The Spirit Of The Game

I have to confess that I am a cricket addict, it doesn't matter who is on I'll be watching. So you can imagine my excitement at this time of the summer as the Ashes rolls around. I suspect that even if you aren't that into cricket it has invaded your consciousness over the past few days due to the incident involving England wicketkeeper Jonny Bairstow.

For those of you who haven't heard, there was controversy when Jonny Bairstow, assuming the ball to not be in play anymore wondered from his crease and was promptly stumped by the Australian wicketkeeper Alex Carey. The controversy doesn't surround if Bairstow was in or out everyone agrees that he was out, according to the laws of the game, the controversy surrounds if what Carey and the Australian team did was within the "spirit of the game".

Cricket has always considered itself a gentleman's game, where if you nick the ball to the wicketkeeper you walk, if the ball goes for a boundary you signal it and somehow what the Australians did it was felt went against this "spirit of the game."

What has transpired in the past few days has been nothing short of astounding. The Prime Minister of the United Kingdom Rishi Sunak weighed in declaring that what Australia had done was against the spirit of the game, a few of the quotes from the England players have stood out to me though.

Stuart Broad, the England bowler in a column for the Daily Mail said this:

I was angered by Australia’s decision, particularly having heard their lines about creating a new legacy as a team, and how they have changed since the tour of South Africa in 2018.

Fair enough you might be tempted to think, here is an England player seeking to uphold the spirit of the game, that is until you remember that Stuart wasn't so keen to uphold the spirit of the game when he refused to walk after nicking the ball to slip twice. Or there was the reaction of England head coach Brendon McCullum who said that England would have chosen not to uphold their appeal and therefore Bairstow would have been declared not out. That again sounds good and very sporting but yet again when we consider McCullum's history when he controversially ran out a Sri Lankan player celebrating a team mates hundred it begins to ring a bit hollow. Perhaps the England team itself can be held up to be bastions of the so called spirit of the game...or perhaps not, consider the world cup final when Stokes deflected the ball over the boundary for four crucial runs from a throw. Surely the spirit of the game would have said well next ball we won't play a shot but of course with the game on the line that couldn't be done.

Perhaps we should consider the run out of Colin DeGrandhomme in similar circumstances last year again the appeal was not withdrawn again similarly in a one day international v New Zealand when Ryan Sidebottom an England bowler ran into the New Zealand batsman who was subsequently run out the appeal was not withdrawn.

Now what is the point in all this? Well quite simply this is how we often try and deal with God isn't it? Like the England cricket team we might say we have done some bad things but we aren't as bad as the person down the road, we aren't as bad as the worst of the worst and therefore actually because we aren't as bad as them then God will tolerate our sin.

The problem comes though when we realise that God's standard isn't the Australian cricket team, it isn't our friend down the road, but God's standard is perfection and if we are honest we all know that we have fallen far short of that standard of perfection. We all know that we have done things that aren't right, we all know that we have said things that are hurtful and we all know in our heart of hearts that we fail to meet that standard.

Yet thats the good news of the gospel, that there is one who is perfect, there is one who has always done what is right, there is one who was good and kind and true. Jesus came and laid down his life so that through faith in Him, His perfection could be our perfection, his obedience could be our obedience. Dont settle for comparing yourself to someone else but rather come to know Jesus as your saviour and know His perfect obedience for yourself today.

Book Review: Devoted To God's Church Sinclair B. Ferguson

 

I bought this book just after Christmas with some gift vouchers someone in the congregation had kindly given me and it is quite simply a superb little book. Sinclair Ferguson authored a book a few years ago entitled "Devoted to God" which was essentially a manual on discipleship, this volume with a similar name instead focuses on how as Christians we are called to be devoted to God's church. It is a very timely book given the current situation we find ourselves in with churches being largely online, with very little accountability on attendance or not, but also in an age where church attendance in general is declining this book is a helpful counter to that.

There are 11 chapters in the book each focusing on slightly different aspects of the life of the gathered church, ranging from mission to preaching to prayer. I have to say the chapter i found most helpful was the first chapter and the simple focus Ferguson had on just showing up to church. The contrast he draws out with the Rotary club membership is fascinating. If you are a member of the Rotary club the constitution states that you have to be there, you have to make up missed meetings somewhere else or face the consequences. If that is true of something as insignificant as the Rotary club then surely how much more seriously should we take church attendance and participation? This was a tremendous tonic to the current climate in which people struggle to commit or if they do commit it will only be to a very limited amount of time and energy.

This book isn't a long read, only 180 odd pages and it is interwoven with some very helpful, very down to earth illustrations which bring home the truths to the reader in a very relatable way. The call to be devoted to God's church is one that as followers of Jesus we all need to take seriously and this book will help us along the road to that devotion.

The book can be purchased here

How Long O LORD?

 How long? A question we have found ourselves asking a lot of late isn't it? How much longer will I have to homeschool for? How much longer before I can get back to work? How much longer will this lockdown last? How much longer will I have to wait until I can get the vaccine? How long until everything is back to normal? 

Maybe you have been asking some spiritual questions of a similar nature? How long before we are back together as a church? How much longer before we can sing together? Its been a year of deep frustration for many of us and a year I dont think many of us could have imagined living through and at the heart of it has been this frustration with that question of how long?

The Psalmist has a fairly similar experience in Psalm 13 in fact he asks exactly the same question how long O LORD? How long will you forget me? How long will you hide your face from me? It is easy in the situation we are in at the moment to feel that way isn't it? To feel like the LORD has forgotten us, to feel helpless and hopeless.

We get a sense of the Psalmists problem in v.2 where he asks the question how long shall my enemy be exalted over me? Yet what solution does the Psalmist offer? Well we see that in v.5 he trusts in the steadfast love of the LORD, the covenant love that the LORD has for his people and because of that his heart can rejoice in the salvation of the LORD, he can sing to the LORD because he has dealt bountifully with me.

As he looks around the Psalmist sees reasons for despair, he sees foes prospering, he sees his own weakness, he sees the sorrow in his heart, he sees his enemies prevailing over him. As we look around it is easy to see reasons for despair, the mounting deaths associated directly or indirectly with COVID 19, we see the wicked prospering, we can see and sense our own weakness.

The solution to the question of how long isn't to look around but its to look up, to remind ourselves of the covenant love of the LORD which never fails, to see the steadfast love of the LORD displayed on the cross through his son Jesus Christ, truly in the midst of asking how long will it be until we can say I will sing to the LORD because despite what I can see around me at the moment he has dealt bountifully with me.

There is an excellent modern rendition of this Psalm which can be found at:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WaMPbjkprQ0

Book Review "Therefore The Truth I Speak" Donald MacLeod

I posted an extract from Donald MacLeod's new book the other day in a blog trying to explain why the government couldn't unilaterally force churches to close but now that I have finished the book I thought it might be a good idea to post a fuller review of the whole book.

This book is a gem of a book, people today deride history newer is better there are no lessons to be learned from the people of the past, but MacLeod in this volume illustrates why that is so foolish. The characters in this book may be from 1500-1700 but the lessons the issues they are facing could well be taken from 21st Century church history, what role does the state have in the church? When is it right to listen to the king and when is it right to disobey him?

The book is a relatively straightforward read, Donald MacLeod writes in a way that is academic but it is accessible for the interested, this volume isn't as scholarly as say MacLeod's "The Person Of Christ" but it does not lack scholarly rigour.

Each chapter takes a person from the period of time and works through the lessons that they taught the church at the time and what those lessons might mean for us in the church today. Figures covered include Patrick Hamilton and George Wishart, John Knox, Andrew Melville, Robert Bruce, Alexander Henderson, Samuel Rutherford, David Dickson and Robert Leighton. Interspersed with historical sketches other more topical chapters are written including on Federal Theology, the impact of Rutherford's Lex Rex and the Second Book of Discipline. 

This book is no hagiography the charachters dealt with are dealt with fairly their good points are emphasised but by no means are there flaws hidden. What you come away from this book with is a sense of the importance of Scottish Theology on the whole presbyterian church worldwide, with a sense of the deep peity of the men and women involved and the cost associated with being a presbyterian in Scotland in 1500-1700, most of the characters studied ended up deposed, in prison, or killed for their faith.

If you would like to buy a copy of the book you can find it here:

Evangelical Bookshop

Is Online Church Really Church?

  Your Facebook feed, like mine has probably been inundated recently with images like this, ministers recording sermons for Youtube having the most embarrassing thumbnails created. It has been amazing to see the way that the church has responded to the Covid19 crisis and things that seemed impossible or unthinkable six months ago are now commonplace. Yet with the restrictions on worship being lifted in the U.K. at least it got me thinking about the issue of what church is.

Fundamentally the church is a gathering...its a group of people, however big or small coming together to praise and worship God and to encourage one another in our walk with God. The classic proof text of this is of course Hebrews 10:25,

    "not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near." (E.S.V.)

Now we should be clear here and say that this verse in context was written to a group of Christians who were tempted to turn their back on Jesus and go back to the Old Covenant way of doing things, the letter is written to encourage them to cling to Christ and not to go back. So we cant just take this verse and say you see every church should be meeting this Sunday because its a clear command of God. Yet this verse does help us because its clear that meeting together should be the norm for Christian people, why? So that we can encourage one another, so that we can spur one another on towards love and good deeds. The Christian life lived in isolation is a difficult life, the Christian life in isolation will be a struggle, will be a Christian life where we remain blind to our own sins and difficulties.

Yet this isn't the only text in the bible that speaks about Churches, yet I cant find a reference to church in my bible where it is to an individual, there may be small churches, there may be house churches but an individual, one person church, is an oxymoron.

Which brings us back to online church and the question if it is really church or not? This is where I am struggling because i am not sure that it is, it is impossible to gather online in any meaningful way, we can watch the same sermon, we can listen to the same songs at roughly the same time but thats not the same as church in my opinion. We can zoom afterwards to our hearts content but that isn't the same as looking someone in the eye, as seeing their movements and their body language.

I wonder if we are so reluctant to return to church services because online church is so much easier? Its nice to sit in our pyjamas with a cup of tea and watch, its nice to be able to pause and rewind as a child screams about something insignificant but friends we are missing out on so much by not being able to meet together. 

Two Kings In Two Kingdoms

I have recently been reading and enjoying Donald MacLeod's latest book on the theology and theologians of Scotland. Like yours my social media newsfeed has been full in recent days of the discussion of churches closing during the latest wave of the Covid19 pandemic. This follows on from the Scottish Government's unilateral decision that churches on mainland Scotland would close, with very little consultation with the churches involved. It also follows on from the Northern Ireland executive decision to discuss with churches today (Wednesday 6th January) the possibility of moving church services back online again.




This is where MacLeod's book helps us understand what is going on and especially his discussion on Andrew Melville, in it we are reminded that when Melville speaking to king James said this,




"Sir, we will always humbly reverence your majesty in public; but since we have this occasion to be with your majesty in private, and since you are brought in extreme danger both of your life and crown, and along with you the country and the church of God or like to go to wreck, for not telling you the truth and giving you faithful counsel, we must discharge our duty, or else be traitors both to Christ and you. Therefore, Sir, as diverse times before I have told you so now again I must tell you, there are two kings and two kingdoms in Scotland: there is King James the head of this commonwealth, and there is Christ Jesus the King of the church, whose subject James the sixth is, and of whose kingdom he is not a king, nor a lord, nor a head, but a member. Sir, those whom Christ has called and commanded to watch over his church, have power and authority from him to govern his spiritual kingdom both jointly and severally; the which no Christian king or prince should control and discharge, but fortify and assist; otherwise they are not faithful subjects of Christ and members of his church. We will yield to you your place, and give you all due obedience; but again I say, you are not the head of the church: you cannot give us that eternal life which we seek for even in this world, you cannot deprive us of it.'




The bit in bold is the famous bit and the bit that helps us understand the current situation but I thought it was worth quoting in a fuller way. The legacy that Melville and Melvillian Presbyterianism has left us is what has become known as the two kingdoms. There is a legitimate kingdom over which the civil magistrate, in this case the king, in our case parliament has a rule but that kingdom is not the church of Christ. We as citizens of that kingdom owe allegiance to the rules and powers and authorities of that kingdom so far as its reach extends. Yet this civil power does not rule over the church, therefore the government cannot tell churches to close, they cannot compel churches to close, they can ask, they can advise, they can make it difficult for us to meet, they can even make it illegal for us to meet but as the church we must make the final decision. Will we meet as Christians or not? Will we gather as the church or not? Will we choose as the Covenanters did to meet in fields, in barns and risk persecution, fines, arrest and imprisonment?

This is where the fundamental difference between Northern Irish and Scottish governments arises, I think both will end at the same place with churches offering only online worship, but the Northern Irish government didn't impose this restriction, they talked to the church, and no doubt threatened that if compliance wasn't forthcoming then it would be compulsory. Yet the Scottish government acted unilaterally reaching beyond their powers over the church of Christ.

Now I fully accept that different Christians will come to different answers over this, some seeing the severity of the current situation will gladly move online for a season to help us get over this hump, others will say that if the church cannot preach Christ, eternity and the good news of the gospel in the midst of a global pandemic when will they preach it?




Friends let us deal with one another in charity and love, let us speak well of one another and let us look to the day when we will all worship the Lamb together around the throne of grace.

Book Review: Finding The Right Hills To Die On

I am grateful to crossway and Netgalley.com for an advance review copy of this book. This is a short little book but it is an excellent book in every way. Ortlund sets out the premise that we need theological triage in our day, just as a doctor arriving at an accident would prioritise which patient to treat so we too in days of decline in the Western Church need to know what doctrines should and shouldn't stop us from working with other Christians.



Ortlund does this helpfully by setting out three categories of doctrine, those which every Christian should hold to and which are essential to the Christian faith, the examples of this that he sights are the Virgin Birth and justification through faith alone, helpfully he reminds us that not being able to articulate justification through faith alone at the moment of conversion is a very different category from a believer who knows and denies the doctrine. We should be gentle with the one and perhaps less gentle with the other.



The second category that Ortlund identifies are important doctrines over which Christians may legitimately disagree but which are not essential to the faith. The most common example he cites for this is the practice of baptism either creedobaptism or peadobaptism. Christians throughout history have disagreed on this subject have disagreed on the method and mode of baptism. This is a cause Ortlund argues to divide the church because to not do so would be disingenuous. To be united using a doctrinal minimalism would be confusing both for the ledership and the congregation. However helpfully he calls us back to remember that separation from each other doesn't mean that we are called to throw rocks at one another rather we are called to love one another and look out for one another good even in the midst of difference.





The third category that Ortlund cites are things which have traditionally been called things indifferent, things that are important because they are revealed to us in God's word but things on which salvation doesn't hinge. The examples cited for this are the seven days of Genesis 1 and the thousand years of Revelation 20.




I think the beauty of this book is that it doesn't give any answers, in fact it causes more questions as I read the book I began almost doing my own theological triage, well is the role of women in the church a first order thing or a second order thing as he argues? Do the seven days of Genesis 1 belong in category three or category two? As you read these are the questions you ask and this causes you to question and engage with your own theology that little bit more.



In short, given the days we are living in, given the smallness of many churches certainly in the UK our doctrinal distinctive are becoming less important, we are going to have perform this theological triage more and more often. We are going to have to think well is planting a church of our denomination in a town that has four other gospel churches important or should we go to the area that has no gospel witness at all? You might think the answer to that is straightforward but until we perform this theological triage, until we keep the main thing the main thing sadly the answer may not be as striaght forward as you might hope.



This book serves as the antidote to that thinking, this book calls us to keep the main things the main things and to rejoice in gospel difference when we see it. Every Christian should read this book.