Editorial Blog
Dave Doveton is the Senior Editor of this website. These articles are mostly concerned with authentic, biblically orthodox Christian faith and its interaction with the Anglican Church, especially the Church of England, and the wider culture. Please press the ‘Refresh’ or “reload’ button to ensure you see the latest blog post at the top of this column.
The Idols of Death and the God of Life.
By Dave Doveton, Anglican Mainstream.
“I call heaven and earth to witness against you today that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse. Therefore – choose life…” Deuteronomy 30:19
The decision by the House of Commons to pass the “Terminally Ill Adults” Bill (or as it is more popularly known, “Assisted Dying”), has provoked an outpouring of emotional responses – both positive and negative. Christians have rightly condemned the decision, which came after a long debate full of harrowing personal anecdotes. I will not examine the complex pastoral and personal issues that swirl around this sensitive topic. There is no doubt that many people are in circumstances which lead them to contemplate suicide or see it as a solution – heaven forbid, a good – or envision it as better than present emotional or physical suffering. I will instead focus on its wider cultural significance.
This is not just a matter of giving people ‘freedom of choice’; this is a watershed, an indicator that the culture, in the words of Joseph Boot, “has not simply reached a bump in the road but has been sucked into a kind of vortex of democratic insanity”[i] in its downward spiral.
The downward spiral has been commented on by many who have highlighted how the sexual chaos, the rising authoritarianism, and the embrace of death are all part of a descent due to idolatry. Boot summarises how self-idolatry ultimately results in the will to power,
“The essence of all sin is idolatry, and it was so from the first. The plan of the tempter was that every person would be their own god, determining what would be good and evil for themselves…Idolatry has many facets, but the most central is the worship of self…in all forms of idolatry people succumb explicitly or implicitly, deliberately or inadvertently, to the notion that reality is to some degree chaotic, and that forces (spiritual or material) can be placated, manipulated or bribed to conform to my own will.”[ii]
The assertion of the right to kill myself is the ultimate assertion of control. It is an assertion of my own will to power over the will of the Creator and sustainer.
Idolatry is progressive and leads to an inversion of what we see as precious or worthy. The truth is that God is of highest worth – worthy of worship (worth-ship) and devotion. When we dethrone him, we substitute other idols as objects of devotion – whether that be ourselves, other people, creatures, animals or even inanimate objects. St Paul teaches that the hierarchical order of worth in creation is inverted, and that which God meant to serve us and fulfil our lives becomes our master and we become its slaves.[iii]
A culture on a downward spiral in the manner described by Paul is a culture implicitly in a death wish. The implicit has now broken cover and has become horrifyingly explicit. Graeme Archer describes some of the signs that should have alerted the guardians of truth to what was inevitably to come.
“So, it isn’t surprising that a state which sanctions Hate Marches in its capital thoroughfares, loud with chants for death; that rips down its built history (Smithfield is going! What next? St Paul’s?) and whose museums it permits to linger only that they may hector its citizens about the sin of their supposed racism. It doesn’t surprise me that such a society would eventually find its apotheosis in the form of this Bill. If the culture upstream celebrates its own extinction, why are we surprised that politics downstream finds a way to codify your own obliteration into law?
Welcome to the age of death: look at the adverts on the Tube, grotesque beyond the imagination even of P.D. James, whose Children of Men novel foresaw and described our childless pitilessness in many ways. Even she didn’t imagine that the “Quietus” would be represented by adverts showing an ecstatic young woman dancing around her fitted kitchen in joy that one day the state will kill her.”[iv]
We may take his point further – Church leaders have rightly pointed out the evil of the Bill, and its assault on the sanctity of life. However, the irony is that many of these same leaders[v] have openly endorsed changes in the culture such as same sex blessings and transgenderism that once adopted by the culture, are then codified in various ways into law as a ‘good’. These changes were equally idolatrous in their nature, as assertions of individualistic, autonomous will over the Creator’s stated design for life and health and freedom (as I have argued previously)[vi].
Opponents (Christian and other) have rightly stressed the fact that once state approval is given to assisted suicide, a line has been crossed, and a slippery slope lies ahead. There is ample evidence from those countries (Canada, Netherlands, etc) where assisted dying (or the equivalent) has been law for some time that this is the case. A clear understanding of God’s word would however show that we have been on a slippery slope for some time now. What Pope John Paul II called the culture of death emerging in western civilisation – and denied by many who were blind to the signs – has now suddenly leapt into focus.
That which the enemy of our souls offers – theft, death and destruction has become the answer and something to be celebrated. Not only that, but the claim to a kind of freedom that proponents of the bill assert turns out to be a chimera, as John Paul II observed,
“To claim the right to abortion, infanticide and euthanasia, and to recognize that right in law, means to attribute to human freedom a perverse and evil significance: that of an absolute power over others and against others. This is the death of true freedom.”[vii]
As we pass through this season of advent with its theme of hope amidst the darkness and depressiveness of a culture turning ever more away from the God of life. The light of hope we have in Christ should spur us and encourage us to proclaim the gospel even more powerfully and confidently.
“…to give light to those who sit in darkness and in the shadow of death, and to guide our feet into the way of peace.” Luke 1:79.
____________________________________________________________________________________
[i] Joseph Boot, Dead Men Walking, http://www.ezrainstitute.ca/resource-library/blog-entries/dead-men-walking
[ii] Joseph Boot: The Mission of God: A Manifesto of Hope for Society, Wilberforce, London, 2016, p543.
[iii] Romans 1:18-32; Paul outlines the inversion of Genesis 1:26 in Romans 1:23. See also John 8:34.
[iv] https://unherd.com/2024/11/what-the-death-bill-tells-us-about-life/
[v] Most notably bishops of the Church of England.
[vi] https://anglicanmainstream.org/prayers-of-love-and-faith-baal/
[vii] Pope John Paul II, EVANGELIUM VITAE, https://www.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_25031995_evangelium-vitae.html.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
The Whitewashing of Tombs
By Dave Doveton, Anglican Mainstream.
At the height of the Covid pandemic, as an assisting priest in an urban parish, I was responsible for leading several funerals of congregants who had died of the Covid virus. There were very strict Department of Health regulations in place regarding how the coffin was to be interred – undertakers and their assistants appeared in protective clothing like figures out of an apocalypse, spraying clouds of sanitiser everywhere. When it came to the interment, I had to stand several meters away from the grave to say the committal and final prayers.
The health regulations were wise precautions to prevent possible contamination from a corpse, for it was still unclear how contagious the virus was. At the time, I was reminded of the Biblical prohibition which forbade contact with a dead body.
In the Gospels, Jesus alludes to the purity laws when addressing the Pharisees and scribes who were teachers of the law, but his concern is not of a physical or ritual contamination, but a spiritual one.
“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees. Hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs, which outwardly appear beautiful, but are full of dead people’s bones and all uncleanness. So you also appear outwardly righteous to others, but within you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness.”[i]
Jesus had very harsh things to say to the religious leaders of the day – the elites, typified by this devastating insult, “whitewashed tombs full of dead people’s bones”. To have contact with a grave or a dead body brought serious defilement, and here he is accusing them of being the most serious cause of defilement themselves.
The basis of Jesus’ critique was the hypocrisy of the leaders – appealing to purity laws, yet they themselves being the ones that were ‘unclean’, and leading people astray by their teaching. Matthew records Jesus’ warning that they were making their followers “twice a child of hell”[ii]. On the surface, they appeared to be orthodox upholders of the TORAH, God’s law and teaching, but they gave lip service to belief. They professed belief but betrayed their profession of faith and their vows to uphold the truth of God’s word, rather acting as gatekeepers to a religious establishment.
“Woe to you… For you shut the kingdom of heaven in people’s faces. For you neither enter yourselves nor allow those who would enter to go in.”[iii]
Luke has this equally insulting declamation by Jesus, “Woe to you (Pharisees)! For you are like unmarked graves, and people walk over them without knowing it.”[iv]
The Lukan saying conveys the idea that there is nothing about these leaders that might warn their followers they will be led to destruction by the very people they trust. Their influence will be defiling, just as contact with a grave would defile a person according to the ritual purity laws.
In our day, Anglican leaders profess the faith, clergy and bishops promise to uphold the faith, and laity look up to them trusting that they are people of integrity who take their ordination promises seriously. Yet, when openly advocating for issues such as same sex blessings, which are contrary to God’s word, they do not see a problem. On several occasions, I have heard the accusation of error met with the response, “this is an ethical issue (human sexuality), it is not a foundational matter – after all the creeds say nothing about it.” The Archbishop of Canterbury has come out personally in denying biblical teaching on human sexuality[v], also having made this defence of revisionist leaders in 2022 to the Lambeth Conference,
“They have not arrived lightly at their ideas that traditional teaching needs to change. They are not careless about scripture. They do not reject Christ. But they have come to a different view on sexuality after long prayer, deep study and reflection on understandings of human nature.”[vi]
This is basically saying “we are not disobeying scripture or denying Christ by taking this stand” Consequently, the crowds rest a little easier, having been pacified by this assurance. Yet, is heresy really a type of unbelief? How can a person happily say they are an orthodox Christian, yet hold to a heretical position on one or two issues? Even Gene Robinson called himself an ‘evangelical’, effectively evacuating the word of all real meaning.
Heresy and Unbelief
St Thomas Aquinas held that heresy was NOT a type of unbelief. He pointed to Jerome’s comment on Galatians 5:19, “The works of the flesh are manifest…” Heresy is derived from the Greek hairesis meaning ‘choice’.
Now heresy would seem not to pertain to the understanding, but rather to the appetitive power; for Jerome says on Gal. 5:19: [*Cf. Decretals xxiv, qu. iii, cap. 27] “The works of the flesh are manifest: Heresy is derived from a Greek word meaning choice, whereby a man makes choice of that school which he deems best.” But choice is an act of the appetitive power, as stated above (FS, Question [13], Article [1]). Therefore heresy is not a species of unbelief.[vii]
Heresy is the consequence of a choice to achieve or maintain temporal profit of some sort (power, status, money, or popularity). It is thus associated not with intellectual error and unbelief, but with the vice of pride and covetousness. Choice is an act of the appetitive power; therefore, it is not unbelief. So, it is entirely possible to believe the major portion of Christian doctrine but be heretical on one point.
Foolish confidence
People tend to be trusting of leaders who exhibit confidence and assurance that their position is the right one – that they are on the right side of history, that they will win the argument, that they are the professionals and the experts in Biblical interpretation. There are strong psychological factors in the social landscape of the church and leaders often (sometimes unwittingly – I don’t ascribe malevolent motives at all here) take advantage of these dynamics. When bishops and clergy lull their people into a false sense of security, the people become complacent, and abandon responsibility to hold their leaders to account. They can also become fatalistic, believing that it is impossible to change the trajectory of the church once a novelty that goes against scripture and tradition has been accepted.
However, the confidence of leaders who are in error is ultimately a misplaced confidence – the Bible terms it ‘foolish confidence’. The Hebrew word used to express this idea is kesel, used in a figurative sense. It is used four times – twice in Job; once in Psalm 49:13 to refer to those who are unfaithful to the covenant; and lastly in Ecclesiastes, “I turned my heart to know and to search out and to seek wisdom and the scheme of things, and to know the wickedness of folly (kesel)….”[viii]
Here the writer uses the term when trying to understand the folly (foolish confidence) of humankind. He concludes, “God made man upright, but they have sought out many schemes.”[ix] He thus associates foolish confidence with those who are not content to remain in faithfulness to upholding God’s standards, but rebel.
Peter warns his hearers against teachers who prove to be those that once knew the way of righteousness, but they turn their backs on the sacred command[x]. One mark of those who begin to propagate heretical doctrines is their tendency to accept aselgeia, or sexual impurity. This is also clearly asserted in 2 Timothy 3:6-8; Jude 4-16 and Revelation 2:20, and supports Aquinas’s teaching.
Whitewashing gives a clean and sanitary appearance to what is in the end dark, and deathly. In the same manner leaders who wear the mantle of authority in the church, sworn to uphold the doctrines of the Church maintain an appearance of orthodoxy. Just as the Pharisees who were respected as intellectual guardians of the religious establishment with no hint of moral decay.
However, trusting and unsuspecting followers are betrayed by those who should be leading them to repentance and life.
_____________________________________________________________________________
[i] Matthew 23:27
[ii] Matthew 23:15
[iii] Matthew 23:13
[iv] Luke 11:44
[v] https://christianconcern.com/comment/archbishop-abandons-doctrine-to-approve-of-same-sex-intimacy/
[vi] https://anglican.ink/2022/08/02/justin-welbys-opening-statement-to-the-bishops-at-lambeth-2022-on-the-call-on-human-dignity
[vii] Aquinas, The Summa Theologica, Second Part of the Second Part, Of Heresy, Article 1.
[viii] Ecclesiastes 7:25
[ix] Ecclesiastes 7:29
[x] 2Peter 2:20,21.
__________________________________________________________________________
The Rejection of “Gay Blessings”
By Dave Doveton, Anglican Mainstream.
The Anglican Church of Southern Africa’s recent Provincial Synod had on the agenda a motion to approve a set of prayers for the ‘blessing’ of same sex couples. The motion was defeated[i].
There have been repeated attempts by a fringe group of gay rights activists, encouraged and supported by several diocesan bishops – mainly from the dioceses which make up the greater urban region of Cape Town and environs – to broker in the approval of homosexual relationships by the church. This attempt has over the past several years been resisted both in the House of Bishops and the Province.
Dioceses such as the Diocese of Port Elizabeth, a firmly evangelical diocese have been firm in their rejection of any moves to sanction prayers of blessings or any change of doctrine which would allow gay marriage (legal in South Africa since 2006). Bishop Eddie Daniels initiated a process this year to get the mind of the diocese on the matter and the verdict was unanimous in support of classical biblical teaching on the matter. In contrast, some Bishops in the Cape Town region have actively campaigned to have gay blessings approved. Lesbian and gay couples have toured parishes speaking to congregations in an attempt to sway opinions. A short video was also circulated featuring a gay couple who extolled the virtues of their love and friendship. This indicates the well worn strategy of using emotion and sentiment as weapons of persuasion. These are the highly manipulative public persuasion tactics used in social marketing and outlined in Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen’s book, “After the Ball: How America will conquer its fear and hatred of gays in the 90’s”. These methods have been successful in changing whole denominations (such as The Episcopal Church (USA), the Anglican Church of Canada and more recently the Scottish Episcopal Church and the Church of England). It is also a reflection of the influence of western gender ideologies which subvert biblical doctrine on human identity and sexual morality. The arguments used are on the whole dismissive of received doctrine and external norms such as biblical law, prioritising internal subjective feeling and convictions. These override all else – this of course is the essence of the old heresy of Gnosticism. The world-renowned psychologist Jordan Petersen has recently warned that the western protestant churches have by embracing the ‘woke rainbow mob’ been captured. “When the Christians start worshiping hedonistic pride”, he said, “something has gone dreadfully wrong.”[ii]
The Anglican Provinces of Africa have been unanimous in their rejection of this heresy – only Southern Africa seems to have suffered an infection. Infections if not resisted are sadly often fatal to human bodies, but also the body of the Church. In 2 Timothy 4:3 Paul states, “For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions.” The Greek translated as ‘sound teaching’ can also be translated ‘healthy teaching’, emphasising the vital importance of right doctrine for the spiritual health of the Church. We continue to pray for health and healing.
[i] See Press Release: https://anglicanchurchsa.org/provincial-synod-rejects-prayers-for-same-sex-couples/
[ii]https://www.christiantoday.com/article/jordan.peterson.says.woke.rainbow.mob.is.infiltrating.protestant.
____________________________________________________________________________
Apocalypse – the Unveiling
By Dave Doveton, Anglican Mainstream.
“We do not see our signs, there is no longer any prophet….” Psalm 74:9
Iconography is the study of pictorial symbolism, a window as it were into reality that is beyond language, for it has the power to captivate and to convey–even subliminally to subconsciously indoctrinate–the viewer. Iconographic memes are everywhere if we bother to look. Sometimes they assault us from unexpected quarters. They convey a reality that the political and cultural elites wish to propagate. Take this example. In writing a most powerful commentary on the dissolution of the Christian basis of English culture and values, Joshua Treviño writes,
“Yet there is still iconography. The Anglo-Saxon England of one thousand years ago in which the small parish of St Benedict was erected, stone tower and all, was replete with iconography. Men and women alike encountered imagery of the saints, of the faith, of Christ as a matter of routine in their lives. Today the images remain, and today they are encountered daily, but they are of something else entirely. We walked through an Underground station whose long dirty white corridors were decorated with easily hundreds of images of London’s “queer” population. Each icon — let us use the word, for this was the intent — contained a headshot of some sort, with explanatory text below. One of them struck me and exemplified the rest: a man named Fotis, whose pronouns are Ve / Vir. Elsewhere in a train station, we encountered an image of two African women in passionate embrace: its caption reminded the passer-by that “loving who you choose” is what makes Britain Britain. Of course it does not, but it is a purposeful substitution of the new and confected nation for the old and rooted one. The new religion clambers upon the ruined edifice of the old and apes its forms.”
Iconography is deliberate and it has a purpose, that is to teach, to instil in the general population an approved way of seeing the world and thus a way of seeing themselves – more from Joshua Treviño,
“All this is tutelage, of course. The images of Fotis the Ve / Vir and the like pervade the public square in London for instructional purposes. They teach the English their new narrative, their new understanding of self, and their new permitted ambit of thought and belief. In Trafalagar Square, after telling my son about Nelson, I noted that the crossing lights throughout the busy intersections were not the usual green-and-red walking men. Instead they were sex symbols: literally so, two male symbols intertwined on some crossing lights, two female symbols interlocked on others, and (less common) a male symbol and a female one paired. The regime narrative is that this is intrinsically British, and therefore belongs in a quintessentially British space —”[i]
Often the iconography entails live, dramatic mimetic representations of familiar scenes. However, stripped of their original face, they display their desecrating images to be viewed by millions across the globe. One instance of this is the opening ceremony of the Paris Olympics.
The symbolism is obvious for those who know something of pagan worship and spiritual belief. The last supper is replaced by another feast containing a farrago of underlying pagan doctrine. Christ is replaced by a lesbian; the disciples are replaced by men in drag. This unveils as the pagan celebration of gender bending, the ‘non-binary’, and the confusion of male and female. In Greco-Roman culture, this was exemplified in the cult of Cybele. The cult of the mother goddess, Cybele had attendant priests – called “Galli”, in her temples. These were men who castrated themselves as a way of offering themselves to the goddess. Rituals were held in temples but also in the streets where her devotees paraded in women’s clothing, hairstyles and wearing perfume, jewellery and makeup. They celebrated the rites with wild music and dancing, and at the climax of her yearly festival the Megalensia, in frenzied excitement, scourged and cut themselves and initiates were driven to emasculate themselves. In general, Roman society reacted adversely to their transgression of gender norms. The Roman writer, Firmicus Maternus said,
“…they say they are not men… they want to pass as women.”
Tertullian commented on them, saying,
“…the Galli also worship her (Cybele) by the punishment of their emasculated body.”[ii]
Perhaps the height of the desecrating symbolism seen in Paris, is the symbol of another Greco-Roman god, Bacchus. Also known as Dionysus, he was the god of wine, sensuality, and orgiastic behaviour. He is presented as to us as the ‘bread’ instead of a holy Christ, he is the one offered to us – blue and grinning. This is a diabolical inversion of the Christian message in which Jesus gives his life for us as the sacrifice – pagan gods demand our lives – and our sacrifice.
Another deeply disturbing image was of course the appearance of a headless Marie Antoinette, with a backdrop of a building façade dripping in blood. A reminder of the bloody French revolution no doubt, but perhaps a reminder also that every pagan empire from the Aztecs and Inca to Babylon and Rome ends in violence and bloodshed.
If we had not yet got the message, the closing ceremony featured Apollo, Nike and other gods of Greco Roman devotion. Often the dark spirits behind the age reveal themselves and their plans for us.
Several Christian writers have asserted that we are passing from a purely secular, unbelieving culture ambivalent toward the church to an openly hostile culture. In addition, they assert that it is not a slow, incremental shift, but a collapse akin to the destruction of Rome or the fall of Constantinople.[iii]
Jesus used symbolism to shock his hearers into realising the urgency of their situation. John likewise uses symbolism in the book of Revelation[iv]. Jesus also exhorts us to be watchful and recognise the signs around us that portend realities to which many are blinded. In Matthew’s gospel in response to the blindness of the Pharisees, Jesus says,
“…you know how to interpret the appearance of the sky, but you cannot interpret the signs of the times.”[v]
Jesus had been using parables. The imagery he used forced his hearers to see reality in a different way, often shocking them. Jesus’ used symbolic language in a manner similar to the Old Testament prophets. Their purpose was to shock people into seeing the reality of their situation, so that they would make the changes that God required of them. Jesus, and later Paul, observed that the symbolic language would have either one of two effects on hearers. In explaining the purpose of the parables, he says,
“To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given.” and, “This is why I speak to them in parables, because seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand.”[vi]
Then Jesus refers to Isaiah’s prophecy, which described the effect of his own parabolic preaching to the apostatising people of Israel several centuries previously.
“…you will indeed hear but never understand, and you will indeed see, but never perceive….”[vii]
Jesus is saying the parables would have either of two effects – for those who had open hearts and were following him in obedience, they would be given understanding, but for those who stubbornly clung to their rebellion and apostatising ways, they would be hardened.
Thus,
- They would see spiritual truth and make necessary changes to bring themselves into line with God’s purposes. OR
- They would be blinded and numbed and descend into greater apostasy. This particularly applied to religious leaders. In the Old Testament, this most often applied to the false prophets, priests and kings. In the Gospels, this applied to the Scribes and Pharisees, and in the pastoral epistles and Revelation, to false teachers.
It should therefore not surprise us that we see many prominent church leaders (especially in churches that are apostatising by allowing heretical practices such as gay ‘blessings’), who are quite blind to the realities of the cultural collapse around them. Because they do not see ‘the signs of the times’, they are not preparing themselves or their flocks for the developing confusion and deception that is accompanying the accelerating cultural and spiritual shift in the Western world. They and their flocks are being swept into a new and pagan way of seeing themselves and the world.
____________________________________________________________________________
[i] https://www.armas.co/p/this-sceptred-isle
[ii] Fathers of the Third Century : Tertullian Part 4, ch 21 https://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf04.iv.iii.xxi.html
[iii] See: Rod Dreher, “The Benedict Option”; and, “Live Not by Lies“.
[iv] For a discussion on the use of symbolic language by Jesus and John see especially Gregory K. Beale, The Purpose of Symbolism in the Book of Revelation, CALVIN THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL, 41 (2006): 53-66.
[v] Matthew 16:3b.
[vi] Matthew 13:11-15.
[vii] Also referenced by Paul in Acts 28:26,27.
____________________________________________________________________________
“Love” and the Message of the Gospel (Part 2: Kerygma)
By Dave Doveton, Anglican Mainstream.
The Gospel is the message of God’s salvation in Jesus Christ and in Part 1, I discussed how contemporary cultural notions regarding ‘love’ have often distorted the essential message that we as Christians have to bring to a needy and broken world. God’s motive for saving human beings – his love – has been transformed into a watered-down gospel message that merely proclaims that God loves us, and we should all love one another. All this amounts to is sentimentality because it is love without truth. I recently discovered an example of this on a Facebook page where a quotation by an ordained minister in the United Church of Christ is posted.
“The goal is not to bring people to Christianity; the goal is to bring people to love. If that is through Christianity, fine. If it’s another religion or no religion at all, fine. What the world needs is love, not more people professing right belief.”[i]
Of course, intellectual assent without true Christian living is undesirable. However, as C S Lewis argued, before people could live a life of true freedom, true morality and true knowledge, they must believe there is an objective truth and desire to live according to it. The Kerygma encapsulates the truth in a propositional form that God wants us to know, respond to and share with others so that we can enter into a saving relationship with him.
The Kerygma
Kerygma simply refers to the proclamation of the essential Gospel message (from the Greek Keryssein – to proclaim). The word appears in Matthew 24:14 “And this gospel of the kingdom shall be proclaimed (kerysso) throughout the whole world as a testimony to all nations…”. The verb is also commonly used in the other synoptics. Paul uses the verb nineteen times and the noun nine times in his letters.
In the book of Acts we have several post resurrection evangelistic sermons preached by, among others, Peter and Paul. Not one of these sermons mentions the love of God, but they do all exhibit this kernel of propositional truth. Apart from the written gospels, which convey in narrative form the truth about Jesus’, death and resurrection, we have Paul’s letters. However, we also have several evangelistic sermons in the book of Acts:
Firstly, several sermons to the Jewish people:
- Peter’s sermon on the day of Pentecost, addressing an audience of Jews. He brings this sermon to a climax in a proclamation concerning Jesus – God has made him both Lord and Christ. This provokes a reaction from his hearers– what must we do? They realise that God expects a response. Peter’s answer, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.”[i]
- Peter’s sermon in Solomon’s portico also ends with a proclamation (summarised) – God glorified his servant Jesus, the Holy and righteous one (whom you killed), the author of life, whom God raised from the dead and we are witnesses, The right response is part of Peter’s proclamation; “Repent and turn back (there is a double emphasis here) that your sins may be blotted out and times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord…”[iii]
- Peter’s defence before the High Priest: “The God of our fathers raised Jesus, whom you killed by hanging him on a tree. God exalted him at his right hand as leader and saviour, to give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins.”[iv]
Secondly, to the Gentiles:
- Paul to the Greek debaters: “…he now commands all men everywhere to repent because he has set a day on which he will judge the world by a man whom he has chosen and this he showed by raising him from the dead.”[v]
- Paul in his defence before King Agrippa outlines his kerygma: “…I was not disobedient to the heavenly vision, but declared first to those in Damascus, then in Jerusalem, and throughout all the region of Judea, and also to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, performing deeds in keeping with their repentance.”[vi]
The kerygma proclaimed by the early apostles takes slightly different forms, but it can be summarized as: God’s Kingdom has come in the person of Christ – and by the resurrection God has shown Christ to be both Messiah and sovereign Lord. There is consequently a need for people to respond to this message by repenting and having faith in his death on the cross which has purchased forgiveness for us – and living in obedience to Christ as disciples through the power of the Holy Spirit.
The word kerygma is also used by some theologians to refer to the entire teaching and ministry of Jesus. The use of this term was popularized by British scholar C. H. Dodd, who includes the following main aspects of the kerygma of Jesus, based on the preaching of Peter[vii]:
1. The Age of Fulfilment has dawned, the “latter days” foretold by the prophets.
2. This has taken place through the birth, life, ministry, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
3. By virtue of the resurrection, Jesus has been exalted at the right hand of God as Messianic head of the new Israel.
4. The Holy Spirit in the church is the sign of Christ’s present power and glory.
5. The Messianic Age will reach its consummation in the return of Christ.
6. An appeal is made for repentance with the offer of forgiveness, the Holy Spirit, and salvation.
Returning to our first quote, one can see where a message without a kerygma will lead us. If the main problem in the world is a lack of love, this means that the issue of human sin is overlooked or denied. The scripture clearly teaches that sin alienates us from God and one another, thus the need for repentance and a changed life under the lordship of Christ. Indeed, if there is no sin problem then Christ’s death on the cross is in vain because there is no need for forgiveness. We are left with what H Richard Niebuhr described as the essence of liberal protestant theology:
“A God without wrath brought men without sin into a Kingdom without judgment through the ministrations of a Christ without a Cross.”[viii]
When all is said and done, what we see are the old liberal canards dressed up in new clothes, a sentimental and superficial message, which will have the same powerless effect in changing people’s lives and transforming society. It is only the true gospel that has the power of God to change people. As Paul writes, “For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes…”[ix]
If the core of the message is not the kerygma, we are dealing with another gospel. Paul is clear about those who preach another gospel – they should be anathematised.
“But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.”[x]
___________________________________________________________________
[i] Quote by the Rev Dr Caleb J Lines, posted on ‘Episcopalians on Facebook’.
[ii] Acts 2:38
[iii] Acts 3:19
[iv] Acts 5:30,31
[v] Acts 17:30,31
[vi] Acts 26:20
[vii] source: http://www.afn.org/~afn52344/kerygma.html
[viii] H. Richard Niebuhr, The Kingdom of God in America.
[ix] Romans 1:16
[x] Galatians 1:8
_____________________________________________________________________________
‘Love’ and the Message of the Gospel (Part 1)
By Dave Doveton.
A recently unveiled bronze statue of Billy Graham stands in a hall of the US Capitol in Washington. Inscribed at the base is a verse from John’s gospel – perhaps one of the most popular verses used by evangelists in recent times, “For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son, that whosoever believes in him should not die but have eternal life”. However, Graham would probably be aghast at many of the messages preached on the basis of that text, for it seems to have given a number of preachers the impression that “love” is the central message of the Gospel, despite the obvious fact that in the text, God’s ‘love’ for humanity is the motivation for the gospel message. Indeed, in some circles it seems to have formed an interpretative key to the whole of the New Testament and the basis for sexual ethics that are totally at variance with the plain teaching of scripture.
In the revised common lectionary used by the Anglican Church of Southern Africa, the collect for Pentecost Sunday asks that God may “send us out as witnesses to the wonder of your love”. A recent report from the ACSA Synod of Bishops speaks of “our mission to share the love of Jesus with everyone”. A search through the collects for the year finds only one collect explicitly referencing the Lord’s charge to preach a message (or kerygma). The commandment by Jesus regarding our attitude and behaviour towards others, while rightly important to obey, seems to have eclipsed his command to preach the gospel – the Kerygma. God’s motivation – his faithfulness and lovingkindness – has replaced his message. The Great Commandment has eclipsed the Great Commission and rendered it irrelevant. Mainline Western Protestantism has transformed the Gospel into a moralistic therapeutic deism.
This privileging of therapeutic anthropology has been the basis of decisions by bishops and other Western church leaders to approve same sex marriage and the blessing of same-sex partners. Consider this statement by an Australian Bishop:
“This is a long overdue recognition that if God is love, and faithful persons are living together in love, then the church ought to bless those persons in the name of God,” [i]
Furthermore, this message of unqualified love implies that God includes all in his embrace. Another collect in the Southern African Lectionary opens with the phrase, “God of the foreigner and the outcast, no one is excluded from your embrace….”[ii] Without qualification, this is a half-truth.
Gavin Ashenden has pointed out the subtle replacement of certain categories of Christian teaching with Marxist categories. For example, the sin/holiness dichotomy is being eclipsed by another – namely the dichotomy of alienation/inclusion. This affects the core of the message preached, so that it becomes a message based on the problem of the alienation of human beings from one another (be it according to class, colour, language, or race), and the solution being that of God showing his love for us by including everyone in his embrace. We are then expected to imitate God by accepting all without preconditions and to affirm them. Because it is seen as heretical to discriminate on the basis of group identity, it now follows we must affirm self-chosen identities such as LGBTQ+ – and not only that, also sanctify them through gay blessings.
In a similar vein, Carl Trueman notes the reframing of the discussion by people like Pope Francis and Andy Stanley: “… both Stanley and the Pope appear to share is a commitment to the therapeutic anthropology that pervades modern Western society and the implicit assumption that any significant challenge to this from a traditional Christian perspective is unloving or bigoted. Affirming people in their sexual and gender identities seems to be the order of the day and, as with the pope and Andy Stanley, pastoral strategy must therefore be developed in isolation from (and, arguably, in opposition to) traditional Christian teaching. The ethic of “love as feeling” rather than “love as directing to the truth” is strong.[iii]
Indeed “love as directing to the truth” is arguably the kernel of the John 3:16 verse. God’s love directs us to his saving message. He does NOT show his love by including us in his embrace, in which case he would be accepting us on our terms, that is affirming our self-chosen identities. He shows his love by offering us saving grace through identity in Christ – which are his terms, not ours.
But what does the scripture teach regarding the message of the Gospel?
John 3:16 is the only verse in John’s gospel that speaks of God’s love for all people. All other references to love pertain to the relationships within the Christian community and the relationships within the Holy Trinity. (for example, Jesus’ commands to love one another as he loves us).
The synoptic gospels have no mention whatsoever of God’s love as such. However, the parables of Jesus portray the nature of God as a loving father – for example in the parable of the widow searching for her lost coin, and in the parable of the prodigal son. In that parable, the father only embraces the lost son when he repents and turns back. God the Father embraces us when we repent and return. He is always willing to forgive and restore those who turn to him. That is the point at which he includes us, not before. Except to say that all are included in his invitation (1 John 2:2), and he seeks out the lost as seen in the parable of the wedding feast.
The synoptic gospel of Mark (as with Matthew and Luke) proclaims the good news – that in Jesus, God was fulfilling his promise to the prophets that he would deliver his people by overthrowing the idolatrous powers of this world to bring in his reign. Mark quotes Isaiah 41:3 to make the link and show how Jesus’ death and resurrection are the inauguration of his kingship. In the Greco-Roman world of that time, the term ‘good news’ or evangelion was a theological term pertaining to the Roman imperial cult[iv]. It was the good news of the emperors’ birth – who was both man and god, and saviour who would stop war and bring peace to the world – the pax romana. Over and against the peace that the emperor offered the world through the might of the Roman Empire, Jesus offered peace with God through repentance and forgiveness in his coming kingdom.
The gospel teaches that salvation is positional.
Paul in his portrayal of the gospel in 1 Corinthians 15:3-11 reiterates these themes, explaining how the proclamation of the cross and resurrection fulfils the Old Testament.
The metaphors used by St Paul to the Colossians describe a complete change of their position and destiny in a spiritual sense, “He has rescued us from the dominion of darkness into the Kingdom of his beloved son…” These phrases also describe the position of the sinner as one of hopelessness without responding to God’s grace in repentance and faith. Paul uses the Greek word echthros (enemy) to emphasise the severe situation of sinners – that they are at enmity with God, and thus deserving of his wrath.
Romans 5:8 restates and encapsulates the theme of John 3:16, “…but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. And it further elaborates – for we were enemies of God and Christ saves us from his wrath (Rom 5:9,10), which of course is implied (but rarely noted) in the phrase from 3:16, should not perish, meaning spiritual death.
The gospel teaches us that unregenerate people are enemies of God.
In Colossians 1:21 Paul repeats this description of our state before salvation – “And you who once were alienated and hostile (echthros) in mind, doing evil deeds….” The unregenerate person rebels against God in his thinking and his behaviour, hence he is an echthros (an enemy) in relation to God.
Importantly, for our current debate with revisionism, Paul assures us that:
- Those who reject God’s offer of salvation through Christ will suffer the wrath of God as his enemies and,
- Those in the church who continue in unrepentant lifestyle are also regarded as enemies of the cross of Christ and will endure the same fate. “For many, of whom I have often told you and now tell you even with tears, walk as enemies (echthros)of the cross of Christ. Their end is destruction, their god is their belly, and they glory in their shame.” Phil 3:18.
Motyer explains the indivisibility of the attributes of God. He is love, he loves all creation, but his wrath against sin exists simultaneously. “The word of God’s grace and the word of God’s wrath are the same word: the word which promises life is but a savour of death and judgment to the rebel, and therefore a curse. When God’s curse falls on his disobedient people, it is not the abrogation but rather the implementation of his covenant.”[v]
John elaborates on the incarnation in the verses following 3:16, expressing the same truth in a slightly different way. God sent his son into the world to save the world, but those who reject his grace condemn themselves (verses 17,18). John concludes, “And this is the judgement: the light has come into the world, and the people loved the darkness rather than the light …”
In Part 2, I will explore the way in which the primitive church shared the gospel using several examples from the book of Acts.
___________________________________________________________________________
[i] Bishop John Parkes speaking about the majority vote at the synod of the Diocese of Wangaratta which allows clergy to conduct same-sex blessings.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-09-02/same-sex-marriage-blessings-wangaratta-anglican-diocese/11468984
[ii] Anglican Church of Southern Africa, Lectionary Advent 2023-December 2024.
[iii] Carl Trueman, When Being Affirming Isn’t Loving, FIRST THINGS. https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2023/10/when-being-affirming-isnt-loving
[iv] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_gospel#Etymology
[v] Motyer, J. A. 1996. Curse. In New Bible Dictionary. Third Edition, edited by I. Howard Marshall, A. R. Millard, J. I. Parker, and D. J. Wiseman, 248–249. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press,
___________________________________________________________________________
The War on Reality
By Dave Doveton.
“You shall not bear false witness…” Exodus 20:16
The contemporary phenomenon of gender ideologies which we see promoted by certain western ruling elites has reached a stage where a particular group who self-identify as transgender have undergone hormone and psychological regimens and even surgery to alter their bodies. This amounts to a reaction to embodied reality that can only be described as a rebellion, a war on reality itself. If my internal feelings about who I am clash with outer reality, then reality is ‘wrong’. Expressive individualism has asserted its autonomous right to defy reality.
In Romans chapter 1 Paul outlines a process whereby a culture descends into chaos by rebelling against the Creator God. He says that they in unrighteousness suppress the truth. He uses the Greek aletheia. This word can be taken to mean ‘the truth about God’ as he uses the word in an opposing sense of the choice of ‘a lie’. That is, they choose falsehood instead of the truth. Moreover, the word aletheia is also used to convey the idea of reality in contrast to superficiality or falsehood – as in “the only true God” (John 17:3 and 1 Thess 1:9), and Jesus’ description of himself as the ‘true’ or real bread in John 6:32.
A consequence of this choice, Paul observes, is a ‘darkening of their hearts’ and ‘futility in their thinking’. Idolatry stands in opposition to the truth; idolatry deceives and deludes those who practise it. Those who suppress the truth are both dishonouring the real God, but also ultimate reality. They suppress the truth about God, but also attempt to suppress reality.
Several key aspects of reality they reject or suppress:
Rejection of The Father:
In Sigmund Freud’s theory of personality development, there are two principles[i] that he describes in his model of the psyche which are helpful to our understanding of human personality: a) the pleasure principle or ID which is a drive to satisfy urges and b) the reality principle or superego which acts as an authority in checking desires and impulses against reality. Fathers play a strong role in the development of the reality principle – in that they are the figures of authority and responsibility to whom we give account. They together with schoolteachers are the ones who give direction, injunctions, and prohibitions, they give us our value system, and call us back to reality. Biblically and theologically God the Father, Creator of the universe is ultimate reality as he gives meaning to everything. He is the ultimate authority, and to him all must give account. The contemporary attack on fatherhood, paternal attributes, and masculinity (labelling it as ‘toxic’) can therefore be plainly seen as a rebellion against reality. True fatherhood exposes the lie of gender ideologies.
This rebellion is at the heart of a worldview which is becoming progressively more nihilistic in nature. Helmut Thielicke, in his analysis of the decadence that swept German culture of the 1930’s and 40’s expresses this very well,
“As soon as the world loses the Father of the world, as soon as it is deprived of God, it must necessarily be stripped of the invisible. And among invisibles, naturally, are norms such as justice and also the ethical laws of value that determine good and evil.[ii]”
The German theologian pointed to two further components of a reality denying nihilistic worldview[iii] which we now find in contemporary culture – they were: the rejection of purpose and meaning for human beings and the rejection of limits or boundaries.
Rejection of meaning and purpose:
This a major characteristic of nihilism. If human beings have no God ordained purpose, if life has no meaning except to pursue pleasures, desires, and material wealth, it is merely materialistic and mechanistic. If so, it has no transcendent purpose or value. This lays the foundation for abortion, euthanasia of the weak, the elderly and those with mental health challenges such as severe depression.
Rejection of limits or boundaries:
The deconstruction of human identity by gender ideologies is at heart a rejection of creational limits placed on us as either male or female. Thus, we embrace transgenderism, and quite possibly eventually, sexual aberrations such as paedophilia and zoophilia. Ultimately, transhumanism is the next state to be attained – the fusing of human and machine. The deconstruction of human identity that occurs when we reject limits or boundaries must also lead to the deconstruction of relationships which order our society – marriage and the biological family. It is logical that the boundary between private and public behaviour may also be transgressed in some ways – including people indulging in public sexual activity.
Euthanasia can also be seen as a logical outcome of such a rejection of limits, as taking control of one’s death is an attempt to manipulate bodily boundaries.
Just as binary sexual distinctions are part of Gods created order, national boundaries demarcate sovereign nations, part of the global ordering of society. The Old Testament affirms distinct nations to be part of his created order and as Genesis 10:5 shows, with the ultimate purpose of blessing humanity. The prohibition against moving boundary markers in Deuteronomy 19:14 emphasises respect for property rights and by implication all boundaries and borders. Invasion and the transgression of boundaries is thus seen as offensive to the Lord who expects the proper stewardship of the land. Here Thielicke uses the metaphor of national identity to illustrate the interrelationship of limits – human and national/geographic:
“Only as we see the “limits of humanity” (Goethe) do we see what man is, that is, not what this or that man is, but man as such. Anyone who has ever crossed a geographical boundary or the border of his own country knows what I mean. He knows that here for the first time he begins to experience fully the real nature of his own country, because he begins to see it in contrast with another; that only here is he raised to a deepened self-consciousness as a representative of his homeland because this consciousness is then related to the whole.”[iv]
Antisemitism and hatred of Israel
What could the rise of a virulent antisemitism currently seen in the UK and USA have to do with nihilistic tendencies that we have described? One may as well ask the question why German society was so easily led into discrimination and hatred of the Jewish race. I suggest it is an inevitable part of this phenomenon. Again, it has to do with the breaking of boundaries and limits. Boundaries make distinctions; and distinctions are a scandal to nihilism. Israel, the ethnic nation, which in pre-war times was without a homeland, still existed as a scattered yet distinct people in many nations, including Germany. Although not all Jews were religiously observant, they were culturally distinct. This is the Biblical reality – the Jews were and are called to be God’s elect in the OT and still have a divine calling and purpose (Romans Chapter 11).
In addition, the people of Israel were to be evidence of both the existence of the real God as a sign of his presence in, and his purpose for, the world. If cultures aimed at the suppression of the truth about God, the nature of reality and his purposes, they would naturally want to deny the reality of his distinct nation/people. In the case of Nazism, the outcome of this was the attempted extermination of the Jewish race – genocide. This genocidal impulse is resurfacing in a terrifying way and spreading at a frightening rate in our time.
Even as we witness irrational antagonism toward Jewish people, we should recognise that we the people of the New Covenant are also called as the Israelites were, to be a distinct people, a kingdom of priests and a holy nation. A logical progression, therefore, would be a wave of anti-Christian sentiment towards orthodox Bible-believing Christians who stand for the truth. Remember Dietrich Bonhoeffer and his compatriots.
As we observe, the result of these tendencies to ignore reality by abandoning boundaries and limits is increasing disorder in society locally as well as globally. Ayn Rand describes this choice that each individual has – either to turn away or to suppress the truth about reality,
“(each) has the power to suspend, evade, corrupt or subvert his perception of reality, but not the power to escape the existential and psychological disasters that follow.”[v]
Or, summarised as the pithy observation, “we can deny reality, be we cannot deny the consequences of denying reality.”
These consequences are now presenting themselves. Already researchers are showing how young people are not being helped by gender ideologies but rather their mental problems are exacerbated[vi]. German political elites are attempting to redefine even the most basic God ordained structure – the family[vii]. Powerful international bodies such as the United Nations are attempting to deny the reality and goodness of the natural family for the foundational health and well-being of society.[viii]
As believers, we know that these denials of reality will not, as their proponents claim, lead to a better, more compassionate society but to dystopia. Reality, if ignored, always comes back to bite us.
False language as weapon
Finally, anti-reality ideologies promote wholesale transgression of the commandment, “You shall not bear false witness”. Thus, terms used in this ideology such as “non-binary”, “trans woman” are terms which do not align with reality. That is, they are not true but false and thus ultimately evil and have destructive effects on society.
False language is not only deceptive, but also a weapon in this war against reality. Dr Jeffery Ventrella observes,
“Many of the clashes with paganism occur over language, as language crafts moral imagination and plausibility structures. Vocabulary impacts thinking and thinking impacts action. And abusing language precipitates the abuse of power. Accordingly, we should expect language to be weaponized as a means for advancing paganism….”[ix]
Conclusion: How must Christians react?
If this is indeed a conflict[x], our Lord has given us the appropriate resources and ways combating what is false and destructive in today’s Western culture. I would like to suggest at least four: a renewed mind, living within God’s ordained boundaries, speaking the truth in love, and ensuring there is adequate Christian education of our children at home and in Church.
- If we look at 1 Peter 1:13 exhortation in contrast to a pagan worldview, Christians set our hope on God’s grace by preparing our minds for action and having sober minds. That is, we are called to have a correct understanding of reality itself.
- The writer of Ecclesiastes proclaims: “Vanity of Vanities, all is vanity”. This wisdom teaching examines the folly of seeing life as meaningless and can be seen as a tract against nihilistic beliefs, even when there are no easy answers to the deep questions of life. The solution proposed is found at the end: The end of the matter; all has been heard. Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man. (Ecclesiastes 12:13) I take this to mean that we are called to be a separate people and to show a different way of living according to God’s law and in relationship with the Father. Through our lives, God’s people illustrate how living in limits is liberating and is abundantly fulfilling in every way.
- We are called to be people who speak the truth in love; we do not allow ourselves to be subsumed in a web of lies propagated by various gender ideologies. Speaking the truth in our contemporary situation has the power to undercut false ideologies and worldviews and reconstruct the moral imagination[xi]. Those who build systems and governments on falsehood always try to silence truth-tellers because they are afraid of their power[xii]. “For the weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh but have divine power to destroy strongholds. We destroy arguments and every lofty opinion raised against the knowledge of God, and take every thought captive to obey Christ…” (2 Corinthians 10:4,5)
- Spiritual formation of our children through education and discipleship in the home and in church is essential – both to equip them in facing the cultural challenges they face in the present but also preparing them for the future. (Titus 2:1-10, Ephesians 6:4)
___________________________________________________________
[i] In Freudian theory, the reality principle is a regulatory standard of the mind whereby the demands of reality are taken into account before gratifying drives. The reality principle develops as a modification of the wishful thinking and impulsivity associated with the pleasure principle. (Encyclopedia of Personality and individual differences). Retrieved at https://link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/10.1007/978-3-319-28099-8_1421-1 on 24/04/2024.
[ii] Helmut Thielicke, “Nihilism, its Origin and Nature – With a Christian Answer”, Translated John W Doberstein, Harper and Brothers, NEW YORK, 196, P61.
[iii] Ibid.
[iv] Ibid P62.
[v] Ann Rand, essay “The Metaphysical versus the Man-Made” in Philosophy: Who Needs It.
[vi] See this summary of the Cass Report, for example: https://christianconcern.com/comment/cass-review-why-are-children-uncomfortable-with-their-sex/
[vii] https://www.mercatornet.com/will_woke_german_bureaucrats_redefine_the_family_to_include_6_spouses
[viii] https://juicyecumenism.com/2024/04/16/gender-ideology-western-hemisphere/
[ix] https://truthxchange.com/resource-library/articles/lies-that-paralyze-weaponizing-pleasant-words/
[xi] See Rod Dreher, Live Not by Lies: A Manual for Christian Dissidents.
[xii] When a brave dissident spoke against the communist colossus, it shook in fear; see https://europeanconservative.com/articles/essay/how-my-mother-scared-brezhnev/
____________________________________________________________________________
Desecration of the Holy and the rise of an antichrist spirit
By Dave Doveton.
“This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you heard was coming and now is in the world already.” 1 John 4:3
Several commentators have made scathing observations about the recent opening of Canterbury Cathedral to stage a silent disco where ravers could dance to profane music from the ‘90’s, energised by copious amounts of alcohol. But how do we understand the ‘rave in the nave’? Was it just a way of getting young people into church, and a clever fundraising strategy as the dean and archbishop say? Or possibly merely an error of judgement on the part of church leaders which will in time be forgotten as other pressing and urgent matters arise to confront the church?
Or – does it signify something far deeper and more profound that is taking place in the church and the culture – a window that has opened a crack, revealing an approaching darkness and chaos that will take most people by surprise? This question becomes even more pressing when we are informed that at least six other Church of England Cathedrals intend to copy Canterbury’s experiment in the coming weeks.
British Cathedrals are complex in their significance. They are landmarks, signifying both the faith of the worshipping community that surrounds them and the sovereignty of God over their affairs. They are awe-inspiring sacred spaces, set apart for worship but also symbolizing the spiritual authority of the bishop whose cathedral it is. Even more significant is Canterbury, seat of the archbishop and mother church of global Anglicanism.
Many have posited a relationship (psychological and theological) between cathedral and people. God has created man to be a ‘sacred space’ for his own possession through the Holy Spirit, and cathedrals are also ‘sacred spaces’ set apart for the purpose of inviting God’s presence in worship. Because we as humans have a relationship with the architecture and function of our buildings, it is reasonable to assume that a change in the understanding of what it means to be a human will also affect how we see cathedrals – there will be some sort of symbiosis.
Carl Trueman is quite clear in his assertion that a major part of the transformations in our understanding of what it means to be human must be expressed in the theological concept of desecration.
“One need not be a Christian or even a theist to grasp that these transformations have theological significance. Both Marx and Nietzsche connect their understandings of the modern world to desecration. In the same passage that pronounces that all that is solid melts into air, the Communist Manifesto declares that all that is holy is profaned. And Nietzsche’s madman makes very clear that God has not simply ceased to exist in the moral imagination, but is dead—more than that, we have killed him. This slaying of God is surely the ultimate act of active desecration.”[i]
This desecration of man is really a desecration of the image of God. In Christian belief our humanity can only be understood in relation to our creator. What it means to be fully human is to be a temple of the Holy Spirit[ii]. We are soul spirit and body meant to reflect the divine image, and as believers to be personally filled with the Holy Spirit.
In contemporary culture, this desecration manifests in a number of different ways. We desecrate this image through abortion, pornography, more recently through the surgical assaults on children – emasculation of young boys and the mutilation of womanhood in young girls. We parody holy matrimony by a parade of ‘alternate pairings’ that we call ‘marriage’. We offer assisted suicide to the weak, elderly, and vulnerable and call it ‘compassionate’ and ‘dying with dignity’ – forgetting that murder and suicide are an assault on the very image of God that imparts human dignity.
This desecration of the human person must influence the way we relate to and use our holy places. Our desecration of cathedrals and churches is related to the desecration of ourselves[iii]. Moreover, it is a process, and to understand this process we turn to scripture and history for help.
The apostle Paul reveals much about this desecration of the holy. In his second epistle to the Thessalonians, he outlines a progression – which is a pattern found in several other places including the books of Daniel, Maccabees, and Revelation.
“The rebellion comes first, then the man of lawlessness …exalts himself above all objects of worship and takes his seat in the temple of God proclaiming himself to be God.” 2 Thessalonians 2:3,4.
Paul outlines a trajectory here with several stages – rebellion, desecration, then a mimesis when the spirit of antichrist imitates the divine. The author Luke Burgis, notes that in a post secular culture,
“(there are) people or things that appear to mimic Christ, but that do so in fraudulent and seductive ways. For instance, the broader secular culture bills itself (sic) as “more Christian than Christianity” in its concern for victims, and it stands on this to justify things as vile as state-sanctioned euthanasia. It is always sold as compassion. The secular culture is oddly in a mimetic rivalry with Christianity, or with Christ himself. The antichrist is the one who mimics Christ as closely as possible to the point where people who are unformed and not in relationship with Christ begin to be confused about who is who.”[iv]
In Paul’s time, as in John’s, the mystery of lawlessness was already at work. To help his community understand the process Paul draws on the Old Testament book of Daniel. Daniel describes the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes who ruled the Seleucid Empire from 175 BC until his death in 164 BC, during which time the Maccabean revolt occurred.[v]
The historical circumstances of the Maccabean revolt are recorded in the books of the Maccabees. They describe how the leaders of Judaism had become corrupt, both in terms of abandoning the tenets of Mosaic faith and in immoral behaviour. Greek cultural influence had led to the formation of a Hellenising party within Judaism who were keen to spread their influence. During the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes, the citadel was occupied by a particularly rebellious and violent group of Hellenists who caused civil unrest. According to Maccabees they even shed innocent blood, defiling the sanctuary[vi].
Menelaus obtained the high priesthood by bribery and was instrumental in bringing about the murder of the true high priest, Onias. He was also implicated in the theft of the holy vessels of the temple – so initiating sacrilegious acts against the temple of God. The chaos caused by the Jewish Hellenists in the environs of the temple mount disturbed the orderly functioning of the city, and Antiochus was only too eager to intervene, now in religious affairs. The Hellenists had already initiated a programme of discouraging circumcision. Antiochus passed laws forbidding the practice, also proscribing the observance of sabbaths, feasts and regular sacrifices. In a further attempt to supplant Judaism, pagan altars were built, including an altar to Zeus that was placed upon the temple altar. The Hebrew scriptures were destroyed, and anyone found in possession of them faced the death penalty. Finally, Antiochus desecrated the temple by sacrificing a pig on the altar to Zeus.
Apostasy progresses as culture influences the faith, resulting in the twisting of doctrine and the moral corruption of the clergy. Apostatizing groups then form, even desecrating the holy. Those who are apostate then encourage the intervention of the state or political power.
The desecration of the holy space precedes the sanctification of the diabolical – the values of good and evil are inverted. Fr Ripperger, the renowned Roman Catholic exorcist, describes this inversion as diabolic disorientation where moral codes are progressively oriented away from God; sin is glorified, and virtue attacked.
The antichrist spirit is transformative -it not only defiles but inverts. What was formerly held to be a good is seen as evil and vice-versa. Those who hold to true biblical values of good and evil are hated and attacked. We already see this in western culture in so many ways.
In AD 70, the Jerusalem temple was once again desecrated when the Roman general Titus’ army overpowered the defenders of Jerusalem and looted the temple. He brought back the sacred temple objects and massive amounts of gold and silver to Rome[vii] . With the proceeds of these spoils of war he built the Colosseum[viii]. This was a place of entertainment for the populace, but also a place where the emperor, the embodiment of the state, displayed his temporal and spiritual power. Eventually the Christians of Rome became the victims of these displays and were brutally put to a martyr’s death in the arena. The metaphor is repeated today, not literally but symbolically – a sacred space is exploited for purposes of entertainment. If the process is not interrupted, eventually the outright hatred for confessing bible-believing Christians will result in persecution. Caesar will claim to be God – and by that time the majority will happily accept his claim.
[i] https://www.firstthings.com/article/2024/01/the-desecration-of-man retrieved 04/03/2024.
[ii] 1 Corinthians 6:19.
[iii] Dr Cajetan Skowronski, who led a protest against ‘the rave’ writes, “I … consider the desecration of the sacred ground of our temple buildings, as both a natural consequence of the desecration of ourselves—as fleshly temples stamped through with the Imago Dei—and as a contributing factor to that same desecration of man.” See: https://europeanconservative.com/articles/essay/my-attempt-to-stop-the-desecration-of-canterbury-cathedral/ retrieved 04/03/2024.
[iv] Interview with Luke Burgis: Be Not Conformed—Girard and the Problem of Desire in a Postsecular Age, The Public Discourse. https://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2024/02/92785/ retrieved 04/03/2024.
[v] Daniel Chapters 11,12.
[vi] 1 Maccabees 1:35ff.
[vii] Josephus, Jewish Wars 6:317.
[viii] The archaeologist Sean Kingsley recounts the discovery in 2001 of an inscription on a marble lintel of the Colosseum which records the order of Titus to build the amphitheatre, financed by the spoils plundered from the temple. Kingsley, Sean, God’s Gold, HarperCollins, 2007, New York, p14, 15.
_____________________________________________________________________________
Rumours of War: reading the signs of the times.
By Dave Doveton.
“You know how to interpret the appearance of the sky, but you cannot interpret the signs of the times.” Matthew 16:3b, also Luke 12:56.
“The prudent sees danger and hides himself, but the simple go on and suffer for it.” Proverbs 22:3
“Proclaim this among the nations: Consecrate for war; stir up the mighty men. Let all the men of war draw near; let them come up. Beat your ploughshares into swords and your pruning hooks into spears; let the weak say, “I am a warrior.” Let the nations stir themselves up and come to the valley of Jehoshaphat; for there I will sit to judge all the surrounding nations. The Lord roars from Zion, and utters his voice from Jerusalem, and the heavens and the earth quake. But the Lord is a refuge to his people, a stronghold to the people of Israel.” Joel 3:9, 10, 12,16.
Hardly a week goes by without some defence official or high-ranking military officer commenting on the readiness of Europe or the UK for a major war. Comments by General Sanders, head of the British army, that conscription may be necessary for the UK if it is to be prepared for war on land, set alarm bells ringing for many. This was by no means a prediction, but a call to readiness to meet any possible future scenario, given the heightened tensions in Europe around Ukraine and the conflict in the Middle East. British secretary of Defence, Grant Shapps, has been more forthright, saying that Britain was moving from a peaceful ‘postwar’ world to a ‘prewar’ world and needed to re-arm for protection against a Russian threat[i].
These prognoses followed a warning to Swedes from two top defence officials that they needed to prepare for war[ii]. Other parliamentary speakers from the Baltic nations of Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania have more recently delivered strong warnings about the preparedness of the west in the event of an expanding conflict in Europe. The United States is making serious preparations as it moves nuclear warheads back onto British soil after an absence of fifteen years[iii].
Let me begin by saying that I am not making predictions, nor in any way trying to be alarmist or spread fear and anxiety. Yet, at the same time, remembering the words of our Lord that we should always be ready and that we should be able to read the ‘signs of the times’, we need to ask what his admonishment would mean in practice for a Christian disciple. Also, how can we help others, as well as ourselves prepare for major changes around us that conflict, whether small or great, inevitably does bring. It is abundantly clear from scripture that Jesus wanted his followers to be prepared for future events that would alter their lives immeasurably. This is borne out by his warning to them regarding the cataclysm that would unfold in AD 70 when the Romans invaded and destroyed the temple[iv], Jesus not only prepared them mentally, but he also gave specific directions on how to respond to events[v].
The conflict in the Middle East between Israel and Hamas, and more lately the strikes against American bases in neighbouring countries such as Jordan and Syria; the wider involvement of Yemeni Houthi with their attacks on shipping in the Red Sea; the counter strikes by America and its allies on Iranian backed militia – this could spin out of control if Iran were to become directly involved. The China/Taiwan issue also has the potential of erupting into a war involving the great powers, not to mention North Korea’s constant threats to ignite a nuclear conflagration.
Many countries would be affected by a world war, not only by direct destruction of vital infrastructure, such as roads, communication facilities, hospitals etc. but also by indirect effects. These may be physical, such as the disruption of normal trade and supply chains such as we have seen in the Red Sea region, which affect the availability of goods and services and result in soaring prices. The global financial system would be shaken to its core by a major war[vi]. Modern warfare is also transforming radically with the weaponisation of technology. Global financial systems have already been weaponised by the USA by its prevention of Russia from using the SWIFT system. “Hot” warfare often follows on from “economic” warfare.
Cyber-attacks can disable control systems such as electricity grids and water supply reticulation, not to mention nuclear and other power plants and render them inoperable. A major world war would certainly degrade the communication systems of the world – the internet included. Even banking activities may be stopped by internet disruption and opportunistic criminal hackers.
Not least, as is often said, the first casualty of war is truth. The object of propaganda is the control of the narrative. How does one navigate the propaganda war? Christians should be those who are concerned to know the truth and therefore try the utmost to discern lies and half-truths when reading or listening to media reports and try to get information from a wide range of outlets.
Joel’s timely message (Joel Chapter 3:9-16)
Joels ancient vision of a coming conflict which he sees as affecting his people brings him to sound an alarm, but also to prepare the people of God for what will transpire. I will highlight several points in his message.
- God is sovereign (v12 – 16) He permits war for his sovereign purposes in the world and for his people. We therefore do not have to fear in times of conflict and even world war. Christians should never be ruled by their circumstances, because of the Biblical vision of God’s ultimate purpose for our lives and the world – which is ultimately good.
- God is our refuge (v16) Often we find there are competing claims to have God “on our side” in conflicts, and Christians should be wary of this. There are, however, ‘just wars’[vii] for we live in a fallen world.
Joel also helps the people to prepare:
- Consecrate for war. In my opinion, this means we need to seek the will of the Lord for direction as we navigate the circumstances and prepare for the time to come. Consecration entails a deepening of commitment to the Lord and his purposes – above even that of family and national allegiances.
- Let the men of war draw near. There are those whom the Lord has gifted to be leaders at times like these. They may not be the most likely candidates or the most popular (Winston Churchill certainly was not popular or favoured by the political class but turned out to be an amazing wartime leader). This can apply with regards to both political and church leadership.
- Beat your ploughshares into swords: The resources we used in civilian life are to be diverted and put into use appropriate to the situation of conflict. Just as in the last world war, industrial production was geared to the war effort, in a spiritual sense we invest in spiritual and practical defence. We must be prepared for change.
- Let the weak say I am a warrior: Everyone has a part to play, even the weakest believer. The time at hand calls for courage and boldness. Every Christian needs to stand firm and boldly proclaim what they believe in the storm of an evil hour when people are being swept along by totalitarian ideologies and hatred towards the Jewish people. War has the capacity to spread dehumanising ideas. When people are afraid and threatened, they become easy prey to people who dehumanise our foes and perceived enemies. This should never be tolerated. We pray not only for a just outcome to conflict, and just retributions but we also pray for enemies.
- Most importantly, the battle for the Christian is a spiritual one. We are prayer warriors first and foremost. Those who have a ministry of intercession have a vital role to play. During World War II, Rees Howells[viii] and his team of intercessors spent many hours each day interceding as God led them.
Sometimes we are daunted by the prospects we face, but the sentiment expressed by Mordecai to Queen Esther remains ever valid, “…who knows whether you have come to the kingdom for such a time as this”[ix]. The Lord has placed us in this world at this time and place for his purpose, and according to St Paul – he is able to do far more abundantly that all we ask or think, according to the power at work within us.[x]
[i] https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/jan/26/why-are-european-defence-leaders-talking-about-war
[ii] https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-67935464
[iii] https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/01/26/us-nuclear-bombs-lackenheath-raf-russia-threat-hiroshima/
[iv] Luke 19:41-44, Luke 21:5-24.
[v] Luke 21:20,21.
[vi] https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/01/31/markets-are-fatally-complacent-about-the-risks-of-world-war/
[vii] See for example the Roman Catholic just war tradition, https://juicyecumenism.com/2024/02/06/roman-catholic-just-war/
[viii] https://www.amazon.com/Rees-Howells-Intercessor-Norman-Grubb/dp/0875081886
[ix] Esther 4:14b.
[x] Ephesians 3:20.
________________________________________________________________________
Holy Fire: Hebrews 12:28-13:19 and Unacceptable Worship
By Dave Doveton.
“See that you do not refuse him who is speaking. For if they did not escape when they refused him who warned them on earth, much less will we escape if we reject him who warns from heaven….
…let us offer God acceptable worship, with reverence and awe, for our God is a consuming fire.” (Hebrews 12:25, 28b, 29)
The passage from Hebrews is laden with references to the Lord’s appearance at Mount Sinai, where his glory was described as a ‘devouring fire’ (Exodus 24:17) and Moses’ warnings to the Israelites in Deuteronomy about idolatrous and false worship (Deut. 9:19). The quotation from Deuteronomy 4:24 highlights the fact that worship can be dangerous. Acceptable worship is that which reverences God’s holy nature and his position as judge. As early as the Jerusalem Church, false disciples were severely dealt with by God, as Ananias and Sapphira found out to their cost. Hebrews Chapter 13 continues with an outline of what this entails, as this theme continues through to verse 15. Thus, the author emphasizes mutual love, hospitality, freedom from the love of money, but also reminds his hearers that God judges the sexually immoral (13:4) – a repeat of the warning in 12:16 where he mentions the ‘ungodly Esau’.
This echoes the warnings in 1 Corinthians –
“Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty concerning the body and blood of the Lord …. For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgement on himself. That is why many of you are weak and ill and some have died.”
The danger of unacceptable worship, especially regarding the eucharist, is thus clearly articulated in the New Testament and has precedent in the Old. As we have seen, Deuteronomy lays out what God regards as acceptable.
In the period of the two kingdoms, prophets such as Amos and Isaiah spoke vehemently against the manner in which people were worshipping God and proclaimed it unacceptable. Isaiah renders the Lord’s clear and unambiguous verdict on Judah’s worship:
“When you spread out your hands, I will hide my eyes from you; even though you make many prayers I will not listen; your hands are full of blood. Wash yourselves; make yourselves clean; remove the evil of your deeds from before my eyes; cease to do evil, learn to do good…” (Isaiah 1:15,16)
This excoriating sentence on the people of Judah is introduced by Isaiah by an address to the spiritual leaders which would have been even more shocking and offensive in their eyes.
“Hear the word of the Lord, you rulers of Sodom! Give ear to the teaching of our God, you people of Gomorrah!” (Isaiah 1:10)
He equates the spiritual leaders with the rulers of the most depraved pagan cities of ancient times and models of a terrifying judgement that is used throughout the Old Testament as an apocalyptic sign describing the destiny of rebellious humanity.
Amos in similar manner denounced the people of the Northern Kingdom – especially the priests and leaders, for their lack of concern for the poor and other social justice issues; he also warned about the dangers of unacceptable worship.
“Come to Bethel and transgress; to Gilgal, and multiply transgression; bring your sacrifices every morning, your tithes every three days; offer a sacrifice of thanksgiving of that which is leavened, and proclaim freewill offerings, publish them; for so you love to do, O people of Israel!” declares the Lord God. (Amos 4:4,5)
The prophet denounces with stinging sarcasm the worship life of people living in disobedience to God. Their worship activity, their sacrificial offerings, far from procuring forgiveness for their sins effectively engaged them in more transgression.
The Israelites were going about their worshipping duties and services as usual. The externals were properly observed, but they were not living lives of genuine repentance and godliness. This is an offence to God, and it is despicable in his eyes.
He further admonishes them and pleads with them to turn before judgement comes,
“Seek me and live; but do not seek Bethel and do not enter Gilgal or cross over to Beersheba; for Gilgal shall go into exile and Bethel shall come to nothing. Seek the Lord and live, lest he break out like fire in the house of Joseph, and it devour with none to quench it for Bethel…” (Amos 5:21-23)
He repeats the warning that worship at Bethel would not quench the fire of God’s anger but would add fuel to it. The prophet excoriates the pagan forms of worship at these centres because they corrupted Israelite worship from being the worship of the creator and turned it into the worship of creation. Thus, whenever culture transforms the church, the results are:
- Godly behaviour and the pursuit of sanctification as an essential part of personal devotion and worship disappear.
- The importance of God’s purposes in creation are lost.
These traits (among others) are clear to see in those churches that are apostatising. Firstly, the acceptance of same sex unions, the decision by church authorities and synods to bless such unions – even amongst the clergy.
Secondly the acceptance of gender ideologies which deny the purpose of the creator in his design for human flourishing, which is the creation of male and female and the union of one man and one woman in marriage.
This is the thrust of Paul’s argument in the first chapter of Romans. Dishonouring God leads to outcomes – namely judgements in which God gives people over to impure sexual desires, a blindness to the truth and a proclivity to become captive to false ideologies (believing a lie), among other consequences.
We should not be surprised that those who follow revisionist teachings on human sexuality show no signs of changing their minds and seem ever more adamant in their adherence to heresy, and in the case of leaders, encouraging those in their pastoral care to continue in a lifestyle that has repeatedly and clearly been revealed as highly offensive to almighty God.
The call by bishops to prioritise the unity of the institution above all else[1] – including ethical and doctrinal fidelity – can be regarded as an encouragement to a misplaced trust in the institution. Jeremiah faced similar calls which he labelled as deceptive. “Do not trust in these deceptive words, ‘This is the temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord’”,he warned. Trust in deceptive words has its consequences. Jeremiah told the temple worshippers that they trusted in deceptive words to no avail[2]. They were living lives in open defiance of the covenant yet came to stand before the Lord in worship, believing he would hear their prayer and deliver them[3]. Yet the security of the institutional structures represented by the temple meant nothing. Without sincere repentance leading to amendment of life and behaviour, they would be cast out of their land[4] – in Judah’s case by invading Babylonians. Some six centuries later, Jesus was to use Jeremiah’s description of the temple as a ‘den of robbers’, openly rejecting the temple worship leaders and the religious leaders in general. He then pronounced the same warning of a coming judgement to the worshippers of his day.
Both Jeremiah and Jesus were ignored, which precipitated cataclysmic judgements. History seems to be repeating itself in our present situation – or to put it a more theological way – God is not mocked.
[1] For example, the Bishop of Liverpool’s letter of December 13, 2023 states, “This remains a time when we must continue to be kind to one another as the Church of England takes this step. For through this what is most important is the unity of our purpose at this Christmas time reaching the communities we serve with the Good News of Jesus’ birth”. https://liverpool.anglican.org/house-of-bishop-commends-prayers-of-love-and-faith.php
Also, one of the Archbishop of Canterbury’s many appeals: https://www.christiantoday.com/article/archbishop-of-canterbury-appeals-for-unity-at-the-start-of-synod/134208.htm
[2] Jeremiah 7:4,8.
[3] Jeremiah 7:9,10
[4] Jeremiah 7:15
_________________________________________________________________________
