The Old Preacher

Viewing the World through God's Word

Page 16 of 76

Reformation: Menno Simons

The power of the Word of God.  Again and again it was unleashed to birth the Reformation.  We celebrate the Reformation’s 500th year by reading about its participants, courtesy of desiringgod.org.  Today, Menno Simons . . .

Here We Stand

Day 7

Menno Simons

1496–1561

The Fearless Pacifist

By Ryan Griffith

If you are familiar with the contemporary Mennonites, you may be surprised to learn that the group’s founder started as a Catholic priest who had never read the Bible.

A Priest Without the Bible

In 1524, at the age of 28, Menno Simons was ordained a priest of the Catholic Church in Utrecht, Germany. Although familiar with Greek and Latin and studied in Catholic doctrine, Simons had never read the Scriptures themselves. “I had not touched them during my life,” he later wrote, “for I feared if I should read them they would mislead me.”

In 1526, he began to question the truthfulness of the Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation (the idea that the bread and wine transform into the actual flesh and blood of Jesus in the Eucharist). Simons thought this doubt might be the devil deluding him, so he reluctantly began to study the Bible. While he could nowhere find the doctrine of transubstantiation, he discovered the gospel of salvation by grace through faith in Christ! He began sharing his discoveries with others from the pulpit, propelling him to a place of regional prominence as an evangelical preacher.

Smoke but No Flame

Simons’s study convinced him of the Bible’s unrivaled authority, leading him to examine Catholic doctrine in Scripture’s light. He also rejected the practice of infant baptism as unbiblical and began to encourage congregants to be baptized in accordance with their confession of faith in Christ. Despite his embrace of evangelical doctrine, he remained a priest in the Catholic Church and worked for its reform. All the while, however, his fascination with biblical teaching was merely intellectual. He relished the sweet smell of his newfound fame but lacked the pure flame of true affection for Christ.

The execution of three hundred Anabaptists at Old Cloister near Bolsward in April 1535 brought him to the point of crisis:

I reflected upon my unclean, carnal life, also the hypocritical doctrine and idolatry which I still practiced daily in appearance of godliness, but without relish. My heart trembled within me. I prayed to God with sighs and tears that he would give to me, a sorrowing sinner, the gift of his grace, create within me a clean heart, and graciously through the merits of the crimson blood of Christ, forgive my unclean walk and frivolous easy life.

Overcome by his sins of pride, timidity, and love of comfort, Simons decisively renounced his “worldly reputation, name and fame.” “In my weakness,” he wrote, “I feared God; I sought out the pious and though they were few in number, I found some who were zealous and maintained the truth.”

Enemy of the State — and the Devil

After being baptized, Simons immediately threw himself into preaching the gospel, explaining the Scriptures, and traveling extensively. Simons discovered that the devil had kept him from the Bible and true conversion, and now he was determined to be Satan’s sworn enemy. His preaching quickly drew the ire of Catholic officials. Emperor Charles V even issued an edict against Simons, offering a significant reward to anyone who might deliver him into the hands of authorities.

Nevertheless, Simons exhorted his fellow Anabaptist Reformers to reject violent means for accomplishing reform, advocating pacifism and separation from worldly power. His preaching and reforms were so successful that, eventually, north German and Dutch Anabaptists would be known as Mennonites. On the twenty-fifth anniversary of his renunciation of Catholicism, Simons’s health rapidly declined, and he died the following day, January 31, 1561, at the age of 66.

Misled No Longer

As the devil misled young Menno, so our enemy would mislead us, too. He would keep us from Scripture, from fearing God, from confession of sin, and from humble faith. May we, instead, “with sighs and tears” plead for and joyfully receive the gift of grace in our promised Savior, Jesus Christ.

Although I resisted in former times Thy precious Word and Thy holy will with all my powers . . . nevertheless, Thy fatherly grace did not forsake me, a miserable sinner, but in love, received me, . . . and taught me by the Holy Spirit until of my own choice I declared war upon the world, the flesh, and the devil . . . and willingly submitted to the heavy cross of my Lord Jesus Christ that I might inherit the promised kingdom. (Simons, Meditation on the Twenty-Fifth Psalm)

Reformation:k Wolfgang Capito

 The Reformation transformed Christianity.  On this its 500th anniversary, we should know what God did and through whom he did it.  That’s what this commemoration of individuals, courtesy of desiringgod.com is about.  Here’s today’s edition . . .

Here We Stand

Day 6

Wolfgang Capito

c. 1478–1541

The Protestant Peacemaker

By Rick Shenk

“What is God like? Whom should we follow?” Many people must have been asking these questions during the turbulent times that we now celebrate as the Reformation. Reformers, counter-Reformers, humanists, and Anabaptists argued (and sometimes fought) to define our understanding of God and his gospel. Nothing could be of greater importance.

Many of the people who struggled together (or against each other) during the Protestant Reformation are still well known in the twenty-first century. But the work God did through the Reformation included a cast of hundreds, even thousands, unknown to many of us today. Among this group is Wolfgang Capito (1478–1541), a Reformer who desired more of God and preached the gospel while promoting peace. And for that reason, he was often in trouble with his reforming friends.

Humanist Beginnings

Wolfgang Capito was born in France in 1478. Wolfgang’s father, Hans, was a poor and frugal smithy. He valued education and sent his son to a Latin school and then for training as a doctor. When Hans died in 1500, his last words were a command, warning Wolfgang against rashly becoming a priest.

Rashly or not, Capito was already moving in that direction. Abandoning medicine, he studied theology. Specifically, he was trained as a Christian humanist, becoming a student and a close friend of Erasmus. As a humanist, he loved the biblical text and biblical languages, desired Christianity’s reform (particularly the morals of its leaders and priests), and yearned for peace. Soon he was ordained for service in the Catholic Church.

Capito was sent to Basel in 1515. There, in Basel Minster, he was slowly drawn out of Catholicism, and mere humanism, into the Reformation. While in Basel he became friends with Zwingli and a correspondent of Luther. During this time, Luther’s theology confused him. At first, he begged Luther to be less offensive, especially to the pope.

This counsel Luther did not heed! Even so, Capito eagerly published Luther’s works in northern Europe in 1518. Yet, still a humanist, Capito truly did not understand. He continued to engage in a dialogue with Luther, and then in 1522 he visited Wittenberg. While disturbed by the tragic sin he witnessed there, yet he also discovered the heart of the Reformation in the gospel — God found his heart.

A Call for Peace

When God shifted him from a humanist to a theological Reformer, Capito explained it this way: “I have moved to the side of the pious Papists and Lutherans who seek only the soul’s salvation and nothing temporal; and I admonish them to Christian unity, as much as God gives me grace” (Wolfgang Capito, 94). His heart was now God’s. Yet his humanist training resonated deeply with the biblical call for peace.

During his lifetime, he wrote three hymns. One of them endured in German hymnals for centuries and is titled “Give Us Peace”:

Give us that peace that we do lack,
Through misbelief, and in ill life.
Thy Word to offer Thou dost not slack,
Which we unkindly gainstrive.
With fire and sword, this healthful Word
Some persecute and oppress.
Some with the mouth confess the truth
Without sincere godliness.

Though God’s word was powerfully being preached throughout Germany, France, and beyond, yet there was persecution and oppression within the Reformation which wearied Capito and sent him to his knees in prayer — and to his pen. He continued to call Luther and Zwingli to find common ground on the theology of the Lord’s Supper, and he called for mercy to be shown to the Anabaptists.

Throughout his life as a Reformer, many interpreted his call for mercy to theological opponents to mean he agreed with those opponents. Yet, mercy is not agreement; his condemnation of violence, coercion, and even offensive language was a call to God’s people not to interfere in the work of the Holy Spirit to discipline those who oppose.

The Lord’s Servant

“What is God like? Whom should we follow?” Such questions still challenge the world today. As we seek to call many to delight in the God of Luther and Calvin, we would do well to follow Capito’s example and God’s command: “The Lord’s servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth” (2 Timothy 2:24–25).

We are called to gentle and peaceful engagement, even at the risk of being misunderstood.

“That fire which all the world shall never be able to quench.”  So wrote theologian Richard Sibbes of the spiritual passion God kindled at the dawn of the Reformation.  On this, its 500th anniversary, we are remembering it through some of its important contributors, courtesy of desiringgod.org . . .

Here We Stand

Day 5

Wibrandis Rosenblatt

1504–1564

The Bride of the Reformation

By Noël Piper

In 1504, Wibrandis Rosenblatt was born in Säckingen, Germany. Over the next sixty years, she would marry and be widowed four times, inspiring one writer to describe her as the Reformationfrau — “the Bride of the Reformation.”

Ludwig Keller

Her 1524 marriage to Ludwig Keller was short lived. In July 1526, Wibrandis, 22, was a widow with a daughter, also named Wibrandis.

Among the Reformation leaders, clerical marriage was becoming “a new way of serving the community of Jesus Christ.” Johannes Oecolampadius had argued publicly for the freedom of pastors to marry, though he himself was still single (Frau Wibrandis, 15). Oecolampadius’s friend Wolfgang Capito wrote to him, “If a suitable person is pointed out to you, I think you should not decline. To have a mate of like zeal will be a glory to the Lord.”

Johannes Oecolampadius

Someone must have pointed out Wibrandis. On March 15, 1528, she and Oecolampadius were married, raising some eyebrows at their age difference — 45 and 24 — but causing most friends to rejoice. He wrote in a letter, “The Lord has given me a sister and wife . . .  a widow with several years experience in bearing the cross. I wish she were older, but I see in her no signs of youthful petulance. Pray the Lord to give us a long and happy marriage” (Women of the Reformation, 82).

At this point, pastors had not been marrying for several hundred years. Wibrandis and other wives of sixteenth-century Reformers became friends through letters, determining and shaping their new role as they lived it.

Soon, three children were added to their family — Eusebius, Aletheia, and Irene — before the death of Oecolampadius in November 1531 due to blood poisoning from an abscess. That same month, Capito’s wife Agnes also died.

Wolfgang Capito

Martin Bucer’s matchmaking propensities sprang into action. “My choice for Capito is the widow of Oecolampadius. . . . He writes me that he has been very touched by the sight of the widow Wibrandis and the orphaned children” (Women of the Reformation, 85). Wibrandis and Capito were married on August 11, 1532.

Capito was pastor of New St. Peter’s Church in Strasbourg. Their household included Wibrandis’s mother and the four children of her previous marriages. Five more were born — Agnes, Dorothea, Irene (after the death of Irene Oecolampadius), John Simon, and Wolfgang.

“Since she did curb his foibles, balance his budget, and keep his household sweet, her achievement belongs to the annals of unrecorded heroisms” (Women of the Reformation, 87). But plague in 1540 took the children Eusebius, Dorothea, Wolfgang, and also Capito himself.

Martin Bucer

News of Capito’s death reached the Bucers when Elisabeth Bucer was close to death. Elisabeth pled with her husband and Wibrandis that they marry after she died, and they did in April 1542.

Bucer wrote, “There is nothing that I could desire in my new wife save that she is too attentive and solicitous. She is not as free in criticism as was my first wife. . . . I only hope I can be as kind to my new wife as she is to me. But oh, the pang for the one I have lost” (Women of the Reformation, 87–88).

One can imagine Wibrandis’s similar grief for three husbands. For the fourth time, she adapted to a new husband, learning how they would love and support each other according to their particular needs, ministries, and preferences.

By 1548, new laws required Protestant churches to fulfill conditions that Bucer could not endorse. He fled into exile in England, and taught at Cambridge, while assisting in biblical translation and developing liturgy. After only a year, suffering a cold, damp winter and a long list of physical ailments, he urged Wibrandis to come. She came and eventually brought the family.

During Bucer’s last months, Wibrandis nursed him almost constantly, doing also whatever was required for caring for the rest of her family, consisting of the children and her mother. After her husband’s death in February 1551, Wibrandis wrote numerous articulate letters to sort out their finances and move the family back to Strasbourg. Some were in German, some in Latin, revealing her facility with language and languages.

Wibrandis the Woman

Lest we are tempted to see a passive woman swept up by circumstances and the decisions of imposing men, here is Wibrandis’s forceful voice to her son Simon John Capito, away at university:

I haven’t heard from you for some time, but I well know that if I had, the news would not have been comforting. . . . If only I might live to the day when I have good news from you. Then would I die of joy. . . . If you would follow in the footsteps of your father, then Grandma, the sisters, and the in-laws would lay down their very lives for you. . . . If you will behave yourself properly, come home. If you won’t, then do as you will. I wish you a good year. Your faithful mother. (Women of the Reformation, 93–94)

In 1564, Basel lost 7,000 to plague, including Wibrandis Rosenblatt. She was buried beside Oecolampadius.

Today in Bad Säckingen, her birthplace, is Wibrandis-Rosenblatt-Weg, a short street leading to the bank of the Rhine. Beside the street towers the steeple of the Evangelische Kirchengemeinde, a Protestant church.

 

Indebted Children

Lois and I were both blessed to be raised in Christians homes.  We might be punished for disobeying, but we knew we were loved and belonged no matter what.

In today’s text (Romans 8:12-17), Paul tells the Rome church they are indebted (under obligation) to God the Spirit, but as children of God.  In this text, he implicitly exhorts the church to apply what he’s written in 8:1-11.  A good summary of that text is 8:3,4 . . .

“For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do: by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and as a sin offering so that the just requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit” (8:3,4).

Now, the implicit exhortations which follow from that summary . . .

“So then, brothers and sisters, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh –“ (8:12).

Paul tells the Rome church and us (including himself) that we are “debtors” but not to the “flesh” (sinful nature or the law of sin in our members).  We’re no longer under obligation to the flesh, because God has acted by sending his Son (8:3,4).  Therefore, our “indebtedness” is now to God the Spirit, who indwells us.

“for if you live according to the flesh, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live” (8:13).

Here’s the reason why we’re not obligated to the sin nature:  if we live in conformity with its desires, we die.  In short, our sin nature does us no good.  It leaves us  separated from knowing God now, and eternally separated from him at the judgment.

Paul isn’t warning the believers we will die, since he’s already assured us, “There is therefore no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus” (8:1).  He’s warning us to stay away from what “kills” unbelievers.

But, “if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live.”

“ . . . the deeds of the body.”  Paul sees the body as the place where the law of sin operates, as he’s already written . . .

“ . . . but I see another law at work in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within my members” (7:23).

“We know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body of sin might be destroyed, and we might no longer be enslaved to sin” (6:6).

Until that destruction we are to “put to death the deeds of the body” so we might live.  And this we are to do “by the Spirit”.

“ . . . put to death” comes from the Greek thanatao.  Literally, it means “kill someone.”  Figuratively, it means “put a stop to”—in this case, the body’s sin-nature deeds.  We shouldn’t skim Paul’s language-choice—a violent word, implying the warfare-against-sin in which we are caught up.  And the present tense means Paul wants his readers to keep on “killing” the body’s sin-nature deeds.

Commentator Leon Morris writes, “Such acts are the object of decisive and hostile actions as far as the believer is concerned.   There is to be no life in the deeds in question.  They are not living options.  And this is to take place through an action in the believer, though not an unaided action, for the mortification is to be done ‘by the Spirit’.  It is the energy of the divine Spirit, not the energy of the flesh, that enables the believer to put the body’s deeds to death” (The Epistle to the Romans, p. 312).

Paul now explains why all genuine believers will fight sin to the death and live . . .

“For all who are led by the Spirit of God are children of God. For you did not receive a spirit of slavery to fall back into fear, but you have received a Spirit of adoption. When we cry, “Abba! Father!” it is that very Spirit bearing witness with our spirit that we are children of God, and if children, then heirs, heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ — if, in fact, we suffer with him so that we may also be glorified with him “ (8:14-17).

All true Christians will “kill” sin because “ . . . all who are led by the Spirit are children of God”.  To be “led by the Spirit” is to be guided into fights against sin.  Those “led by the Spirit” are “children of God”.  They have a “family-like” relationship with God, and he with them.

Thus, they will live because they are God’s children!  They are not slaves “to fall back into fear.”  They are “children”, who belong no matter what.

We, of course, are not naturally God’s children.  (Here Paul opposes the popular cultural thought that we’re all children of God.)  We’re God’s children by “a Spirit of adoption”.  That means we have been given rights and privileges not naturally ours.  We’re admitted into a heavenly family to which we have no rights of our own.

And while “adoption” is a legal proceeding, Paul makes it very personal.  We have received a “Spirit of adoption”.  He is given to indwell us, to live inside us.  And it is by him that we cry, “Abba!  Father”.  “Abba” is an Aramaic term for father, meaning something close to our “papa” or “daddy”, while retaining proper respect and honor.

This is intimacy with God as our Father that we sense in our spirit.

This leads to a “legal” standing that we “adopted children of God” enjoy—“heirs, heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ . . . “   In the Old Testament, the children of Israel were heirs of the land.  Later, that promised land came to be understood in connection with the Messiah.  Paul identifies us as “joint heirs with Christ”.  Thus, we inherit what the Messiah inherits—not just eastern Mediterranean land, but the new creation over which he will reign and all eternal blessings belonging to it.  As adopted children of God, all this is ours with Christ.

But there’s a condition–“if, in fact, we suffer with him so that we may also be glorified with him.”  What kind of suffering might Paul have in mind?  In the immediate context (8:1-17), it’s the suffering of “killing” sin.  It’s easier to “go with the flow”, to do what feels right.  But indwelling sin (what Paul calls “the law of sin”) remains in us.  Empowered by the Spirit, we must resist it and put it to death when it tempts.  Because of this, following Christ brings with it its own afflictions.

As Paul continues (8:18-39), it becomes obvious Paul is broadening out suffering to include any kind.  Sickness, pain, persecution, poverty may come.  With it will come a severe faith-test.  Sin will raise its siren call to “curse God and die”.  It must be killed.  If we are to be glorified with Christ, we must suffer with him.

* * *

You and I, believers in Christ, have a debt, an obligation.  But a good one.  We’re obligated  to put the deeds of our sin-indwelt bodies to death.  This might sound silly coming from the old preacher.  Isn’t it mostly the young  who endure temptation?  I guess I used to think that, just as I used to think I had really grown holier.  Then I realized I had just grown older.  Temptations to sin may have changed, but they still confront me.

Anyway, I’ve said our obligate to “kill” the deeds of our sin-indwelt bodies is a good one.  That’s because we’re obligated as adopted-by-the-Spirit children of God.  We’re obligated as sinners who now call God “Father” and sense in our spirit that God is our Father.  We’re obligated as children who will increasingly learn to live in accord with the Spirit who indwells us.  And we’re obligated as children who are joint-heirs with Christ himself, glory awaiting.

I conclude with two thoughts.  One, no matter what happens we belong.  We’ll not be kicked out of the family.  And, two, we’re not little defenseless children cowering at the attacks of sin.  We’re children of the King, armed with the Spirit, destined to win.  We’re on the offensive against sin!

 

 

 

 

Reformation: Philip Melanchthon

 
This is Day 4 in our 500th Reformation Commemoration courtesy of desinggod.org.   Read about the men whose lives God used to shape the Reformation . . .

Here We Stand

Philip Melanchthon

1497–1560

The Gentle Lutheran

By David Mathis

He was not the kind who started revolutions, but the kind who brought order to the ensuing chaos. His mentor, Martin Luther, was brash, impulsive, and forceful. But Philip Melanchthon was a timid, sober-minded unifier. Luther, by his own admission, was “substance without words,” while his brilliant young disciple was “substance and words.”

Luther had little concern for precision or guarding against misconception; Melanchthon made nuance his forte. Luther said he used a spear, while Melanchthon used pins and needles. Luther was a pioneer, hacking his way through centuries of superstitious brush with an apostolic machete. But Melanchthon, like Bullinger in Zurich and Calvin in Geneva, played the part of the calm, collected systematic, grading the Protestant path for generations to come.

He was “the quiet reformer” — and a fitting complement to the loud, boisterous Luther. But not only was Melanchthon known as quiet and peaceful, but on occasion he demonstrated an explosive temper. And not only was he relentlessly curious, and a master of many subjects, but he also was strangely superstitious. Like every sinner, he was his own inconsistent blend of virtue and vice, and God was willing to work with that.

Prodigy, Professor, Copilot

Born in 1497 in southwest Germany, Melanchthon was nephew to renowned humanist Johann Reuchlin (1455–1522), who suggested, in the humanist tradition, that young Philip change his last name from Schwartzerdt (“black earth”) to the Hellenized Melanchthon.

A child prodigy, Melanchthon studied the classics in Heidelberg and Tubingen, and arrived in Wittenberg in 1519, at age 22, just as the Reformation was heating up. That same year, he accompanied Luther as an aid to the Leipzig Disputation. By 1521, he published the first edition of his Loci Communes (“basic concepts”) which started as a commentary on Romans and sought to tie Christian theology, inspired by Luther, to the biblical text, rather than the philosophical categories of medieval scholarship.

As the fires of reform raged, Melanchthon was there at Luther’s side in 1529 at Marburg, and there in Luther’s stead in 1530 at Augsburg, where he represented the Lutheran cause — and even drafted the Augsburg Confession — since Luther was an outlaw and unable to attend.

Independent Mind

Melanchthon’s close association with Luther, however, did not mean that all Lutherans embraced him. Even while Luther was still living, some impugned Melanchthon as a corruptor, that he was hijacking Luther’s bold movement for something more docile. Meanwhile, many others greatly appreciated Melanchthon’s nuance, level head, and theological acumen and thought he was doing his pioneering friend an invaluable service.

Melanchthon was too careful a thinker to agree with Luther on everything. But even as differences emerged, he always thought of himself as Luther’s disciple. He was helping his mentor, not rebelling against him, in maturing his theological insights.

His two key divergences with Luther, for which some detractors would relentlessly take him to task, pertained to the bondage of the will and the Lord’s Supper. As early as 1540, a decade after Augsburg, and six years before Luther’s death, Melanchthon went public, in an updated version of the confession, with an iterated view of the Table. His opponents accused him of being a crypto-Calvinist on the Eucharist; however, in the other key divergence, he clearly moved away from Geneva. Melanchthon rejected double predestination, which he thought a necessary entailment of Luther’s view of the will, and suspected that at least some of Luther’s followers were going too far in their sense of the will’s bondage.

Leader of the Lutherans

As the years passed, even after Melanchthon’s death in Wittenberg in 1560, “the quiet reformer” carried the day in one of his major disagreements and lost the other. With the 1577 Formula of Concord, and the 1580 Book of Concord, “Lutheran orthodoxy emerged as playing down the doctrine of predestination (with Melanchthon) and affirming the real presence in the Eucharist (against Melanchthon)” (The Reformation, 353). From a Reformed perspective, both decisions went in the wrong direction, and account for key differences with Lutherans today. We’d say Concord would have been better off to hear Melanchthon on the Table and listen to Luther on the will.

In the final tally, Melanchthon became the intellectual leader of the Lutherans. Not only was he the first systematic theologian of the Reformation, and one of its most significant figures, but he designed educational systems that gave Lutheranism staying power not just in his unstable days but in the even more turbulent times to come. God put Melanchthon’s gifts, quirks, and even inconsistencies to good use to reinforce Reformation theology as a world-changing force.

A Continuationist Church

Seems like desiringgod.org day at the Old Preacher.  But, I can’t resist passing along this blog by Jason Meyer, pastor of Bethlehem Baptist Church, Minneapolis, Minnesota.  He titles his blog, “Confessions of a Functional Cessationist”.  (Cessationists believe that the miraculous gifts of the Spirit ceased with the ending of the apostolic age and close of the biblical canon.  Continuationists believe the gifts continue until Jesus comes.)

For some time I’ve realized that the pastor who is not a continuationist robs his church of the upbuilding the Spirit-gifts are given to promote.  I share Meyer’s blog hoping that, if your pastor is not a continuatiionist, you might begin to pray that he will become one and lead the church in that direction.

 

Article by

Pastor, Minneapolis, Minnesota

This article is more about aspirations than answers. I am describing the start of a journey more than documenting how to arrive at a destination. I begin with a confession: I have always been a theoretical continuationist. That is, I have always believed that the gifts of the Spirit continue to this very day.

I have never adopted the cessationist viewpoint that certain spiritual gifts ceased when the apostolic age came to an end. Paul’s argument that tongues and prophecy will end “when the perfect comes” (1 Corinthians 13:8–10) is a reference to the second coming of Christ, not the close of the biblical canon. I tell my cessationist friends that there is a day coming when I too will be a cessationist: the second coming.

Even though I have always been a theoretical continuationist, I am far too often a functional cessationist. In other words, I am a continuationist in theory, but I look a lot like a cessationist in practice. This gap between theory and practice pricks my conscience.

Test Everything — Including Attitudes

Recently, I have been convicted by clear differences between the way the Bible speaks and the way I speak about spiritual gifts. I have said things like “I am open, but cautious” when it comes to sign gifts like prophecy, tongues, and interpretation of tongues. That statement about caution rightly stresses the need to “test everything” (1 Thessalonians 5:21). Every experience must be examined by the searchlight of Scripture.

“Instead of ‘open, but cautious,’ I am more like ‘open, but overly suspicious.’”

However, in practice, I can take this caution so far that it turns into suspicion and fear. Instead of “open, but cautious,” I am more like “open, but overly suspicious.” I have discovered that Scripture tests our attitudes and not just our experiences. It was a little shocking to see how much my attitude is actually rebuked by Scripture. Paul commands Christians, “Earnestly desire the spiritual gifts” (1 Corinthians 14:1). He characterizes the Corinthians as “eager for manifestations of the Spirit” (1 Corinthians 14:12).

My attitude towards spiritual gifts has fallen far short of earnest and eager. In fact, Scripture goes further and asks me about how much I am committed to corporate edification. Spiritual gifts or manifestations of the Spirit are for “building up the church” (1 Corinthians 14:12). The great Love Chapter (1 Corinthians 13) controls the application of spiritual gifts (1 Corinthians 14). This issue is not just an attitude check, but a love test. Will I love my people enough to move from extreme caution to earnest desire? What motivates me more? Do I fear losing a measure of corporate control, or does love move me to desire greater heights of corporate edification?

Desiring God in His Gifts

One thought has captured me more than any other at the start of this journey. This thought came from a thought-provoking question from Sam Storms in his book The Beginners Guide to Spiritual Gifts. He asks whether we should talk about “God and his gifts” or “God in his gifts.” He does not leave the answer in doubt.

Spiritual gifts are nothing less than God himself in us, energizing our souls, imparting revelation to our minds, infusing power in our wills, and working his sovereign and gracious purposes through us. Spiritual gifts must never be viewed deistically, as if a God “out there” has sent some “thing” to us “down here.” Spiritual gifts are God present in, with, and through human thoughts, human deeds, human words, human love.

This paragraph captured me. These words arrested me because if spiritual gifts are manifestations of God, then, in a sense, desiring the gifts is desiring God. Christian Hedonists are not fully desiring God if we stop short of desiring him in his gifts.

The pastoral implications are weighty as well. The apostle Paul keeps pushing the discussion of spiritual gifts toward corporate edification: “building up the church” (1 Corinthians 14:12). Love looks like a pastor wanting more manifestations of God for the corporate joy and edification of his people.

Christian Hedonism Seeks for More

Therefore, I aspire to pastor a Christian Hedonist, continuationist church. The gifts of the Spirit are present at our church; I don’t want to give the impression that manifestations of the Spirit have been absent. But certain gifts of the Spirit — like prophesy and speaking in tongues — have been more sporadic than consistent.

“Spiritual gifts are nothing less than God himself in us.”

I don’t have all the answers for what consistency would look like as a Christian Hedonist, continuationist church, but I want to grow into it. We are taking some small steps in this direction. Our leadership has made plans to attend the Convergence Conference this month, and the next Bethlehem Conference for Pastors and Church Leaders will focus on the person and the work of the Holy Spirit.

We don’t expect changes to come overnight. Any changes in practice will require extensive teaching and careful shepherding, but we are eager to learn from others who are leading the way in demonstrating how to desire God in his gifts.

Reformation: Girolamo Savonarola

This catches us up-to-date with our Reformation remembrances on its 500th year anniversary courtesy of desiringgod.org.

Here We Stand

Day 3

Girolamo Savonarola

1452–1498

The Florentine Forerunner

By Zach Howard

Surrounding the base of the Luther monument in Worms, Germany, sit the four forerunners of the Protestant Reformation — Jan Hus, John Wycliffe, Peter Waldo, and Girolamo Savonarola. They could not have more different personalities, yet each inspired Luther’s reforms in his own way. Luther found Savonarola personally inspiring: as Luther traveled to the Diet of Worms in 1521 to stand trial — after burning the papal bull that excommunicated him — he carried on his person a picture of the Dominican friar.

As Luther faced the possibility of death in Worms, perhaps he compared his own life to Savonarola’s: with a prophetic voice, Savonarola had condemned the Roman church’s corruption. His conflict with the pope climaxed in his excommunication and execution by fire. Luther was likewise excommunicated for his complaints against papal abuses. And though Luther escaped his own death sentence, he found a particular resonance with Savonarola; two years after hiding away in Wartburg Castle, Luther published Savonarola’s prison meditations on Psalms 51 and 31 and praised him as “that godly man of Florence.”

The People’s Prophet

Born to a wealthy family in Ferrara, Italy, in 1452, Savonarola was a precocious young man with a penchant for learning. Intended by his parents for the medical field, he made a sudden choice at 23 years old to join the Dominican order after becoming disillusioned with the vanity of Italian culture. As a young friar, he soaked deeply in the writings of Thomas Aquinas and in Scripture, quickly demonstrating a capacious mind, which allowed him to commit most of Scripture to memory.

Savonarola arrived in Florence in 1490 already renowned for his learning, yet it was his preaching that catapulted him into the center of Florentine reform and politics. Often from the cathedral in Florence, Savonarola would preach to thousands in the vernacular with powerful imagery and simple language from the Scriptures. He announced the saving grace of Christ with biblical potency while simultaneously offering excoriating critiques of the immoral practices of political and ecclesial leaders.

His influential preaching, along with some remarkable events outside Savonarola’s control — the French king’s surprise invasion into Italy along with a devastating disease — suddenly elevated his influence in Florence. Equally important in his ascent as the city’s prophetic voice was the pervasive belief among ordinary people of an imminent, momentous upheaval related to the end times, especially as the year 1500 approached.

Excommunicated

From 1494 to 1498, Savonarola fomented dramatic political and social change. His preaching became far more prophetic. Emphasizing Christ’s return, he called Florence to live as a new Jerusalem. His moral reform bled into political reorganization as he worked to establish a “Christian republic,” much like Calvin later did in Geneva.

Towards the height of these changes, he organized the youth of Florence to model and incite for reform, precipitating several “Bonfires of Vanities” in protest against the annual Mardi Gras Carnival. These youths led citizens in destroying instruments of temptation like carnival masks, playing cards, fine dresses, makeup, mirrors, and even musical instruments. The last of these occurred in the Piazza della Signoria at the center of Florence on February 7, 1497, just months before Pope Alexander VI excommunicated Savonarola.

After his excommunication, Savonarola’s conflict with Pope Alexander VI exploded when the pope captured letters Savonarola had sent to the kings of France, England, Spain, Hungary, and the Emperor of Germany, pleading with them to call an ecclesiastical counsel to depose the pope for his abuses. Savonarola opposed not the office, but the person of Alexander VI and, in this way, differed from later Reformers’ more expansive critiques of papal authority and Catholic doctrine.

Luther’s Spark

Insofar as Savonarola affirmed the primacy of Peter, encouraged devotion to Mary, and tended towards a semi-Pelagian view of salvation, he remained doctrinally within the Roman Catholic Church. But insofar as Savonarola called for moral reform, condemned papal abuses, and elevated the authority of Scripture, he anticipated the Reformation.

Although Savonarola’s one-man reform movement in Florence did not continue long in Italy after his death, his passionate preaching and zealous reforms had exposed the church’s corruption like a brief yet bright match lit in a dark cave. Savonarola’s spark was the kind by which Luther, just two decades later, would kindle his own fire for reformation.

 

Reformation: Jan Hus

 We continue with our Reformation commemoration from desiringgod.org . . .

Here We Stand

Day 2

Jan Hus

c. 1369–1415

The Goosefather

By Greg Morse

On December 17, 1999, the pope issued the ceremonial equivalent of a modern apology: “Our bad.”

John Paul II addressed a crowd in the Czech Republic, expressing “deep regret for the cruel death” inflicted upon their hero. “Deep regrets” were the very least the Catholic Church could offer.

Sealed with Blood

Lured to the Council of Constance under the promise of safety, Jan Hus was immediately thrown into prison for six months, given a mock trial, and ordered to recant — which he refused. In July 1415, he was stripped naked, adorned with a dunce hat painted with devils and labeled “Arch-Heretic” — all as he prayed for his enemies.

They then led him past a burning pile of his books and chained him to the stake. In response to being chained up like a dog, he said, “My Lord Jesus Christ was bound with a harder chain than this one for my sake, so why should I be ashamed of this rusty chain?” They told him once more to recant, but he refused, proclaiming, “What I taught with my lips I will now seal with my blood.” And that he did.

As the flames climbed higher, he sang. The secretary of the council pronounced, “O curse’d Judas, because thou hast abandoned the pathways of peace, and hast counselled with the Jews, we take away from thee the cup of redemption.” Thankfully, the Catholic Church did not have the authority to take the cup of redemption that day.

After his death, outrage filled Bohemia. In his name, followers revolted against Rome in violent protest that lasted for over a decade. Jan Hus was a preacher, a political figure, a prophet, a proto-Reformer, and a martyr of the first class.

Wycliffe’s Bulldog

Around 1369, a goose was born in gooseland. Jan Hus (Czech for goose) was born in Hussinec (Czech for gooseland) in the Kingdom of Bohemia. Born into a poor family, the goose left the gaggle for the priesthood in search of a better living and prestige. He came to be a renowned preacher at Bethlehem Chapel, but spent much of his time serving in academia as the dean of the philosophical faculty in Prague. Living in a time of social unrest between German speakers and Czech citizens, Hus became a key figure for Czech nationalism.

Hus lived in a time when immorality infected the priesthood of the Catholic Church. He soon began preaching “violent sermons” against the rampant iniquity of the clergy until they reported him to the archbishop and had him banned from preaching. As Hus read Scripture and watched the popes of his day abuse their power, he concluded that papal authority was not ultimate. He needed a sturdier foundation than was built from the straw and sticks of men’s opinion — no matter how highly regarded those men were. He built his life and ministry on the word of God.

His views about Scripture’s ultimate authority were set ablaze as he began to read the condemned works of John Wycliffe. Wycliffe found a loyal disciple in Hus. Hus defended his works with such tenacity that one historian called Hus “Wycliffe’s bulldog” (The Unquenchable Flame, 30). He staunchly argued against indulgences, advocated for both the bread and the wine to be served in communion, and preached in the common language (as opposed to the untranslated Latin of the day).

Although still in agreement with the Catholic Church on matters such as the Mass, his allegiance to the teachings of Wycliffe got him excommunicated, tried for heresy, and burned alive.

The Geese Are Not Silent

After Hus was finally condemned to death, he proclaimed, “You may roast the goose, but a hundred years from now a swan will arise whose singing you will not be able to silence.” Exactly 102 years later, a sprightly monk nailed ninety-five theses to Wittenberg’s door.

He too, seeing the discrepancy between Roman doctrine and Scripture, sought to reform the Catholic Church. He too was led to challenge the pope. And he too was condemned as a heretic. During the Leipzig Debate, Luther was disparagingly condemned as a “Hussite.” He rejected the title in the moment, but took time to read his works during an intermission, returned, and commended the teaching of the condemned Hus. Luther was Hus’s swan, and would later own the association. He’s often painted with swans to this day.

The Goosefather, a prominent forerunner to the Reformers, stood his ground and was martyred. The Swan followed the Goose, and Rome still has not silenced him.

Reformation: Peter Waldo

 
desiringgod.org is taking readers on a 31-day journey to remember “Martin Luther’s spark that set the world ablaze” on this the Reformation’s 500th anniversary.  I’ll be passing along these commemorations to deepen our knowledge of how God worked through these men who suffered so much for the Word of God.  Here’s Day 1–2 days late.

Here We Stand

Day 1

Peter Waldo

Died by 1218

The First Tremor

By Jon Bloom

More than three hundred years before Martin Luther was born, an unlikely reformer suddenly appeared in the city of Lyon in southeast France. His protests against doctrines and practices of the Roman Catholic Church were strong tremors foretelling the coming spiritual earthquake called the Reformation. And the movement he launched survived to join the great Reformation. He is known to history as Peter Waldo.

Many details about Waldo are not known, including his name. We don’t know if Peter was his real first name, since it doesn’t appear in any document until 150 years after his death. His last name was most likely something like Valdès or VaudèsValdo (Waldo) was the Italian adaptation. We also don’t know the year Peter was born or the precise year he died — historians disagree over whether he died between 1205 and 1207 or between 1215 and 1218.

But we do know a few earthshaking things.

A Rich Ruler Repents

In 1170, Waldo was a very wealthy, well-known merchant in the city of Lyon. He had a wife, two daughters, and lots of property. But something happened — some say he witnessed the sudden death of a friend, others say he heard a spiritual song of a traveling minstrel — and Waldo became deeply troubled over the spiritual state of his soul and desperate to know how he could be saved.

The first thing he resolved was to read the Bible. But since it only existed in the Latin Vulgate, and his Latin was poor, he hired two scholars to translate it into the vernacular so he could study it.

Next, he sought spiritual counsel from a priest, who pointed him to the rich young ruler in the Gospels and quoted Jesus: “One thing you still lack. Sell all that you have and distribute to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me” (Luke 18:22). Jesus’s words pierced Waldo’s heart. Like the rich young ruler, Waldo suddenly realized he had been serving Mammon, not God. But unlike the rich young ruler who walked away from Jesus, Waldo repented and did exactly what Jesus said: he gave away all he had to the poor (after making adequate provision for his wife and daughters). From that point on, he determined to live in complete dependence on God for his provision.

A Movement Is Born

Waldo immediately began to preach from his Bible in the streets of Lyon, especially to the poor. Many were converted, and by 1175 a sizable group of men and women had become Waldo’s disciples. They too gave away their possessions and were preaching (women as well as men). The people started calling them the “Poor of Lyons.” Later, as the group grew into a movement and spread throughout France and other parts of Europe, they became known as “The Waldensians.”

The more Waldo studied Scripture, the more troubled he became over certain doctrines, practices, and governing structures of the Catholic Church — not to mention its wealth. And he boldly spoke out against these things. But since the Church officially prohibited lay preaching, Waldo and his ragtag band drew opposition from church leaders.

A Sign to Be Opposed

The Archbishop of Lyons was particularly irked by this uneducated, self-appointed reform movement and moved to squash it. But in 1179, Waldo appealed directly to Pope Alexander III and received his approval. However, only five years later the new pope, Lucius III, sided with the archbishop and excommunicated Waldo and his followers.

In the earlier years, the Waldensian movement was a reform movement. Waldo never intended to leave the church, and he held to numerous traditional Catholic doctrines. But after the excommunication, and continuing beyond Waldo’s death, the Waldensian’s Protestant-like convictions increased and solidified.

  • They rejected all claims to authority besides Scripture.
  • They rejected all mediators between God and man, except the man Christ Jesus (though Mary was venerated for quite a while).
  • They rejected the doctrine that only a priest could hear confession, and argued that all believers were qualified.
  • They rejected purgatory, and thus rejected indulgences and prayers for the dead.
  • They believed the only Scripture-sanctioned sacraments were baptism and communion.
  • They rejected the Church’s emphasis on fast and feast days and eating restrictions.
  • They rejected the priestly and monastic caste system.
  • They rejected the veneration of relics, pilgrimages, and the use of holy water.
  • They rejected the pope’s claim to authority over earthly rulers.
  • They eventually rejected the apostolic succession of the pope.

The Pre-Reformation Joins the Reformation

Despite the excommunication and Waldo’s death, the Waldensian movement continued to grow for quite a while. It spread into northern Italy and regions of Spain, Austria, Germany, Hungary, and Poland.

But the Roman Catholic persecution also continued and grew in severity, till by the fifteenth century, the Waldensian ranks had shrunk into small, obscure communities in the alpine valleys of France and Italy. But when the Protestant Reformation burst on the scene in the sixteenth century, most Waldensians became Protestants.

Peter Waldo was proto-Protestant, though he didn’t know it. He was a merchant turned prophet who simply believed in the word of God with all his heart, which he demonstrated with all his life. And in taking God at his word, Waldo turned his world upside down.

Mind-Set

I suppose if we polled people we’d find that 75% define sin as “doing what God forbids” or “breaking God’s law”.  Paul would fall in that majority, but with a caveat.  He would argue that sin is a power before it becomes our action.  A power that lives in us. And,  a power that indwells even believers in Christ.

In Romans 8:1-5, Paul tells his readers in the Roman church (and us) that those “in Christ Jesus” are no longer condemned to live under the domination of sin’s indwelling power.  God’s Son came to condemn sin in us, so that the righteous requirements of the law might be fulfilled in us who “walk” in conformity with the Spirit now living in us.

The Greek word translated “set the mind” is phronouson—also translated “ponder, be intent on, keep thinking about.”  In 8:5 we face a translation dilemma.  The dilemma leaves us with an important question:  Is “setting [our] mind on the things of the Spirit” something we do “naturally” as Christians or must we deliberately choose to do it?  Here’s the verse . . .

“For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit.”

The Greek word that most versions translate “live” is ontes, which means here, “For those who are according to the flesh . . . “. Is Paul talking about a state of being?  Does “live” then mean something like “are alive”?  If so, then “set their minds” is something we naturally do depending on who we are.  That is, if we “are” according to the sinful nature (that is, we are unbelievers without the Spirit) we (naturally) set our minds on the things of the flesh.  If we “are” according to the Spirit (that is, we are believers with the Spirit) we (by new nature) set our minds on the things of the Spirit.  Therefore, Paul isn’t implicitly urging us to set our minds on the things of the Spirit.  He’s explaining this is what we do because of who we are.

Paul gives us good reasons for understanding “live” as our state of being (and so we “naturally” set our minds on Spirit-things) and for understanding “live” as what we do (and so we should set our minds on Spirit-things).

First, in 8:9, he writes, “But you are not in the flesh; you are in the Spirit, since the Spirit of God dwells in you.”  State of being.  What we are.  Not an in-flesh person, but an in-Spirit person.

Second, in 8:4 and flowing immediately into 8:5, Paul writes, “(God by sending his own Son condemned sin in the flesh), “so that the just requirements of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk . . . according to the Spirit.  For those who live [are] according to . . . the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit.”  Context (“who walk”) implies “For those who live . . . ” is more than a state of being, but something we do.

Which is it?  I sort of pick both (you knew I would).  I take Paul to say, “Those who are in accord with the Spirit by faith in Christ, set their minds on Spirit-things. That’s what they do.  So you should, so that you will walk in accord with the Spirit.”

It’s important to note this isn’t living by a new law.  The indwelling Spirit is a power who enables us to walk in accord with him.  Law on stone or on page can’t do that.

“To set the mind on the flesh is death, but to set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace. For this reason the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God; it does not submit to God’s law — indeed it cannot, and those who are in the flesh cannot please God” (8:6-8).

Set your mind on your sinful nature, you will live a life of sin that ends in “death”.  Every form of thanatos (“death”) in the New Testament refers, not to a natural process, but to a destroying power related to sin and its consequences. Spiritually, as Paul uses it here, it means separation from knowing God as a result of judgment.

But set your mind on the Spirit and that is “life and peace”.  Life, as opposite from separation from God, is fellowship with him.  Peace is both an end to enmity against God and shalom—complete well-being in fellowship with God.

Paul explains why the mind set on the sinful nature is “hostile” to God. (The Greek extha means hates God!) It doesn’t submit to God’s law; thus, it is hostile to God.  In fact, it cannot submit to God’s law.  “In-sinful-nature” people can’t be acceptable to God.

Note:  becoming a Christian isn’t merely choosing to believe a set of doctrines.  It’s experiencing a change from being in the flesh (sinful nature) to being in the Spirit (being made holy).

“But you are not in the flesh; you are in the Spirit, since the Spirit of God dwells in you. Anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him. But if Christ is in you, though the body is dead because of sin, the Spirit is life because of righteousness” (8:9,10).

Paul assures his readers in the Rome church that they are not “in the flesh”.  That is, their life, their state of being, is not in the sinful nature.  They are “in the Spirit”.  And this because God’s Spirit lives in them.  “But now we are discharged from the law, dead to that which held us captive, so that we are slaves not under the old written code but in the new life of the Spirit” (7:6).

Paul goes so far as to make having the Spirit of Christ the mark of who is a Christian and who is not.  “Anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to Christ.”

But “if Christ is in you, though the body is dead because of sin . . . “ In other words, If Christ in us our body is still “dead” under the power of sin and will physically die.

“ . . . if Christ is in you . . . the Spirit is life because of righteousness.”  In contrast to the “deadness” of our body.  Paul explains that the Spirit indwelling us is the source of life, because righteousness has been imputed by Christ.  And this life will reach even to our body . . .

“If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will give life to your mortal bodies also through his Spirit that dwells in you” (8:11).

If the same Spirit “who raised Jesus from the dead” dwells in us, “he who raised Christ from the dead will give to [our] mortal bodies also . . . “.   Christ died and was raised by the Spirit.  The same experience will be ours.  God the Holy Spirit not only gives us a new spiritual nature; at this age’s end he will also give us a new bodily nature.  The Spirit who will affect that transformation already indwells us.

* * *

Romans 8:1-11 remains mostly meaningless to people (unbelievers and believers both), who define sin only as “doing what God’s doesn’t want”.  In fact, our culture so emphasizes personal choice that most can’t conceive of having a nature that limits those choices to what leads to alienation from God and eternal death.

What Paul teaches here is counter-cultural.  As always, culture seeps into the church.  So:  will we get our understanding of humanity-before-God from popular culture or the apostolic word?

That apostolic word begins by telling us our very nature is sinful.  But it continues to tell us in faith-union with Jesus Christ, we can receive a new nature—the Spirit of Christ—who enables us to set our mind on Spirit-things and empowers us to practice them.

Commentator Leon Morris writes this about us who are “in the Spirit”:  “ . . . their whole being centers on [the things of the Spirit].  What the Spirit does is their absorbing interest . . . It is . . . a delighted contemplation of what the Spirit does . . . “ (The Epistle to the Romans”, p. 305).

I have to confess my “whole being” is conflicted.  At times I center on the things of the Spirit.  At other times I do not do the good I want.  Then, what the Spirit does is not my absorbing interest.  I find myself caught up in a spiritual war.  Indwelling sin (still residually living in me) pulls me down, while the indwelling Spirit (gifted to me by grace through Christ) urges me up.

I must ponder, be intent on and keep thinking about the “things” of the Spirit in order to “walk” in accord with the Spirit.  “Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord” that his Holy Spirit actually  empowers me in this fight!  And, “Thanks be to God”, also, that as I’m (still) learning to “walk out” my new nature, there is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus!

 

 

 

 

« Older posts Newer posts »

© 2025 The Old Preacher

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑

error

Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)