WEIGHTIER MATTERS

An Essay Concerning the Tendency of Conservative Presbyterians, And the American Church At-Large, to Neglect Ministries of Justice and Mercy

Part 1 of 4

by Ben Aalbers M.Div., M.A.

Revelation 3:14–22

“To the angel of the church of Laodicea write: These are the words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the ruler of God’s creation.  I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot.  I wish you were either one or the other!  So, because you are luke-warm – neither hot nor cold – I am about to spit you out of my mouth.  You say, ‘I am rich; I have acquired wealth and do not need a thing.’ But you do not realize that you are wretched, pitiful, poor, blind and naked.  I counsel you to buy from me gold refined in the fire, so you can become rich; and white clothes to wear, so you can cover your shameful nakedness; and salve to put on your eyes, so you can see.  Those whom I love I rebuke and discipline.  So be earnest, and repent.  Here I am!  I stand at the door and knock.  If anyone hears my voice an opens the door, I will come in and eat with him, and he with me.  To him who overcomes, I will give the right to sit with me on my throne, just as I overcame and sat down with my Father on his throne.  He who has ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.” 

-        Words of warning and hope spoken by Christ, the faithful and true witness, to the church of Laodicea, who, like the American church, believed she was the “richest” church of her day.

Part One

Although I affirm that the true church of Christ has always included members of the Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant traditions, I’m especially glad that I belong to the reformed branch of the Protestant tradition because, historically, two of our guiding doctrines have been sola Scriptura (Scripture alone) and semper reformada (always reforming).  This means we recognize that our theology and practice will never be perfectly biblical so we must continually return to Scripture as our sole standard (sola Scriptura) in our never-ending need to reform (semper reformada) our theology and praxis to make them more Godly.  These two doctrines are very important because they serve to both protect and correct the church.   They protect us from something the church is prone to in every generation - the habit of defining righteousness according to strict, extra biblical standards.  A good example of this is when Sheldon Vanauken, author of A Severe Mercy, returned to American after studying abroad only to discover that his American brothers and sisters in Christ were certain that drinking alcohol was unchristian-like behavior.   Sheldon, who became a Christian while studying at Oxford and often went to the local pub with C.S. Lewis, couldn’t figure out where they got the notion that drinking alcohol was a sin because it certainly was not prohibited in the Bible[1].  I’m sure you can think of many other extra-biblical standards that are prevalent in the church today but this essay, however, is going to focus on the correcting rather than the protecting aspect of these two principles.  

If you’ve ever attended various churches for any length of time, you know that each church, or denomination, seems to concentrate on different aspects of faith or even different portions of Scripture.   For example, some churches in West Virginia really focus on the last couple of verses in the book of Mark and thus during the service you may find yourself holding a hymnal in one hand and a rattlesnake in the other.   Other churches provide an hour during services so that members can corporately share what they feel has been a prophecy that God has given them.   This begs the question ‘Where do we as conservative Presbyterian’s focus?’  We focus where 95% of all conservative, American, Protestant Churches focus — at the pulpit.  We center on the preaching of the word[2].   I know we worship through song and we might even participate in a time of corporate sharing but most of our time is spent hearing the preached word.   Studying Scripture has also dominated our time of small group and individual spiritual cultivation.   Yet despite all of our time and effort spent concentrating on Scripture the lifestyles of American Christians are essentially indistinguishable from those of non-Christians.  This is most evident when comparing attitudes and practices between believers and nonbelievers concerning money and material possessions[3].   New Testament scholar Craig Blomberg notes, “In most affluent or suburban Western communities, it is impossible to detect any outward differences between the expenditures of professing Christians and the religiously unaffiliated who surround them in their neighborhoods[4].”  Our fruitlessness is not due to the moral inertia of the Clinton administration nor the liberal media — two popular whipping posts for evangelical Christians.  We must never believe that the ungodly behavior of those outside the Church is responsible for the immoral behavior in the Church.  Nor must we believe that God is unable to bless his people due to the immorality of the culture in which they live.  I propose that one of the reasons, if not the most significant reason, why we bear little fruit is because God will not bless the American church when it is unwilling to sacrifice for the purpose of providing justice and mercy for the defenseless and needy.  We must at least partially assume that the power of our prayers for growth and blessing is severely diminished due to our neglect.[5]  This is where the principle of correction comes in.   We must return to Scripture again so that we can correct our understanding of righteousness.  I believe that there are at least four passages which are given to epitomize/summarize righteousness, i.e., to know God: Jeremiah 22:16[6], Micah 6:8[7], Matthew 22:35-40[8] and James 1:27[9].  These passages reveal the desires of God’s heart as well as identify and describe cardinal characteristics of his kingdom on earth. 

Where did we go wrong?  Early church writings demonstrate that charity was not only highly esteemed but was considered a core spiritual discipline.  Didache 15:4 identifies charity and prayer as equal Christian responsibilities.   II Clement 16:4 asserts that, ‘Almsgiving therefore is a good thing, even as repentance from sin.  Fasting is better than prayer, but almsgiving than both…for almsgiving lifts off the burden of sin.[10]”   Centuries later, the reformers designated the three marks of the church as the preaching of the word, the correct administration of the sacraments, and church discipline[11].  I truly believe that these three characteristics should serve as marks of the church but they are not sufficient for our time.  Although the affirmation of theses three marks apparently did not cause most churches in the 17^th,18^th and 19^th centuries to neglect the call and practice of mercy[12], history will most likely not make the same conclusion of our day.  One means of correction would be to affirm that protecting and providing for the poor is a mark of the church. Scripture contains too many passages about ministries of justice and mercy (here after MJM) not to include this practice as a mark of the church[13]. 

In addition to the insufficiency of the historical marks of the church, I believe another, more contemporary, reason for our neglect of the destitute is the ever increasing tendency in the evangelical community towards theological minimalism[14].  We evangelicals have nearly reduced the totality of our Christian faith and practice down to the contents of the “sinner’s prayer.” In doing so we have emphasized the fact that a) all people have sinned b) even the slightest of our sins separates us from God c) we can do nothing to earn our salvation and d) we are saved by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone.   Though this teaching is delightful, important and true, it distorts the reality that a) God doesn’t feel the same way about all sin[15] and b) all of Scripture demonstrates that true faith always produces fruit of compassion[16].  Put differently, some things matter more to God than others, and he judges our deeds both in life and in death[17].   For example, the “expert in the law” asks Jesus about the greatest commandment[18].  His question suggests that some commandments are of greater importance[19].  Again in Matthew, Jesus rebukes the teachers of the law because although they give a tenth of their spices they “neglected the more important matters of the law,” which happen to include justice and mercy[20].    Who can deny that we have become focused, if not obsessed, with “spices” such as group Bible study, Scripture memorization, conferences and brief prayer before meals?  If sociologists studied the habits of an average American Christian in an effort to identify the most important teachings and practice of the faith, I doubt MJM would even be considered.  I can think of four scenarios, three of which are personal, that I believe demonstrate how the American church has lost sight of the weightier matters.  First, as a child I got spanked when I swore but I received no punishment when it became obvious that I was stealing money from the jar that held the tithe money from my allowance[21].  Second, one evening during my first week of serving as a youth minister in a small church, I coincidentally encountered an older man who was standing outside the church doors.  Upon seeing me he recognized me as the new youth pastor and hastily tried to hide the cigarette he was smoking behind his back while shamefully apologize for smoking[22].   Third, recently an acquaintance of mine, Tammy, told another acquaintance of mine, Sara, that she was romantically interested in my close friend, Mark.  Sara, knowing that Mark was more serious about his faith than Tammy was of hers, warned Tammy, “Mark is a godly man.” Tammy replied, “That’s ok, I can stop swearing[23].”  Perhaps the best example may be in the practices of the popular and often controversial preacher, Tony Campolo.  He has told many congregations, “8,000 children in Africa will starve during the upcoming week and you don’t give a sh**.”  He continued by saying, “what is even more disturbing is that fact that you’re more upset about my language than you are about the welfare of those children.”   So true.  According to Scripture, Christians should make those outside the church uneasier about their checking account than about smoking, drinking or cussing. 

An enormous shift in priorities and affections must take place if the American church is going to reform itself according to the word and Spirit of God.  First, we must pray that the affections of our hearts would be changed so that we would become sensitive to the neglected and powerless in our communities.  As this happens I believe that prayers of repentance with follow. Second, we must acknowledge and work through our fears of shifting more of our time and resources toward MJM and away from the study of Scripture.  Third, we must learn to model our compassion according to Scripture, learning who the neglected are and what God expects from us. 

It would be no small gift from God if he did change our hearts.   I have no doubt that millions of church-goers in America give to charity and take no pleasure in the suffering of others but we must be willing to engage at a deeper level.  We must begin to personally associate with the neglected as well as give more from our abundance.  Friendship/association with the destitute is the essence of almsgiving[24].  An overwhelming majority of us have no contact with these people.   Our financial and social status allows us to conduct our daily lives without having to relate with them.  If we do cross paths with someone in need we often become immensely uncomfortable and struggle to know what is the correct course of action.  Having lived in small-town Iowa until the age of 22, I had never encountered a beggar until I moved to Orlando, Florida two years later.  During my first visit to the local grocery store a beggar stopped me on my way out and asked me to give him money so that he could buy food.   I wanted to ignore him and get into my car as fast as possible.  I knew that if I talked with him there was a possibility that he could embarrass me by doing or saying something inappropriate.   The possibility of embarrassment exists every time I relate with a person in need.  This is only one of many fears that we must surrender to Christ.  Ministering to the destitute will bring personal suffering and force us past our comfort zones.   We must pray for courage and a willingness to put our egos on the line.   We desperately need God’s grace to open our eyes so that we can see our own immense wealth, the needs of others and give with a cheerful heart.

Second, we must admit and work through our fears about shifting more of our energies away from Scripture and towards mercy ministries.    First, let me affirm my commitment to Scripture.  I embrace it as a gift from God to his people.  In its totality it contains the gospel, which is the power of God for salvation.   It is a faithful and true witness about the triune God and us.   God has been and will always be pleased to use it in conjunction with the Holy Spirit to form and mature his people in Christ.   The preaching of the word is a means of grace that should not be neglected.    Personal study of the word is often very beneficial and should be encouraged.    With this said, I also agree with Kenneth Leech when he warns that the things of God can cut us off from God[25].   Are our Bibles and study groups a stumbling block[26]?   Both Testaments clearly warn that even God given means of grace, i.e., the temple and its accompanying ceremonial practices, can provide a false sense of righteousness as well as being a stench in God’s nose when his people are not reflecting his heart by providing justice and mercy[27].    We must assume that this is also possible for us who live during the new covenant.   Our religious practices will nauseate God as long as we neglect the weightier matters of the law.

A seminary classmate of mine gave a short presentation about his views concerning the different components of ministry.  He identified three perspectives: cognitive, emotional, and behavioral.  Reflecting on his past ministry experience, he noted that he had focused almost exclusively on the cognitive, specifically learning and teaching Christian doctrine.  The behavioral element was delegated to special occasions such as going on short-term mission trips.   I don’t recall what he said about the emotional element, but in light of fact that he had ministered in Presbyterian churches I doubt any resources were spent on that perspective.  My classmate wanted to change the disproportionate nature of his past ministry efforts.  We should also desire to change.  Why does the idea of spending less time studying Scripture scare us and sound heretical?  I propose that one of the reasons why we are scared is that we do not want to compromise the importance of Christ’s atonement.  We are reacting against theologically liberal churches and denominations which often offer only humanistic solutions towards suffering while neglecting Christ’s call for repentance and faith. Our reaction is to affirm Christ through preaching, worship and bible study.  We, of course, are right to affirm Christ but we forgotten that he is just as interested in justice as he is in justification[28]. Acts 6:1-4 teaches us that the ministries of word and deed are equal in status as evidenced by the fact that the Greek word diakonia is used to describe both[29].  A second reason for our fear may stem from the fact that our theological focus, both historically and currently, is on teaching and preaching doctrine, specifically the doctrine of sovereign grace.  Most reformed church members hover around Biblical passages that affirm God’s sovereign grace because that is where their pastors hover.   We spend tremendous amounts of resources defending and teaching this doctrine.   At least one of our confessions, the Canons of Dort, was written for the sole purpose of defending the doctrine of sovereign grace and other confessions such as the Westminster Confession contain numerous statements pertaining to this doctrine[30].  Despite the fact that two-thirds of the Westminster Confession is an exposition of the 10 commandments, i.e., the Christian life, the reformed community is still characterize by its teaching and defending of doctrine, especially the doctrine of election, rather than acts of mercy[31].  I believe the doctrine of sovereign grace is precious[32] and should be defended with all diligence but those who need our charity the most, along with God himself, will not care about the correctness of our doctrine if it’s not accompanied by our obedience to the weightier matters.  As the African proverb states, “An empty belly has no ears.” We must admit and talk about our obsession with teaching and learning doctrine at the expense of MJM.  American Presbyterianism has a history of teaching wonderful doctrine while ignoring the injustices that exist under its nose.  In his book, Black and Presbyterian: The Heritage and the Hope, Gayraud Wilmore describes American Presbyterianism in the 18^th, 19^th and early 20^th centuries.   The 1789 General Assembly provided the venue for the first official discussion of slavery by American Presbyterians.  But in unfortunately typical Presbyterian fashion they discussed the importance catechizing of slaves rather than their emancipation.  Wilmore writes,

“It was becoming increasingly clear to [Blacks] that the Presbyterian Church condemned slavery in theory and condoned it in practice…The more white Presbyterians tiptoed around the outright repudiation of slaveholding Christians, the more their consciences drove them to the next best thing – bringing the poor slaves to Jesus and preparing them for membership in the Presbyterian Church by religious instruction.  In other words, ‘doing good for poor Black folk’ easily became an acceptable substitute for emancipating them… No church was more high-sounding and profound in its Biblical and theological analysis of slavery and did less about it (emphasis mine)[33].”  

Wilmore cites Samuel Cornish, a Black Presbyterian minister who wrote about his experience at an 1837 Presbytery meeting:

“I have seen a [Black] minister of Jesus Christ sitting in Presbytery, with his white brethren in the ministry, who, though it had been announced that full provision was made among the church members for every brother…yet [was] left by himself in the church for three successive days, without dinner or tea, because no Christian family could be found in the congregation, who would admit him to their table, on account of his color[34].” 

The Emancipation Proclamation did not end such open racism.  As late as 1904, leaders in the Cumberland Presbyterian denomination were making statements such as: “As a race [Blacks] are inferior to the whites in culture, mental and moral development, and civilization; and for this reason they have a peculiar claim upon the stronger race for help and guidance[35].” We are only fooling ourselves if we believe that similar attitudes no longer plague American Presbyterianism.  Wilmore concludes, “Whatever can be said assuredly about Black people and the Presbyterian Church it cannot be said that they come together naturally[36].”  Although the lack of minority members remains a huge issue for a vast majority of conservative reformed churches[37], the reason I’ve cited Wilmore is to again emphasis our pattern of ignoring the weightier matters of the law in our obsession of doctrine. What if Bible study groups became MJM groups that provided for the poor in their community?   Perhaps the spiritual blessings and growth we are hoping for through our emphasis on studying Scripture will be given by God as we become agents of mercy and justice[38]?

Concerning confessions and creeds, I’m all for theological maximalism in contrast to the current trend of theological minimalism.   I believe it is important that the Reformed community possess agreed upon doctrines that can guide us and provide a barrier against heresy, but we must understand the nature and common use of a theological maximal confession such as the Westminster Confession.  As much as we would like to consider the Westminster Confession as a devotional tool, it is rarely used that way.  It simply wasn’t written that purpose[39].  I believe its most common and best use is as a reference tool and thus its contents remain largely unknown to the average lay person just as there are a significant number of words in a dictionary whose meanings are unknown until a situation arises which requires knowledge of a specific word.   The Heidelberg Catechism, which was written for the express purpose of educating children[40], is superior as a faithfully reformed devotional tool.   The disadvantage of the Westminster Confession, Heidelberg Catechism and other large confessions are their size.  We may all know the answer to the first question of the WSC and the Heidelberg Catechism but who knows the answer to question 76 or even question 2?   I believe a confession set to music is the best way to memorize and communicate a statement of faith[41].  We can take our lead from the late Rich Mullins and his song Creed[42].   Music is also a beautiful and effective way to learn doctrine[43].  With the exception of two clauses, the PC (USA)’s A Brief Statement of Faith[44] could be used as lyrics.  What then should we do with our traditional creeds and confessions?  John Leith provides a good approach to the Westminster Confession:  “As a historical achievement, the Westminster Confession should be neither [idolized] nor rejected.  It should be accepted for what it is, a remarkable theological achievement of the Reformed community in the seventeenth century, and received with gratitude for the guidance that it may give for the theological task today[45].”  The Westminster Confession has accomplished its original purpose and then some but it is time for a maximal reformed confession for the 21^st century.   Certainly the Westminster Confession can be improved upon[46]. I believe it is time for the more conservative reformed communities such as the OPC, PCA, ARP and CRC to follow the PC(USA) and RCA by producing newer confessions and creeds which build upon the merits of past confessions but attempt to redistribute their theological focus to include more of perhaps Micah’s theology.

Lastly, what can we learn from Scripture about our ministry to the neglected?  Both testaments have much to teach us about those in need and what God desires concerning our ministry to them.  Let’s first address the question “Who are the neglected?” Although the Biblical understanding of the destitute includes financial and spiritual elements, there are many other factors that determine a person’s status as such.  The neglected are better understood as the disenfranchised, those whose educational level, gender, legal status, physical health, race, vocation, religious purity and family heritage are such that they are excluded from the popular culture, including the religious culture, in which they live[47].  This definition would also include orphans, aliens and widows as well as those who, like Zacchaeus, are monetarily rich but are relegated to the periphery of society. If Luke’s numerous references of women is any indication, it would seemingly also include women[48].     The OT is replete with passages concerning protection and provision for the poor and vulnerable[49] but, as we will see, the ‘poor’ seem to have a somewhat different status.  Gospel parables and numerous other New Testament texts reiterate God’s concern for the poor in the new covenant.