Tag Archive for complimentarian at Zeal For Truth

Tag Archive for 'complimentarian'

Christianity and Covenants: Husbands and Wives

Published by Colin November 3, 2009 in Religion and Theology. 36 Comments

This is the second article in a multi-part series on Christianity and covenants. Other topics are:

Overview
God and Christians
Christians and Marriage
Christians and Employers
Christians and Finances/Debt
Christians and the Local Church
Christians and Governments
Christians and Animals and the Environment

Husbands and Wives
It is an incredible thing that many churches will sometimes spend valuable sermon time preaching on the evils of homosexuality, pre-marital sex or general “left-wing” debauchery, and yet often ignore fundamental aspects of the marriage relationship as layed out in scripture and deduced in Christian theology. Many Christians view this as a “defense of marriage” against encroaching secular humanism or (leftist) moral relativism. Some even go to the polls or to protests against gay marriage as part of the purely “defensive” effort.

Ironically, these highly visible, yet “defensively” dubious activities, have no ability whatsoever to “save” or “protect” the sanctity of marriage - rather, husbands and wives loving and submitting to one another in light of the gospel is where the power is.

Marriage does not exist as a political tool for the government to use to promote family values or even reproduction. Marriage also is not just any relationship between two people who “love” each other. Marriage is, first and foremost, an image, a covenant that is a representation of Christ’s relationship with the church (Ephesians 5:22-33).

The Marriage Covenant
A marriage is not a contract. The husband does not agree to love the wife if she submits to him. The wife does not agree to submit to the husband if he loves her. In fact, the marriage relationship is actually two separate covenants that are acknowledged before God.

When a man and woman take marriage vows, they each make a promise to unconditionally, and unilaterally fulfill a set of promises. It is the same kind of covenant that God makes with man. The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (CBMW) puts it perfectly:

[Husbands:] Your unconditional acceptance of your wife is not based upon her performance, but on her worth as God’s gift to you.

Ironically, even on the CBMW website, a bastion of complementarianism, it was difficult to find a corresponding statement for wives. This was the best I could do:

There are many situations where a husband is selfish, unreasonable, and hypocritical. This alone does not release a wife from her responsibility to respect and submit to him.

But really, the point is simple - the roles and structure in marriage is ordained by God. It is voluntarily entered into by husbands and wives, both of whom engage an unconditional set of vows to one another.

This is what makes marital love so special - it is a self-sacrificing love - a love that does not come from merit or profit. The best synonym I can think of for this kind of love is “commitment.” It means that spouses make a deliberate, intentional choice to overlook each other’s faults, to forgive one another and to commit to one another in the same way that God has done these things toward us.

Christ forgave us while we were still sinners - so we love our spouses, knowing that they have, do and will sin against us. Christ gave himself for us, so we too surrender our lives, our pride and our independence for the benefit of our spouse. Christ clothes us in his righteousness and has saved us - we protect, honour and affirm the role of our spouse and their worth as a child of God.

The marriage relationship comes back to the gospel. As it should - Paul already reminded us of this in Ephesians 5.

Perverting the Gospel
The feminist movement in the hearts of men and women has been the greatest modern assault on marriages. I worded that sentence carefully. It is not simply feminism - in the sense of certain intellectuals, books or even ideology. It is the fact that something other than biblical marriage has encroached upon the marriage covenant in the hearts of husbands and wives.

A quick way to survey these views, is to go back to Ephesians 5, and interpret them in the theology of marriage being an image of Christ and the Church.

Marriage is a 50/50 partnership: If my salvation from sin were a 50/50 partnership with God, I’d be in big trouble. If Christ and I are both responsible for salvation, how can I expect that I maintain it in all of my continuing sin and falling short of God’s standards? What if Christ and I disagree on how best to save me?

Marriage is a give and take relationship: Imagine if the gospel were give and take. Maybe God should stop “taking” all the time and give me a little more leeway to indulge sin? But if I wanted to give to God, what can I bring that is worthy of a perfect, self-sufficient God?

Marriage roles are interchangeable: Perhaps it isn’t me who needs saving, it’s God! And I can save him just as well as he can save me.

Marriage is conditional: God only has to forgive me if I first apologise. God will only save me if I make a vow to praise him forever. What if Christ’s death and resurrection were only available to people of a certain pre-existing righteousness?

Now if marriage has less to do with the gospel, then more egalitarian, even feminist views on marriage are potentially compatible with marriage. However, scripture argues that marriage and the gospel go hand in hand.

This goes back to an earlier point. What is the best way to affirm and support the biblical view of marriage? It is not to attack feminism in others, or egalitarianism - but rather for us to have a deeper knowledge of the gospel. For us to continue to probe the love with which God has loved us and to meditate on the work of Christ on the cross. In doing this, we will have a better understanding and vision for loving our spouses.

Some Introductory Thoughts On The Anglican Church

Published by Bryan February 5, 2008 in Religion. 18 Comments

At the moment I am seriously considering starting to regularly attend a local Anglican church. I have been to one Sunday morning service, eight or so Sunday evening services, two guest lectures, and many morning prayer services hosted by the church at the university I attend, and now need to weigh the pros and cons of making it the church I regularly attend. There is a lot I like about the Anglican church in general (and this church particularly) yet I still have some reservations.

So what is it that attracts me to the Anglican church? In no particular order:

The Pros
1. Liturgy - There is a lot left to preference (unless you hold to a strict RPW) when speaking of how a worship service can be performed. I prefer a higher liturgy Sunday morning then the free for all format of a typical evangelical church, but both have their usefulness. Different forms of worship emphasize different aspects of God’s character. The liturgy in my experience emphasizes the holiness, beauty and mystery of God, things that I have missed in other church services and want to explore more.

2. Preaching - The preaching I have been exposed to has been tremendous. Although the church has a reactor, many different staff members and church members preach in the various services. This allows for a variety of perspectives on a variety of topics. Although I do not always agree with what is being said (do I ever?) the sermons are well thought out, biblically based, and have both theological and practical elements.

3. Intellectual Element - One thing that has really impressed me has been the commitment to intellectual life. I am not sure if this is unique to this specific church, or part of the Anglican character overall, but it is definitely pronounced in this church. They have a yearly lecture series that brings in a well known and knowledgeable speaker each year (Two years ago was Stanley Hauerwas, and Ian Hutchinson this last year). This commitment can also be seen in the small groups that they are starting up, other speakers they often bring in, and even simple things like publishing an announcement in the bulletin when a church member receives a Ph.d in philosophy.

4. Tradition - The evangelical church, except for a few exceptions, have lost all concept of tradition and nearly all of history. This is a huge loss, not because these things are essential to be a Christian, but because they provide a connection to our past and helps to regulate our future. The Anglican church still holds on to tradition through the creeds, prayers, and liturgy. Unlike the contemporary evangelical church, which is often afraid to look at history since they have a suspicion they will not see themselves in it, the Anglican church in my experience is not afraid to look at church history.

5. The Sacraments - Since beginning to seriously consider baptism and the Lord’s supper, my views have gone from Baptist, to Reformed, then back to Baptist but for the past year has been moving toward what I believe Anglicism teaches. Baptism of infants with baptism not only being an outward sign but a means which God uses to effect a spiritual change within us. Likewise, I believe that God uses the Lord’s supper to impart grace to those who receive it in faith. The topic of the sacraments is much to big for this entry, but one the fact that the Anglican church teaches (or at least allows for) a view that I believe has more scriptural support then other views is very attractive.

The Cons
What concerns me? Once again, in no particular order:

1. Homosexuality - The Anglican church is currently tearing itself apart over the question of homosexuality. It is not clear where the communion will go on this issue since there are major voices all over the map on it right now. What is for sure is that the firestorm over the issue is intensifying (See JI Packer explain the issues) and it will eventually come to a head. I hope and pray that homosexuality will not be embraced, but there is a strong possibility that it might be.

2. Women Priests - The Anglican church has allowed women priests for a while now. Although it has been several years since I examined the issue (I soon plan on examining it again so it is fresh in my mind to discuss) I am a complementarian and have never been convinced by the arguments in favour of women priests. Although among heavily conservative members of the Anglican church this is still an issue, it appears for my brief reading that among most this is no longer an issue.

3. The North/South Divide - On a whole the more northern churches (Europe, and North America) are liberal while the southern churches (Africa) are much more conservative. This is coming out full force on the homosexuality issue, but the divide seems to be much deeper, and will no doubt continue to arise. This is concerning because it shows a division within the Anglican communion that will not be going away soon.

4. Certain Members of the Anglican Church - Some members of the Anglican church have become so liberal they should have been excommunicated long ago. John Shelby Spong is really the best example of this I can think of. I do think the Christian tent should be a big one, but there are essentials to the faith that if you give up you are no longer in it. There are of course those in all denominations who should be excommunicated for giving up essentials of the Christian faith, but it is a concern when bishops in a hierarchical church can give up essentials and still hold on to their position.

My Conclusions
What does all this mean? There are things I really like in the Anglican church, and things that give me pause and caution. The particular Anglican church I have found seems to be a little bit on the conservative side, has an evangelical emphasis, and embraces traditional liturgy. There have been two question that have weighed on my mind regarding all this these last few months:

1. How much error can I tolerate in a church I attend? When saying that I understand that there is no doubt error within my own theology that I do not see, and that no church or denomination is without error. But what is a position that I view as error that I can live with, and what is one that stops me from regularly attending a specific church?

2. Correctness of theology is important, but so also is church practice (evangelism, missional living, discipline, accountability…etc). So although theology must be weighed in any decision to regularly attend a church, so must how that theology is lived out be weighed. Does the Anglican church (and this one in particular) meet my requirements in this regard?

Note: Since I began thinking this entry through and writing it I believe I have come to a decision on regularly attending this church or not (writing helps the thinking process). However the points and questions raised in this piece are still important and should be discussed and thought out.

M	T	W	T	F	S	S
« Feb
1	2	3	4	5	6	7
8	9	10	11	12	13	14
15	16	17	18	19	20	21
22	23	24	25	26	27	28
29	30	31

Zeal For Truth