A friend passed along a great quote on humility...

...all day long, at the moment you become aware of burdensome cares, cast them upon the Lord, who cares for you. Where there is worry and anxiety; there is the pride of self-reliance. The humble man, though he may be responsible for many things, is free of care--he is care-free. His life is characterized by joy and peace, for it is impossible to be worried while trusting the Sovereign One.

– C.J. Mahaney, Ch. 7 - Cultivate Humility of "Dear
Timothy: Letters on Pastoral Ministry"

There are a lot of things in pastoral life that puff up our pride and discourage humble living.  As a pastor, have you ever considered:

1.  Where do you turn when you are carrying a heavy burden?   Are there others in your life to whom you can turn and show your weakness? 
2.  How often do you struggle with the pride of self-reliance? 
3.  Can your life be described as joyful and peaceful? 
4.  If I asked your wife to describe your life, what would she say?
5.  Do you ask your staff for feedback on your sermons, prayers, and other aspects of your public ministry?  Or are you scared about what they might say?  If they said you did a poor job, how would you react?
6.  How often do you worry about your church?  your sermons?  your outreach to the community?
7.  Are you willing to ask church members for forgiveness?
8.  Are you willing to ask your wife and children to forgive you when you mess up?
9.  Do you find yourself always directing those around you (your staff, your family, etc.), or do you take the time to really listen to what others have to say?
10.  Do you  cultivate a spirit of humility among the leaders in your church?  Is your leadership team willing to tell you when you are wrong?  Or are they too scared to ever contradict your opinions?

Even as I write these questions, I notice how far short my life falls from the biblical standard.  There are a lot more questions I could ask.  The 10 listed above are a small sample that can help you answer the question, "Am I, as a pastor, actively cultivating humility in my own life?"

Hey Matt,

Thanks for the helpful posts and comments.  It's awesome to see the fruit the Lord has produced in the years you all have been teaching this at CHBC.  Not only is their greater victory for many people in this area, but there are the many joyous weddings, a higher view of marriage itself, the increase in chivalry (for lack of a better word), and greater acceptance and faithfulness in marital/gender roles.

But this kind of opportunity isn't only for the young singles.  How about middle-aged singles, widows, and divorcees?  Often, middle aged persons are at greater risk of failure in this area because (a) they fear their opportunity for marriage is over, and (b) they rationalize their temptation to sin by saying, "I'm an adult, experienced and able to handle it."  For the most part, Christians are not accustomed to church leaders and churches taking an interest in their intimate lives as you describe, which gets compounded by unhealthy notions of independence in later years.  In most places, we probably need this kind of teaching as an aid to both young and older singles until we build cultures of "close shepherding" and meaningful relationships in the body.

Greg, great insight re: the call to concern ourselves with loving others rather than being loved.

Last night some of the elders (Mark Dever, Michael Lawrence, Scott Croft and I) gave a somewhat annual talk to the single men (women are next week) of Capitol Hill Baptist Church on physical intimacy prior to marriage. We try to give this talk following a series of lectures entitled Friendship, Courtship and Marriage given in our adult education program. The format we typically use is 30-40 minutes of lecture followed by about an hour of questions and answers.

The essence of our talks were captured in a book entitled Sex and the Supremacy of Christ edited by John Piper and Justin Taylor. A new book that does a good job along the same lines published by Crossway is John Ensor's Doing Things Right in Matters of the Heart.

We initially gave these talks because we saw very little difference between the world and the church when it came to dating. Men were painting a picture of marriage in their dating habits and then stepping away (defrauding). Women were being emotionally hurt or wrongly using physical intimacy to draw men in. After giving this talk now for 10 years we have seen a significant shift in the dating culture of our church. And yet there's always young, single men needing to be instructed (last night was our biggest crowd to date!).

If you've never considered such a seminar in your church, I would strongly encourage you to learn more about your singles and their need for instruction. For the glory of God.

Hey Mike,

Great post.  Provocative as usual. 

It was also interesting reading the comments thus far.  Some think what you do at home is critical, others think what you hear in the preaching is critical, and some/most would probably say that the combination of private study and public preaching is the key.

I wouldn't disagree with those who see both private study and public preaching as critical to spiritual growth.  But I think the Bible holds out more.

The issue of private study and hearing public preaching, as currently defined, seem to place great weight on what we do as individuals.  That is, a certain kind of individualism is implicit in the tension between private study and listening to public preaching.  The discussion ends at "what will I do in my life with what I hear?"  If that's the end, then there really isn't much difference between private study and my individual listening to and applying of a sermon.

It seems that what is critical for public preaching is precisely the public nature of the activity.  What we do together.  How we collectively are shaped.  And what we do in our private study lends itself to growth when it is put to public use, not just private use.

The gifted persons in the church are given "to prepare God's people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining the whole measure of the fullness of Christ.  Then we will no longer be infants, tossed back and forth by the waves, and blown here and there by every wind of teaching and by the cunning craftiness of men in their deceitful scheming.  Instead, speaking the truth in love, we will in all things grow up into him who is the Head, that is, Christ.  From him the whole body, joined and held together by every supporting ligament, grows and builds itself up in love, as each part does its work." (Eph. 4:12-16).

The local church, the body of Christ, is central to spiritual maturity and growing up in Christ.  If we are individualistic and privatistic (is that a word?) we will inevitably be less mature than we might otherwise be, and so will our fellow brethren if we don't commit ourselves to building up the entire body.  What we learn in both our private and public study is intended for the benefit of others, the whole.

The real tragedy with this current discussion about "study at home" v. "public preaching" is that they both reveal a woefully low valuation of the local church, the collective Christian life, as essential to spiritual maturity.  It's BOTH private study and public preaching applied in the gathered life of the body, neither done with a self-centered preoccupation with "my maturity."  If all we're doing is teaching people to read their Bibles (which is necessary), if we don't help them to see that studying and hearing the words is a means to building up the entire body, then we shouldn't be surprised that (a) they misunderstand spiritual maturity and are given to self-righteousness and the knowledge that puffs up, (b) they still don't mature as we'd hope, and (c) that others mature slower than we'd like. 

A couple other thoughts:

1.  If a preacher resorts to mocking the people by crying in a high chair, he's probably long abandoned belief in the sufficiency and efficacy of the preached word for producing God's designs (Is. 55:11).

2.  That man should take a vacation.  Get some perspective.  Talk with older godly pastors.  If after all of that, he finds that he really doesn't want to feed God's people, he should leave the ministry.

3.  If it is the preaching of the gospel that intercepts a hell bound sinner and translates him into the kingdom of light, saving his eternal soul, then as preachers we'd better have the kind of soberness and gravitas about our task that the stakes deserve.

4.  Mike, you were very kind in phrasing point 2 as a question.  Surely there is laziness in the pastorate, and we need to repent wherever we discover it in our lives.  This, I think, is a serious problem that pastors don't expose and talk enough about.  Thanks for bringing it to light.

5.  Mike, LOVED your point #4 and concluding sentence.  Thanks for serving us so well, brother.

Yes, I'm breaking all the blogging rules with a long post, but here it goes...

A very thoughtful and godly brother recently emailed me about several of the contributions to the recent 9Marks eJournal on race. He had sincere questions, and wondered if we shouldn’t simply be working harder to simply affirm our unity in the gospel.

His email made me realize that it might be useful for at least for one or two people what I, as a white man at 9Marks, learned from reading through all the contributions to the last issue of the eJournal: in short, I’ve become fairly persuaded (together with every contributor to the forum) that we Whites aren’t getting it. And the fact that not many of us are even talking about the “race problem” is evidence of the fact that we aren’t getting it.

Here’s why I think we’re not getting it. We continually rehearse the line about the solution being in “the gospel,” as if that’s the final word on the matter. We feel satisfied with that. What we haven’t done, however, is the more difficult work of asking what the gospel requires from us personally. What I learned from a number of the contributors, together with several offline conversations, is that we Whites can display a fair degree of insensitivity toward non-white brothers and sisters in Christ by (i) affirming our unity in the gospel, while (ii) simultaneously paying insufficient attention to the existential realities of what it's like being a minority in the United States.

It’s like a conversation I once had with Thabiti in which I (proudly) told him that I didn’t think of a fellow friend as “black.” I just thought of him as a “friend.” Thabiti gently asked me whether I had asked this friend about what it’s like to be black. I said I hadn’t. Thabiti then remarked that I must not be a good friend after all, because those are the experiences this friend has on a daily basis.

Do you see what I’m getting at? I can say, “Hey, we’re all one in Christ.” But if I’m unwilling to enter into the experience of a minority as best I can—maybe by joining a different church; maybe by seeking out different friends; maybe by working extra hard to serve; most definitely by asking honest questions—I am potentially demonstrating a failure to love a brother or sister in Christ as an embodied human being. Rather, I’m showing an indifference to what he or she may experience on a daily basis.

Yet aren’t we all grateful that the God of the gospel is not like that? (Think of Frank Houghton’s hymn: “Thou who wast rich beyond all splendor, all for love’s sake, becamest poor; thrones for a manger, didst surrender, sapphire paved courts, for stable floor…”)

Are Whites willing to consider whether “systemic injustices” remain in the United States that minorities still experience in 2007? I sat next to an African American gentlemen on an airplane recently who has been living in Washington, DC for several years, having moved from Mississippi. We had been enjoying a good conversation for over an hour when I asked him what it was like to be black in DC versus Mississippi. He said it was harder in DC because he felt like he’s already hit the glass ceiling in his work for the government, something he never felt like he hit in the South. Wow. That’s not what I expected to hear. We had already been discussing the gospel, and so at that point, I was able to extend the gospel conversation with a little more conscientiousness.

In other words, unity in the gospel, ironically, means

1) that complete color blindness won’t work. Color blindness, in many circumstances, is insensitive. It’s wrongfully indifferent. It’s uncaring. We know this when it comes to widows and orphans and outcasts and aliens. Jesus tells us not to tell a brother to be “well fed” and then send him off with nothing. Why would we then be “blind” to the social disadvantages that come in American society with belonging to a minority?  If my fellow White brother or sister wants to argue that there are not social disadvantages that come with being a member of the minority, I would suggest asking whether that’s your idea or whether you learned it through conversations with minorities.

2) But unity in the gospel also means there is another sense in which we should be colorblind. There should be aspects of my affection, friendship, fellowship, and partnership in the gospel with Thabiti, for example, that we will share aside from, apart from, in spite of, without giving a thought to differences of ethnic background. To be constantly aware of our differences would allow the differences to overwhelm all that we share in common—both spiritually and temporally.

3) In short, Christians and churches need to exercise discernment for knowing when to be color blind and when to be color conscious. The different members of the body should recognize both our differences and our oneness, so that each can love and honor the different parts of the body as occasion requires (1 Cor. 12). One body; many parts. Being entirely unaware of our differences will demonstrate a lack of love and concern for one another. Being overly aware will undermine unity and promote division. In the final analysis, of course, our unity in Christ should govern everything. May God give us all more wisdom!

It’s on this third point where the rubber really meets the road for the actual decisions church leaders and members have to make: How does this affect our selection of leaders? How does this affect our selection of music or dress? How does this affect what Sunday Schools are taught? How does this affect the preacher’s choice of applications or illustrations? It’s in these types of practical areas where we Christians should be asking God for more wisdom in combining color consciousness and colorblindness in just the right ways and at the right times.

All this why I liked Thabiti's proposal: it remarkably combines both oneness in Adam and in Christ with actual color consciousness, i.e. "affirmative action in the church." Now, maybe this isn’t the right answer either. But we need to have the conversation to figure that out…

Here's Jeremy Pierce's reply to Thabiti's reply below. (ht: Justin Taylor).

T-,

From our conversations I know you don't want to dwell too much on the fiction, but point people instead to reality. But it's evident you've been thinking about these things for a long time, and for as much as we've talked about it, I know I'm still catching up. So, I know you don't want to camp here long, but can you help me (us) a bit more with the fiction?

What exactly do the "experts" say "race" is? That is, what do they mean to speak of the "Black race" or "White race" or "Asian race"? I mean, if you (a "Black" man) and I (a "White" man) are both created in God's image, and if we share the same biology (except for skin color and the fact that I'm taller and more handsome), what is this "race" thing--as people like Jeremy would define it? (And I'm happy for Jeremy to jump into the comments section!) Thanks, brother.

Thabiti,
Your article Many Ethnicities, One Race seems to be getting some attention. Here's one response (thanks to JTaylor for pointing it out). Any thoughts? Anyone else? Is "race" a fiction?

Brothers, have you read the forum on race in the new issue of the 9Marks eJournal?  What do you think? Is there a race problem in the church, and are Whites missing it?

Is the idea of eternity and the believer's ultimate end simply lost to the modern church?  We hear 12 step sermons to make everything better in this life and rarely hear about the next.  Mark Dever has commented before about the change in modern hymnals and how they have increasingly dropped ideas like decay and death (this life) and eternal life with God. 

With this on my mind, I had the privilege this past Sunday to preach at Mike McKinley's church (Guilford Baptist in Sterling, VA) and put to them six reasons why eternity (the idea) may be lost in the church.

1.  We’re distracted by baubles.  We don’t long for and speak of eternity because in our hyper-connected, wealth-soaked, desires-driven world we remain suspended in a state of EXTREME DISTRACTION --by baubles—showy ornaments of little value.  Music, drink, golf,  houses, cars, IPODS, DVDs ESPN, HBO or MTV.  These things are not necessarily bad.  But too often mere baubles.  Meaningless.  They are nothing in light of eternity.  But, boy, are they powerful. 

2.  We’re too content.  Living in America is to be comfortable.  I know there are exceptions, but even the poor in America (according to recent studies) live better than most of all of human history.  We’re content.  Why long for something else when things are fine -- here?  Our wealth buys us out of hard labor.  Our healthcare buys us out of extreme pain.  We are content/comfortable with this world, not eager for the next.  And so we don’t speak of eternal matters.

3.  We may not be Christians.  We don’t speak of eternity because we don’t know the eternal God.  Jesus said, “Out of the mouth comes that which fills the heart (Matthew 12:34).  It’s a nice little test the Lord of the Universe came up with.  You want to know what’s on your heart?  Check what comes out of your mouth.  Sports?  Work?  Relationships?  Money?  Politics?  Does anything eternal ever make it out?  I have a special concern here for you who are or have grown up in a Christian home.  You learn early how to talk the talk.  You know the Christian buzz words and adopt the Christian culture, but is what you say you believe real to your own soul? 
   You talk about mysteries without standing in awe. 
    You talk about zeal without any passion. 
    You speak of sin in the absence of sorrow. 
    You even speak of heaven without any eagerness. 
Be on your guard that you are not playing the role of the Pharisee.  We may not be Christian and so we don’t speak about eternity.

4.  We’re Christian, but our holy desires may be too slight.  About John Owen (leading Puritan preacher) it was said, “holiness…shined in his whole course [his whole life], and was diffused through his whole conversation.”   Owen in his own words:    “If the word does not dwell with power in us, it will not pass with power from us.”  Owen desired all things holy and it came out.  Our holy desires may be too slight.  And so we don’t speak.

5.  We don’t understand our role as Christians.  We don’t “get saved” then do what we want and see God sometime way off in the future.  When you come to Christ, you get a new identity and with that a new role, if you will.  When John the Baptist comes on the scene, the Jewish leadership sent priests out to find out who this guy was.  “Who are you?”  “Are you Elijah?”  “Are you the Prophet?”  “What do you say about yourself?”  What is John’s description of himself?  I AM A VOICE.  I’m not a lawyer or a nurse or a federal worker.  I’m not a teacher, homemaker, student or pastor.  I’m not a painter or a journalist.  I AM A VOICE.  That’s your role!  I believe and therefore I speak (2 Cor 4:13).  We don’t understand our role and so we don’t speak for our eternal God.

6.  We’re too fearful.  We fear the reproach of men.  We fear being rejected by family.  We fear the loss of friends.  We fear looking different/acting different/being different.    Friends, we need to be willing to have every part of this life look stupid if it means being faithful to God and preparing to stand in His presence in the next.

There it is.  Six reasons why the idea of eternity may be lost in our churches today.  I pray it would not be lost to our pastors.

To Matt's query, while a Washington, DC or a New York City or a Los Angeles will always be unique, isn't it safe to say that in the twenty-first century, technology and mobility are making more places crossroads?  For that reason, I'd say most any city today is unusually strategic.

Having said that, it is amazing how when one comes to know and love a place, he can begin to see its need and strategic importance.  I'm sure those pastors in Ocean City are well aware that seeds planted in the hearts and minds of vacationers will be spread throughout the eastern seaboard.  Then there's Mike who planted in the fastest-growing county of the country.  I'm currently at a church near a terrific seminary and a university--undoubtedly strategic.  One of the commenters to Greg's last post mentioned that though there are a lot of churches in his area, many seem to have forsaken the gospel.  So he's strategic simply by trying to be a bible-focused church.   Then there is the NW, like the NE, it has fewer churches--very strategic.

Now, on to the important stuff.  What in the world is a "fried-Snickers" and a "youth led revival"?

Brothers,

Do I dare introduce a new topic for the week when I'm on vacation? 

Actually, it is my vacation spot that prompts my question.  I'm in Ocean City, NJ which is about an hour outside Philadelphia, PA.  It is an island that hosts permanent residents of about 25,000 and swells to about 100,000 during the peak summer months.  We attended Ocean City Baptist Church on Sunday morning where the very capable Kevin O'Brien (a Masters Seminary grad) faithfully exposits the scripture week in and week out.  Just two blocks down on the same street is First Presbyterian Church where John Sheldon (a big James Montgomery Boice fan) faithfully preaches God's word, I fear an anyomaly in his PCUSA denomination.

When Mark Dever was considering a call to Washington, DC he noted how the apostle Paul went to crossroads to preach the gospel and that DC represented one of better crossroads in our own country and even the world.  So does that make a town like Ocean City less strategic?  In other words, should we encourage men to look for opportunities to pastor that are particularly strategic, populated -- a great crossroad?  Or is any town where the gospel is absent strategic...enough?

For your amusement I provide proof of my time away.  That's my youngest, Joanna, and me eating at our favorite boardwalk pizza place -- Mack & Manco Pizza.  Hey Mike, you've eaten here, right?

In the upcoming July '07 edition of 9News David Powlison writes the following in his article entitled "The Therapeutic Gospel:

"The path of Jesus calls forth more grit than thrill.  He needed endurance far more than he needed excitement." 

Friends, read this article (next week) and consider putting this quote in your Bible or above your desk -- especially those of you who are pastors!

(BTW:  For your first ever blog entry I suggest quoting someone wiser than yourself!)