worthiness, to be sure, but all this is buttressed by the value of Christ’s person, his blood shed at the cross and the grace of the Holy Spirit (see the warning of Heb 10:26-31). Of course, I know Wesley was aware of the distinction, and a casual perusal of his writings would reveal how much he usually laboured that obedience is based on and framed within the love of God in Christ, his trustworthiness and the redemption he has already provided. But it isn’t front and centre here.
This is particularly tragic since, as I said, of the whole treatise, this is probably the only bit which modern British Methodism is really all that familiar with. It’s such a shame that Britain’s Methodists (and a good chunk of the rest of the world’s Methodists) now swear an oath at their covenant service which is crossless, Christless and exclusively moralistic.
I’m going to end this series here because all that’s left is Wesley’s suggestion for a covenant prayer, it’s several pages long, and while you could do a lot worse than read it, I don’t really have the time or the energy to simply copy it out.
I’ve enjoyed reading this book, and it’s got me thinking about Methodism as a whole quite a lot. I love historic Methodism, and its achievements in the 18th century are a continued blessing to the English speaking world and beyond even to the present day. It’s a movement which has the essentials of the Gospel front and centre, and has been backed by a vigour to see other people come to Christ which I can learn a lot from. It’s also the source of the very finest in English hymnody. There’s a lot to be treasured and emulated here.
Ultimately, while it’s probably not harmful, the practise of the covenant renewal service in Methodism is somewhat unnecessary. God has already given us an act of covenant renewal – the Lord’s Supper. I wonder how different Methodism would have looked if Wesley had titled this booklet “Directions for participating in the Lord’s Supper”. If we all, week by week, put these sorts of thoughts into our participating in the Lord’s Supper (it was once an event accompanied by quite intense personal preparation, not unlike the covenant service), how would that look?
It strikes me as well that Methodism’s two greatest faults – its subjectivism and its individualism – come out in this booklet. The biblical way to renew the covenant, through the Lord’s Supper, is primarily objective in nature – God makes us objective promises based on historical events, we are primarily recipients. It’s also inherently communal in nature – you can’t take the Lord’s Supper on your own at home.
By contrast here, it is the believer making a covenant with God. Rather than entering the covenant sealed in Christ’s blood, we make our own manmade covenant, saying “and the covenant that I have made on earth, let it be ratified in heaven.” In a day without smoking pots and halved animals, I wonder what we have for a sign of this covenant, that God has in fact ratified it. Don’t get me wrong, the content of the covenant Wesley proposes is essentially identical to the one God has already made, it is the shift from God to man, from objective promise to religious experience that bothers me a bit.
I don’t want to end this on a negative note, because as I said, I enjoyed the book, so I’m going to leave you with a hymn written specially for use at covenant renewal services by John Wesley’s brother, Charles.
Come, let us use the grace divine, and all with one accord,
In a perpetual covenant join ourselves to Christ the Lord;
Give up ourselves, through Jesus’ power, His Name to glorify;
And promise, in this sacred hour, for God to live and die.
The covenant we this moment make be ever kept in mind;
We will no more our God forsake, or cast these words behind.
We never will throw off the fear of God Who hears our vow;
And if Thou art well pleased to hear, come down and meet us now.
Thee, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, let all our hearts receive,
Present with Thy celestial host the peaceful answer give;
To each covenant the blood apply which takes our sins away,
And register our names on high and keep us to that day!
January 4, 2009
Seeing in the New Year, John Wesley Style: Step 3, Receive Christ as your only Saviour
(This post continues a series on John Wesley’s Directions for Renewing our Covenant with God)
So, here it is, receive Christ as your only saviour. Surely any evangelical has heard all this before, right?
Well, in a sense, yes, probably. I didn’t find anything particularly surprising in what Wesley put here. But really, that’s a bit of a comfort – if we’d got this part wrong, it wouldn’t matter very much which parts we had got right. Still, it’s good to go over the basics from time to time.
The thing Wesley is keen to underline here is that we must have Christ, and Christ alone to be our Saviour. “This is your closing with Christ as your Priest. And in this is included your renouncing your own righteousness; you can never, you will never cast yourselves on him alone, ’til all your hopes in yourselves have given up the ghost… let not only your sins go, but let your righteousness go, all the refuge of lies in which you have trusted.”
I don’t know about you, but much though renouncing my own righteousness is more appealing than renouncing the world and worldly happiness, I don’t find it easy. Wesley says it all flows from two necessary things, a knowledge of your own sin, and a knowledge of your total inability to reform yourself. Once again though, Wesley seems to view this as a process which lasts ages – this time it sounds like he’s thinking in terms of weeks:
“Nothing will bring a sinner to Christ, but absolute necessity: he will try to forsake his sins, he will think of leaving his drunkeness and becoming sober; of leaving his adulteries and becomign chaste, and so see if by any means he may not escape. He will go to prayers and sermons and sacraments and search out if there is any salvation in them; but all these, though they be useful in their places, yet looking no further, the sinner sees there is no hope in them…”
All this to say that, while I’m sure he wouldn’t say it’s impossibe, Wesley doesn’t seem to have high hopes for people just becoming Christians on the street during first contact. It reminds me of the importance of offering good follow up, and the usefulness of courses like Christianity Explored to give seekers time to take in what’s going on.
Having basically said that we should allow the Law to grind us more or less into the dust, Wesley offers three reasons why we should be confident in trusting Christ to cover all our sins, to paraphrase: That is what he was made Christ (the annointed one) for, God commands that we do, and he promises that Jesus will provide a safe refuge.
December 31, 2008
Seeing in the New Year, John Wesley Style. Step 2: Make a Conscious Choice
(This post continues a series on John Wesley’s Directions for Renewing our Covenant with God)
The word “decision” is viewed with a certain degree of suspiscion in the reformed world – and rightly so. A (quite healthy) desire to see people converted to Christ combined with a deep and tragic underestimation of the sinfulness of our hearts – what the theologians call semi or full pelagianism – has lead to a highly subjective approach to evangelism focussed on squeezing out as many “personal decisions for Christ” as possible. Many of us will have attended one or another over-emotional church service where hundreds are packed into a small space to participate in long stretches of loud, extatic singing and an impassioned talk encouraging us to “accept Christ into our hearts”. In the worst cases it amounts to little more than manipulation, psychological pressure or brainwashing.
At the same time, of course, a decision has to be come to. “Choose this day whom you will serve” Joshua encouraged the Israelites (Joshua 24:15). How can Wesley help us to make the right kind of decision – and help others to do likewise?
It is a considered choice
As I said yesterday, I really can’t see the kind of decision Wesley’s looking for being made on the spur of the moment. If you’ve managed successfully to suffuse yourself with thoughts of how much greater the eternal is than the temporal, of the realness of things unseen, and the stakes involved (see yesterday’s post. For what it’s worth, in 24 hours, I didn’t manage it) well now you have to lay the whole matter before yourself. Wesley encourages you to sit down and talk to yourself, saying
“Soul, you see what is before you, what will you do? Which will you have, either the crown or the curse? If you choose the crown, remember that the day you take this you must be content to submit to the cross and the yoke, the service and sufferings of Christ which are linked to it. What do you say? Would you rather take the gains and pleasures of sin, and venture on the curse? Or will you yield yourself a servant to Christ, and so make sure the crown?”
Later on he encourages us to pester our hearts “from day to day” about this. Far from being a spur of the moment thing, Wesley advises us to sit ourselves down and think very carefully about what we’re doing. Even if the meetings the Methodists held were often very passionate affairs, it was passion undergirded by thorough reflexion. An 18th century Wesleyan Covenant service lasted for about 3 hours, with at least an hour of penetrating self examination before a sermon and the making of the actual covenant. Methodist preachers would often preach for several weeks in preparation for it. I have attended a modern Methodist covenant service – it came out of the blue and was all over in under an hour. I wonder if I wasn’t the only one who had completely forgotten what I’d so boldly promised after only a couple of weeks.
It is a conscious choice
This follows on really from the fact that it’s something you put a lot of thought into. Wesley reminds us that no-one is accidentally a Christian – it’s something you do on purpose. Wesley doesn’t share the same sunny confidence in human nature that we see so often today – he knows that the natural bent of the human heart is away from God. As such, there can be no simple decision once made that will change everything, Wesley advises rather a day to day pestering of our sinful hearts into submission to Jesus; “If your hearts would rather fly off and wave the whole business [that is, avoid coming to a decision] leave them not so… follow your hearts from day to day, let them not rest until the matter be brought to an issue [that is, decided]“
Similarly, he reminds us that there’s no middle ground; “if you remain undetermined for Christ, you are determined for the devil”. Faced with the commandment to love God with all our heart, soul, mind and strength, there is no neutral response. It’s a choice we all effectively make one way or another, but the Christian, contends Wesley, does so very deliberately.
It is a costly choice
Another difference about this choice and the kinds of “decisions” which are so common these days is that is hurts. Lots. It seems so counter-intuitive to underline the cost of discipleship, the pains of being a Christian, when you’re asking someone to become a Christian. Nevertheless, it’s a thread which runs consistently through Wesley’s argument. Remember, when you choose the crown, you take the cross and the yoke with it.
“This is your choosing the good part, God and the blessedness of the world to come for your portion and happiness; and in this is included your renouncing the world and worldly happiness.”
Renouncing the world and worldly happiness? Ouch! I can feel myself revolt against it. Doesn’t he want people to come to Christ? Shouldn’t we be emphasising the joy and peace that comes from believing, the strength in every trial, the eternal hope? Can’t we explain about how the world opposes us, and the devil tempts and indwelling sin gnaws away at our resolve later on when they’re more ready to hear it? No wonder he wants us to contemplate how much more important the eternal is than the temporal, who else would make this choice?
But it’s this that marks John Wesley’s “choice” from the modern evangelical “decision”, and it’s this that wins me over. Wesley isn’t asking his readers simply to make a decision for Christ. He isn’t asking them to walk an aisle or sign a card. He’s not even asking them to be counter-cultural or to accept God’s plan for their lives. He’s asking them to die that they might live.
(Image: Decision by Richard Scott 33 under a Creative Commons Licence)
December 28, 2008
Seeing in the New Year, John Wesley Style. Step One: Get a bit of Perspective
This post continues a series on John Wesley’s Directions for Renewing our Covenant with God.
It sometimes seems as though every girl I know could quote the opening line of Jane Austin’s Pride and Prejudice. Calvin’s institutes has an opening line which is quoted and requoted in reformed books “Nearly all the wisdom that we possess, that is to say, true and sound wisdom, consists of two parts: the knowledge of God and of ourselves”. I remember being particularly struck the first time I read John Piper’s Don’t Waste your Life by its opening two paragraphs.
John Wesley delivers a killer line to open this booklet, summing up in a few short phrases the whole of point 1 in his book:
“Get these three principles fixed in your hearts:
- That things eternal are much more considerable than things temporal;
- That things not seen are as certain as the things which are seen;
- That upon your present choice depends your eternal lot [that is, fate].
Chose Christ and his ways and you are blessed forever;
Refuse and you are undone forever.”
The first thing that struck me about this advice is how contrary it runs to what you could call “10 minute fix” spirituality. Quite simply put, there’s no way you could just pray a prayer, or even spend a single night in meditation on these three things and then have them “fixed” in your heart. This is the work of hours of prayer and meditation over a long period. Though I’m going to blog through this entire booklet in only 5 days – between now and New Year’s day – I’m already struck by the fact that if this exhortation isn’t still with me in six weeks time, I won’t have even got past step one in Wesley’s book.
It contrasts uncomfortably with so much of modern Evangelicalism, obsessed as it is with one off “decisions” for Christ which produce hoardes of nominal converts. What Wesley’s looking for can’t be done in ten minutes (except in very special cases – I’m not denying that there are any cases of dramatic conversions). But then, Wesley’s lookng for something which lasts more than 10 minutes – genuine repentance, a very real change of the heart, a new person.
A second thing that struck me was the way Wesley said “Get these three principles fixed in your hearts… and then make your choice.” Wesley clearly intends to stack the deck a little here in favour of Christ. With all that lot in mind, what choice are you going to make? Only a nutter would refuse Christ. It demonstrates the absolute necessity that we keep a robust doctrine of Heaven and Hell before us, especially in evangelism. But it also makes me wonder – when was the last time I heard a sermon on Heaven? I can remember a couple on Hell, but I struggle to think of the last time the New Creation formed the basis of a sermon I heard.
It also struck me that we should always keep in mind that the Gospel is for believers as well as unbelievers. It’s not just the thing you use to become a Christian, it has to form the basis, the warp and woof of the whole Christian life. Just think, if these three thoughts were part of the wallpaper of your mind, the context where all your other thoughts move about, how would that affect your response to temptation?
Grammatically speaking, we’re only one sentence into the booklet so far, and I’m already feeling majorly convicted. I’d never have disputed the truth of the three things Wesley mentions, but I couldn’t honestly say they were “fixed” in my mind. Where do we go from here? Any suggestions?
For now, I’m going to make a start by meditating on Psalm 90, but I’d love to hear your suggestions.
Seeing in the New Year, John Wesley Style: An Overview
Like many helpful books of the period, John Wesley’s Directions for Renewing our Covenant with God obligingly sets out the whole structure of the book in a set of numbered points. Hooray! Like this, with just a quick skim, you can follow the whole argument of the book from start to finish. So here is is, renewing our covenant with God in five (no promises about easy) steps:
- Get a bit of perspective.
- Make a conscious choice.
- Receive Christ as your only Saviour.
- Receive Christ as your only Lord.
- Confirm it all with a solemn covenant.
So far, it all seems reasonably uncontraversial, but hopefully you can see the shape of what’s to come now.
December 27, 2008
Seeing in the New Year, John Wesley Style
My grandfather was Scottish. New Year was always a bigger thing in Scotland than it was in England – the Presbyterian church strongly discouraged celebrating Christmas for about 400 years, and it was a normal working day until the 60s. We’ve always made quite a thing of it in my family and it doesn’t feel right for me not to these days.
Another set of people who’ve historically loved New Year are the Wesleyan Methodists and this year I’ll be seeing in the New Year John Wesley style. Although the first Methodist Covenant service was apparently held on 11th August 1755, they quickly became a New Year’s thing.
I’ll be using John Wesley’s book, Directions for Renewing our Covenant with God to think on approaching the New Year. Published in 1781, it more or less gives Wesley’s advice for anyone wanting to make a fresh start with Christ, whether a new believer coming for the first time or a seasoned believer wishing to set aside a little time to reorient their life around Christ and the Gospel.
Since it’s probably more useful to read one book and think about it than read five without, I’m going to be asking a few questions about each section of the book that I blog about:
- Are the things Wesley thinks important to put in when explaining how to come to Christ the same things we put in when we go through Gospel outlines, chat to friends or give talks? If not, which bits do we miss out, why and is that a good thing?
- Are the things which Wesley mentions important parts of what comes to mind when we think about the Gospel and our day to day lives? If there are things missing which should be there, how can we incorporate these things into our lives better?
- How does the way Wesley explains coming to Christ challenge our present Christian living and thinking? What can we do to remedy that?
If you fancy joining me, this link above goes to a pdf of the whole booklet. It’s only 22 pages long and I read it in a single stint (though of course I’ll be reading it again much more slowly to make these posts). I’d highly recommend it if you have a minute. One tip though, remember that in 18th Century typing if the letter “s” appears before the end of a word it’s printed as something that looks more like an “f” to us. So Wesley’s saying “soul” not “foul” and encouraging us to discern our “case”, not our “cafe”.
(Picture: London, England – November 26th 2006, Statue of John Wesley by Jamie Sanford under Creative Commons Licence)
December 23, 2008
How to practise Total Depravity as well as preach it
At the Cambridge College that I came tantalisingly close to getting into (Gonville and Caius) students go through three gates as part of their course. At the start they enter through the gate of humility. At the start of second year, they all ceremonially proceed through the gate of virtue. On graduation day, graduates pass through the gate of honour. If you try to get through the gate of honour (which is usually padlocked shut) before you’ve finished your degree, tradition says you’ll never graduate.
What I suppose this tradition is trying to teach Caius (that’s pronounced “keys”) students is that when you arrive you know nothing and only after hours, years, of hard work (and it is hard work, I have friends there) can you leave in honour.
Well, this is my gate of humility: first post on my blog and it’s going to be to recommend something someone else has written. David Starling has given us a really helpful piece on some of the practical implications of the doctrine of total depravity. I was particularly struck by his comments about total depravity and compassion. The idea that everyone is deeply, radically alienated from God and unable to reform himself has a lot of potential to be used for finger pointing. Starling helped me remember the chinese proverb that says if you point the finger at someone you point three back at you. Ironic (paradoxical, perhaps) that being brutally honest in your attitude towards our sin could actually make you more compassionate.
Can anyone else think of any practical implications of this doctrine?
(Image: Gonville and Caius College Gate of Honour by Jim Linwood, Licensed under the Creative Commons License)
