Archive for July, 2009

Parishioner Mollie Ziegler Hemingway writes about media reactions to swine flu among eucharistic Christians

Thursday, July 30th, 2009

Popping this one as it is nice to see a media analysis of swine flu and the church, whether we agree or not:-

GetReligion.org

The oink and Holy Communion

So my husband fell ill with the flu last week — likely swine flu. We’ve been taking the necessary precautions, which include not attending Divine Service today at our church. While much of the hoopla surrounding swine flu is overblown — we’ve learned it’s basically the same as normal flu, just scarier sounding — the pandemic is affecting the way congregations handle communion.

This is an old story, in that every time there’s a particularly bad flu outbreak we get stories about the matter, but this piece that ran on CNN.com seemed a bit brief and problematic.

The headline, to begin with, struck me as a bit irreverent:

Poisoned chalice? Swine flu hits church wine

It also makes it seem as if, well, swine flu actually hit church wine. Nothing in the story supports that idea. It’s just that the archbishops of Canterbury and York in the Church of England have recommended that parishioners stop sharing the chalice during communion because of fears over swine flu.

The article itself isn’t bad, explaining intinction and Health Department advisories against sharing common vessels. It never even comes close to discussing the theological implications of the change in practice. And there’s this error in the final graph:

The Archbishop of Canterbury is the spiritual leader of the worldwide Anglican Church, the second-largest Christian denomination after the Roman Catholic Church.

No, that would be the Orthodox Church. Haven’t we been here before? Yes indeed, we have.

For additional information on pandemics and communion, much better work has been done. Religion News Service had this back in April. And I liked this Chicago Tribune piece during the same time period for the way it highlighted how sharing the peace or holding hands during the Lord’s Prayer might also be avoided.

One interesting thing, that I learned from an old Al Tompkins column at Poynter, is that the CDC gets asked about transmission of infectious diseases via the chalice all the time. They report that people who share the chalice have no higher incident of infection than those who don’t. Interesting.

Channel 4 documentary by reporter Jon Ronson on the Alpha course – Revelations: How to Find God

Thursday, July 30th, 2009

Evangelicals Now

Misidentifying the Holy Spirit?

Recently, Channel 4 showed a documentary by reporter Jon Ronson on the Alpha course. It was called Revelations: How to Find God (1/8/09). Apparently Ronson approached 20 churches to get material for his report and the only one of these to agree was St. Aldate’s, Oxford, whose vicar is Charlie Cleverly. The result was broadcast at 7.00 pm on Sunday June 28.

Some have seen the portrayal as subtly cynical. However, I thought the report was relatively sympathetic. Ronson himself stated in a Radio Times interview: ‘This is a really gentle, human film. I wanted to make one that both Christians and agnostics would like. And I know that I’ve managed it, because we’ve shown the film both to the church and the agnostics and they’ve both really liked it. … the people who do the Alpha course are … just regular people trying to make sense of their lives and of the world’ (Radio Times, 27/6-3/7/2009, p.162).

Quite promising

Indeed, the early part of the course, when people were encouraged to discuss their misgivings about God or the Christian faith, seemed quite promising. It was clear that the initial objections people raise are fairly stereotypical. Alpha booklets are, in fact, available to answer all these points.

Despite all this, the documentary as a whole for me was a shocking reminder of how professing Christians can confuse psychological experience with a work of the Holy Spirit.

‘Holy Spirit weekend’

The Alpha course was started originally in the late 1970s as a local course run by Holy Trinity Brompton (Church of England) to help Christians explore their faith. In 1990, Nicky Gumbel restructured and streamlined the entire course to target people, particularly agnostics, who might be interested in becoming Christians. It consists of weekly sessions held over ten weeks.

Gumbel was convinced that the Holy Spirit should be a key component in Alpha (of course the Holy Spirit must be central in any evangelistic work as it is his work to convict people of their sin and need for salvation). Gumbel decided to make a central feature of the course something called ‘The Holy Spirit weekend’: halfway through the course, attendees are taken on a weekend- or day-retreat when the things they learned, which are ‘in the head’, can be spiritually applied to them. This sounds fine, but what it boils down to is this:

* Attendees have received teaching during the first half of the course.
* It remains for this teaching to percolate from the ‘head’ into the ‘heart’.
* This has to be done by the Spirit.
* The way this is done is by learning to ‘speak in tongues’.

The shocking thing is that the people being encouraged to ‘speak in tongues’ were not even Christians. They were inquirers and, clearly, some of them were understandably spooked by this.

In fact, the biblical gift of ‘tongues’, or ‘languages’, is a miracle, just as much as raising someone from the dead. How embarrassing, then, to watch the retreat-leader demonstrating ‘tongues’ by doing something which he had learnt to do. In fact, most people can learn to produce such syllables, provided they set aside their inhibitions and disbelief long enough to attempt it, something I would not encourage.

Toronto connection

The programme reported that Nicky Gumbel had visited the Toronto Airport Vineyard Church in 1994 and so became convinced that the Holy Spirit should be central to the course. Video-clips were then shown of the typically bizarre behaviour in those meetings. This served to remind me of the lapse in discernment required to accept such manifestations as being symptomatic of the Holy Spirit’s work.

It was not surprising to see at least two people turned off the Christian faith, or at least ‘organised religion’, through this episode. This laid them open to becoming New Agers or Wiccans or Buddhists, which many people of our generation perceive as viable alternatives to ‘organised religion’. In this way the course is in danger of inoculating certain people against the Christian faith. There was one person who had become more sympathetic as time went on, feeling that the course had a good vibe. But what was he being led into? The Christian faith? Or a lifestyle-change enhanced by a psychological technique which makes people feel good?

In the programme we saw people becoming progressively more open during the first half of the course as their difficulties were resolving. But, just as this was happening, the ‘Holy Spirit weekend’ aborted the incipient new openness to God.

Failure in discernment

The New Testament is very clear in exhorting us to test and discern our spiritual experiences. We need to:

* be aware of false spiritual experiences which lead us away from God (Colossians 2.18; Galatians 1.8);
* have our senses exercised to discern between good and evil (Hebrews 5.14);
* allow, but test, prophetic utterances (1 Corinthians 12.3; 14.5,19,39,29-31; 1 Thessalonians 5.19-22; 1 John 4.1-6);
* value the gift of discerning spirits (1 Corinthians 12.10), which is available because it is needed;
* be aware that authentic miracles can have a demonic or satanic source (2 Thessalonians 2.9-10; Revelation 13.13-15);
* test all messengers claiming to come from God (2 Corinthians 11.13-15; Revelation 2.2).

It is not always obvious how all these tests are to operate today, but the message that everything should be tested is loud and clear.

Confused paradigm

It is interesting that Alpha has a link with both the ‘Toronto Blessing’ and the Vineyard Movement. Therefore, the shared spirituality is no surprise.

Indeed, one of the key faults within the Vineyard movement is its tendency to embrace both Christian and pagan experiences within its paradigm of spirituality. I became aware of this through my personal acquaintance with a Vineyard leader. He had been an agnostic, but then experienced a spontaneous stereotypical mystical state. This type of experience is described by R.C. Zaehner in his book, Mysticism, Sacred and Profane. It is an ‘oceanic’ feeling in which the person senses as if he or she is one with the whole of reality and that this ‘whole’ is somehow contained within the self. Boundaries between different objects are totally dissolved and ‘all becomes one’. The poet W.H. Auden called this type of experience, ‘The Vision of Dame Kind’, and it is a foundational phase in all non-Christian mysticism. It can also be mediated through hallucinogenic drugs and is related to the manic phase of manic depression or ‘bipolar disorder’. Soon after his experience, someone in the Vineyard commented enthusiastically, ‘It sounds like baptism in the Holy Spirit’. This convinced him to join the Vineyard.

Vineyard spirituality was heavily influenced by Agnes Sanford, a popular visiting speaker at Fuller Theological Seminary in California, where John Wimber, the Vineyard founder, encountered her. Mrs. Sanford was highly influential in the thinking of Episcopalian and Lutheran charismatics in the USA in the 1960s and also within the charismatic wing of the Church of England. In her autobiography, Sealed Orders, Mrs. Sanford described such a panenhenic experience, which she regarded as an experience of the Holy Spirit. She creatively fused this experience with her belief in a personal God and the resulting cocktail was her ‘panentheistic’ [All-in-God/God-in-everything] spirituality, which made her believe that God’s power could be mediated to us through material objects.

This acceptance of both Christian and pagan spiritual experiences all as ‘God’s work’ is a key-note of Vineyard and Toronto spirituality. Once this is understood, many enigmas become clear.

Alien spirituality

Effective courses for non-Christians, such as Christianity Explained or Christianity Explored, strip out non-essential or controversial factors which can distract people from realising that they are in rebellion against their Creator.

It was tragic to see people being drawn to God and then having, regretfully, to decide that the Christian faith was not for them merely because of the introduction of a spiritual element alien to the historical Christian faith.

Mike R. Taylor

Christian Mission field on your doorstep?

Thursday, July 30th, 2009

Evangelicals Now

I know of a woman living in a large town who is suffering from terminal cancer, has few friends, no family close, is very isolated and in need of friendship and support.

I am sure that every true Christian would want to reach out to her to offer friendship, prayer and the encouragement of the gospel. Unfortunately, this has not happened. Sadly, this lady lives in a small bedsit just around the corner from a large shiny new church and they know nothing of her or she of them! Are there many others like this lady on our doorsteps who are not reached? What can be done?

Think again

I would like churches to think again about door-to-door visiting as a means of connecting to people of different circumstances, class and ages in our communities. I do not find that the cults have made door work difficult, as most people do not identify them with mainstream churches. The door visiting I am suggesting comes from a heart of genuine concern. I have been visiting door-to-door on a regular basis for over two years and been very encouraged by the contacts and friendships I have made. Jesus’s parable about the shepherd going out to find a lost sheep has encouraged me not to rely on outreach courses or guest services but to actively go out to seek the lost, those open to the gospel.

What motivates me?

I am motivated by stories like the one above and the many people I meet who are pleased that I have made contact. One elderly lady said after I called: ‘No one seems to care for us around here, no one has ever called around from any of the churches’. I also have in my mind a woman I once met who had not been attending church for some time. She had been befriended by some door-knocking Jehovah’s Witnesses and eventually joined their group. This taught me that door-to-door work does work, but, unfortunately, in this case and, I fear, many others, for the enemy and not for the true church. The cults grow and prosper through their door-to-door work. Why should we leave it to them when there is a harvest to gather?

The precedent of going out to people in their homes goes back to Jesus in Luke 10. The Lord sent the 72 out two by two ahead of him to every town and place. In a sense that is what I believe we as God’s people need to do, preparing the way for the Lord in every way, including door-to-door work.

Think ‘crossing bridges’ and ‘doors’ as a strategy — it works on several levels.

1,000 people in the UK and the USA were polled for The Economist in 2008 and asked: ‘Do you believe there is a God?’ Less than 40% in the UK said yes, compared with 80% in the USA. This fits with my experience on the doors — that a large number of people are indifferent to God. Will they be persuaded by church adverts or will meeting real Christians like us, whom they can begin to trust, make a difference and lead them to the living God?

Building bridges as a church outreach strategy worked in the 1950s when most churches had a large fringe of people who were associated with church and the majority of the population had some biblical background belief and knowledge. So, when a special service or event was put on, the congregation had a large pool of people to invite and advertisements for the event would draw the curious. Today large church fringes are gone and, alas, there are not the contacts to invite. This approach also does not follow Jesus’s command to ‘Go and make disciples’, but relies on them coming in.

A better picture would be to replace the picture of ‘building bridges’ with one of ‘crossing bridges’. To cross a bridge means going from where I am to where someone else is, physically but also emotionally and spiritually. To go to them was the example set by Jesus and St. Paul. Jesus does this with Zacchaeus and Paul turns from Asia and crosses a bridge into Europe (Acts 16).

I am an enthusiast for courses like Alpha and Christianity Explored as they do reach people, but what about those who do not like courses, those who are not academic and do not read books, those who are not middle class and do not like shared meals? How do we meet people who are not like us?

Make room for a door-to-door strategy. It is biblical, it is inclusive and it works!

What should door-to-door look like? I used to think that the only way to do door visiting was to either pop an invitation into a door and disappear quickly or alternatively knock and ask a confrontational question such as ‘What will happen when you die?’ or ‘Why should God allow you into his heaven?’ I have read of success stories when these methods work. The Lord is sovereign and can use anything, but neither of these approaches sat well with me. Increasingly I have been challenged through Scripture that it is through relationships and grace that the Lord loves to work.

For over two years I have been doing door-to-door evangelism as an evangelist with Counties, aiming to ‘cross bridges’ to two very different housing estates in Bedfordshire. My approach has been to sow seeds and look for long-term relationships. I determined from the outset to look for needs and to operate as a community worker. It was also important that I was not hiding my relationship with the local church nor denying my faith in any way. This has borne fruit in the setting up of a local coffee morning in someone’s home on a council estate, we now have 15 ladies (and some gents) meeting monthly. On the private housing estate I have been systematically working doors in the area of a local church over a two-year period and now have 63 contacts that I return to regularly to deliver a copy of a Christian outreach newspaper, Challenge or New Life. All take and read the newspaper I leave and take invitations to relevant church events/activities when appropriate.

Another Counties worker, Jonathan Brain, also does door work and finds some used to go to church but have drifted. Others say they find the church very irrelevant to their lives and how untouched they are by church. We both find that in every road there will be a few houses where they are pleased with the visit and want to keep in touch. Jon says: ‘Most are surprised to have a visit from the local church and are pleased to see you’.

Some people are not ready to come to a church service, but will come to a coffee morning in a home or a social group or activity — e.g. drawing or walking group.

More than what the cults do!

It is so easy to belittle and criticise what the cults do around the doors, but I admire their dedication and I believe they get results by pure perseverance. If they knock at enough houses they are going to get a percentage of receptive people. On the other hand they offend others by their pushy and blunt approach and I make sure I set myself apart from their approach, introducing myself as from the local church and interested in building community.

More than social action

Saint Francis of Assisi is supposed to have said: ‘Preach the gospel at all times and if necessary use words!’ It’s a clever saying, but this is only part of the story as it is clear that Jesus spoke as well as acted and was very direct about the need for repentance. Giving out literature and DVDs with testimonies and sharing my own faith is a very important part of the strategy.

More than quick hit and run!

A lot of programmes are based on formulas and methods, which claim to preach the gospel. Door work should be more than communicating a simple sound bite (an ABC message) on a one-off visit. How do we think this is really getting across Jesus’s message of unconditional love demonstrated by death on a cross? I wonder if the feeling of failure of door-to-door work comes from the failure to have a long-term commitment to a door-to-door strategy that takes prayer, time and energy.

I hope I have encouraged church members and leaders to think again about doors as an open opportunity and a challenge to us to reach different sections of our communities. Time is short and we should make the most of the opportunities in whatever form they present themselves!

Colin Johnson,
part-time evangelist with Counties (http://www.countiesuk.org)

The spate of resignations at the UK’s “equalities” watchdog (EHRC – Equality and Human Rights Commission) is not the fault of under-fire chairman Trevor Phillips, his deputy has told the BBC

Thursday, July 30th, 2009

“Equality” commission…yeah right, equality for those that the Labour government loves and inequality for those that it hates….some are more equal than others……

BBC

Deputy defends equalities chief

The spate of resignations at the UK’s equalities watchdog is not the fault of under-fire chairman Trevor Phillips, his deputy has told the BBC.

Six commissioners left the Equality and Human Rights Commission in four months amid calls for Mr Phillips to quit.

But deputy chairman Baroness Prosser said criticisms of his leadership style were “wide of the mark”.

Some commissioners may have been “miffed” at being told they would have to reapply for their posts, she added.

The EHRC began work in October 2007, having taken on the work of the old Commission for Racial Equality (CRE), the Disability Rights Commission and the Equal Opportunities Commission.

‘Not successful’

Earlier this month Mr Phillips and Lady Prosser were reappointed as chairman and deputy but remaining commissioners were told they would have to reapply for their posts, which are being reduced from 16 to 11.

The latest to quit was gay rights campaigner Ben Summerskill, who said Mr Phillips was damaging the cause of equality by staying on, saying he had “not been successful in running the commission and bringing it together”.

Earlier this month human rights researcher Professor Francesca Klug and disability campaigners Sir Bert Massie and Lady Campbell quit.

These departures followed the resignations in March of the commission’s chief executive Nicola Brewer and commissioner Kay Hampton.

But Baroness Prosser told the BBC nine commissioners remained who “remain very supportive of Trevor as chair” and those who had left had “different reasons” for doing so.

“The disability lobby has always been cross that disability was brought into the commission in the first place,” she said.

“They wanted things to remain separate and have never felt comfortable with the agenda of the equality commission covering all strands of inequality.”

‘Deep discontentment’

She noted that three resignations came on the day commissioners were told they would have to reapply for their positions.

“It’s interesting that they decided to go on that particular day. Who am I to say what their thinking was at that time?,” she said.

She said there had been “long discussions” about the commission’s “governance”, in which it had been agreed the board needed to be reduced in size and changed in composition.

“Everyone agreed that in theory but obviously when it comes to practice and it comes to themselves people felt miffed I imagine,” she said.

In an article for the Guardian last week, ex-commissioner Kay Hampton said Mr Phillips’ leadership style was “better suited to a political party than a human rights organisation” and had “led to deep discontentment and dissatisfaction”.

But Lady Prosser said she had not complained about Mr Phillips when she resigned in March, and had said at the time she had too much work to do and make the journey from Scotland to London.

“She never said any of the things at that stage that she is saying now, much of which is very far wide of the mark.”

Asked if Mr Phillips would be doing any interviews, she added: “I don’t know if he will or not and in a way why should he? None of this is his doing.”

The Commons communities and local government committee is set to look into what has been happening at the EHRC when MPs return after the summer recess in October.

One of its Labour members, Emily Thornberry, said it was “clearly in trouble”.

The joint human rights committee is also reportedly considering a separate inquiry.

The National Audit Office also criticised the commission for re-employing senior staff from its predecessor bodies, soon after they had been given generous redundancy payments.

Debbie Purdy with multiple sclerosis is due to find out whether the Law Lords have backed her bid to clarify the law on assisted suicide

Thursday, July 30th, 2009

Click here for Latest Posts:-

Debbie Purdy wins ’significant legal victory’ on assisted suicide

There was something very British about the last judgment ever (Debbie Purdy – Euthanasia) to be given by law lords in the Lords chamber. Something almost pathetic.

BBC:-

Result due in right-to-die case

A woman with multiple sclerosis is due to find out whether the Law Lords have backed her bid to clarify the law on assisted suicide.

Debbie Purdy, 46, from Bradford, is considering going to Switzerland to end her life, but fears her husband may be charged on his return to the UK.

She wants an assurance her husband, Omar Puente, will not be prosecuted.

Although no-one has been prosecuted in such circumstances, they could potentially face 14 years in prison.

Losing strength

And the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) has said it would not be possible to give a guarantee of immunity from legal action.

Ms Purdy has already lost challenges in the High Court and Court of Appeal, and the Lords ruling represents her last chance of success in the UK legal system.

If that ruling goes against her, her only option will be to take her case to the European Court of Human Rights.

Ms Purdy was diagnosed with primary progressive MS in March 1995. She can no longer walk and is gradually losing strength in her upper body.

She has suggested that at some point she may travel to Switzerland to take a lethal dose of barbiturates prescribed by doctors at the controversial Dignitas organisation.

More than 100 UK citizens have so far ended their lives at Dignitas, and no-one who has accompanied them has ever been prosecuted on their return to the UK.

However, the reasons why legal action has never been taken have never been made clear.

And Ms Purdy, who wants her husband to be at her side when she dies, wants to be confident he will not be arrested upon his return.

Impossible dilemma

She said that without that assurance she faces an “impossible dilemma” over what to do.

Her legal team said that if the law was not clarified she would have to end her life earlier than she wanted to.

But if the risk of prosecution was sufficiently low, she would be able to wait until the last moment before travelling to Switzerland with her husband’s assistance.

Lord Pannick QC, who is representing Ms Purdy, said: “It is ironic that the policy designed to protect the sanctity of life will have the effect of shortening the life of terminally ill persons such as Ms Purdy.”

An attempt to amend the Coroners and Justice Bill to lift the threat of prosecution facing those who help somebody kill themselves overseas was rejected last month.

In 2001 Diane Pretty, who had motor neurone disease, failed to get immunity from prosecution for her husband if he helped her to die in the UK.

Several attempts to legalise suicide in Britain have also been rejected.

The issue has been further highlighted this week by an admission by former GP Dr Michael Irwin, of Cranleigh, Surrey, that he provided financial assistance for a terminally ill cancer patient to travel to Dignitas.

Dr Irwin, a long-standing euthanasia campaigner, challenged police to arrest him after revealing that he had written a cheque for £1,500 towards the cost of 58-year-old Raymond Cutkelvin’s assisted suicide in 2007.

A Surprise Catholic Bestseller – It’s always pleasant business to report good news from the Catholic publishing scene. Actually, good news from a surprising source.

Thursday, July 30th, 2009

America Magazine

It’s always pleasant business to report good news from the Catholic publishing scene.  Actually, good news from a surprising source.

Last year Orbis Books (full disclosure: Robert Ellsberg, the publisher, is a friend, and Orbis published one of my books) published a book by Jim Douglass, a veteran Catholic peace activist and theologian, called JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters.  It was reviewed very favorably in America here by George Anderson, SJ.  Just when you might have thought everything that could be said about the death of JFK had been said, Douglass offered a new examination of the assassination. His own contribution was to attempt to establish the motive for Kennedy’s killing, tracing the process of conversion that led him, over the course of three years, from his attitude as an ardent Cold Warrior to his commitment to lead the world away from the edge of apocalypse. A series of political steps caused him to be viewed as a virtual traitor by elements of the CIA and military establishment.

The book was published by Orbis, the publishing arm of Maryknoll. Explaining why a Catholic house would publish a book on this topic, Ellsberg wrote in an email to me today, “Douglass views this history from a contemplative perspective, particularly attuned to the grave moral and even spiritual matters at stake. In fact, he draws on the writings of Thomas Merton to define this perspective. President Kennedy, it turns out, saw his mission in similar terms. In some ways, the book is a meditation on the cost of peacemaking, and it is a challenge to readers to assume the vision that was cut short by Kennedy’s assasins.”

The book received coverage in the religious press and won a book award from the Catholic Press Association.  Sales (for Orbis) were what Ellsberg called “modestly impressive.”

But thus far the book had not received any attention by the secular media.

Until….

Oliver Stone, the director of the controversial movie “JFK,” appeared on the Bill Maher show on HBO and brought along a copy of Douglass’s book. At one point during his interview he waved the book around and said it was something everyone should read. The next day the book shot up to #31 on Amazon and remained on the Top-100 bestseller list for a week.  (Note to authors: Send Oliver Stone your book.)  Orbis immediately sold 4,000 copies of the $30 hardcover edition. Stone then posted a blog on the Huffington Post.  Within days his post was viewed by over 95,000 people.  (Note to our bloggers: Send your link to Oliver Stone.)  Suddenly Orbis was unable keep up with demand.  As of today they have asked for 15,000 more copies to be printed in anticipation of continued demand, Ellsberg said.

The death knell for small presses, especially small religious presses, especially small Catholic presses, seems to be reported every day.  Not so fast.  Places like Orbis–to say nothing of the marvelous houses of Loyola, Liguori, Ave Maria, Paulist, LTP, Liturgical Press, New City Press, St. Anthony Messenger, St. Mary’s Press, Ignatius PressOSV Books, Pauline Books, Word Among Us and other places with dedicated staff–work very hard to provide not only fodder for prayer and meditation but books on topics that other presses may balk at.  Each has its niche; each is a great gift to the church and the world.


Let’s pray that, even if Oliver Stone never mentions another Catholic book on television, that all those presses, and the rest of the Catholic presses, which surprise, delight and inspire us, are around for a long time.

James Martin, SJ

Operation Noah The only Christian group campaigning exclusively on climate change is in danger of extinction because of a lack of funding

Thursday, July 30th, 2009

The Tablet

British eco charity faces closure

29 July 2009

The only Christian group campaigning exclusively on climate change is in danger of extinction because of a lack of funding. Operation Noah was set up in 2001 to pressurise politicians into action and mobilise Christian communities to the climate change cause. However, despite having recently formulated an ambitious seven-year plan, the charity is in grave financial trouble and is urgently seeking backers. “We can’t guarantee our survival beyond November unless we see a real change in our fortunes,” said Mark Dowd, campaign strategist for the charity, explaining that there was a severe shortage of major donors.

www.operationnoah.org

Church at the heart of Country Life

Thursday, July 30th, 2009

Telegraph – George Pitcher

I’m off to St Luke’s church in Kinoulton in Nottinghamshire tomorrow, as part of my quest for intelligent life in the rural Church of England. The series is called Pitcher’s Parish Records (though I’m seriously thinking of changing that to Pitcher’s Parish Pumps).

The remarkable thing I’ve noticed so far is that there really does seem to be a mini-reformation underway. Churches are at last shaking off their Victorian ennui – the mindset that gave rise to the set-piece, sung Sunday service, with the church locked for the rest of the week – in favour of the more medieval, vibrant model that preceded it.

Churches are again being used for pastoral, community purposes. In place of the late-medieval sheltering sheep and gruel for beggars in the nave are post offices, school activities and social centres.

So it’s delightful to hear that the Country Life magazine Village Church for Village Life award, worth £10,000 and the brainchild of Sir Roy Strong,has gone to a church that’s doing just that, St Andrew’s in South Warnborough in Hampshire.

St Andrew’s has been struggling with a congregation of 22 but with the assistance of South Warnborough Working Gentlemen’s Club (now there’s an institution with a Victorian ring to it) it has removed pews, installed a kitchen and proper lavatories and is now embarking on playing host to schools, concerts, and is working with community businesses such as the village shop.

There will be those who say that this is further evidence of the demise of the Church of England, even that it’s sacrilegious. They are wrong. Churches are dying precisely because they don’t serve their communities in the practical ways that are characteristic of Christian ministry. It’s a vicious circle: If they don’t minister to their villages in practical, pastoral ways, then villagers feel no sense of ownership of them and little responsibility for their maintenance.

Churches, like their congregants, grow fusty and soulless if all they do is offer weekly worship and a biscuit for the faithful. They should be living organs of Christian ministry. And it looks like St Andrew’s is coming to life again. Just another small resurrection in the Church of England. Good luck to it.

Hear NASA astronauts Gene Cernan and Charlie Duke speak about what’s greater – walking on the moon or walking with Jesus

Thursday, July 30th, 2009

CHARLES SPURGEON THE INCARNATION AND BIRTH OF CHRIST

Thursday, July 30th, 2009

“But thou, Beth-lehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the
thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me
that is to be ruler in Israel whose goings forth have been from of
old, from everlasting.” Micah 5:2

THIS is the season of the year when, whether we wish it or not, we are
compelled to think of the birth of Christ. I hold it to be one of the greatest
absurdities under heaven to think that there is any religion in keeping
Christmas-day. There are no probabilities whatever that our Savior Jesus
Christ was born on that day and the observance of it is purely of Popish
origin; doubtless those who are Catholics have a right to hallow it, but I do
not see how consistent Protestants can account it in the least sacred.
However, I wish there were ten or a dozen Christmas-days in the year; for
there is work enough in the world, and a little more rest would not hurt
laboring people. Christmas-day is really a boon to us, particularly as it
enables us to assemble round the family hearth and meet our friends once
more. Still, although we do not fall exactly in the track of other people, I
see no harm in thinking of the incarnation and birth of the Lord Jesus. We
do not wish to be classed with those

“Who with more care keep holiday
The wrong, than others the right way.”

The old Puritans made a parade of work on Christmas-day, just to show
that they protested against the observance of it. But we believe they
entered that protest so completely, that we are willing, as their
descendants, to take the good accidentally conferred by the day, and leave
its superstitions to the superstitious.

To proceed at once to what we have to say to you: we notice, first, who it
was that sent Christ forth. God the Father here speaks, and says, “Out of
thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be the ruler in Israel.” Secondly,
where did he come to at the time of his incarnation; Thirdly, what did he
come for; “To be ruler in Israel.” Fourthly, had he ever come before; Yes,
he had. “Whose goings forth have been from of old from everlasting.”

I. First then, WHO SENT JESUS CHRIST? The answer is returned to us by
the words of the text. “Out of thee,” saith Jehovah, speaking by the mouth
of Micah, “out of thee shall he come forth unto me.” It is a sweet thought
that Jesus Christ, did not come forth without his Father’s permission,
authority, consent, and assistance. He was sent of the Father, that he might
be the Savior of men. We are, alas I too apt to forget, that while there are
distinctions as to the persons in the Trinity, there are no distinctions of
honor; and we do very frequently ascribe the honor of our salvation, or at
least the depths of its mercy and the extremity of its benevolence, more to
Jesus Christ than we do to the Father. This is a very great mistake. What if
Jesus came? Did not his Father send him? If he was made a child did not
the Holy Ghost beget him? If he spake wondrously, did not his Father pour
grace into his lips, that he might be an able minister of the new covenant? If
his Father did forsake him when he drank the bitter cup of gall, did he not
love him still? and did he not, by-and by, after three days, raise him from
the dead, and at last receive him up on high, leading captivity captive? Ah!
beloved, he who knoweth the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost as
he should know them, never setteth one before another, he is not more
thankful to one than the other, he sees them at Bethlehem, at Gethsemane,
and on Calvary, all equally engaged in the work of salvation. “He shall
come forth unto me.” O Christian, hast thou put thy confidence in the man
Christ Jesus? Hast thou placed thy reliance solely on him? And art thou
united with him? Then believe that thou art united unto the God of heaven,
since to the man Christ Jesus thou art brother, and holdest closest
fellowship, thou art linked thereby with God the Eternal, and “the Ancient
of days” is thy Father and thy friend. “He shall come forth unto me.” Did
you never see the depth of love there was in the heart of Jehovah, when
God the Father equipped his Son for the great enterprise of mercy? There
had been a sad day in Heaven once before, when Satan fell, and dragged
with him a third of the stars of heaven, and when the Son of God launching
from his great right hand the Omnipotent thunders, dashed the rebellious
crew to the pit of perdition; but if we could conceive a grief in heaven that
must have been a sadder day, when the Son of the Most High left his
Father’s bosom, where he had lain from before all worlds. “Go,” saith the
Father, “and thy Father’s blessing on thy head!” Then comes the unrobing.
How do angels crowd around to see the Son of God take off his robes! He
laid aside his crown, he said, “My father, I am Lord over all, blessed for
ever but I will lay my crown aside, and be as mortal men are.” He strips
himself of his bright vest of glory; “Father,” he says, “I will wear a robe of
clay, just such as men wear.” Then he takes off all those jewels wherewith
he was glorified; he lays aside his starry mantles and robes of light, to dress
himself in the simple garments of the peasant of Galilee. What a solemn
disrobing that must have been! And next, can you picture the dismissal!
The angels attend the Savior through the streets, until they approach the
doors: when an angel cries, “Lift up your heads, O ye gates, and be ye
lifted up ye everlasting doors, and let the king of glory through!” Oh!
methinks the augers must have wept when they lost the company of Jesuswhen
the Sun of Heaven bereaved them of all its light. But they went after
him. They descended with him; and when his spirit entered into flesh, and
he became a babe, he was attended by that mighty host of angels who after
they had been with him to Bethlehem’s manger, and seen him safely laid on
his mother’s breast, in their journey upwards appeared to the shepherds
and told them that he was born king of the Jews. The Father sent him!
Contemplate that subject. Let your soul get hold of it, and in every period
of his life think that he suffered what the Father willed, that every step of
his life was marked with the approval of the great I AM. Let every thought
that you have of Jesus be also connected with the eternal, ever-blessed
God, for “he,” saith Jehovah, “shall come forth unto me.” Who sent him,
then? The answer is, his Father.

II. Now, secondly, WHERE DID HE COME To? A word or two concerning
Bethlehem. It seemed meet and right that our Savior should be born in
Bethlehem and that because of Bethlehem’s history, Bethlehem’s name,
and Bethlehem’s position-little in Judah.

1. First, it seemed necessary that Christ should be born in Bethlehem,
because of Bethlehem’s history. Dear to every Israelite was the little
village of Bethlehem. Jerusalem might outshine it in splendor, for there
stood the temple, the glory of the whole earth, and “beautiful for situation,
the joy of the whole earth was Mount Zion.” Yet around Bethlehem there
clustered a number of incidents which always made it a pleasant restingplace
to every Jewish mind; and even the Christian cannot help loving
Bethlehem. The first mention, I think, that we have of Bethlehem is a
sorrowful one. There Rachel died. If you turn to the 35th of Genesis you
will find it said in the 16th verse-”And they journeyed from Bethel, and
there was but a little way to come to Ephrath; and Rachel travailed, and
she had hard labor; and it came to pass, when she was in hard labor, that
the midwife said unto her Fear not, thou shalt have this son also; and it
came to pass, as her soul was in departing, (for she died) that she called his
name Ben-oni: but his father called him Benjamin; and Rachel died, and
was buried in the way to Ephrath, which is Bethlehem. And Jacob set a
pillar upon her grave, that is the pillar of Rachel’s grave unto this day.” A
singular incident this-almost prophetic. Might not Mary have called her
own son Jesus, her Ben-oni; for he was to be the child of sorrow? Simeon
said to her-”Yea a sword shall pierce through thine own soul also, that the
thoughts of many hearts may be revealed.” But while she might have called
him Ben-oni, what did God his Father call him? Benjamin, the son of my
right hand. Ben-oni was he as a man. Benjamin as to his Godhead. This
little incident seems to be almost a prophecy that Ben-oni — Benjamin, the
Lord Jesus, should be born in Bethlehem. But another woman makes this
place celebrated. That woman’s name was Naomi. There lived at
Bethlehem in after days, when, perhaps, the stone that Jacob’s fondness
had raised had been covered with moss and its inscription obliterated,
another woman named Naomi. She too was a daughter of joy, and yet a
daughter of bitterness. Naomi was a woman whom the Lord had loved and
blessed but she had to go to a strange land, and she said, “Call me not
Naomi (pleasant) but let my name be called Mara (bitter) for the Almighty
hath dealt very bitterly with me.” Yet was she not alone amid all her losses,
for there cleaved unto her Ruth the Moabitess, whose Gentile blood should
unite with the pure untainted stream of the Jew, and should thus bring forth
the Lord our Savior, the great king both of Jews and Gentiles. That very
beautiful book of Ruth had all its scenery laid in Bethlehem. It was at
Bethlehem that Ruth went forth to glean in the fields of Boaz; it was there
that Boaz looked upon her, and she bowed herself before her lord; it was
there her marriage was celebrated; and in the streets of Bethlehem did
Boaz and Ruth receive a blessing which made them fruitful, so that Boaz
became the father of Obed, and Obed the father of Jesse, and Jesse the
father of David. That last fact gilds Bethlehem with glory — the fact that
David was born there — the mighty hero who smote the Philistine giant,
who led the discontented of his land away from the tyranny of their
monarch, and who afterwards, by a full consent of a willing people, was
crowned king of Israel and Judah. Bethlehem was a royal city, because the
kings were there brought forth. Little as Bethlehem was it was much to be
esteemed, because it was like certain principalities which we have in
Europe, which are celebrated for nothing but for bringing forth the
consorts of the royal families of England. It was right, then, from history,
that Bethlehem should be the birth-place of Christ.

2. But again: there is something in the name of the place. “Bethlehem
Ephratah.” The word Bethlehem has a double meaning. It signifies “the
house of bread,” and “the house of war.” Ought not Jesus Christ to be born
in “the house of bread?” He is the Bread of his people, on which they feed.
As our fathers ate manna in the wilderness, so do we live on Jesus here
below. Famished by the world, we cannot feed on its shadows. Its husks
may gratify the swinish taste of worldlings, for they are swine, but we need
something more substantial, and in that blest bread of heaven, made of the
bruised body of our Lord Jesus, and baked in the furnace of his agonies,
we find a blessed food. No food like Jesus to the desponding soul or to the
strongest saint. The very meanest of the family of God goes to Bethlehem
for his bread; and the strongest man, who eats strong meat, goes to
Bethlehem for it. House of Bread! whence could come our nourishment
but from thee? We have tried Sinai, but on her rugged steeps there grow
no fruits, and her thorny heights yield no corn whereon we may feed. We
have repaired even to Tabor itself, where Christ was transfigured, and yet
there we have not been able to eat his flesh and drink his blood. But
Bethlehem, thou house of bread, rightly wast thou called, for there the
bread of life was first handed down for man to eat. And it is also called
“the house of war;” because Christ is to a man “the house of bread,” or
else “the house of war.” While he is food to the righteous he causeth war
to the wicked, according to his own word-”think not that I am come to
send peace on the earth; I am not come to send peace, but a sword. For I
am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter
against her mother, and the daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law.
And a man’s foes shall be they of his own household.” Sinner! if thou dost
not know Bethlehem as “the house of bread,” it shall be to thee a “house of
war.” If from the lips of Jesus thou dost never drink sweet honey-if thou
art not like the bee, which sippeth sweet luscious liquor from the Rose of
Sharon, then out of the selfsame mouth there shall go forth against thee a
two-edged sword; and that month from which the righteous draw their
bread, shall be to thee the mouth of destruction and the cause of thine ill.
Jesus of Bethlehem, house of bread and house of war, we trust we know
thee as our bread. Oh! that some who are now at war with thee might hear
in their hearts, as well as in their ears the song” -

“Peace on earth, and mercy mild,
God and sinners reconciled.”

And now for that word Ephratah. That was the old name of the place
which the Jews retained and loved. The meaning of it is, “fruitfulness,” or
“abundance.” Ah! well was Jesus born in the house of fruitfulness; for
whence cometh my fruitfulness and thy fruitfulness, my brother, but from
Bethlehem? Our poor barren hearts never produced one fruit or flower, till
they were watered with the Savior’s blood. It is his incarnation which
fattens the soil of our hearts. There had been pricking thorns on all the
ground, and mortal poisons, before he came; but our fruitfulness comes
from him. “I am like a green fir-tree; from thee is my fruit found.” “All my
springs are in thee.” If we be like trees planted by the rivers of water,
bringing forth our fruit in our season, it is not because we were naturally
fruitful, but because of the rivers of water by which we were planted. It is
Jesus that makes us fruitful “If a man abide in me,” he says, “and my words
abide in him, he shall bring forth much fruit.” Glorious Bethlehem
Ephratah! Rightly named! Fruitful house of bread-the house of abundant
provision for the people of God!

3. We notice, next, the position of Bethlehem. It is said to be “little among
the thousands of Judah.” Why is this? Because Jesus Christ always goes
among little ones. He was born in the little one “among the thousands of
Judah.” Not Bashan’s high hill, not on Hebron’s royal mount, not in
Jerusalem’s palaces; but in the humble, yet illustrious, village of Bethlehem.
There is a passage in Zechariah which teaches us a lesson:-It is said that the
man on the red horse stood among the myrtle-trees. Now the myrtle-trees
grow at the bottom of the hill; and the man on the red horse always rides
there. He does not ride on the mountain-top; he rides among the humble in
heart. “With this man will I dwell, saith the Lord with him who is of a
humble and contrite spirit, and who trembleth at my word.” There are
some little ones here this morning- “little among the thousands of Judah.”
No one ever heard your name, did they? If you were buried, and had your
name on your tombstone, it would never be noticed. Those who pass by
would say, “It is nothing to me: I never knew him.” You do not know
much of yourself, or think much of yourself; you can scarcely read,
perhaps. Or if you have some talents and ability, you are despised amongst
men; or, if you are not despised by them, you despise yourself. You are
one of the little ones. Well, Christ is always born in Bethlehem among the
little ones. Big hearts never get Christ inside of them; Christ lieth not in
great hearts, but in little ones. Mighty and proud spirits never have Jesus
Christ, for he cometh in at low doors, but he will not come in at high ones.
He who hath a broken heart, and a low spirit, shall have the Savior, but
none else. He healeth not the prince and the king, but “the broken in heart,
and he bindeth up their wounds.” Sweet thought! He is the Christ of the
little ones. “Thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the
thousands of Judah yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be
ruler in Israel.”

We cannot pass away from this without another thought here, which is,
how “wonderfully mysterious was that providence which brought Jesus
Christ’s mother to Bethlehem at the very time when she was to be
delivered! His parents were residing at Nazareth; and what should they
want to travel at that time for? Naturally, they would have remained at
home, it was not at all likely that his mother would have taken a journey to
Bethlehem while in so peculiar a condition; but Caesar Augustus issues a
decree that they are to be taxed. Very well, then, let them be taxed at
Nazareth. No; it pleases him that they should all go to their city. But why
should Caesar Augustus think of it just at that particular time? Simply
because, while man deviseth his way, the king’s heart is in the hand of thy
Lord. Why, what a thousand chances, as the world has it, met together to
bring about this event! First of all, Caesar quarreled with Herod, one of the
Herods was deposed, Caesar says “I shall tax Judea, and make it a
province, instead of having it for a separate kingdom.” Well, it must be
done. But when is it to be done? This taxing, it is said, was first
commenced when Cyreneus was governor. But why is the census to be
taken at that particular period-suppose, December? Why not have had it
last October? and why could not the people be taxed where they were
living? Was not their money just as good there as anywhere else, It was
Caesar’s whim, but it was God’s decree. Oh! we love the sublime doctrine
of eternal absolute predestination. Some have doubted its being consistent
with the free agency of man. We know well it is so, and we never saw any
difficulty in the subject; we believe metaphysicians have made difficulties;
we see none ourselves. It is for us to believe, that man does as he pleases,
yet notwithstanding he always does as God decrees. If Judas betrays
Christ, “thereunto he was appointed;” and if Pharoah hardens his heart, yet,
“for this purpose have I raised thee up, for to show forth my power in
thee.” Man doth as he wills, but God maketh him do as he willeth, too.
Nay, not only is the will of man under the absolute predestination of
Jehovah; but all things, great or little, are of him. Well hath the good poet
said, “Doubtless the sailing of a cloud hath Providence to its pilot;
doubtless the root of an oak is gnarled for a special purpose, God
compasseth all things, mantling the globe like air.” There is nothing great
or little, that is not from him. The summer dust moves in its orbit, guided
by the same hand which rolls the stars along, the dewdrops have their
father, and trickle on the rose leaf as God bids them; yea, the sear leaves of
the forest, when hurled along by the tempest, have their allotted position
where they shall fall, nor can they go beyond it. In the great, and in the
little, there is God-God in everything, working all things according to the
counsel of his own will; and though man seeks to go against his Maker, yet
he cannot. God hath bounded the sea with a barrier of sand, and if the sea
mount up wave after wave, yet it shall not exceed its allotted channel.
Everything is of God; and unto him who guideth the stars and wingeth
sparrows, who ruleth planets and yet moveth atoms, who speaks thunders
and yet whispers zephyrs, unto him be glory; for there is God in everything,
III. This brings us to the third point: WHAT DID JESUS COME FOR? He
came to be “ruler in Israel.” A very singular thing is this, that Jesus Christ
was said to have been “born the king of the Jews.” Very few have ever
been “born king.” Men are born princes, but they are seldom born kings. I
do not think you can find an instance in history where any infant was born
king. He was the prince of Wales, perhaps, and he had to wait a number of
years, till his father died, and then they manufactured him into a king, by
putting a grown on his head; and a sacred chrism and other silly things; but
he was not born a king. I remember no one who was born a king except
Jesus; and there is emphatic meaning in that verse that we sing-

“Born thy people to deliver
Born a child, and yet a king.”

The moment that he came on earth he was a king. He did not wait till his
majority that he might take his empire; but as soon as his eye greeted the
sunshine he was a king; from the moment that his little hands grasped
anything, they grasped a scepter: as soon as his pulse beat, and his blood
began to flow, his heart beat royally, and his pulse beat an imperial
measure, and his blood flowed in a kingly current. He was born a king. He
came “to be ruler in Israel.” “Ah!” says one, “then he came in vain, for little
did he exercise his rule; ‘he came unto his own, and his own received him
not ,’ he came to Israel and he was not their ruler, but he was ‘despised
and rejected of men,’ cast off by them all, and forsaken by Israel, unto
whom he came.” Ay, but “they are not all Israel who are of Israel,” neither
because they are the seed of Abraham shall they all be called. Ah, no! He is
not ruler of Israel after the flesh, but he is the ruler of Israel after the spirit.
Many such have obeyed him. Did not the apostles bow before him, and
own him as their king? And now, doth not Israel salute him as their ruler?
Do not all the seed of Abraham after the spirit, even all the faithful, for he
is “the father of the faithful,” acknowledge that unto Christ belong the
shields of the mighty, for he is the king of the whole earth? Doth he not
rule over Israel? Ay, verily he doth, and those who are not ruled over by
Christ are not of Israel. He came to be a ruler over Israel. My brother, hast
thou submitted to the sway of Jesus? Is he ruler in thine heart, or is he not?
We may know Israel by this: Christ is come into their hearts, to be ruler
over them. “Oh!” saith one, “I do as I please, I was never in bondage to
any man.” Ah! then thou basest the rule of Christ. “Oh!” says another, “I
submit myself to my minister, to my clergyman, or to my priest, and I think
that what he tells me is enough, for he is my ruler.” Dost thou? Ah! poor
slave, thou knowest not thy dignity; for nobody is thy lawful ruler but the
Lord Jesus Christ. “Ay,” says another, “I have professed his religion and I
am his follower.” But doth he rule in thine hearts Doth he command thy
will? Doth he guide thy judgment? Dost thou ever seek counsel at his
handing thy difficulties? Art thou desirous to honor him, and to put crowns
upon his heads. Is he thy ruler? If so then thou art one of Israel, for it is
written, “He shall come to be ruler in Israel.” Blessed Lord Jesus! thou art
ruler in thy people’s hearts, and thou ever shalt be; we want no other ruler
save thyself, and we will submit to none other. We are free, because we are
the servants of Christ; we are at liberty, because he is our ruler, and we
know no bondage and no slavery, because Jesus Christ alone is monarch of
our hearts. He came “to be ruler in Israel,” and mark you, that mission of
his is not quite fulfilled yet, and shall not be till the latter-day glories. In a
little while you shall see Christ come again, to be ruler over his people
Israel, and ruler over them not only as spiritual Israel, but even as natural
Israel, for the Jews shall be restored to their land, and the tribes of Jacob
shall yet sing in the halls of their temple; unto God there shall yet again be
offered Hebrew songs of praise, and the heart of the unbelieving Jew shall
be melted at the feet of the true Messias. In a short time, he who at his
birth was hailed king of the Jews by Easterns, and at his death was written
king of the Jews by a Western, shall be called king of the Jews everywhereyes,
king of the Jews and Gentiles also-in that universal monarchy whose
dominion shall be co-extensive with the habitable globe, and whose
duration shall be coeval with time itself. He came to be a ruler in Israel, and
a ruler most decidedly he shall be, when he shall reign among his people
with his ancients gloriously.

IV. And now, the last thing is, DID JESUS CHRIST EVER COME BEFORE?
We answer, yes: for our text says, “Whose goings forth have been of old,
from everlasting.”

First, Christ has had his goings forth in his Godhead. “From everlasting.”
He has not been a secret and a silent person up to this moment. That newborn
child there has worked wonders long ere now; that infant slumbering
in its mother’s arms is the infant of to-day, but it is the ancient of eternity;
that child who is there hath not made its appearance on the stage of this
world; his name is not yet written in the calendar of the circumcised; but
still though you wish it not, “his goings forth have been of old, from
everlasting.”

1. Of old he wend forth as our covenant head in election, “according as he
hath chosen us in Him, before the foundation of the world.”

“Christ be my first elect, he said,
Then chose our souls in Christ our Head.”

2. He had goings forth for his people, as their representative before the
throne even before they were begotten in the world. It was from
everlasting that his mighty fingers grasped the pen, the stylus of ages, and
wrote his own name, the name of the eternal Son of God; it was from
everlasting that he signed the compact with his Father, that he would pay
blood for blood, wound for wound, suffering for suffering, agony for
agony, and death for death, in the behalf of his people, it was from
everlasting that he gave himself up, without a murmuring word, that from
the crown of his head to the sole of his foot he might sweat blood, that he
might be spit upon, pierced, mocked, rent asunder, suffer the pain of death,
and the agonies of the cross. His goings forth as our Surety were from
everlasting. Pause my soul, and wonder! Thou hadst goings forth in the
person of Jesus from everlasting. Not only when thou wast born into the
world did Christ love thee, but his delights were with the sons of men
before there were any sons of men. Often did he think of hem, from
everlasting to everlasting he had set his affliction upon them. What!
believer, has he been so long about thy salvation, and will he not
accomplish it? Has he from everlasting been going forth to save me, and
will he lose me now? What! has he had me in his hand, as his precious
jewel, and will he now let me slip between his precious fingers? Did he
choose me before the mountains were brought forth, or the channels of the
deep scooped out, and will-he lose me now? Impossible!

“My name from the palms of his hands
Eternity cannot erase;
Impress’d on his heart it remains,
In marks of indelible grace.”

I am sure he would not love me so long, and then leave off loving me. If he
intended to be tired of me, he would have been tired of me long before
now. If he had not loved me with a love as deep as hell and as unutterable
as the grave, if he had not given his whole heart to me, I am sure he would
have turned from me long ago. He knew what I would be, and he has had
long time enough to consider of it, but I am his choice, and there is an end
of it; and unworthy as I am, it is not mine to grumble, if he is but contented
with me. But he is contented with me-he must be contented with me-for he
has known me long enough to know my faults. He knew me before I knew
myself; yea, he knew me before I was myself Long before my members
were fashioned they were written in his book, “when as yet there were
none of them,” his eyes of affection were set on them. He knew how badly
I would act towards him, and yet he has continued to love me;

“His love in times past forbids me to think,
He’ll leave me at last in trouble to sink.”

No; since “his goings forth were of old from everlasting,” they will be “to
everlasting.”

Secondly, we believe that Christ has come forth of old, even to men, so
that men have beheld him. I will not stop to tell you that it was Jesus who
walked in the garden of Eden in the cool of the day, for his delights were
with the sons of men; nor will I detain you by pointing out all the various
ways in which Christ came forth to his people in the form of the angel of
the covenant, the Paschal Lamb, the brazen serpent, the burning bush, and
ten thousand types with which the sacred history is so replete; but I will
rather point you to four occasions when Jesus Christ our Lord has
appeared on earth as a man, before his great incarnation for our salvation.
And, first, I beg to refer you to the 18th chapter of Genesis, where Jesus
Christ appeared to Abraham, of whom we read, “The Lord appeared unto
him in the plains of Mamre: and he sat in the tent door in the heat of the
day; and he lift up his eyes and looked, and lo, three men stood by him; and
when he saw them, he ran to meet them from the tent door, and bowed
himself toward the ground.” But whom did he bow to? He said “My
Lord,” only to one of them. There was one man between the other two, the
most conspicuous for his glory, for he was the God-man Christ; the other
two were created angels; who for a time had assumed the appearance of
men. But this was the man Christ Jesus. “And he said, My Lord, if now I
have found favor in thy sight, pass not away, I pray thee, from thy servant:
Let a little water, I pray you, be fetched, and wash your feet, and rest
yourselves under the tree.” You will notice that this majestic man, this
glorious person, stayed behind to talk with Abraham. In the 22nd verse it is
said,-”And the men turned their faces from thence and went towards
Sodom;” that is, two of them, as you will see in the next chapter “but
Abraham stood yet before the Lord.” You will notice that this man, the
Lord, held sweet fellowship with Abraham, and allowed Abraham to plead
for the city he was about to destroy. He was in the positive form of man;
so that when he walked the streets of Judea it was not the first time that he
was a man; he was so before, in “the plain of Mamre, in the heat of the
day.” There is another instance-his appearing to Jacob, which you have
recorded in the 32nd chapter of Genesis and the 24th verse. All his family
were gone, “And Jacob was left alone, and there wrestled a man with him
until the breaking of the day. And when he saw that he prevailed not
against him, he touched the hollow of his thigh; and the hollow of Jacob’s
thigh was out of joint, as he wrestled with him. And he said, Let me go, for
the day breaketh. And he said, I will not let thee go, unless thou bless me.
And he said unto him, What is thy name? And he said, Jacob. And he said,
Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but Israel; for as a prince hast
thou power with God.” This was a man, and yet God. “For as a prince hast
thou power with God and with men, and hast prevailed.” And Jacob knew
that this man was God, for he says in the 30th verse: “for I have seen God
face to face, and my life is preserved.” Another instance you will find in the
book of Joshua. When Joshua had crossed the narrow stream of Jordan,
and had entered the promised land, and was about to drive out the
Canaanites, lo! this mighty man-God appeared to Joshua. In the 5th
chapter, at the 13th verse, we read-”And it came to pass, when Joshua was
by Jericho, that he lifted up his eyes and looked, and, behold, there stood a
man over against him with his sword drawn in his hand, and Joshua went
unto him, and (like a brave warrior, as he was,) said unto him, Art thou for
us, or for our adversaries? And he said, Nay; but as Captain of the host of
the Lord am I now come.” And Joshua saw at once that there was divinity
in him; for Joshua fell on his face to the earth, and did worship, and said to
him, “What saith my lord unto his servant?” Now, if this had been a
created angel he would have reproved Joshua, and said, “I am one of your
fellow servants.” But no; “the captain of the Lord’s host said unto Joshua,
Loose thy shoe from thy foot; for the place whereon thou standest is holy.
And Joshua did so.” Another remarkable instance is that recorded in the
third chapter of the book of Daniel, where we read the account of
Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego being cast into the fiery furnace, which
was so fierce that it destroyed the men who threw them in. Suddenly the
king said to his counsellors-”Did not we cast three men bound into the
midst of the fire? They answered and said unto the king, True, O king. He
answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the
fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of
God.” How should Nebuchadnezzar know that? Only that there was
something so noble and majestic in the way in which that wondrous Man
bore himself, and some awful influence about him, who so marvellously
broke the consuming teeth of that biting and devouring flame, so that it
could not so much as singe the children of God. Nebuchadnezzar
recognized his humanity. He did not say, “I see three men and an angel,”
but he said, “I see four positive men, and the form of the fourth is like the
Son of God.” You see then, what is meant by his goings forth being “from
everlasting.”

Observe for a moment here, that each of these four great occurrences
happened to the saints when they there engaged in very eminent duty, or
when they were about to be engaged in it. Jesus Christ does not appear to
his saints every day. He did not come to see Jacob till he was in affliction;
he did not visit Joshua before he was about to be engaged in a righteous
war. It is only in extraordinary seasons that Christ thus manifests himself to
his people. When Abraham interceded for Sodom, Jesus was with him, for
one of the highest and noblest employ meets of a Christian is that of
intercession, and it is when he is so engaged that he will be likely to obtain
a sight of Christ. Jacob was engaged in wrestling, and that is a part of
Christian’s duty to which some of you never did attain; consequently, you
do not have many visits from Jesus. It was when Joshua was exercising
bravery that the Lord met him. So with Shadrach, Meshach, and
Abednego: they were in the high places of persecution, on account of their
adherence to duty, when he came to them and said, “I will be with you,
passing through the fire.” There are certain peculiar places we must enter,
to meet with the Lord. We must be in great trouble, like Jacob; we must be
in great labor, like Joshua; we must have great intercessory faith, like
Abraham; we must be firm in the performance of duty, like Shadrach,
Meshach, and Abednego or else we shall not know him “whose goings
forth have been of old, from everlasting;” or, if we know him, we shall not
be able to “comprehend with all the saints what is the height, and depth,
and length, and breadth of the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge.”
Sweet Lord Jesus! thou whose goings forth were of old, even from
everlasting, thou hast not left thy goings forth yet. Oh! that thou wouldst
go forth this day to cheer the faint, to help the weary, to bind up our
wounds, to comfort our distresses! Go forth, we beseech thee, to conquer
sinners, to subdue hard hearts-to break the iron gates of sinners’ lusts, and
cut the iron bars of their sins in pieces! O Jesus! go forth; and when thou
goest forth, come thou to me! Am I a hardened dinner? Come thou to me;
I want thee:

“Oh! let thy grace my heart subdue;
I would be led in triumph too.
A willing captive to my Lord,
To sing the honors of thy word.”

Poor sinner! Christ has not left going forth yet. And when he goes forth,
recollect, he goes to Bethlehem. Have you a Bethlehem in your heart? Are
you little? He will go forth to you yet. Go home and seek him by earnest
prayer. If you have been made to weep on account of sin, and think
yourself too little to be noticed, go home, little one! Jesus comes to little
ones; his goings forth were of old, and he is going forth now. He will come
to your poor old house; he will come to your poor wretched heart; he will
come, though you are in poverty, and clothed in rags though you are
destitute, tormented, and afflicted; he will come, for his goings forth have
been of old from everlasting. Trust him, trust him, trust him; and he will go
forth to abide in your heart for ever.

Switch to our mobile site