Thank you, Cecil, for patiently taking me out of my pastoral legalism.

We live in a microwave society. What you want things immediately. If they don’t come immediately, then we go to the other extreme and become so despondent, that life becomes almost unbearable. And sadly enough, we don’t recognize the issues of our own heart that’s causing this impatience and, thus, start blaming other people for not moving in our timing.

It’s a form of legalism. How so? Legalism this when we began to impose a law on someone else in order for them to be righteous. The Pharisees expressed a form of legalism in which they took a diluted law of Moses , and impose it on the people for them to approve they’re righteousness before God and before them. If they did not rise to their standard, they would be mocked, ridiculed, and possibly excommunicated from the temple.

When pastors are impatient, they are usually impatient because they have a set of changes that they wish to implement quickly, but if this is too fast for the culture of the church, the impatient pastor does not look inside to shepherd the People at a good pace, but looks outwardly with chagrin that those who are not following his pastoral pace. Thus, impatient  pastor sees them as the ones to blame for not following his lead,, when the shepherds are to lead one step ahead of the Sheep, and not 10 or 100.

About four years ago, I visited my former church for a funeral recently. It had been two and half years since I’d visited the church , and I had the opportunity to see my old church family and bring back some precious memories of that time.

But I also remember my impatience coming out of seminary. I had studied under the finest theological minds on the planet. I was ready to use all of my knowledge and impart it on the very fortunate congregation that called me pastor.

I shudder to this day on my first two years there.  Early 30s and knew everything.

My friend Cecil Short, the one who lost his wife at that funeral, took me under his wing and showed me so much about being a pastor. Cecil lived just up the road from the church. I remembered a conversation we had soon after I came about him thinking of stepping down as a deacon.  Why? His age.  I told him, “Cecil, I need your wisdom. Please stay on.” And gratefully, he did, and for eight years, we served Jesus together in that little town outside of Lexington, Kentucky.  And anytime I found myself in a pickle or just needing to vent, I would come to his house, Ann would bring me a Diet Mountain Dew, and we’d sit on the back porch and sort it all out.

Yes, he was a deacon. No he was not a pastor or preacher. No, he wasn’t belligerent in how he taught me. He simply questioned, made me think, offered general advice when I came to his house almost in tears as to why the church wasn’t  following my lead.

He showed me how to love, to be patient, and that pastor meant shepherding and caring, not just expecting others to follow my lead because I had the title.

Thank you, Cecil.  You are my friend who is over 40 years my senior.  Thanks for shaping that green pastor patiently and modeling a patience for me. I’ll never, ever forget you, Ann, your sweet family, and how patient you were with me.

Across the Facebook landscape, I came across a ‘share’ in my newsfeed that said, “Starbucks CEO: If You Support Traditional Marriage, We Don’t Want Your Business.”  In fact, many others who are friends of mine brought this to my attention, with the understanding that if this is what Starbucks believes and thinks, we shall take our business elsewhere. (I confess, I even forwarded this article before I read the whole thing.)

But let’s notice something about this article.

1. The title in the headline by Victor Medina (at the website “Restoring Liberty: Published by Joe Miller) does not contain quotes, meaning that Howard Schultz, the CEO of Starbucks, did not say this.  This serves as an example of journalists who use this tactic to get traffic.  It worked.  But the problem is, Schultz did not say this exactly.  Beware of jumping to conclusions.
2. As you read the article, which links to the original Forbes.com article, you see that, yes, Schultz does hold to the same-sex ‘marriage’ agenda, we see the true thrust of the article.  Schultz was confronted by a shareholder who had a problem with Schultz gay ‘marriage’ stance, and this led to a decline in profits.  The article points to a Huffington Post article noting that the shareholder, Tom Strobhar, the founder of the anti-gay marriage Corporate Morality Action Center.  The article does not say whether Strobhar’s issue was with the moral stance or the financial profits (or lack thereof).
3. In response, Schultz gives the figures, acknowledging the boycott by Starbucks customers and the affect it had on profits.  But he went on:  ““Not every decision is an economic decision. Despite the fact that you recite statistics that are narrow in time, we did provide a 38% shareholder return over the last year. I don’t know how many things you invest in, but I would suspect not many things, companies, products, investments have returned 38% over the last 12 months. Having said that, it is not an economic decision to me. The lens in which we are making that decision is through the lens of our people. We employ over 200,000 people in this company, and we want to embrace diversity. Of all kinds.”
4. At the end of the day, Schultz response was to this particular shareholder and all shareholders, concluding:  “If you feel, respectfully, that you can get a higher return than the 38% you got last year, it’s a free country. You can sell your shares in Starbucks and buy shares in another company. Thank you very much.”  I hope you can see that this is different than saying, “Traditional marriage advocates are not welcomed at Starbucks.”  He’s saying, “This is where we stand.  If you are investing in this company and do not agree with this stance, you are welcomed to invest elsewhere.”  This is in essence what traditional marriage advocate companies such as Hobby Lobby, Chick-Fil-A, and Domino’s say as well–this is where they stand.

Regardless of which side of the argument you are on, we must beware before you share. Take time to read through an article before you jump to conclusions.  If Howard Schultz’s stand is something you as a consumer do not agree with, sure, let them know with your patronage (or lack thereof) where you stand.  And he is doubling down on his stance in this matter.

Let’s just make sure we are conveying accurately what’s being said so we have the whole picture.

When it comes to our Christian walk, four foundational matters must be in place: 

• The person of Christ as our cornerstone, 
• The pages of Scripture (the Bible),
• The people of God (that is, the church), and
• Lastly but not leastly, prayer.  

James and Joel Beeke rightly define prayer as:

Prayer is the act of forging a connection between two specific points: our human needs and the resources of God offered us in Christ.  You can start at either point, and reach to the other in prayer. 

Another said that prayer should be like breathing. As breathing is the response of physical life to the presence of air, so prayer should be the response of spiritual life to the presence of God.  

Sadly, many in the Western Church (by that, I mean, those in Europe, the US, and in Canada) where so many advances and conveniences come in abundance, prayer comes all too infrequently. There’s a story of a brother of a seminary student who came to visit him one day.  Unsure of directions, he turned to the first person who passed by and asked, “Is this Davidson Hall?” On hearing the man described later, the seminary student asked his brother if he had realized that he had been talking to a world-famous theologian. The brother couldn’t believe it. He had the opportunity to ask *any* question—and he asked only where a building was.

Isn’t that how we pray? We talk to God for matters that are really small and insignificant.

As we go through 1 and 2 Timothy to look at rebooting our church and our lives, Paul is getting to the brass tacks of what a church should look like. In order for a church to reboot, then, churches need to reconnect with their designer.  Jesus is the Designer of this machine. He told His disciples, “I will build my church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it.” Jesus’ life and teaching was filled with prayer. Yes, the Son of God, God the Son, devoted much of his personal time to prayer. If Jesus did, then what about us?

Paul had a lot to say about the conscience.  When he urged Timothy to straighten out the doctrinal mess in Ephesus, he said, “The aim of our charge is love which issues from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith” (1 Timothy 1:5).  When outlining the qualifications of an elder in 1 Timothy 3, one qualification was to “hold to the deep truths of the faith with a clear conscience” (3:9).  In 2 Timothy 1:3, Paul said that “He served… with a clear conscience.”

Andy Naselli wrote an excellent book on the nature of the conscience of a Christian:

If God, the Lord of your conscience, shows you through his Word that your conscience is registering a mistaken moral judgment and you believe he wants you to adjust your conscience to better match his will, your conscience must bend to God.  Do you remember the principle, “To obey God is better than men” (Acts 5:29)? That holds true even when that man happens to be you!  You must obey God rather than yourself. You must obey God rather than your conscience. If your conscience is so sacrosanct that it’s off-limits even to God, that’s idolatry. … Whenever “obey conscience” collides with “obey God,” “obey God” must come out on top every time. Thankfully, a Christian with a well-calibrated conscience will rarely have to make this choice.

Churchgoers who rarely read the Scriptures, however, will seldom struggle with their conscience. Many deceive themselves in believing that their conscience and calling of course matches up with God’s. But when you read something in the Scriptures that doesn’t line up with your thinking—does Scripture have to bow the knee to your philosophies, or vice versa?

Alexander and Hymanaeus’ conscience went bad.  In fact, their consciences were seared to where they didn’t even care about Christ and His Word, or the covenant they had made with their family of faith. They rejected the warfare.  They let go to the wrong thing and held on to the wrong thing. They shipwrecked the faith in their hearts.  They rejected God’s accountability but also the accountability of their church and leadership.

I’m going to ask you to pray for a particular matter in  helping each other wage the good warfare. I ask you to pray because we certainly want to move forward in God’s will and wisdom in regards to a specific matter.

… in regard to a church covenant. Our by-laws were changed at a recent business meeting to allow for a more clear and stringent outlining of when problems arise between a member and staff or between staff and staff.  One of the matters in there dealt with the breaking of a covenant.

That got me to thinking: does ARBC have a covenant?   It does, that Connie found in the bottom of a drawer that was likely dated in the 1960s.

Churches need three robust and functioning documents:

•  a statement of faith (which we have),
• a church covenant between members and church (which is outdated), and
• a Constitution and By-Laws which deals with day-to-day managerial matters.

Here’s one definition of a church covenant:

The church covenant is equal parts promise, summary of expectations, ethical statement, and biblical standard. We summarize how we promise to live together in the covenant. It forms the ethics, or the moral principles, of our worldview and holds out a biblical standard by which we live. Our acceptance of this multifaceted document follows the practice of believers throughout the centuries who have pledged to God and one another to live out the gospel in community.

Clearly in the NT, Jesus and Paul outline the need for church discipline as an act of love.  Matt Perry didn’t come up with it. A seminary professor didn’t come up with it. But Jesus and His servant Paul came up with it. Certain teachings and conduct do not belong among those who name the name of Christ.  We want to protect the flock, but we also call out significant issues that arise to help folks repent.  Over the years, many in neighborhoods know about those who live like the devil Monday-Saturday, but try to polish off their halo on Sunday.

Membership is not a name on a roll, but a covenant we make to God, to the pastors of a church, and to each other.  Because of what Jesus and Paul outline in the NT, we at ARBC need to take steps to adhere to a covenant of membership that outlines biblical standards, ethics, and expectations of members. It’s an accountability and a pledge we make to each other to help our comrades in arms who have already enlisted in the Lord’s army to help each other fight sin and stay strong in our walk with Jesus.

Sadly, few who are in leadership positions in our churches actually lead our churches. Spurgeon noted in his Lectures to My Students that the pulpit is often called “Coward’s Castle.” This is true. Yet, with a false sense of humility, many pastors hesitate to lead from the pulpit. Part of the problem is giving in to the culture’s hatred and hesitancy of authority figures, especially in the church. Part of the problem too is that pastors need to show the same type of leadership and personality in the pulpit as well as outside of it.

In an age where prevalent and influential preachers reject the mantle of “preaching the word” as a herald and would rather have a conversation with the congregants as a way to connect, we can see why the church has turned into a wishy-washy institution with little power but a whole lot of opinion and conjecture.

The commentator John Jason Owen elaborates:

Teaching is a part of the duty of the herald of salvation. Not only are men to be taught the way of salvation, and thus be brought to Christ, but also after conversion, they are to be instructed in the duties and obligations of the gospel, and prepared for usefulness on earth, and the enjoyment of Christ in heaven.

What are these pastors to do with Hebrews 13:17 when the writer urges the Jewish Christians to:

Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they are keeping watch over your souls, as those who will have to give an account. Let them do this with joy and not with groaning, for that would be of no advantage to you.

Obey? Submit? Yes! God has established authority in the church for the good of our souls. Pastors, you are going to have to give an account for your souls. So does the Apostle Paul tell Timothy, “Preach the Word” (2 Timothy 4:2)! That’s a command — an imperative! They follow you as their leader not due to your leadership abilities, but based on what we see in Hebrews 13:7:

Remember your leaders, those who spoke to you the word of God. Consider the outcome of their way of life, and imitate their faith.

Pastors must (1) speak the Word of God through teaching and preaching, (2) live out what they preach.  At our church, we remind each other that “Monday through Saturday counts just as much as Sunday.” That’s not just a slogan passed down from the preacher to the parishioners. Preachers need to heed this as well.

Lead, pastors! Lead! Study! Pray! Praise! Thank! Compel! Motivate! Urge! Plead! Implore! Exhort! Rebuke! Challenge! Love! Model! Live it!  Just read the pastoral epistles and see! Don’t shy away! Spurgeon says again in his Lectures: 

The word of God is sharper than any two-edged sword, and therefore you can leave the word of God to wound and kill, and need not be yourselves cutting in phrase and manner. God’s truth is searching: leave it to search the hearts of men without offensive additions from yourself.

Trust Christ!  Trust His Word!  Jesus is enough to provide the strength and courage to do so.

Here are some pictures of the Denver area over the last month.