Category: All Articles

Developing Deep Christians

by Mike Avery, posted in All Articles, Christian Living, Church, Theology

If you had the opportunity to attend a public event at the United States Military Academy in West Point, NY you would see an impressive group of young men and women who are being prepared to go anywhere in the world, under any circumstances and swing into action the minute their boots hit the ground.   They are military officers in the making. Upon their graduation they will be commissioned as “leaders of character committed to the values of Duty, Honor, and Country . . . prepared for a career of professional excellence and service to the Nation as an officer in the United States Army”.

Is there any similarity between what happens at West Point and what happens at your local church?  Does your local church have a systematic process that produces mature Christian disciples who can pray, share their faith, explain the Bible, defend their doctrine, put the wellbeing of others ahead of their own, stand up under persecution or  do whatever they need to do for Christ’ Kingdom wherever their feet hit the ground?

You don’t have to answer that question because we already know the answer.  The church is struggling to produce men and women who fit the biblical standard of spiritual maturity. We are failing to produce people of depth – deep in spiritual character, deep in faith, deep in prayer, deep in love for God and others!  This process is actually called discipleship and it is not happening in the average church.

The Call to the Conservative Holiness Movement speaks to this in Article VIII.  It decries the fact that we have, “largely abandoned our Methodist system of spiritual formation and forgotten how to fulfill our Lord’s command to make disciples. We have sought revival without preparing to preserve its fruits. We have emphasized spectacular conversions and neglected the biblical necessity of disciplined growth in faith, virtue, knowledge, self-control, perseverance, godliness, brotherly kindness, and love”.  The end result is that the CHM suffers from too many shallow Christians.

I felt the “push back” and irritation from a lot of conservatives as soon as that last sentence formed on the page in front of me! But alas it must stand!  Conservatives face the normal fallout of failing to disciple their people.  However they also face another subtle danger – that of appearing to be deep rather than actually being deep! It is very easy for us to look spiritual while actually being as shallow as the carnal Corinthians.  Being deep is more than just knowing and honoring the Bible in visible ways (especially those that make us look spiritual in our setting).  That can happen while failing to demonstrate the character it commands. One can be meticulous, even legalistic, about his tithe and yet fail ever to develop the spirit of generosity. One can dress modestly and still have a sensual spirit. Sheer knowledge of the Bible doesn’t make one godly. The mere application of a few visible commands doesn’t mean we have cultivated holy character. One can read the Bible daily, acquire significant amounts of Biblical knowledge, adopt standards of dress and behavior, yet have no straight-line correspondence between that and real Christlikeness.  One can embrace the conservative creed, adopt its life-style principles, and learn the language of the “old fashion way” and still be shallow.

Many conservative leaders readily admit that the CHM is not getting the job done when it comes to the discipleship of new believers.  Some recognize that we also are not taking the second step and engaging in the lifelong mentoring process that creates deep Christians.  However, few if any are talking about the problems that result from not discipling – a problem that Thomas Bergler calls the “Juvenilization of Christianity.”   When converts are not placed on a deliberate trajectory toward spiritual maturity, the character traits of duty, discipline, scriptural living, holy habit, holy affections, denying oneself, sacrificial loving and giving – all traits of mature Christians – are decoupled from normal adulthood and moved down the road to some future time that may or may not arrive. The shallowness that is left is a self-centered, emotionally driven and intellectually empty faith that is focused more on “being fulfilled” than on “being faithful.”

Discipleship the only Cure!

            New believers do not develop into deep Christians on their own any more than a little boy playing soldier becomes a great general on his own. We know this from church history and from personal experience. More importantly, we know this because the Bible gives us examples of how God Himself develops deep people.  Jesus chose to spend the majority of His time discipling His twelve disciples.  With only a three year public ministry, I think it remarkable that He made a limited number of public appearances and preached relatively few sermons while investing the vast majority of His time in the men who followed Him.   Watching this process unfold in the Gospels, it looks like just three years of walking, talking and eating with them.  But in reality Jesus was building character, teaching them how to think as He thought and reshaping the spiritual parts of their lives in such a way that would prepare them to live, suffer and die for His Kingdom.  This three year investment had such exponential results that we still feel its effect today!

Christians who are spiritually deep people have gone through God’s discipleship program.  Whether it is Moses, Paul, John Wesley or John Doe, all deep people have three things in common.  Each has been cultivated by God through direct encounters, experienced the character development made possible by difficult circumstances, and has been exposed to deliberate mentoring by resourceful people.

Divine Encounters

            The journey to becoming a deep person begins with a direct encounter with God.  This is what the church has called a person’s conversion.  No man can or even wants to become a deeply spiritual person who has not had a heart change wrought by the Holy Spirit. The Apostle Paul’s experience on the road to Damascus was such an encounter. He was not only converted to Christ but given his life’s calling. But there are other encounters with God.  Some are very personal like Jacob’s encounter with God at Peniel.  That was an encounter that gave Jacob a painful insight into his own carnal self and left him with a changed nature, a new name and a life marked forever by an amazing touch from God. Other encounters give us insight into the character and nature of God. Moses’ encounter with God in Exodus 34 is an example of this.  Moses had asked to see God’s “face” (glory) and was told he would be permitted to see God’s “goodness.”  What he asked for and what he received was quite different – a difference that is important.  Dennis Kinlaw clarifies this difference with this comment, “you can have a spiritual experience that is very exciting and yet is contentless or you gain an insight into the character of the Eternal that will change you forever.”  These encounters with God along the path of life are crucial to our development into deep people.

Difficult Circumstances

            A.W. Tozer reminds us that, “It is doubtful whether God can use a man greatly, until first He wounds him deeply.”  In my almost forty years of walking with the Lord, I have been blessed to receive numerous words of appreciation and kindness.  They have encouraged me and strengthened me in my work and walk. However, it has been the difficult circumstances of life; the harsh winds of trial and adversity; the unjust words of a foe; and the dark night of the soul that has done more to shape my character in Christlikeness than almost anything else.  Deep people have been discipled by the character shaping experience of difficult circumstances.

Deliberate Mentoring

            Deep people are not self-formulating.  Their lives are enriched by the counsel and wisdom of others.  All of us need Godly men and women who have experienced life and know God intimately to speak into our lives.  Most often this comes in a person to person encounter. However, it may take the form of books or other spiritual resources. Moses had his father-in-law   Jethro.  Paul had his traveling partner Barnabas.  Timothy had his spiritual father Paul. Wesley had his books, his brother and his Moravian friends.  The early Methodists had the class meeting – a system that produced a steady stream of deep people. Tozer had the writings of the Early Church Fathers and the Mystics.  Deep people will always have someone in their life that affirms, instructs, corrects, and holds them accountable.

The Implications of Failing to Disciple

            The CHM has got to stop using the altar as the primary place of spiritual formation.  The altar can certainly be a place of spiritual transformation and decision.  But spiritual formation and growth takes place in the discipleship phase of Christian living. The work of discipling believers and mentoring deep people can no longer be a point of mere discussion.  It must begin in earnest. Our failure to disciple deep people has already created a scarcity of spiritual leaders who have that blend of maturity, wisdom and balance that is needed to lead effectively.  If we do not reverse the trend, the CHM could well be headed into irrelevance.

Alan Redpath wisely noted that the conversion of a soul is the miracle of a moment, but the maturing of a great saint is the task of a lifetime. Our Methodist fathers understood this and modeled for us the art of making disciples like no one else in the last 200 years. It’s our heritage—it should be our practice—it may be the key to our survival!

Worship

by Mike Avery, posted in All Articles, Christian Living, Church, Ministry, Music, Worship

I love the Church!  I love the branch of the church called the holiness movement where God has placed me!   However, neither my love for the church nor that part which I serve has made me blind to the spots and wrinkles of either. The Call to the Conservative Holiness Movement is an attempt to restate the strengths of that tradition, to recognize weaknesses that have developed over time and to dialogue on how to restore what is vital to its future.  Article seven is a call to the CHM to honestly evaluate its present practices of corporate worship. The importance of such an evaluation is underscored by the importance of the act of worship itself.  The Westminster confession reminds us that man’s chief end is to “glorify God and enjoy Him forever”.  Scripture teaches us that worship is vital to our “creaturehood” and central to our faith.  If things are not healthy in our worship experience then things are not healthy in our church no matter how well we do other things.

Warren Weirsbe defined worship as the believers’ response of all that they are – mind, emotions, will, and body – to what God is and says and does.  In the best Methodist holiness tradition worship engages the whole person in a well-balanced blend of joyful celebration and reverential awe that is often reciprocated by the manifest presence of God.  When worship succeeds in this fashion, I know of no other worship tradition that enables men to worship God any better.

 CHM Worship Strengths

           Conservative holiness people are singing people.   Praise is central to worship.  Music, in the present day church, is the primary form of praise. So music and worship are inextricably connected. Music marks the worship found in both the Old and New Testaments. It has marked the Church across the centuries and around the world.     Step inside the average CHM church and you will hear warm-hearted, enthusiastic, highly-engaged singing that is often reinforced with expressions of praise like, “Glory to God”, “Hallelujah” and “Praise the Lord.”  Holiness people know how to worship in song!

Conservative holiness people deeply desire God’s presence. All Christians claim the promise, “For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them” (Matt. 18:20).  Holiness people, however, truly expect the presence of God to be evident.  Their zeal and longing for His presence is often rewarded with a gracious visitation of His manifest presence.

Conservative holiness people have a keen sensitivity to the work of the Holy Spirit. In the best Wesleyan holiness tradition order and structure are always present.  But there is also present a willingness to let the Spirit of God set aside the planned program if need be to accomplish His own sovereign purposes.

Conservative holiness people have a strong love for good preaching. The preaching event still takes a very high place in holiness movement worship.  Holiness people read their Bibles and carry them to church.  They want good preaching, respond to good preaching and show sincere respect for the preacher who gives them the unadulterated Word of God.

 CHM Worship Weaknesses*

            Too many services lack thoughtful planning.  Growing up in the CHM  I was taught to be suspicious of liturgy, only to discover that every church follows a liturgy, either a good one or a bad one, written or unwritten.  This fear or neglect of careful planning produces a worship experience that lacks continuity (is very disjointed and broken apart by things that could be avoided with minimal planning) and is random in its forward movement. It will fail to lead the congregant in a meaningful worship experience.  Churches who have consistently good worship experiences or those where the worship service is thoughtfully planned, intentionally structured, steeped in prayer and executed under the leadership of the Holy Spirit.  Careful planning does not hinder the freedom of God’s Spirit to work.  Actually, it gives Him a reliable framework through which He can inspire worship and minister grace to His people.

Too many holiness churches have stressed feeling and experiencing God to the neglect of worshiping and glorifying God.  Jesus taught us to worship in spirit and in truth.  Worship must have both heart and head.  Worship must engage emotions and thought.  Truth without emotion produces dead orthodoxy. On the other hand, emotion without truth produces empty frenzy and cultivates shallow people who refuse the discipline of rigorous thought.  Many in a sincere attempt to feel God near have lost this balance and have opened the door to fleshly emotionalism and called it worship.

We have allowed worship to become something we do for our benefit rather than something we offer to God.  Worship has an end – and it is not us! This twist in focus has turned church into a performance event where we are the recipients.  We want the songs to bless us, the prayers to comfort us, and the sermon to help us feel better about our condition.  True worship is not self-centered, but God-centered. In true worship God is the audience and we are the performers!  Robert Coleman said it well, “Worship is the adoring response of the creature to the infinite majesty of God.  While it presupposes submission to Him, to worship, in the highest sense, is not supplication for needs, or even thanksgiving for blessings, but the occupation of the soul with God Himself.”

Prayer is generally fervent but often lacks substance. The offering of prayers has always been a vital part of Christian worship and certainly an important part of worship within the CHM tradition.   Prayer is so intimate and personal that we have been hesitant to critique it.  But as a central part of worship, public prayer should be evaluated.  Public prayer or the pastoral prayer is different from our private time with God.  It should evidence thought and preparation.  I know a pastor who spends a considerable amount of time writing out his Sunday morning prayer. He takes the responsibility of leading his congregation to God seriously. His prayers contain a wonderful balance of adoration, petition and confession.  They are steeped in Biblical language. They have forward movement that is orderly and thoughtful.  But more importantly, they are deep and powerful. On the other hand, unless one has trained himself in the art of public prayer, the average extemporaneous prayer tends to be shallow, directionless and often repetitious.  Careful thought and preparation will not rob us of authentic sincere prayer. On the contrary it will help us truly attain it!

There is a noticeable lack of scripture. We have left scripture out of our present day worship services.  Rarely do you find a CHM church that gives attention to scripture readings, calls to worship, and responsive readings.  Quite often, you do not even need your Bible for the sermon!  Often scripture reading is ignored in the name of “saving time”.  However, I believe we fail here for two reasons: First, we think what we have to say in more important and effective than the public reading of Scripture.  Second, we are poor readers.  One only has to hear a good reader lift up the scripture to know the power of the read word!

 Too Important to Ignore

            There may be something optional about how one worships, but worship itself is not optional. Corporate worship is the exalted purpose and central pulse of every Christian congregation.  If you are not worshiping you are not having church – you are just holding a shabby religious sideshow and calling it worship.  What will it take to motivate you and your church to rebuild the altar of true worship?  Think about it.  There is too much at stake not to!

*I asked a group of Pastors and Church Leaders within the CHM to give me a list of what they believed were the worship weakness of the CHM.  Their lists were remarkably similar and were used to develop the list in this article.

Authority in the Church

by Mike Avery, posted in All Articles, Christian Living, Church, Culture, Ministry, Theology

– May 2012

Authority in the Church

            The issue of authority in the Church has come down to us through the centuries on a sea of blood and fire. The pages of church history tell the story.  You can read of men slain by the sword or burned at the stake for questioning or acting contrary to the authority of the church. At the heart of the Protestant Reformation was the issue of church authority.  The reformers declared that Christ alone was the head of the Church and the Bible was the ultimate authority.  Many of our ancestors left their native lands to escape the heavy hand of a state church whose authority exploited rather than liberated the souls of men.  Even today, there is still a vigorous discussion by churchmen, scholars, politicians and laymen as to the church’s authority on everything from birth control to baptism.

This discussion over authority in the Church may sound somewhat benign and empty to most of the people who will read this article.  Their religious world does not include popes, archbishops, bishops or councils!  Churches within the holiness tradition function as self-governing communities or are affiliated with denominations that have a very limited form of top-down government.  Neither approach, however, has allowed the holiness church to escape the discussion or the problem of authority.  The Call to the Conservative Holiness Movement Article VI states that the CHM has been marked by “the spirit of autonomy and even anarchy. . . . Too often . . . we have exhibited rebellion against the authority structures which God Himself has established, boasting our independence of them, and refusing to submit to their godly discipline. This has been evidenced by continuing divisions among us, often over matters unconnected with allegiance to Scriptural truth.”

This is a part of the Call with which I am not completely comfortable.  The movement obviously faces issues with authority, but I think the Call paints the CHM with too broad of a brush.  I do not question the fact that there are those within the movement who have exhibited a spirit of autonomy and rebellion.  There are those whose self-serving ways and arrogant love for their own opinion has indeed spawned unnecessary division and bred much confusion.   I have watched with sadness as people have violated their word, ignored standards of ethical behavior, and broken membership vows while barely masking their obstinacy.  We have all met an Absalom, an Adonijah or a Diotrephes who would not heed any counsel but their own or follow any path but one of their own making.  But honestly, this has been the exception rather than the rule. On the contrary, most of the conservatives I know are more than willing to be led and are actually looking for leadership.  They are quite willing to take very unpopular stands and live out countercultural lifestyles in obedience to their church and conscience.  I see very little evidence that would indict them as rebels against Biblical authority or Biblically ordained authorities.  This of course is my perception, but I believe it to be a fair one.

Rather than seeing them as rebels, I see something that may be construed as rebellion.  I see confused, frustrated, and at times angry souls who are weary with leaders more willing to bow to church politics and fear than to lead with Biblical conviction and common sense. This weakness in leadership can and does produce reluctant and sometimes resistant followers, but none that should be called rebels.  I see church attendees, both young and old, who lack a proper understanding of Biblical authority.   I also see something else.  I see a generational difference in how authority is viewed and understood.   A failure to understand this generational difference may lead to labeling sincere, sanctified  people  as “rebels” who are only following their conscience and understanding as best as they can.

 A Biblical Understanding of Authority in the Church

            The concept of authority has fallen on bad times over the last few decades.  In some places if you just say the word people react negatively.  This should not surprise anyone since we have had a sad parade of politicians, policemen, professors, pastors and priests who have abused their authority and betrayed those who served under them. This abuse of authority has bred a culture of cynicism and suspicion.  It has created an environment where good authority, God’s authority, is regularly questioned.  The cure is not to abandon the important role of authority in our culture but to carefully proclaim what God says in His Word about authority.  My comments in this article are limited to authority in the church.

The classic passage quoted in the Call and in most other discussions on church authority is Hebrews 13:17a – “Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account. . . .”   This is a powerful principle that serious Christians seek to follow. It is also one that has been so terribly abused that it needs clarification.  First, no preacher, teacher or leader by virtue of their calling has been granted an inherent right to rule over other people.  When I was ordained, I was given the authority “to preach the Word and administer the sacraments.”  The only authority that any pastor, teacher or church leader has is the delegated authority that comes through the Word of God and relates to the “spiritual guidance and soul safety” of those under his responsibility.  (Read Wesley’s Sermon On Obedience to Pastors.)

Secondly, the application of Hebrews 13:17 applies only to those leaders who are faithful.  All through Scripture we are warned to beware of false teachers and false shepherds. How do you judge the false from the true? You judge them by their fidelity to the Word of God, both in what they say and how they live.  Those who teach the Word faithfully and live it faithfully deserve our respect and obedience.  The pastor or leader who claims authority based on his position, or seeks to make his opinion equivalent to scripture, or tries to use religion and false guilt to make one conform to his will is completely out of line with his Biblical authority.

Thirdly, the NT does not describe the kind of church organizations we have today.  This does not mean it opposes today’s denominational structures, it just means that it primarily sees the visible church as a local community of believers led by a body of elders and deacons.  However, it does speak quite forcefully to the issues of order, authority, submission, discipline and accountability.   A person who has willingly joined a church or denomination and has given their pledge to obey the rules of membership ought to do so. They should honor and obey those in leadership and submit to the accountability and discipline of the church as outlined in the Scripture and the covenant of membership.  If they fail to do so or at some point decide not to do so, they should willingly and quietly withdraw from membership.

Church Authority and Generational Differences

The Greatest and Silent Generations  

            Christians born in the first half of the 20th century are referred to as the Greatest (1902-1924) and Silent (1925-1945) generations.  They were born into what is called the “modern era.” Their way of thinking and subsequently their worldview primarily reflects “modernity.”  They have an innate trust for the institutions of government, education and religion.  They highly value rules for morality, decency and conformity.  Issues of right and wrong fall easily and distinctly into black and white categories. They understand the way the traditional church works, see membership as important and think nothing of just doing whatever the church or church manual says.  They do not need exhaustive exegesis or detailed explanations for demands placed upon them. This is not to say that they do not think, it is only to say that these generations accept the rules without the need for “proof” or “explanation” because they believe in and trust the church and its leadership!  Even in areas they personally do not understand or do not fully agree, they are willing to go along and do what the church or pastor says because they trust the authority structures and believe it is important to obey and conform to what they are told.

As this way of thinking worked its way out in the more conservative churches, there developed a subtle emphasis on conforming to “group cultural rules of conduct.”  Conformity became more of a priority than the development of vital piety based on scriptural reflection.  Living the rules with no grasp of the principle behind them became far too common.  This resulted in at least two things worthy of observation: (1) Externals became the focus or “proof” of real heart change; (2) It became far too easy to “look right” and thus “be right” without any internalization of character or sound Biblical understanding of why they did what they did. I hope this will not be misunderstood as an indictment of insincerity or an accusation of hypocrisy – it is not!  It is an attempt to explain how this generation tended to think and act.  I do not question their earnest desire to please God!

This is the generation that pulled out of the Mainline Holiness Denominations and formed what is now called the Conservative Holiness Movement.  This is the generation that embraced without question and lived without fear what their leaders and churches had taught them.  When the Mother Church started changing values that had been held for decades, this generation voted with their feet and left the church.  I believe their actions were rooted in two things: their convictions and their culture.  Neither root is necessarily connected to rebellion.  Were there rebels who opposed the authority of the church and who were involved in the “come out”?  Of course!  But the vast majority of come outers were men and women of godly character who were simply standing by the things they had been taught.

The Boomer, Buster and Millennial Generations

By the late 1960s and early ‘70s America had fully made a dramatic shift from the “modern era” to the “post-modern” era.    The second generation of conservative holiness people (Boomers) was influenced by both modern and post-modern thought.  You can see the influence of both in the way they think and act.  The third and fourth generations of conservatives were primarily influenced by post-modernism.  Post-modern Christians think quite differently from those in the modern generation.  The post-modern generation does not have a natural trust of the institutions of government, education and church.  On the contrary, they have a deep suspicion of these institutions and the power they wield.  They reject “blind acceptance” of anything to the point of being cynical.  They grew up in the “advertising age” and learned quickly you could not believe what you read on the cereal box or heard from the media.  They look at all unsupported assertions with suspicion — especially those given in church.  They do not simply swallow what is taught or preached. They ask questions and want answers. Just because the preacher says it is wrong doesn’t make it wrong for them.  They want a clear, intellectually defensible, Biblical answer.  If answers are not forthcoming, they reject the assertions.  A large number of the early post-moderns were lost to the church because some leaders tragically confused “questions about Biblical truth” with “questioning the truth of the Bible” and classified them as compromisers or rebels.

The post-modern Christian rejects the carefully “air-brushed, compartmentalized, and rote cookie-cutter religious expressions of the previous generations.”   They prefer religious spontaneity and authenticity over mere appearances.  This has caused a post-modern generation to be slow in accepting all the traditional life-style values and standards of the conservative holiness movement.  It’s not that they reject Biblical values, but rather they reject “cookie-cutter” conformity for the sake of just “looking the part” or fitting in to the culture.  They want to know the reason and see the value of the thing they are being asked to do.  I don’t believe they have rejected the traditional values because those values lack veracity but because they have been given without explanation and applied without flexible common sense.  Parents whose post-modern kids grew up in complete conformity to these values while at home are shocked when those same kids jettison those standards after leaving home.  It some cases the rejection flows from a rebellious worldly heart, but in many cases it does not.  It flows from a heart that is seeking spiritual authenticity and from a mind that wants intellectual “buy in.”

Addressing the Problem

            Rebellion is a strong word and should be used wisely.  True rebellion against proper authority reveals a deeper rejection of God’s authority and should be treated as such. That’s why the Bible compares it to the sin of witchcraft and idolatry.  Only the Holy Spirit can root out rebellion and replace it with submission by a radical change of one’s heart.  However, if we are dealing with generational ways of thinking, then we need to understand and respond accordingly.  Christians of all generations desire authenticity.  Authenticity begins with honesty.  We must be honest with who we are, honest about our biases and prejudices, and honest in our interpretation and application of scripture.  Authenticity continues with a willingness to differentiate between what is scripture and what is tradition, what is principle and what is preference – clarifying the role of both.  However, authenticity also means that we refuse to conform to any cultural thought that is wrong but that we confront “unbiblical thinking” in every generation with the Word of God.

Romans 12:1-2 offers some remarkable insight:  “I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is your reasonable service.  And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.”   We can only replace bad thinking with biblical thinking by the faithful application of the Word of God.  The Holy Spirit can enlighten the mind with Biblical truth and change any way of thinking that does not align itself with God’s point of view. The Holy Spirit can also discern between resistance to generational thinking and acting and rebellion to Biblically ordained authority.  If real rebellion is present, then repentance and the relinquishment of self to God in holy surrender is the only cure for the rebel within.   We must have both, the radical change of hearts and the renewing of the mind, if we are to effectively deal with the problem of authority in this generation and in the ones to come.

A Return to Disciplined Spirituality

by Mike Avery, posted in All Articles, Christian Living, Church, Theology

– April 2012

A Return to Disciplined Spirituality

The Call to the Conservative Holiness Movement’s Article V is a call to return to the principled piety that was fundamental to historic Methodism’s success in spiritual formation. John Wesley’s approach to the cultivation of holy character was nothing more than the methodical application of the ordinary means of grace that the Bible says are central to spiritual health and growth.  Wesley defined the means of grace as the instruments appointed by God to “convey to men, preventing, justifying, and sanctifying grace.”  Wesley’s list of these means included: Scripture, prayer, the Lord’s Supper, fellowship and fasting.

For some in the CHM, a call to reach into the treasures of our past is a call in the wrong direction.  The assumption is that “everything has changed” therefore new approaches to the development of spiritual life are needed. I would dispute both parts of that equation.  I readily acknowledge the constant change in the culture around us but I firmly assert that basic human nature has not changed.  Thus the fundamental human problem has not changed. Neither has the Biblical solution to that problem changed nor has the effectiveness of that solution changed. Faith still comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God.  The ordinary means of grace are just as effective in today’s 21st century church (if given a chance) as they were in those first Mediterranean house churches established by Paul centuries ago.

The CHM should not let go of its historic approach to the development of spiritual character.  What it does need to do is to work on applying it with a better balance between discipline and dependence.  It is easy to slip into the extreme of either approach.  The extreme side of discipline is to overemphasize the role of what we do to cultivate spiritual life.  This position is characterized by the mentality of striving.  It emphasizes knowledge, rules, re-dedication efforts, and human activity while virtually ignoring God’s grace extended through the enabling power of His Spirit. Its emphasis on “what-do-I-need-to-do” can lead to the bondage of legalism. On the other hand, the extreme side of dependence is to overemphasize God’s role in our spiritual development to the neglect of any human initiative.  This position is characterized by a “Jesus-did-it-all passivity.”  It stresses experience, the supernatural, and the person of the Holy Spirit to the neglect of human endeavor.  The one side rolls up its sleeves and says, “God helps those who help themselves.”  The other side responds with, “It’s all by grace.”  The CHM has generally fallen into the ditch of the former but is now showing signs of falling into the ditch of the latter.

The Biblical answer to this imbalance is that spiritual formation is both human and divine.  Kenneth Boa stated it succinctly when he said that “discipline should work in concert with dependence, since grace is not opposed to effort but to earning.”  Paul places these elements back to back in Philippians 2:12-13:  “So then, my beloved, …work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; for it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure.”  Paul makes it clear that working out our salvation is not the same as working for it.  He is also careful to balance this with the fact that God is active within us, accomplishing what all our learning and labor cannot.

The CHM must also guard diligently against the danger of just practicing the means of grace as an end in themselves.   The “doing” of certain spiritual practices can create a subtle carnal smugness. The means of grace are never an end but merely the instruments through which God administers His grace.   The means of grace were not given to satisfy our sense of “doing” but to transform us from the inside out!  One can read the Bible faithfully yet fail to demonstrate the character it commends. One can be meticulous about his prayer time yet fail to ever really pray or experience the oneness of true intercession.  One can kneel at the altar to receive the elements as ritual only and completely miss the reality of His presence. Wesley warned about following the outward signs only without our hearts being renewed and enabled by the Holy Spirit.

Alan Redpath wisely noted that the conversion of a soul is the miracle of a moment, but the maturing into a great saint is the task of a lifetime.  Our Methodist Fathers understood this and modeled for us the art of disciplined spirituality like no one else in the last 100 years.   It’s our heritage – it should be our practice—it may be key to our renewal!

Holiness

by Mike Avery, posted in All Articles, Christian Living, Church, Ministry, Theology

– March 2012

Holiness

I was sitting in the barber’s chair when my barber, Tony, asked me what I was working on that day.  I told him I was writing.  He asked me what I was writing about.  I told him I was writing on the subject of “holiness.”   He grew very quiet and finally said, “That’s a subject nobody talks about.  Of all the things that get talked about in here I have never heard anybody talk about holiness”.

Tony is right. Purity and moral excellence is certainly not in the top ten lists of today’s societal values.  The media will only talk about it when they have the opportunity to mock a morally decent person as a hypocrite– otherwise the subject is just too boring.  Movies typically cast the morally upright as some “out of touch simpleton” whose attempts to do the right thing are valued only for a few laughs.  Sadly, most people have never heard a sound, scriptural discussion on holy living – not even in church.

The subject of holiness desperately needs to be re-discovered and re-introduced into the culture and values of America.  That process should begin in the church.  The practical presentation of holiness has long since been cast out of the pulpits and publishing houses of the people that made it a household word in America – the Methodists.  Actually, many of the twentieth century holiness groups (descendants of Methodism) have also de-emphasized the message or abandoned it altogether in their quest for respectability and acceptance at the table with mainstream evangelicals.  It is true that Evangelicalism has become the dominant expression of Christianity in America.  But it is also true that the moral and spiritual life of the nation has collapsed while embracing its flimsy offers of cheap grace, the promise of heaven no matter how you live and the disgusting doctrinal conclusions that Christians are just “saved sinners” who are far from “perfect” but are “forgiven” nonetheless. It shouldn’t surprise any of us when surveys show that there is almost no difference at all in the core values between the churched and the unchurched in America!  What is missing?  Holiness!

The Biblical call to holiness leaves no room for Christians who want to coddle sin and live in a state of perpetual immaturity and worldliness.  Not only does scriptural holiness teach that Christians can be liberated from willful sin and empowered to live lives of obedience to Christ; it also teaches that the Christian can be cleansed from the inner propensity to rebellion, selfishness and pride through the work of the Holy Spirit.  A holy life is a life where spiritual and moral character is taking root and being lived out in a sensible, upright and godly way.

This is the message that birthed the Wesleyan Revival, took 19th century America by storm and raised the level of social and moral concern on two continents!  The post-Civil War holiness revival impacted numerous denominations in America and influenced many Christian Leaders outside the Methodist holiness tradition.  Oswald Chambers, a Scottish Baptist, was significantly affected both spiritually and theologically by his association with the American holiness movement.  In his popular devotional My Utmost for His Highest he wrote, “Continually restate to yourself what the purpose of your life is. The destined end of man is not happiness, nor health, but holiness….God has one destined end for mankind, viz., holiness. Never tolerate through sympathy with yourself or with others any practice that is not in keeping with a holy God. Holiness means unsullied walking with the feet, unsullied talking with the tongue, unsullied thinking with the mind – every detail of the life under the scrutiny of God.”

Many in the broader holiness movement today would be embarrassed by Chambers words.  They would see them as extreme, maybe even hypocritical.  However, there is still a clear witness to the historic message of scriptural holiness!  The Francis Asbury Society is a strong voice among Methodists. The mainline holiness groups still have a few scholars, pastors and laity who aren’t ashamed to lift the torch for scriptural holiness. The most welcoming home for the holiness message is among the Conservative Holiness Movement.  They write it in their church disciplines, teach it in their Bible Colleges, preach it in their pulpits, editorialize it in their periodicals, celebrate it in their testimonies, and emphasize it in their conventions.  For the most part, the CHM is strongly committed to the message of holiness.

However, providing the message of scriptural holiness a home and keeping it healthy are not one and the same.   The Call to the Conservative Holiness Movement addresses this in Article V.  The Call points out certain weaknesses that can and will undermine the message.  Let me enumerate some of my own concerns with the CHM’s stewardship of the holiness message.

I am concerned about legalism.  That scriptural holiness has behavioral and lifestyle ramifications cannot be argued: external matters are not unimportant. But when we turn our primary focus away from the heart and onto externals (usually particular standards of dress or modes of behavior) we are in danger of reducing holy virtue to custom and thereby trivializing both.

I am concerned about “works righteousness.”  Holiness people take the formation of moral and spiritual character seriously. However, the balance between God’s work in us and our work in forming holy habits can get out of balance more easily than one might think.  God graciously invites us to work in cooperation with the Holy Spirit through a variety of spiritual disciplines appropriate to our need, but it is always God at work in us. We have nothing that has not been given to us by the Holy Spirit.  All holiness is God’s holiness in us! The temptation to believe that any progress forward is somehow our own doing can be a very real problem.  The tendency to believe that careful obedience to Biblical principles or personal adherence to codes or cultures of lifestyle somehow earns merit or standing with God is a subtle form of pride that must be rooted out. Andrew Murray reminds us that, “There is no pride so dangerous, none so subtle and insidious, as the pride of holiness.”  Deep devotion to Christ and careful attention to righteous living must be motivated by loving obedience or we will fall into the ditch of works righteousness.

I am concerned about perfectionism.  Holy people have not attained a state of “sinless perfection” that renders them incapable of any wrong action. Holiness involves both purity and maturity.  There is still much room for growth in the sanctified life.  Holy habits deepen into fixed patterns of living as we learn to walk in the Spirit.  We can and do make many mistakes.  There may be times when our attitudes or actions are simply wrong. When that happens we should, in good old honest humility, exercise repentance, make amends and learn from our failures. We never learn from failures denied. Only by seeing them, admitting them, and mending them in total meekness will we follow Peter’s admonition to “grow in grace and the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” (2 Peter 3:18).  This is how holy people respond to failure.  However, perfectionism cuts us off from our essential humanity, forcing us to deny who and what we really are, or to downplay or outright deny what we have done.  When this happens we are simply pretending we are something we are not, and such duplicitous behavior is destructive.   True holiness is not the breeding ground for pretentious behavior or self-righteousness.  Rather it is the womb in which honesty and humility are nurtured.

I am concerned about message drift.  There is a certain amount of tension and balance in which every Biblical truth must be held.  The same is certainly true of the call to holiness.  The balance wheel for holiness is unadulterated love for God and others.  If holiness loses that balance, it will become a crotchety, sterile, loveless way of rules and regulations that values law over love.  One ends up behaving like the Priest who valued unsullied hands for temple service more than helping the wounded Samaritan out of the ditch.  It can also go the other direction and become nothing more than a mental ascent to a positional sanctification that is void of any real sanctity.  The theological concept of being “in Christ” is reduced to nothing more than a convenient semantic cover-up for a life of sin and failure.   I fear both extremes.  Scriptural holiness will not take you down either path.

I am concerned about isolation. The CHM has made valiant attempts to honor the Biblical call to separation from the world but has simply become isolated from the world thereby hiding its candle under a bushel.  The message of holiness needs to be lived out loudly in the market place of life and we are the people to do it!  It needs to be broadcast over the Web, printed in books and argued as the path to true happiness for individuals and families.

My barber is right.  You don’t hear talk about holiness in the barber shops, bakeries or board rooms of America.   But the day will come when “Holiness unto the Lord” will resound throughout the earth and be part of an eternal conversation by those who have “pursued that holiness without which no man will see the Lord.”  I want to be one who promotes the conversation now – don’t you?