Richard Wurmbrand said, “Christians are very vague in thinking and speaking about spiritual matters.” * That is especially true for love, isn’t it? And love really is a spiritual matter. However, even among Christians, love has lost its rigorous meaning and has become essentially a linguistic sedative. This is a significant barrier which we must overcome in order to obey our high calling to Christian submission – lived out practically and decisively in everyday relationships.


Gisela Yohannan shares a testimony about how she discovered a new vibrant meaning behind the words, “love your enemies”. She had previously forgiven an “enemy”, but did not realize that she was supposed to LOVE the person whom she forgave - until the Spirit convicted her. She writes, ‘For me, forgiveness ended when I no longer held something against that person. ( …) Now I realized that there was more beyond that! I discovered that the completion of forgiveness was, “love your enemy”. But I couldn’t find any desire in me to ever want to get close to this person, let alone love him. (…)

“As I thought of this command, “love your enemy”, I had to admit that it was meant to be very practical, not an abstract philosophical idea. (…) Yet I didn’t want any closeness. I didn’t want to receive anything from him. (…) I wished to be left alone, and not to see that person, at least not often. I TOLERATED his presence. (….) There was no bitterness in my heart, no hate, no anger…. but also no love. Even if I wanted to love that person, it was totally above my strength, above my ability, above anything I could find in my heart. With all honesty I could say I DIDN’T EVEN WANT TO LOVE that person. (…) I couldn’t find or produce any love in my heart to give to my “enemy”. All I could find was TOLERANCE.” **

Gisela admitted that she could not love her “enemy” herself; but she came to trust that God was able to create what was missing in her heart. She writes, “I knelt down to pray, confessing my inability to love and giving myself into his loving hands to work on my heart.” After that God gave her a willingness to love her enemy. Her fear of being hurt again gradually diminished, and her trust in the Lord increased. God gave Gisela a quality of love that is impossible except through God, by humble submission to him.

Gisela does not disclose the details. But her testimony does demonstrate that love is much more than tolerance; and it is more than preferential love. She expresses how she found much joy in her heart as a result of her new behavior. This is a high benefit of Christian submission! That requires - not only the decisive choice to contribute towards the benefit of our “enemy” - but also to receive something FROM our “enemy”. Really, that is also an act of giving: It is telling our “enemy” how valuable he or she really is to us – and to God. It is the demonstration of forgiveness in its completeness.

Wouldn’t you say that Gisela Yohannan’s testimony effectively dispels the typical vagueness in the word “love”?

Diane

* R. Wumrbrand, With God in Solitary Confinement” , 30.
** Gisela Yohannan, “Broken for a Purpose”, 5-14.

_________________
Diane

I again draw from the writings of Gisela Yohannan and Richard Wurmbrand –this time at a precise point where their writings dovetail in their discussion of loving enemies. Both saw the true implication of “love your enemies” through Jesus’ treatment of Judas.

------------------------------------------------

Here’s what Gisela writes:

“Let us see how Jesus interpreted ‘love your enemy’: Actually, Jesus had many enemies, but he allowed his most “deadly” one to live with him. This was not because Jesus didn’t recognize who he was. John 2:25 says, ‘He did not need anyone to bear witness concerning man for he himself knew what was in man.’

For three years, Judas walked with him on the road, ate with Him, and slept on the same floor. Jesus taught him just the same as the others, provided for his needs, and allowed him to be part of every event, miracle, struggle, prayer meeting and teaching session. He even gave him power to heal the sick and to preach. Every day, Judas was able to talk with Jesus, see Him and take up His time. When he finally came to betray Him, Jesus called him “My friend.” Jesus meant “friend” with His whole heart, because He didn’t use vain words. He actually loved Judas, knowing from the very beginning what Judas was going to do three years later.

“(…) There is not one report in the Gospels that Jesus treated Judas differently, put him down, or loved him less than the others. All the time Jesus knew Judas’ heart, yet He showed him love, expecting one day that he would pierce and crush His emotions – which were as human as me.
(7-8, Yohannan)

---------------------------------------------------

Now notice how Wurmbrand also draws in Judas - at the end of this discourse. He writes:

“Love all men dear brothers, but bestow the greatest part of your love on the ugliest of souls. They need your love more than anyone else. You, my fellow-prisoners must show your greatest love to the Communist torturers and those who betrayed us.

The beautiful souls can endure without tokens of your love. Spend your energy where it is most needed. I lay especially on your hearts love toward the pastors and priests who collaborate with the Communist persecutors and denounce their brethren. I am afraid Romania may develop the situation that existed in the Soviet Union, where many of these traitors were lynched or stabbed by Christians of the underground church. The church of the catacombs had to be protected from traitors, and if there seems no other way, they resort to such means. The church of the first centuries did it, too, though those who teach church history don’t say very much about it.

But this is the extreme solution. In the Nazi times, we won for Christ men who had betrayed us and put us in prison. We should do our utmost to achieve this now [during Communism]. Let the Word become flesh in us, flesh of a MAN WHO ACCEPTS THE KISS OF JUDAS and CALLS (HIM FRIEND, even when he comes at the head of an armed gang to arrest you. Amen.” (49, Wurmbrand)

------------------------------

Both writers are writing in the context of their own "neighbors" - those who have become enemies to them. For Gisela it was a man who had deeply wounded her (see earlier reading). For Wurmbrand and fellow prisoners, it was their prison guards. Both saw Jesus' love for Judas as the model of behavior which they were to apply towards own their enemy "neighbors".

To ponder: Do you have enemies among your "neighbors" - that is family members, colleague, fellow workers, business or online associates, Sunday worshipers... and so forth? Who are the Judases in your life? What is your heart's desire for them - and for you in that relationship? What might hold you back from truly and freely loving them? How might God be calling you to love them, practically speaking?

Diane

_________________
Diane

Perhaps you have never connected Judas with “love your enemy” – at least, before seeing the last two readings here. That was a shift in my own thinking. I’ve always put Judas in his own category – a one-of-a-kind. Yet as I pondered over his character, I was reminded of my own Judas of several years ago: He was not unlike Jesus’ Judas. He was in the inner circle - with God’s people. He had “given his heart” to Jesus. He seemed exceptionally conscientious and trustworthy. He had never been harsh, and never spoken an unkind word. He was a friend. Yet, circumstances unfolded in such a way that he would sell his soul, so to speak, for a temptation he could not resist – at a costly price which deeply impacted myself and Christ’s honor.

In essence, this was a devastating betrayal – one that would ripple wide and long. My “Judas” has never yet expressed remorse.

When a friend betrays you, the impact runs deep through your own soul. After all, it is a violation of an earned trust built through sharing of time, ideas, abilities, and worship with God in fellowship with the saints. The psalmist himself experienced a similar betrayal.

“If an enemy were insulting me,
I could endure it;
if a foe were rising against me,
I could hide.
But it is you, a man like myself,
my companion, my close friend,
with whom I once enjoyed sweet fellowship
at the house of God,
as we walked about
among the worshipers.” Ps. 55:12-14

One day a few years ago I would see my “Judas” again. This time I was standing behind podium giving a spiritual address at a ceremony in a large firm, and he was in the audience, as one of the high-ranking employees. On seeing him there, thoughts about the past flashed through my mind, but I quickly set them aside. Afterwards he approached me to express his deep appreciation for my thought-provoking message. He was sincere, I felt. And then he gave me a hearty handshake. At that moment it was impossible for me to say words like: “Don’t you realize how much damage you’ve done!” I didn’t want to. And actually, that would have been hypocritical in light of my own message. At that moment, I could not hold any bitterness. It was impossible. I’m convinced that this was God’s love ruling through me that day.

As for me, extending my hand in that handshake was a tiny gesture of submission to my enemy. It was giving him something of my own when he requested it.

Diane

_________________
Diane

“Even my close friend, someone I trusted, one who shared my bread, has turned against me.” Ps. 41:9

Betrayers can be excruciating challenges in our obedience to Christian submission. They arise out of trusting and sweet fellowship. They became one of us through mutual submission and shared blessings. We had invested of ourselves into their lives and built trust. Of all the people we know, we least expect betrayals amongst these ones. Yet this is reality: “Brother will betray brother to death”. Mat. 10:21 “Your brothers, your own family – even they have betrayed you… Do not trust them, though they speak well of you.” Jer. 12:6 Jeremiah was betrayed, King David was betrayed, and even our Lord was betrayed.

Remarkably, Jesus actually chose Judas as a disciple, even though Jesus could see his deceitful heart. Jesus did not deny Judas any of the privileges of the relationship. He shared meals with him – symbolizing their fellowship. Jesus shared his blessings and his ministry with his friend Judas - a friendship which was to be betrayed by the very gesture of friendship: a kiss.

The disciples had no idea. Jesus had never provided the inside information ahead of time. Even Judas himself seemed mystified when Jesus prophesied a betrayer in their midst. Judas said, “Surely you don’t mean me, Rabbi?” Mat. 26:25 Perhaps this reveals how blind he was to his own spiritual condition and his evil motives. Even in the very act of plotting, he was no doubt too absorbed with the benefits for himself – the money and the approval of the religious leaders – to contemplate the consequences. Perhaps he saw himself as an upcoming hero.

This reminds me of a story my dad shared about a war experience in Holland in his church congregation. A church member became loyal to the Nazi collaborators and ended up shooting a fellow worshipper - no doubt a heroic act from the perspective of his new allegiance.

Scripture offers no promised immunity from betrayers. Quite the contrary! Yet, it does provide much hope and guidance. God is sovereign, and we can rely on God. That’s just what Jesus did, and God used the evil for good. This is not only a promise, but also a command:

“Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.” Rom. 12:21

Even betrayers do not absolve us from our calling to Christian submission. But they do challenge us to understand what is truly "good".


PS: One question still haunts our minds: How can an evidently righteous person display such a drastic turn around. That’s a topic we can’t bypass.

Cont’d….


Diane

_________________
Diane

Judas would not have perceived himself as an evildoer - not until after Jesus’s death. Certainly his associates, the Jewish rulers, failed to see any evil in their plot. They assumed they were helping God – by quenching a threat to his kingdom. Judas was not alone in his scheme. But neither were the Jewish leaders. Their traitorous act was the culmination of a long history of rebelliousness against God. We can’t forget that.

Christians often assume that sinners deliberately do wrong, knowing it is wrong, and they consciously violate their conscience. We may even assume they intended to hurt; but this is often not true. We must keep in mind that wrong-doers have been shaped through a myriad of life influences and cultural values – which have somehow led them to believe they are doing what is necessary and maybe even helpful. They rarely see the faulty core values or self-serving motives which drive their choices.

A few pages back we addressed the self-serving traits seen in narcissism. Narcissists are those who have an exaggerated sense of self-importance and self-righteousness, are never wrong, and can never accept correction. They have masked their true self so well that, to them, their inflated façade is who they really are. They can’t see other people’s perspectives. Lacking any capacity for empathy, they have a natural predisposition to betray anyone in any way whichever serves to preserve or enhance their false self-image.

But we are not going to talk about narcissism. We are going to talk about the prevalence of marginal conversions among the people of God. While betrayers sometimes arise from authentic fellowships, as in Jesus’s circle, those churches which focus predominantly on outward Christianity are especially prone to becoming a safe haven for potential betrayers – besides any number of sinful habits driven by unchecked, unacknowledged core values.

Scripture is replete with references about superficial commitments and hypocrisy. If you know your Bible even marginally, you will be aware of this problem running through its pages. I need not post verses.

Instead, we might gain a renewed grip on the issue of marginal conversion by examining it in light of a culture which is not our own. So we go to Africa – a continent which, through a long history of ambitious missionary endeavors has inherited some of western Christianity’s less virtuous qualities - marginal conversions being one – as suggested here:

_________________
Diane

An African pastor said:

"Sir, what you have said about conversion moves me, because I must confess, I have not been converted that way. My deeper African values have not been changed. I have merely become an imitation European on the outside. I have not learned to listen to the Holy Spirit, but I have been trained to listen very carefully to what the missionary wants."

This confession was made to conference speaker, Glen Schwartz, after his message on marginal conversions in Africa. The quote comes from a web article called, “A Review of Christian Conversion In an African Context”. It is found here:

http://www.wmausa.org/page.aspx?id=83837

This article aims to explain the prevalence of marginal conversions in some societies, while in others you see radical complete transformations. This reading is highly worth your time – not only to deepen your awareness of the gospel effects around the world, but also to equip and encourage you. We can benefit by understanding better what hinders or enhances gospel penetration. And, above all, we do need evidence of wonderful, genuine moves of God, where Satan is truly dethroned.

This web link will take you to the site, “World Missions Associates”, a ministry that has risen up with the aim of strengthening mission churches which have been incapacitated by dependency syndrome, (as described previously) and empowering them to be effective indigenous churches relying on God with a resilient faith.

PS: If you cannot access the link, please let me know. I can make sure you get it. I see it as helpful background for this thread theme – as it relates to our own responsibility in fulfilling the great commandment in light of the great commission.

Enjoy! And be blessed!

Diane

_________________
Diane

In the previous readings we saw how the church is characterized by the prevalence of marginal conversions. In Africa this problem is closely associated to Western charity which keeps the African churches in a perpetual state of dependency. Missiologist, Glen Schwartz documents these findings in his recent book, “When Charity Destroys Dignity”. He describes how local Christians have become reliant on the foreign missionaries who built the church, run the church, do it much better, know so much more, and can offer a cultural lift. This assumption is perpetuated through the endless stream of financial charity to the missionary enterprise from outsiders - rich westerners. Such charity might make the western Christians feel good about helping, but their donations may actually be doing harm. The outside supply of money keeps the locals from taking ownership of their church, their decisions, and their own faith walk. They remain in an immature state of dependency – rather than become a truly independent and indigenous church capable of reaching their own people. In this sense Western charity is not always true Christian love; and their missionary endeavor is not necessarily true Christian submission.

Now we visit another continent and examine the devastation caused by this unbiblical love and submission, and conversely, the astounding benefits when these virtues are restored. This time we go to South America – to the Huaorani people (aka Aucas). Here’s the story:

In 1995 Steve Saint, son of one of the five missionaries who were speared to death by the Aucas 40 years earlier, returned to the tribe on their request. To Steve’s horror, he discovered that a severe dependency problem had developed over the 40 years since the gospel came to them. Apparently overzealous “love” efforts from outsiders had caused them to become mere spectators of the faith with little capacity for indigenous autonomy, leaving them highly vulnerable to exploitation. Steve Saint summarized his assessment with these words: “I would have to say that their need for protection from the overbearing, over-indulging outside Christian community, was as great a need for protection as anything else.”

That statement can be seen in a 6-page PDF called “Fighting Dependency Among the Aucas”. http://www.adopt-a-people.org/articles/dependency.pdf Here you read how Steve returned to the Huaorani people, not to lord over them (as they wanted and expected) but to submit to them as their servant. From that position he nudged them out of their dependency state and into a vibrant self-sustaining community able to send out their own missionaries. I highly recommend that you read the online article. It is worth your time!!

This document is worth presenting to your missions committee. But the message is for the Western Church too. We are also in a severe state of dependency – not only on a large ecclesial institution as a ruling body over our lives, but on our state and society as an endless source of provision. This does not make mature believers! Furthermore, it merely perpetuates the problem of marginal conversions.

Imagine the far-reaching potential today when Christian submission is practiced as Steve Saint practiced it among the Huaorani! The Body of Christ would be strengthened with mature capable decision makers – reliant on God’s Spirit and Word. Can you imagine what we could become, as a testimony of the living God - in our society and abroad! The implications are unfathomable!

May God raise up truly submissive servant-leaders in the church!

Oh…. and enjoy the article!

Diane

_________________
Diane

I can’t resist a quick stopover in China. China’s Christianity is not to be ignored in any theological theme – including this one.

We have come to see China, no longer as our source of cheap merchandise, but of advanced technology too. Furthermore, China has become adept in sophisticated forms of culture - which we in the West are rapidly losing. I realized that while I rehearsing my score for an upcoming symphony concert – featuring, of all things, American Broadway music. So, here I am sitting at my made-in-China keyboard practicing to a Chinese orchestra performing West Side story on YouTube - under a fabulously skilled young Chinese conductor.

But when it comes to the Chinese Church, China is even more fascinating! China is in the midst of a massive, unprecedented spiritual revival, begun a mere few decades ago – without the direct help of Western missionaries. China is not beset by the dependency issues seen elsewhere in the world. In fact, westerners were all kicked out after 1950 under Chairman Moe’s communist regime. China became virtually atheistic - officially. Today, we hear of mass conversions to Biblical-centered, Spirit-living Christianity.

I quote a few excerpts from the book, “China’s Christian Millions” by Tony Lambert (c.1999, 2006). I draw especially from references to the Chinese church’s indigenous autonomy.

“It is in the rural areas that revival is most apparent….Here [In the Winzhou area] you can see a new church every kilometer..nearly all appear to have been erected in the past decade… here in the lush southern Chinese countryside … 18 percent of the population are officially recognized to be Bible-believing Christians. (…). A church elder told me that not a penny had been given by the government towards the cost, which had been ‘very expensive’. It had all come from free will donations of the local farmers and workers…. 29

“In general the old denominations have disappeared, leaving only traces in theology and ritual as is apparent in the [state run] churches. It is the older indigenous churches which have survived much better, probably because they were better able to adapt to the rigorous climate in New China. … Unlike the Western denominations, these groupings have preserved their own strong identity and ethos. 59

Examples in the older movements:

1) The Jesus Family was founded by Jian Tianying in 1921 … from his readings of the life of Hudson Taylor … determined to break free of foreign control and from the beginning the new society was totally independent and self supporting.

2) The Little Flock was established through Watchman Nee (Ni Tuosheng) who insisted… that there could only be one “local church” in any one locality…. [this] appealed to many young Chinese dissatisfied with traditional churches still largely controlled by foreigners. (…) Their focus on close fellowship in small group meetings and their freedom from foreign control stood them in good stead. ” 63

Lambert reports that there are also strong believers in the state-run church. They have chosen to work in the system, and in so doing are subverting the very system that was set up to subvert the church. 41

A historical event in the Chinese church:

In 1998 leaders of four major house church groupings, held a meeting in northern China to declare their basic unity in Christ in the face of persecution and to draft a confession of faith - as a means to defend their legitimacy and prove to the government that they are not an illegal "cult". Lambert has included the confessional statement in his book. He comments on it, saying: “The statement shows a confidence in the sovereignty and providence of God as the controller of human history. Maturity is shown in the absence of any denunciation of either the government or the TSPM (state church). The later may have “serious deviations” from the faith, but the TSPM-controlled churches are recognized as a legitimate “branch” of Christ’s Church in China. This shows a degree of moderation sometimes lacking in some other house church circles which refuse to recognize the TSPM churches as genuine churches at all, or to acknowledge (in the face of all the evidence) any believer who worships in a government sanctioned church as a brother or sister in Christ.” 69

-----
This is as far as I got so far in the book….. but it’s enough to reveal something of their spiritual strength, resiliency, and love towards each other. It is truly a work of God.

Diane

_________________
Diane

Before moving into the issue of “lording over” I would like to recommend the book, “When Charity Destroys Dignity” by Glen Schwartz.

It is an eye-opening resource on the issue of dependency. It contains well-researched documentation - yet is an exciting read. Here you find strategies for overcoming the problem of dependency in mission churches caused by the Western Church. But its application has a wider scope. You also see why, for instance, giving away Bibles for free is not necessarily the best strategy. The book teaches you how to designate your financial givings strategically.

I see this book as a helpful resource for those who are conscientious about the spiritual well-being of the Church today – abroad and also at home. I purchased my copy for a mere $10.00 from Voice of the Martyr site. It’s also available on the World Missions Associates site. In this 373-page book you find a plethora of other recommended books and journal articles. I ordered a few of the titles. Some I found on Amazon.ca for as little as 1 cent (plus shipping). I see this as an economical way to build up a library – and more importantly, to help us use our time and resources shrewdly. It’s one way you and I can grow in our love for the church of Jesus Christ – and live out our calling of Christian submission – even to our neighbors in distant lands.

Then we will no longer be infants….. blown here and there by … cunning and crafty appeals for our money and time ... (from Eph. 4:14)

Diane

_________________
Diane

“… not lording it over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock.” 1 Pet 5:3

Perhaps you envision the one who “lords over” as highly domineering, paternalistic, controlling – and overall, a cold repelling kind of a guy. He expects everyone to submit to him, but never the reverse. Yet, the apostle Paul likely had something much subtler in mind. After all, he wasn’t simply eager to see an amiable running church; he was eager to see the spiritual maturation of all the members.

From the previous readings on missionary practice, we have become aware of a style of “lording over” that is practiced by kind caring people – by individual leaders and also by charitable church institutions. However, it’s a kind of “love” that is not true Christian submission.

The apostle Paul never heard of our cliché, “helicopter parents” – but he'd probably see it as fitting. This is a pejorative phrase which gained currency in the early 2000’s. It is applied to overly “helpful” parents who constantly hover over their kids. I believe this is the overbearing style of headship Paul is denouncing. He’s cautioning against helicopter-parenting God’s people – keeping them in a perpetual state of dependency so that they can never grow up.

That is a serious problem, because these followers never learn to think for themselves, to make decisions, or to lead new churches themselves. They become incapacitated, just as we saw in African churches. And isn’t that an apt description of western Christianity today! There has, indisputably, been a lot of helicopter- lording going on. It’s an ineffective style of leadership – for children in families and also for God’s people in the church. This is the very problem which Luther fought against so adamantly – and so do many courageous saints still today.

Now I draw from another term which relates to lording-over: the “overfunctioner”. This term is applied to the ministry of pastoral caregiving – and really applies for any relational context. It’s the person who assumes too much of the work in a relationship. The overfunctioner may resort to a lot of advice-giving and explaining– which is an ineffective way of changing anyone. The overfunctioner in the relationship does all the mental and emotional work for the other. This is a kind of ‘lording over’. It keeps the under-funtioner from having to wrestle through the emotional, spiritual, or mental struggle required in making his beliefs and choices truly his own. He can remain endlessly passive and irresponsible, while keeping the overfuntioner feeling busy and useful (and eventually frustrated). For the overfunctioners in a professional capacity, this kind of “lording over” may keep them worthy of their salaries (but also eventually feeling unfulfilled).

In the church, the lording style of leadership may very well produce submissive, compliant members. This arrangement may not seem like a problem for the people because it may have superficial “benefits” – like authorial approvals and social benefits …. and above all, the much-coveted sense of moral righteousness. You can feel right with God. But Jesus said, “What good will it be for someone to gain the whole world, yet forfeit their soul? Or what can anyone give in exchange for their soul?” Matt. 16:26

Helicopter overlords produce “converts” who merely have a second-hand kind of faith which will not stand up against the trials and temptations of life. Deeper core values and presuppositions remain unchanged. And so these people easily go back to their old ways.

Do you see why “lording over” is so bad? It blocks the path to eternal life and weakens the church. This, I believe is what Paul had in mind. He said, “Not that we lord it over your faith, but we work WITH you for your joy, because it is by FAITH you stand firm.” 2 Cor. 1:24

Did you catch that? True Christian submission works WITH people, not over them: “… not lording it over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock.” 1 Pet 5:3 It is BY FAITH that the people stand firm – that is of course, their OWN faith in God.

Diane

_________________
Diane