| CARVIEW |
Another book I began on vacation is Marriage and the Mystery of the Gospel by Ray Ortlund. This is a volume in the Short Studies in Biblical Theology series. Despite the brevity of the volumes, I’ve been reading The Son of God and the New Creation by Graeme Goldsworthy for a few years now. It just keeps slipping through the cracks as other matters rise to the surface. That should not be taken as any form of judgement of either volume.
“… a reasoned appreciation for the Bible as a theologically unified, historically rooted, progressively unfolding, and ultimately Christ-centered narrative of God’s convenantal work in our world to redeem sinful humanity.” Dane Ortlund and Miles van Pelt, from the Series Preface
This is an excellent book by Ortlund. He does trace the biblical teaching of marriage through key texts. This is a great example of what biblical theology is at its best. As he gets to the NT texts in Ephesians and Revelation, Ortlund ties marriage to the gospel. Following Paul, he argues that human marriage is meant to point us to the union of Christ and the Church.
Though short in length (117 pages), it is full of helpful information, insight and implications. He draws on a number of other theologians over the course of the book. He also shows knowledge of ANE practices that provided the context for much of what we see in the OT, and sometimes shake our heads at. God has His reasons.
In some ways his book parallels my as yet unpublished book. It covers much of the same material. It is not as cool, filled with all kinds of illustrations from real life and pop culture. I provided more practical aspects, took more deep dives on things and generally used more words than he didn’t. But I wasn’t trying to fit it into a series of short studies.
Preface
Ortlund reminds us that due to the corruption of marriage and sexuality because of sin, we need a re-discovery of the truth and power of Scripture to grip our culture. The gospel is needed to restore human sexuality from the perversity of our hearts twisting it with pornography, premarital sex, group sex, polyamory and so much more.
“Reformation is the recovery of biblical truth in its redemptive claim on the whole of life. Revival is the renewal of human flourishing by the Holy Spirit according to the gospel.“
Marriage in Genesis
This is by far the longest chapter in the book at over 40 pages. It is the foundation of everything else regarding marriage, not just the book before us. Ortlund makes the case that marriage is “the wraparound concept for the entire Bible” and other prominent themes fit within it. The Bible begins with creation and ends with re-creation. It also begins and ends with marriage!
He contrasts Genesis 1 with the creation myths of the nations. In Genesis, humans are given great dignity by virtue of being made in the image of God. In creation myths they are the playthings of the gods, slaves to them and their kings on earth. In the secular creation myth we have no dignity unless we forge one for ourselves. The Bible says our dignity is given by our Creator, and it doesn’t matter your gender/sex, skin pigmentation or social status. You have dignity. As our founding fathers wrote, “All men are created equal…” in response to Genesis 1.
God also made us male and female. Sexual differentiation which is essential in marriage and procreation. Procreation is celebrated. Sex is enjoyable. Both were made (and necessary) to be fruitful, subdue and rule. Hence it was not good that Adam was alone. He couldn’t fulfill the mandate on his own.
He then brings us to Genesis 2. We were not apes who graduated to living in caves. God placed Adam in a Garden. A place of order, enjoyment and great potential. To subdue and rule was to expand it. The help he needed came in the form of Eve. Like him (human, equal in dignity) and yet not like him in key ways, despite the lies of our day.
“The Bible helps us see that we live in a universe where ultimate reality is relational.“
Head and helper are permanent. This is a glorious reality though often distorted due to sin (feminism <=> patriarchy). He argues for complementarianism (equal in dignity, but the husband is the head of his wife as servant leader, not men as the head of women). Headship is creational (and we’ll see redemption-rooted), not a social construct like patriarchy, or feminism or transgenderism. While we don’t blend gender identities, there are very few gender roles in Scripture. Most come from culture. Eve was made suitable or fit for Adam. His partner, his queen, not his property.
Ortlund notes that the mention of a practice in Scripture is not an endorsement of that practice by Scripture. He specifically mentions polygamy, rightly.
Additionally, when discussing that the man shall leave his parents, Ortlund points out that she is not the only one to sacrifice for this new relationship. My wife literally left her family as marrying me meant moving to FL. But I had to leave my bachelor life. She got to make my home hers too and furnishing changed. Men have to move beyond their pre-marriage relationships and practices. I also didn’t play basketball every week because she still needed to build a web of relationships outside of me in FL.
But we find that the man should take initiative. Boaz didn’t, but once he realized Ruth was game, he was ON IT.
Marriage is a life fully shared. One flesh points us to this. We remain two people, but now have a shared life with triumphs and trials together. Mutual support. Shared goals and dreams. One team, not two people sometimes on the same page. When we discover we aren’t on the same page, we are to act quickly to get on the same page (parenting, spending, vocation etc.). Friends don’t share everything. Spouses are to share everything. No “my money” and “your money”.
With Genesis 3 he gets to why so many marriages experience heartbreak, even divorce. Just like Adam and Eve, we are all 5 minutes from disaster. One thoughtless act or hurtful statement. One regrettable decision. While they were nude (naked and unashamed) the serpent was shrewd and about to disrupt marital bliss. He was going to lie so that he could kill through the covenant curse. He didn’t attack their relationship with each other though. He attacked their relationship with God. Most of our problems come down to someone’s relationship with God. He gets her to question God’s goodness. He gets her to question God’s justice too (you won’t die!). It really is a questioning of reality (and it goes on today on numerous fronts).
Eve rebelled against God, but also her husband’s headship. He listened to her! Rather than listening to God. Now their life together is characterized by power struggles and/or abdication. His work is now full of futility. His sin broke all of reality (see Romans 8). They feel shame as well as guilt. They are estranged from one another, from God and creation. We now live in fear of God, fear of committed relationships, fear of hard work and fear of nature.
To help us understand her “desire” for her husband, Ortlund rightly takes us to Genesis 4:7. Her desire is to control the one she was made to enjoy and help. He will push back and run roughshod over her.
“Only the gospel of Jesus can free us from this endless power struggle and restore the romance, the beauty, the joy and the harmony God intended- manly initiative cherishing and defending the woman, womanly support affirming and empowering the man.“
We can’t fix marriage. The One who crushes the head of the serpent is the only One who can.
He has a create quote by Edwards in discussing how this sadness is meant to drive us back to the heart of God.
Marriage in the Law, Wisdom, and the Prophets
After all the time he took in Genesis you might think such a chapter would be enormous. It isn’t. We see innumerable bad marriages, and plenty of different marriage problems.
The Bible is often mischaracterized. For instance, Ortlund looks at Dt. 20:7 and tells us that the newly married man is not to serve in the military for her happiness, not his. His is included, but she is to have happiness with him just in case something happens at war. This should be a warning to those in the military to marry. Your service threatens your spouse’s happiness in a variety of ways: loneliness of deployment, temptations of deployment, death, disfigurement. There is a reason so few marriages survive for special forces.
He gets into law and gospel issues here as well. The promises came first. The law is part of the Bible, but to temporarily run alongside the promises. Promise takes precedence over law. Promise defines the context of the law and the Scriptures. The law was provisional. Israel was redeemed and about to enter the Promised Land. They left the idolatry and immorality of Egypt and were about to enter the idolatry and immorality of Canaan. Due to sin, the law regulates aspects of marriage not necessary in Eden. Jesus affirmed Genesis 1-2. Divorce was an allowance for the hardness of people’s hearts. God provides mercy for those at the mercy of an adulterous, abusive or abandoning spouse.
“… we can think of the law of Moses as God speaking into an orc culture, regulating its worst features as the beginning of a long process of restoring them to their lost elf culture.”
We can look at the law from our vantage point and look down at it. If we look at it from the perspective of the nations around them it was a step in the right direction. It was restraining the power of sin.
The levirate marriage law was about continuing a family identity through providing an heir. It was a family responsibility, and the one who broke it cared little for his brother or extended family. Like the man in Ruth, he cares only for his own prosperity. This law helped protect the line of the Redeemer, not just a line for David.
He moves to Wisdom to show how God’s wisdom is far superior to men’s wisdom. That includes marriage. It helps us live in reality, to make good choices in light of reality. It advocates wisdom in choosing a spouse. It advocates self-control lest our inordinate desires destroy our marriage. As he looks at Proverbs 31, he sees a woman that is using her strengths to complement her husband, not compete with him. The household benefits and they all arise and call her. blessed. Surely this is no barefoot and pregnant, uneducated woman stuck nursing babies, washing laundry and slaving over the stove. She’s using many gifts to bless her family (not make a name or career for herself- the career would be for the family’s benefit). Her husband affirms and blesses her! He cherishes her rather than resents her.
In the prophets we see material akin to his book God’s Unfaithful Wife: A Biblical Theology of Spiritual Adultery which examined spiritual adultery or idolatry. This part focuses on just that: how adultery in marriage is used to help us understand the idolatry of Israel, Judah and ourselves. “Prone to wander, Lord, I feel it.”
Marriage in the New Testament
This chapter focuses primarily on Ephesians 5 but concludes with some passages from Revelation. Before Ortlund gets there he returns to Jesus and the question of divorce. He re-affirms the design of marriage in Genesis 2. It still is a shared life between a man and a woman that is intended to last until one dies (and not at the other’s hand). God joins people together. The state and the church just recognize that God has in fact joined them together. God, not the state, determines what besides death tears them asunder. In Scripture we see porneia (sexual immorality) in this text, abandonment (1 Cor. 7) and refusal to provide conjugal and material rights (1 Cor. 7 rooted in Exodus 21:10ff).
This means that God is present in every legitimate marriage, not just those between believers. God is united to us body and soul, not just soul. He is therefore Lord over our bodies and what we do with them (1 Cor. 6). We have been bought with a price, body and soul, and should honor God with our bodies.
Ortlund distinguishes between one body and one flesh. In fornication there is one body, a coupling, but not a union. Marriage is about one flesh. The former is incompatible with marriage, while the latter is marriage.
Ortlund reminds us that the call to submit is placed within the context of redemption. He’s like Christ, and she’s like the Church. He sacrificially loves for her benefit. He nourishes and cherishes her. She submits to him in submission to Him. Submission is about disagreement. When you disagree, and both have had their say (a wise man hears his wife out) and his decision is contrary to her will (but not God’s word). It isn’t about putting her under a heel. The headship of a husband, according to Paul, is not a human construct though there are human distortions. Ortlund reminds us that Paul never told husbands to subjugate their wives. They are to love them as Christ loved the Church (2x), and their own bodies. No room for dictatorships here.
And there is no room for the unsatisfiable, critical, demanding, obstinate wife either. No one wants to be married to the leaky faucet, a nagging and scolding wife. Many a marriage has been destroy, robbed of any joy, by this just as much as by an over-bearing husband. His love for her, displayed regularly in service, will or should produce respect in her.
“... deep in the heart of every wife is the self-doubt that wonders, “Do I please him? Am I the one he dreamed of and longed for? Will he love me to the end? Am I safe with this man I married?”… A wise husband will understand that uncertainty, that question, is why down deep in his wife’s heart. And he will spend his life speaking into it, gently, and tenderlycommunicating to her in many ways, “Darling, you are the one I wand, I cherish you.” …For the wife, remember that God made Adam first and put him in the garden with a job to do, a mission to fulfill, a mountain to climb. … deep in the heart of every man is the self-doubt that wonders, “Am I man enough to meet the challenge God has called me to? Can I fulfill my destiny? Won’t I end up failing?” … A wise wife will never put her husband down or laugh at him but will greatly strengthen him and build him up, for God’s glory. He will accomplish more by the power of her respect than he over could on his own.“
That is the money quote. Or quotes.
That mystery of the two becoming one flesh is about Christ and the Church. Jesus continues to prepare the Bride He purchased, the Bride the Father gave to Him as a reward for His obedience unto death on a cross. The wedding supper is coming. Ready and waiting?
]]>Sadly they seem to think you can never have too many cats. Like the Lays commercial, you can’t just have one. Thankfully we peaked at “only” 5. Two belong to our newly married daughter, and after watching the house for us they eventually went to their home. The next day while I was in CA with CavSon #1, one had a kitty version of a stroke and was unable to use her legs. Shocking because that morning, before I left, she was jumping up on the bathroom counter as she was prone to do with her front paws slipping on the tile like Fred Flintstone.

Callie came to us from the Whiskers and Wishes cat rescue. CavDaughter volunteered there. That meant fostering kittens, cats, preggo cats and …. too many cats.
One cat they had was from a hoarder home. She was probably about 8 or 9 and they weren’t sure they would be able to re-home her. Our home became her home. At least part of it.
She was a beautiful Calico. They can be fractious. She and our first cat, Phinn, never got alone. Initially there would be some cat fights, followed by Callie reverse sneezing out of stress. Our room became her home.
In the mornings while the other cats were in the kids’ rooms, we’d let her roam the house. CavWife would leave some treats for her by the fridge. She’d usually retreat to our room pretty quickly. If Phinn got in there, and he didn’t start a fight, he’d just stare her down like, “I can get you whenever I want. You are on borrowed time, old girl.”
When Grond aka Gronk (our daughter’s big, curious orange cat reminds of Gronkowski) lived here, he could open doors (ours have levers), which meant that Phinn could get in more often. Gronk broke in to get at her food. He was always hungry. This meant installing child protection devices on our doors. Especially the door to the primary bedroom where she lived.
When we traveled cross country for my sabbatical we took two vehicles so we didn’t have to worry about Callie and Phinn fighting somewhere on Route 66 or the PA Turnpike. Okay, it wasn’t just that. Imagine trying to fit 6 people, 4 cats and a dog, along with luggage and a litter box in the van. I can’t think of a much worse way to cross the country. It was bad enough the cats limited our lunch options and prevented us from seeing Niagara Falls. I didn’t want to end up in prison if they died from heat exhaustion, and we weren’t carting them to the falls. We were so close, yet so far away.
She Was a Mass of Health Issues
She had health issues from the get go. She was a puker. She’d puke regularly. Sometimes she’d keep puking until there was blood and we administered medication to end the cycle. This made sleep an adventure. I would be awakened at all hours of the night with the sound of her puking. We even bought a water proof blanket to protect the other blankets and sheets from continual washing.
She also had tooth problems. This meant tooth removal. Eventually there were none left. She was our “toothless wonder”. She still ate dry food, preferring it over wet food. We have no idea why.
She had no control over her tail. It had a mind of its own. Callie would put her rear leg on it to keep it from moving.
Not too long ago she was sick with perhaps some respiratory issues. CavDaughter thought this was it. I didn’t see the signs of distress. It took a few days but she started eating again. Then back to jumping on the counters.
Shortly after that she got her rabies shot. We decided this was the last time for that because she was essentially inert for 2-3 days. She barely moved. She had a vaccine reaction (and perhaps her stroke was too).
She Was Particular
For most of her time with us she didn’t like to use the fountain in our room. She much preferred drinking from the shower or one of the sinks in the bathroom. Getting to sleep became difficult. Many a night I was settled in to sleep, about to cross over into la-la land and she’d begin her persistent meow. She wanted water. But from where? Tired I would try to base this on where she was. Did she look like she wanted the shower on? Was she up by the sinks? But often I’d have to go back to run water in the other option.
Occasionally that persistent meow was for food, or some affection. You would work through the options. At other times you were well asleep, dreaming sweet dreams when the meowing would begin. “Get me water, slave!”
She wanted a clean litter box. It needed to be cleaned each evening. And she would promptly use it, like she’d been waiting for you to get your act together that little imaginary princess. If you didn’t get to it (we had a child who was less than consistent and lost their job cleaning the litter boxes), she’d go right outside the box. “Take that!”
Callie didn’t do scratching posts. Didn’t do cat trees. She had nails, just not teeth. She would scratch on the carpet, particularly by our bathroom. We ended up laying a towel there to prevent her from scratching, and to catch at least some puke.
Not My Cat
They would call her my cat. They got me a Cat Dad mug. I’m not sure why aside from the fact that we occupied the same room. She preferred men in general. But … she’d sleep on CavWife at times. She make biscuits on CavWife. There was no indication of particular affection for me unless you consider stepping on my privates affection. I sure don’t.
I only fed her in the middle of the night or early morning. I didn’t give her treats each day. I brought her to the vet once, for the last rabies shot because my daughter abandoned me. They have a funny definition of “my cat.”
Nighttime is the Fun Time
She didn’t just torment us with the meowing for water. Or food. Or affection. She’d get the zoomies at night. This, obviously, meant running over the bed. This meant her running on us. Such fun for us, but a grand time for Callie.
In the summer she’d often sleep above the covers. This often meant we couldn’t snuggle because she’d be between us. Or she would trap me in the center. Not only getting to sleep and staying asleep was a struggle, but moving in your sleep.
At other times she’d burrow under the covers. But if you were in bed she’d just paw at the covers, expecting you to lift them to create a cave for her to enjoy. Are you getting she was a high maintenance cat yet? If not, what’s wrong with you?
Let’s just say that we sleep better now.
A Traveling Cat
It wasn’t just our sabbatical cross-country trip that she enjoyed. Because we didn’t want to “curse” anyone with her, or risk Callie and Phinn going a few rounds without us to intervene, she joined us on our vacations to NY. Our trips to the airport would customarily begin with an episode of puking. After that it was smooth sailing. She like to get out on her leash (to the consternation and condemnation of airline employees at the gate), and she was a star attraction because she was such a pretty calico.

At the Farm, there were times she would have the run of the house. A BIG house. It was like heaven for her. She could burrow in our bed, hang out in the girls’ room or in the windowsill of the living room. Her movements were hindered by her “cousins” Oscar and Tilly. Oscar is a hefty, deaf cat. He’s sweet, but Callie was not well socialized with other cats in the hoarder house. Tilly and Oscar would both try to get into our room since she was a picker and they were ravenous. And of course they had to make her life difficult by using her litter box. HER litter box. But it was a great vacation for her, unless (Mad) Max was there too. Our dog basically ignores Callie. Max can’t. It scares her. So she’d again be confined to our spacious room. This meant Callie would try to scratch (and often succeed) on the furniture. Please, don’t tell my mother-in-law.
]]>In light of this, I decided to pull The Pastor as Counselor: The Call of Soul Care by David Powlison out of my “To Read” queue and bring it on vacation to the frozen woodlands of the Adirondacks. I’m still not sure what I was expecting out of this short book. I have respect for Powlison and have read most of his books. Maybe I was hoping this would clarify things for me.
It clarified that pastors should do more counseling. As a pastor, I’ve wished I’d done more counseling in both pastorates. It isn’t that I didn’t want to. There were some counseling sessions that went well. I helped someone through a difficult job transition. There was marriage counseling as you might expect. I’ve talked with people with issues regarding anger, forgiveness and sexual abuse. But there were people I wish would have sought counseling.
Of course you do plenty informally, in conversations on Sunday. But they often took “how are you doing” as the typical greeting rather than as a request for information and an invitation to open up.
In the forward, Edward Welch notes that “this book is not intended to be a how-to manual. It is more a marker that clarifies your place in this sometimes confusing world of counseling.” It is mean to clarify the pastor’s place in that world. It is meant to encourage pastors to care for the souls of congregants through counseling in addition to feeding them from the Word.
To this end, Powlison’s first words are “Pastor, you are a counselor.” You might be a good counselor or a bad counselor, but you are one like it or not. We deal with the wayward and ignorant, the rebellious, the weak and fainthearted and others.
“Hands-on pastoral counseling never means that you become the only counselor in the body of Christ. You are training Christ’s people how to walk in the image of the “Wonderful Counselor” (Isa. 9:6).“
He’s envisioning a community marked by substantial conversations about the heart. We love to talk about sports, books and movies. Some of us like to talk theology. But we should be talking about the intersection of our faith and our lives, afflictions. We are to apply the wisdom of God as revealed in His word to the particular issues of life.
What Is Counseling?
He notes that what pastors seek to do is very different from what the psychotherapeutic community wants to do. There is overlap. There surely is talking.
A therapists relationship to the client is limited to the sessions. In my MA program we were taught not to acknowledge clients in the “real world”. If they approach us, greet them and talk about things besides what you’ve discussed in sessions. I had one client that struggled with that when he approached me in the grocery store. Well, he had problems with boundaries anyway.
For pastors, counseling is only part of the relationship. We see them regularly outside of sessions, hopefully multiple times a week in worship, SS, committee meetings or Bible studies. There is mutual self-disclosure. A pastoral counselor is more likely to draw on their experiences than a therapist. Caring for the soul is highly relational.
In my counseling program, we were not as detached. It was an interpersonal model, often focused on how the person attached to others, which is often revealed by how you experience them.
A pastor can’t devote 10-15 hours per week to counseling. We will normally do far less due to other responsibilities. We also can’t spend endless weeks counseling an individual. There are many in the congregation, so it will be less intense or focused.
God, knowing that we are self-obsessed sinners with walls of self-protection, wants us to learn to love by being loved: by Him and one another. Our goal is not “health” but maturity, godliness. That includes healthy ways of relating.
We, as alluded to earlier, have multiple relationships with people. We wear many hats in that relationship. The therapeutic world wants to avoid dual-relationships. We come from a very different ethos, that not simply of personal relationships but community.
“Endemic sinfulness deranges our reactions to both traumatic and everyday sufferings. Psalm 23 infuses a different way of suffering. Our derangement is fundamental, rooting in dedicated attentiveness to our own inner voice, the liar we find most persuasive (Prov. 16:2; 21:2). But our Pastor’s voice heals us…”
The Uniqueness of Pastoral Counseling
We have a responsibility to counsel. How much will differ between pastors and pastorates. We have a responsibility to help others love those in their families, neighborhoods, workplaces and churches. We are to help people see their hearts, their motives and twisted nature. This is part of what it means to shepherd people.
We deal with a category that psychotherapists don’t: sin. That means we also deal with a balm they don’t: the gospel. Good biblical and/or Christian counseling does this too, but psychotherapy doesn’t. As a result, preaching and counseling complement one another.
“Counseling usually starts with immediate, troubling experience, and moves toward the God whose person, words, and actions bring light. In contrast, preaching usually moves from Bible exposition toward life application.“
We also have unique opportunities to counsel. We visit them in crisis: hospitals, funeral homes, jail visitation.
Here he addresses the fact that pastors don’t charge. He thinks this allows pastors to be less ambiguous and more honest. We aren’t trying to keep a client.
Well, a bit of push back here. You can offend a congregant in counseling. I’ve had people leave because they shared “too much” and then felt I’d look at them differently. We still need to be gentle. Not less honest, but remember that truth should be joined with love. And people may still leave our congregations.
We are able to “leverage” the trust we have as a pastor in the counseling relationship. A licensed counselor needs to develop trust. We have it which means the process can be quicker. We also know far more about the person: their families, how they relate to others etc. Surely not everything. You’ll be surprised at the things I’ve learned after 10 years because the person thought it wasn’t important. Big things that damage the soul.
How we go about helping them change (and getting them to that point of wanting to change) is also different. We bring God’s wisdom, God’s gospel, faith, hope and love to bear on them and their problems. Another aspect is God’s providence over our trials.
So, this was not quite what I was looking for at the time. I was looking to do it outside of pastoral ministry, more specifically church ministry. He’s focused on counseling as part of church/pastoral ministry.
What he says is very helpful, aside from a few things like that mentioned above. He wants us to embrace our call. This is a good book toward that end. It bears reading. Being short means it is more likely to be read by a pastor.
]]>His blindness was cause for shame. He could not work and was reliant on alms, and the kindness of others. He was ostracized from much of society. Some didn’t pay enough attention to him that they could not positively identify him as the man who had been born blind.
He was broken, but the glory of God was the purpose. Jesus removed much of his shame in healing him. He was ushered into a new mode of existence with new challenges.
But instead of his community rejoicing with him and glorifying God, they began to shame him. “You’re lying to us.” And yet this was an occasion to criticize Jesus because it was the Sabbath. The man was in a catch-22. No miracle, I’m a liar. A miracle, and Jesus is evil.
Shame puts us in these no-win scenarios with others. Admit you’re flawed and you are rejected (or don’t get the job); pretend you are not and your problems deepen and they call you a hypocrite.
It reminds me of the cultural revolution in China (and its manifestation here with the cancel culture) with forced public confessions. The confessions didn’t change anything. You were still exiled to the camps. The group just felt better now that they knew what a horrible person you were. Today we see this on campuses and other places with the cries of “shame”. Or should I say chants of “shame” since it is not one person but a group in unison. These cries are not meant for those who commit evil from a biblical perspective (breaking God’s law) but not toeing the line with the progressive agenda. There are many pushing a cultural revolution here (calling good evil and evil good, calling law and order fascism, agitating communities into “activism”, dividing them into oppressed and oppressor). But I digress, slightly.
Let’s return to John 9.
24 So for the second time they called the man who had been blind and said to him, “Give glory to God. We know that this man is a sinner.” 25 He answered, “Whether he is a sinner I do not know. One thing I do know, that though I was blind, now I see.” 26 They said to him, “What did he do to you? How did he open your eyes?” 27 He answered them, “I have told you already, and you would not listen. Why do you want to hear it again? Do you also want to become his disciples?” 28 And they reviled him, saying, “You are his disciple, but we are disciples of Moses. 29 We know that God has spoken to Moses, but as for this man, we do not know where he comes from.” 30 The man answered, “Why, this is an amazing thing! You do not know where he comes from, and yet he opened my eyes. 31 We know that God does not listen to sinners, but if anyone is a worshiper of God and does his will, God listens to him. 32 Never since the world began has it been heard that anyone opened the eyes of a man born blind. 33 If this man were not from God, he could do nothing.” 34 They answered him, “You were born in utter sin, and would you teach us?” And they cast him out.
Sometimes shame is the work of a system, not just the work of an individual. He was part of an honor culture. He was also encountering a legalistic religious system in the Pharisees.
He is summoned back since they have gotten no where with his parents. They place him under oath to tell the truth (“Give glory to God”). But state “We know this man is a sinner.” They have already judged Jesus. The question is whether or not the man born blind will join in judging Jesus or being judged with Jesus. Will you belong or be cast out? Belonging is important to the honor culture. They are appealing to the fear of shame. “Do you want to be considered nothing, an outcast and apostate?”
He is able to do what he couldn’t before this day: look them in the eye. Before they could mock him without words and not be known. Now he sees- them. Simeon’s prophecy is coming true as the hearts of these men are being revealed through Jesus. Theirs are full of hate.
The man sticks to what he knows: I was blind, but now I see. He makes no statement about Jesus. He doesn’t know Jesus, beyond a brief encounter, at this point.
Back to the miracle: how did Jesus do this? Perhaps they are looking for sorcery: incantations or some ritual. Perhaps it is how could He do what we didn’t even try to do. Remember, this was a man born blind. This miracle is unheard of.
Now it gets ugly. Exasperation on the man’s part because they’ve already gone over it. Sounds like a person who has gone through layers of bureaucracy telling the same story. It is like an innocent man being interrogated by an unbelieving detective. “The story isn’t going to change no matter how many times I tell it.” Ends with this pointed, snarky question: “Do you also want to become His disciples?”
The bomb hit the mark. The question is a bit ambiguous with the “also”. Does it mean he’s a disciple? Do they want to join him? Or are you asking because you want to become His disciples? Of course he knows they don’t.
So they revile, or verbally abuse him. They heap abuse which probably isn’t recorded here. It is intended to belittle him; shame him. Now the definitive statement: “You are His disciple.” But they go further: “we are disciples of Moses.” Jesus went down this road with them before. If they really were, they’d receive Jesus because Moses’ mission was to prepare them for Him. But this is meant as a condescending statement. “We are of Moses, you fool!”
This still happens in theological debate. Sides are chosen, people belittled. Heat but no light. They have not said why Jesus can’t be Messiah except for healing on the Sabbath. HEALING on the Sabbath, the day of rest and re-creation.
But wait, there is more! They know God spoke to Moses, but not to Jesus. They don’t even know where Jesus is from. The man is stunned at their ignorance since this is not the first miracle Jesus has performed. The fact that God listened to Jesus and opened his eyes should be proof to them that God also speaks to Jesus. He can see this so clearly, yet they can’t. They are blinded by their false assumptions.
Offended they heap more abuse on him. He is utterly sinful. He was born this way (back to the disciples’ question). They are offended that such a sinner would seek to teach them. Their fear of being wrong, their pride, have also blinded them to the sign that Jesus is indeed the Word become flesh dwelling among us, as well as the Lamb of God come to take away the sins of the world.
Thankfully they don’t get the final word.
35 Jesus heard that they had cast him out, and having found him he said, “Do you believe in the Son of Man?” 36 He answered, “And who is he, sir, that I may believe in him?” 37 Jesus said to him, “You have seen him, and it is he who is speaking to you.” 38 He said, “Lord, I believe,” and he worshiped him. 39 Jesus said, “For judgment I came into this world, that those who do not see may see, and those who see may become blind.” 40 Some of the Pharisees near him heard these things, and said to him, “Are we also blind?” 41 Jesus said to them, “If you were blind, you would have no guilt; but now that you say, ‘We see,’ your guilt remains.
While not explicit in verse 34, it is explicit here: they kicked him out of the synagogue. He joins Jesus outside of the “establishment”, he joins the “sinners.”
While they toss him away like garbage, Jesus seeks him out. Jesus is not put off by the shame others dump on us. He bore it, just like He bore our guilt. He sees us, not as we are, but as He shall make us. He sees the glory that He offers us, the glory of His that He willingly shares. He’s not focused on whether or not we measure up. He imputes righteousness to us in justification and infuses it in sanctification. He declares us acceptable and then makes us acceptable; quite the reverse of the world.
We should take great comfort in this. Jesus doesn’t treat us like we think He should. Like everyone else claims He should. Jesus is for losers, and makes them winners at the end.
Jesus asks if he believes in the Son of Man (think Daniel). He doesn’t know who the Son of Man is. Not ignorance of the Son of Man and His significance, but the particular identity of the Son of Man.
First Jesus affirms that He is the Son of Man. Because of the miracle, the man believes this to be true. The true Judge and Ruler of Israel was before him as a humble rabbi. He’s given a peek beneath the shame the establishment has placed on Jesus through the miracle. The man born blind sees more clearly than everyone else at this moment.
Second, Jesus receives his worship. He bows before Messiah. He bows before the Word who was with and is God. He bows for the One who is one with the Father, who was before Abraham, who is the I am. Jesus accepts His worship because He is God (contrary to the views of various Arian and Apollinarian groups like the Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormon).
Jesus refers back to Daniel, that He is given the responsibility to judge, and to bring about the great reversal: the blind will see Him, and those who see will become blind should they reject Him.
As you might imagine, there were Pharisees lurking by. They are offended. “Are we also blind?”
Jesus says their guilt remains because they claim to see, but see Him not as He truly is. They are full of unbelief. The man born blind is full of faith. He is justified, and they are condemned by their own testimony.
It is not the testimony of others about you that matters. It is your testimony about Jesus that matters, from one perspective. Do we believe or not? But ultimately it is the testimony about us by Jesus that matters. His acceptance is what matters.
We all have had experiences of rejection. People who didn’t want to be friends (any more). People who didn’t want to date us (or be married to us) anymore, or ever. We’ve been fired from jobs, rejected by schools and employers. We are constantly told we are not good enough, we aren’t worth someone’s time and energy. For some reason Rocky comes to mind, as Mick comes hat in hand asking to train him for the big fight. “Where were you when I needed you?” Rocky the bum, treated as a nobody is someone so many identified with.
Here’s good news. Jesus loves bums and losers. As Paul tells us in 1 Corinthians 1- not many were noble or wise. God choose the undesirables to shame the proud, noble and wise who think they deserve God’s love. He sheds His love on the ungodly, weak, sinful and unacceptable. He doesn’t shame His people: He honors them.
This is something worth believing.

In John 9 Jesus came across a man born blind. Jesus ‘anointed’ his eyes with mud and sent him to wash in the pool of Siloam. He was no longer blind. Eyes that never worked suddenly did. It wasn’t the mud. One the one hand Jesus does what most didn’t- touch him. But it was also a demonstration of faith. If he doesn’t go to the pool, he doesn’t get healed. He trusted the word of Jesus.
The controversy begins with his neighbors. Not all believed it was him. Imagine if your neighbors didn’t believe you were you.
Years ago I visited the library at the seminary from which I got my degrees. One of my professors and former advisors was there and I greeted him. He was getting on in years and didn’t recognize me. I said “I’m me, Cavman” (yes, I used my real name). He replied “I know Cavman, and you are not Cavman.” That’s what this is like. These were not strangers, but people who should know him. But, they didn’t.
I recognize the reality of cognitive decline and dementia for my beloved professor. I didn’t feel the shame that the man born blind must have. But the controversy widened.
13 They brought to the Pharisees the man who had formerly been blind. 14 Now it was a Sabbath day when Jesus made the mud and opened his eyes. 15 So the Pharisees again asked him how he had received his sight. And he said to them, “He put mud on my eyes, and I washed, and I see.” 16 Some of the Pharisees said, “This man is not from God, for he does not keep the Sabbath.” But others said, “How can a man who is a sinner do such signs?” And there was a division among them. 17 So they said again to the blind man, “What do you say about him, since he has opened your eyes?” He said, “He is a prophet.”
Enter the Pharisees! He is brought to the Pharisees by the neighbors. He mentioned the wrong name- Jesus.
Here we get another important piece of data: it was the Sabbath. One again the Pharisees are upset about a miracle on the Sabbath. This was not a party trick, but Jesus healed a man. I guess they expected Jesus to return and hope to find the man the next day and heal him.
This man doesn’t matter to them. His blindness didn’t matter. Getting Jesus mattered.
He tells the story of how Jesus opened his eyes. They make an accusation about Jesus: He was not from God because He didn’t keep the Sabbath. One again the Sabbath matters more than people made in God’s image. Jesus doesn’t fit in their box, therefore He must be evil despite doing good.
Shame systems don’t like anything out of the box. They did nothing for this man, but Jesus did. Jesus, not their heartlessness, becomes the problem.
Not all the Pharisees buy this assessment. They wonder how a sinner could do such a sign, a miracle revealing the Messiah. Jesus once again divides the crowd.
In light of this, they turn to the man formerly born blind. What did he think about Jesus. He straightforwardly says Jesus is a prophet. He doesn’t think, or say, the Prophet (Dt. 18) or the Messiah. Sent by God, yes! Not the One they have been waiting for. He may have been playing it safe. We don’t know. Would you want to go “all in” in light of this controversy? It is possible he’s been shamed into holding his tongue.
18 The Jews did not believe that he had been blind and had received his sight, until they called the parents of the man who had received his sight 19 and asked them, “Is this your son, who you say was born blind? How then does he now see?” 20 His parents answered, “We know that this is our son and that he was born blind. 21 But how he now sees we do not know, nor do we know who opened his eyes. Ask him; he is of age. He will speak for himself.” 22 (His parents said these things because they feared the Jews, for the Jews had already agreed that if anyone should confess Jesus to be Christ, he was to be put out of the synagogue. 23 Therefore his parents said, “He is of age; ask him.”)
The “Jews” is not every Jew. John was a Jew. Jesus was a Jew. This refers back to the Pharisees, the religious leaders of the Jews (which also included the Sanhedrin). It is similar to the “world”, not everyone but those opposed to God. These are the Israelites opposed to Jesus and God’s real plan of salvation.
They don’t believe he was born blind. They believe he made it all up. They want everyone to think that this man is either crazy or a liar. They are gaslighting him. They don’t want anyone, including him, to believe what he knows is true.
Now they summon his parents. His family grew up there, lived there, was known by the people. See how crazy this is!
They acknowledge the man as their son, and that he was born blind. Having not being present at his healing, and fearing the Pharisees, they refer them to him about how he can now see. He was of age (13 or older) and can testify for himself. In other words, stop bothering us.
Apparently he never got home and talked to his parents. The controversy broke out quickly. Hanging in the air is their threat to remove anyone who confesses Jesus as Messiah out of the synagogue.
Jesus is an outsider, considered a heretic despite there not being a trial. Those embracing Him are rejected, removed from the community of faith.
Ever been kicked out of a community of faith?
I was briefly part of the Boston Church of Christ cult while in college. No time for the whole story here but I disagreed with their views and left. The story told to others was I transferred to another college. They couldn’t deal with dissent, and to avoid shame and having to explain, they lied. Yes, my discipler lied to the rest of the group. Shame societies, like cults, cannot handle dissent. The one who disagrees must go- even if they are right.
Those who confessed Jesus as Messiah were right. The Pharisees were wrong. But the Pharisees shamed and rejected Jesus as the Messiah. They shamed Him by slandering and falsely accusing Him.
But to be kicked out of a community of faith when you haven’t been actually excommunicated is exceedingly painful. This man would have been kicked out of the only community of faith he’d ever known. There was none other, unless you followed Jesus. It would mean the loss of most of his relationships. (When pastors are forced out, they don’t just lose their ‘job’ they lose their community of faith. They are unmoored, disconnected. You live in the same town (for a time) but don’t see the same people anymore. The shame snowballs in a way others just can’t wrap their heads around.)
Back to his parents for a moment, and their fear. They didn’t want to be kicked out of the synagogue for believing Jesus was the Messiah. Yet Jesus is the one who healed their son. Fear extinguished any possibility of faith. Shame is about fear, precisely the fear of rejection and exclusion. The Pharisees were using the power of shame to keep most people under control. People were choosing spiritual slavery over real freedom.
Religious groups and cults still use the power of shame to keep people in spiritual slavery. It becomes more important to please the powers that be than the Redeemer.
This man born blind has lost all sense of identity, lost his place in life, his ‘vocation’, had his parents distance themselves from him, and is on the brink of being kicked out of the synagogue after intense questioning. This great day when Jesus gave him sight has become a nightmare.
“He’d expected a hero’s welcome. After all, he’d defeated a trained killer, after being shot in the head. Instead of sympathy, he’d been greeted with ridicule for recruiting an insider threat, and he was cast aside as a failure. .. Nobody gave him his due as a combat veteran, spilling his blood for the Russian state. He was shunned by even his military comrades- his stench of failure treated like a communicable disease that they could contract.” Hunter Killer by Brad Taylor
Just like that fictional character, his expectations were completely off. Instead of rejoicing at this remarkable change in fortune he was interrogated, doubted, rejected and people who knew better wasn’t even sure if he was himself. There was a stench connected to him that no one wanted to get near.
Thankfully, his story doesn’t end there.
]]>Guilt and shame are related, and both are related to sin. Guilt says “I’ve done something wrong”. False guilt can think I’m to blame for wrong done to me. Shame says “There’s something wrong with me” whether I’ve done something wrong or had something wrong done to me.
Now that I’ve laid out some terminology….
As he passed by, he saw a man blind from birth. 2 And his disciples asked him, “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?” 3 Jesus answered, “It was not that this man sinned, or his parents, but that the works of God might be displayed in him. 4 We must work the works of him who sent me while it is day; night is coming, when no one can work. 5 As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world.” 6 Having said these things, he spit on the ground and made mud with the saliva. Then he anointed the man’s eyes with the mud 7 and said to him, “Go, wash in the pool of Siloam” (which means Sent). So he went and washed and came back seeing.
Jesus and His disciples came across a man who was born blind. There had never been a day he didn’t experience only darkness (that was about to change). We aren’t sure how the disciples knew he was born blind. Perhaps others had talked about him, or they asked him.
Shame often talks about others and their problems. By this I mean we place shame on them to justify why we don’t draw near to them. We use shame to hold them at a distance from ourselves. It is likely the disciples didn’t engage the man, but others about the man.
His blindness was not the result of an injury. He didn’t shoot his eye out with a Red Ryder Carbine Action 200-shot Range model air rifle. Ralphie felt shame for shooting himself via a ricochet and breaking his glasses again. He made up a story of an icicle to cover his shame. His lie was a fig leaf designed to avoid the derision of others, turning “You’ll shoot your eye out” to “you shot your eye out.”
The disciples ask a question I never would have dreamed to ask. They want to find who to blame in their cause-effect world. They want to know who to blame in this honor/shame society. “Who sinned, this man or his parents?” All suffering is a result of Adam’s sin, but they want to identify a particular sin, and sinner, responsible for this man’s blindness.
Think about it. Did he sin in the womb that he was born blind? The thought should strike us as ridiculous. The thought that God would punish the man for his parents’ sins should also strike us as ridiculous. But this seemed a very reasonable questions and proposal for the disciples. Someone did something wrong for him to be this way.
At the very least there is guilt. There is also shame. There is something wrong with you, they think, to be born blind. They are looking for someone to blame, for someone to avoid. They don’ want to catch anything.
We all have aspects of our body that are sources of shame. Like many people, I have a birth mark. I don’t think much about it, but as a child my brother would tell me he was going to get Ajax and rub it out. He was communicating that there was something shameful about my discolored skin. People called me “the Nose” in school because of the size of my nose. Some kids on the bus made fun of my “greasy Italian hair” so that I used shampoo that dried it out. Shame. All meant to make the other feel “less than”. Nothing has changed.
Jesus indicates that there was no sin by him or his parents. He was born blind so God’s works might be displayed in him. Jesus is about to perform a miracle proving He is Messiah. This guy is a recipient.
I know I’d ask “why me” or say “really?” since that is a lifetime of suffering. He is an adult who to this point has lived his life blind, dependent on others, unable to work, oblivious to the way others looked at him. This doesn’t seem worth it. Yet, as Creator, He is free to make us as He chooses and for His purposes.
This miracle is not one done from afar. He could have just said the word, like in Genesis 1. But He touched the man. He put mud in his eyes and asked him to wash in the pool (reminding us of Naaman). Jesus was not ashamed of this man, afraid of touching this man. It is funny how He “anoints” the man with the mud.
The man’s life is about to change, irrevocably (unlike in the movie At First Sight). It will get worse before it gets better.
8 The neighbors and those who had seen him before as a beggar were saying, “Is this not the man who used to sit and beg?” 9 Some said, “It is he.” Others said, “No, but he is like him.” He kept saying, “I am the man.” 10 So they said to him, “Then how were your eyes opened?” 11 He answered, “The man called Jesus made mud and anointed my eyes and said to me, ‘Go to Siloam and wash.’ So I went and washed and received my sight.” 12 They said to him, “Where is he?” He said, “I do not know.”
“Isn’t that the beggar?” That’s is how they viewed him: destitute, dependent, shabby and shameful. Don’t we tend to avoid beggars too?
They can’t decide if it is him or not. That’s how well they paid attention to him. They didn’t even recognize his voice. With functioning eyes they didn’t recognize his face. Without stumbling, fumbling or using a stick they didn’t recognize his gait.
One year I returned home from vacation earlier than the rest of the family. I decided, in a moment of insanity, to shave off my mustache and goatee. This was not met with joy by my children. This change in appearance with met with horror. They wanted me like I had been, and I started to grow them back quickly. These neighbors (!) wanted him as he had been, not as he now was.
They were not happy for him. They were not offering to help him adjust, learn a trade (since he can’t beg in all good conscience). Shame systems don’t really want you to change. That’s because they don’t want to change. If you change, they have to change how they interact with you. They were comfortable with your problems. Relating or not relating to you was in their comfort zone. Now they are uncomfortable, uncertain. They feel some shame about how they dismissed you.
While we all deal with our own sense of shame, we do this in a community that either heals or reinforces that sense of shame. Healthy communities will not view you in light of shame (yours or theirs) but value you and help you grow. Unhealthy communities see you as “blind”, “a greasy haired Italian” and that’s the only way they want to see you. They keep you at arm’s length, quietly rejecting you until you become too great of a burden on them.
Jesus is not just healing a man. Jesus is not just revealing He is Messiah through this sign. Jesus is revealing the true condition of this community as fundamentally messed up. They have and will continue to sin against the man born blind.
]]>Christian Living
Looking to disciple someone or better understand what it means to walk with God? Try Walking with God by J.C. Ryle. This is a short book focused on expressing commitment to Christ in daily life. He covers the means of grace, zeal, our relationship with the world and so much more. He regularly gets to the heart of things.
John Newton is one of my mentors. Newton on the Christian Life: To Live is Christ by Tony Reinke is a great book that I re-read this year. I can identify with much of his life despite not being a slave trader nor losing my mother as a child. This book covers his grasp of the sufficiency of Christ, and the joy of Christ as foundational to the Christian life. Reinke includes chapters on trials and blemishes. This book is about real life, real people who are united to Christ despite struggles with sins and circumstances.
A very good book about spiritual formation is A Heart Aflame: A Reformed Approach to Spiritual Formation by Matthew Bingham of Phoenix Seminary. A Reformed approach is centered on the Word of God: reading it, praying it, meditating on it. This stands in contrast to John Michael Comer’s approach which seems to have no guiding (and restraining) principle. There is a place for nature since it points us to the Creator (see Ps. 19 for example). The goal isn’t navel gazing, but beholding our God and Redeemer. As I mentioned in my review, one weakness is not bringing in the sacraments which are a means of grace in most Reformed theology.
It wouldn’t be a best-reads without some Sinclair Ferguson. This year he has two books in the list. The first is Worthy: Living in Light of the Gospel. He builds on a phrase of Paul’s in Philippians about living a life worthy of the gospel. This isn’t the only place Paul uses a variation of this call. This short book spends most of its time in Philippians pulling on the threads of this idea of a life worthy of the gospel. He addresses gospel grammar, gospel identity, a gospel mindset and more. This is a helpful little book, as you would expect from Sinclair Ferguson.
I read The Blessing of Humility by Jerry Bridges years ago, but decided to read it again this year. Worth it! It is a convicting book, and a gospel focused book. His premise is that the beatitudes are a description of humility. This is a book worth reading many times.
Theology
All that Is In God: Evangelical Theology and the Challenge of Classical Theism by James Dolezal. This is more polemical in tone than Barrett’s None Greater because it is a criticism of evangelical theology’s rejection of classical theism. He used to hold to many of these divergent views of God but found classical Christian theism as helpful for liberating theology proper from cultural captivity. He focuses on God as unchanging and simple (no parts). He doesn’t have a separate section on language to show that Scripture uses language we can understand by likening Him to us (His hand, His voice, His anger) that if taken literally gives us a limited and mutable God. This is a book worth the effort and time.
Union and Communion with Christ by Maurice Roberts is a good introduction to the doctrine of our union with Christ, and the distinction between union and communion. They are united, for there is no communion without union, but distinct. Union is unchanging but communion is subject to change. The chapters are short so you have time to slow down and digest the material.
Union with Christ: The Blessings of Being in Him by Sinclair Ferguson. Here is the second entry by Ferguson. It is also a great introduction to the doctrine of union with Christ, like Roberts’ book. He takes a biblical theology approach instead of a more systematic theology approach. He covers, oddly, much of the same ground as he does in Worthy. As the subtitle indicates, he spends a deal of time in Ephesians 1 discussing the blessings we experience or receive in our union with Christ. This book is mean to further our communion with Christ by expanding our understanding of the doctrine of our union with Christ. He also brings us to Philippians, Galatians 2:20 and other significant passages to develop all of this.
Counseling
Experiencing Grief by H. Norman Wright is a great little book on grief for people experiencing grief. Short chapters with one main point because grieving people struggle with concentration. I did mention that he keeps circling back to death, and seems to neglect the fact that grief comes from any sources: moving (lost relationships), lost jobs, changing churches and more. Grief is a tangled ball of emotions that rolls over you periodically. Wright helps us navigate this inevitable reality.
Tired of Trying to Measure Up: Getting Free from the Demands, Expectations and Intimidation of Well-Meaning People by Jeff VanVonderen is a good book about the realities of shame. While there is a theological issue that plagues the latter portions of the book (he seems to deny the reality of indwelling sin) I still found it very helpful in understanding how shame works not only in us, but in systems. We all deal with shame in varying degrees, and we find ourselves in shame systems. From the title you can see that this is not about malevolent people, but often well-intentioned people. Shame can still be damaging as we avoid vulnerability, are robbed of joy and more.
Culture
The End of Race Politics: The Case for a Color-Blind America by Coleman Hughes is a great book calling us to reject race politics, DEI and other race-based policies. Hughes shows how a color-obsessed America has not produced the equality and unity we want. Hughes is something of a next-generation Thomas Sowell: brilliant, conservative (at least in this area), informed and African-American. This is not an old white guy protecting his turf. He grew up in an environment where race was not thought about. It just wasn’t an issue. What mattered was who you were, how you treated others. Then he was indoctrinated in anti-racist thought. He knows of what he speaks.
Toxic Empathy: How Progressives Exploit Christian Compassion by Allie Beth Stuckey. In this life everything that is a blessing can also be a curse. Compassion is a good and godly thing. Empathy is good too (not a sin!). But everything good can be twisted by the Enemy to do harm. We can harm people by trying to help them. Like masculinity, empathy can become toxic. In politics it is used to lead us down bad roads. Emotions are manipulated to embrace harmful agendas.
Stuckey focuses on some common ways like “Abortion is healthcare”, “Trans Women are Women” and more. Progressive agendas are dressed up in Christian sounding language so we are moved to embrace them despite them being contrary to God’s creational realities and/or law. True compassion and empathy exist within the bounds of creation and the law, not used as justifications to move beyond those boundaries He established.
]]>
Spiritual abuse is one of those nebulous topics that we’d rather not talk about. We are slightly more comfortable talking about sexual and physical abuse. In some cases, they can include spiritual abuse.
Perhaps it is more common to think about as “church hurt”. Either way, I thought I should read up on it after attending a counseling intensive this summer. One of the books I picked up was Escaping the Maze of Spiritual Abuse by Oakley and Humphreys, primarily for the subtitle: Creating Healthy Christian Cultures. I was hoping for a book that would help me create healthier cultures as a pastor.
A few things.
- This book is written by two Brits. While they mention some of the issues around Bill Hybels and Willow Creek, the rest of the events are from England and not common knowledge to the American reader. Like me. That doesn’t matter too much. But their laws are different. Coercive control is against the law there, which sounds crazy to me. You can’t outlaw all bad behavior!
- They are researchers, primarily. Their writing has the feel of British researchers. I had some trouble connecting at times due to cultural differences. Some if it could have been more succinct.
- The metaphor of a maze pops up frequently, and it is a good and helpful metaphor. At times I felt like I was in the part of a maze that keeps looping around as the material repeated itself.
This means that there will be a number of case studies they draw on for their conclusions and to provide examples. But at times it feels like “we’ve been down this road before.” There are helpful things here, I just felt like I had to work harder than I wanted to in order to get them.
A Personal Story
When I first became a Christian during Christmas Break I returned to BU clueless as to “what’s next.” One of the women on my dorm floor would invite people to Bible Study while riding the elevator. So I asked her when and where. She never thought I would show up.
That’s because it was a women’s study. They let me stay that one time and I was connected with a guy to join a men’s group. Little did I know that the church they were with was a cult. They were:
- Into the shepherding movement. It was strongly authoritarian. If I wanted to ask a girl out, I’d ask my discipler who would then talk to hers. Yes, I would have needed permission.
- Baptism was necessary for salvation. That baptism had to be performed by them. I discovered when I went home for the summer that they didn’t think there were any other Christians.
- It didn’t happen to me, yet, but I would learn that many would be isolated from friends and family since they were not “true Christians”.
It got me into the Word. I had a long, hard phone call with my discipler and that was it. I was not going to Boston each Sunday to worship. I would find a local church. The next Sunday there was an article in the Boston Globe’s Parade magazine about the church and the spiritual devastation it created. Cut off from prior relationships, those who left the church had no one to turn to.
Turns out my discipler told the rest of the group I transferred to another school.
This is an example of spiritual abuse. I was not too far into the maze and was able to extricate myself with little trouble. Most people are not so fortunate.
The case they introduce the book with was that of John Smyth, “a leading light in the Christian camps”. He abused young men and boys physically (beatings) and spiritually. He, like so many prominent leaders, was protected by the system. Institutions tend to protect themselves. There is great concern for reputation which drives the desire to cover things up.
Some aspects of spiritual abuse are:
Coercion to Conform. Acceptance was dangling on conformity. To not conform would mean you were on the outs. You found them ‘cold and contemptuous’ toward you. Or expelled. Or lied about to explain your absence.
Exploitation. Some leaders take advantage of our hearts’ needs, especially that for friendship and guidance. People want to belong, be accepted and feel worthy of love.
Manipulation. They manipulated you, often by manipulating Scripture. They use the Bible to incite fear and focus on performance (legalism).
Divine Position. They stand in the place of God for you. I don’t know how the Gothard movement didn’t make this book. But he stood between you and God. Women were under the umbrella of their husbands. It is almost Roman Catholic except instead of Mary and dead saints you had leadership as intermediaries with Jesus.
Enforced Accountability. Accountability is good when voluntary. When I ask you to hold me accountable. It is not good when I demand you be accountable to me. This typically ties into performance of some type. Did you did your devotions this week? Did you remain sexually pure this week?
Exercising Control through the Misuse of Scripture. Yes, I mentioned this under manipulation but they brought it out explicitly. Smyth would use Hebrews 12:4 (“you have not yet resisted to the point of shedding your blood”) to justify his beatings for their failure. Well beyond any appropriate time for corporal punishment, well beyond all proper restraint (bruising or breaking the skin) and not being their parent, he justified beating these boys with Scripture. Others have forced women and girls, or boys, to be exploited sexually by misusing Scripture as well.
Censorship of Decisions. This is not helping you think through something or providing desired wisdom. This is the constant monitoring of your decisions, evaluating them and judging you as a result. You begin to cease making decisions of your own.
Secrecy and Silence. No one knows the true extent of abuse because all the victims have been sworn to secrecy. To violate this would mean to incite more rejection and abuse. We are not Biblo Baggins hiding the ring of power.
Isolation as Punishment. Let the shunning begin. It is not just for sinning but failing to conform to the established extra-biblical requirements.
Superiority and Elitism. They establish a two (or more) tiered system. Everyone starts at the bottom but by conformity you can work your way up.
This was the forward. It was very helpful. Succinct. But it did not suffice. They begin to navigate the maze. At times I felt like I was in one, which surely wasn’t their intention.
“Spiritual abuse also happens the other way round, where leaders of churches are abused by the people they are leading and are manipulated by them and at the receiving end of verbal abuse and gossip.“
Why might this be? Unless the church is a dictatorship, the pastor or leader does not control the purse strings. You feel unable to challenge those who determine who much you are paid, and worse, if you continue to work there. In the ARP we talked about the Bull Elder who controlled the Session and the congregation. His word was law, and even the pastor was to bow the knee. Leaders can feel unsupported when their plans conflict with those of the most influential parties.
This all happens to people well before they realize it. You don’t need to be particularly vulnerable (though cults look for those people). In ordinary churches you can have someone who spiritually abuses people. It may take them time to realize it.
Proper theology won’t save you. Theologically sound churches can abuse people because everyone there is a sinner. This doesn’t mean an abuser isn’t a Christian. People can be self-deceived, victims themselves as well. One should question the salvation of the most severe abusers. But real Christians can sin big, or grievously, as the Westminster Standards say.
Defining Spiritual Abuse
The authors then delve into the question of defining spiritual abuse. It is like a slippery eel, nearly defying definition. They note definitions found in other literature. Ultimately they prefer Oakley’s definition (2018). I will just quote the first paragraph. The second uses the ideas mentioned above.
“Spiritual abuse is a form of emotional and psychological abuse. It is characterized by a systematic pattern of coercive and controlling behavior in a religious context.“
Essentially you use God to get your way. You put people on spiritual guilt trips to protect yourself.
Most people don’t immediately experience the abuse. There is a process in which you get deeper into the maze and increasingly abused. It is not obvious at first.
More Features of Spiritual Abuse
When they dive into the key features, they repeat much of what the forward talked about. One aspect they added was the shifting sands of gaslighting: people getting you to question your understanding of reality, to think it is all your fault. I’ve been there, sadly. It is like you are inhabiting a parallel universe and another intrudes claiming it is reality.
In addition to gaslighting, there can be lots of groupthink. People aren’t able to have differing opinions. They respond in unison. They are like clones.
They shift from the practices associated with spiritual abuse to the subjective experience of spiritual abuse. During our counseling intensive, we made a side trip to the Garden of the Gods. Absolutely breathtaking. But we got disoriented and couldn’t find our way back to the car (and the water!). Spiritual abuse leaves you dazed and confused, which way is up? Leaving physically is easier than leaving psychologically. You have suffered trauma and it can color future church experiences. You find it difficult to trust others, and yourself (because you second guess yourself now). You will likely feel anger, or internalize it if it wasn’t permitted in your church culture. You become fearful: will God reject me? Will these people reject me? Will I measure up? In the most severe cases one can wonder who they are.
In terms of building a healthy culture an important aspect is how you respond to disclosures. One problem of the “Me too” movement was it made believing women absolute, as if none ever lied. But we should believe enough to investigate to see if the disclosure is true or not. When you listen to a disclosure, your role is not as defense attorney (nor prosecutor) but investigator. You are to pursue the truth, not protect the reputation of the institution or individual.
While forgiveness is important, it is not instantaneous. People will wrestle with forgiveness, in part because they have not yet “totaled the bill”. There will always be more added to the bill, like health care expenses these days. But get the big stuff sorted so the forgiveness isn’t a cheap way to get anyone off the hook or move on.
Being an Authentic Leader
One aspect of a healthy culture is authenticity, beginning with leadership. Not just the leader, but those in various leadership positions.
“An assumption is being made at the outset that spiritually abusive behavior is born out of inadequacies and failures to exercise good leadership.“
The more out of your depth in an area you are, the more likely you are to veer off into spiritually abusive behavior. Be honest about your strengths and weaknesses. If you are operating in an area of weakness, perhaps ask someone to hold you accountable. Be aware of what is going on inside you (your anxiety for instance) and around you (who do you need to connect with or how they need you).
Change the view of leadership to be redemptive and preventative. This means that when there is failure you are seeking redemption, not simply being punitive. But you want to prevent it to begin with. Study healthy teams, not dysfunctional ones. This means learning what to do right, not what to avoid.
Servant leadership is important as well. The leaders are not elite or entitled. They serve others. I showed up for work days like everyone else. I plunged and cleaned toilets, changed A/C filters, put out the trash. Nothing is “beneath” you, but things are “beneath” abusive leaders.
“By its very nature, compassion is unable to cause harm –“
Wrong! Compassion can harm through enabling the person, keeping them from bearing their own burdens. Compassion can become toxic empathy, where feelings reign supreme and damaging practices are embraced in the name of compassion toward some group or victim. Our culture is beginning to show suicidal compassion: bankrupting itself, putting itself in danger in the name of compassion.
Power is a strange thing. It can make or break us. Power enables some to do great things, helping many people. Power can corrupt a person as well. I’ve seen it happen. They lost the idea of servant leadership and the only good ideas were their ideas. Other ideas were seen as being insubordinate. The event was a success despite this but they never lead anything again before the left the church.
Effective leadership rests on the pillars of character, knowledge and skills. You need to be a genuinely good person, have the knowledge of what to do and the skills to actually do it (or delegate it). Character requires knowing yourself- the good, the bad and the ugly- and being able to self-monitor. That doesn’t mean hiding the bad so you can take advantage, but addressing the bad in you. This means taking time to be self-reflective. There have been periods when I journal. There were times I was too busy to journal, but really should have to reflect on circumstances and myself.
“Our ability to confront the aspects of our character that risk our coming off the rails and leading us (and those we lead) to hard and failure is key to our success and finding authenticity.“
Building a New Culture
Implementing these things can be hard. The old culture will pop up periodically, like a game of Whack-a-mole. It is important to not make the leader the center of everything. We can’t sit on the sidelines waiting for them to save us, make every decision or solution. Been there and didn’t even get a t-shirt. If you are the leader, share the power. Delegate!
For awhile I was giving things away. I gave responsibility for our prayer meetings to someone else. I asked other people to teach. I should have given away more, but no one seemed to want to take on anything. Asking about mission, vision and values I heard very little. It was too much of me and not enough of them. I spoke of the relational values I wanted us to have. I need to do more rebuking of the dysfuntional relating (sin) that we practiced.
“Our culture as a whole must learn to listen and try to understand other people’s points of view, instead of immediately resorting to outrage and offence (Anglicized) just because someone has said something we don’t agree with.”
Yeah, the culture of my denomination needs to do that.
In all of this they speak of organizational structures, control systems, power dynamics, ritual and routine among other things to build healthier cultures. So there is some helpful material here that met my goal for the book.
The most important thing that was missing, in retrospect, was the gospel. This is a book by professing Christians about culture in Christian churches and organizations. There is no discussion of how the gospel addresses the effects of spiritual abuse, nor transforms us so we don’t abuse others.
]]>This “but” is not a good but. His weakness was public passivity and it lead to a great failure on his part.
He didn’t remove the high places. He permitted people to continue to worship there. Personally he was godly, but as the king he was supposed to pursue the piety of the people. He did and didn’t. He did repair the temple so they would have a place to worship YHWH. That was good. He overcame resistance and apathy to do it, though that took him some time. Unfortunately he allowed false worship and syncretism to survive and flourish in Judah.
King Josiah, on the other hand, completely purged the land years later. In that account in 2 Kings 23 we see just how bad Judah had become, but much of it traced all the way back to King Solomon.
4 And the king commanded Hilkiah the high priest and the priests of the second order and the keepers of the threshold to bring out of the temple of the Lord all the vessels made for Baal, for Asherah, and for all the host of heaven. … 5 And he deposed the priests whom the kings of Judah had ordained to make offerings in the high places at the cities of Judah and around Jerusalem; those also who burned incense to Baal, to the sun and the moon and the constellations and all the host of the heavens. 6 And he brought out the Asherah from the house of the Lord, outside Jerusalem, to the brook Kidron, and burned it at the brook Kidron and beat it to dust and cast the dust of it upon the graves of the common people. 7 And he broke down the houses of the male cult prostitutes who were in the house of the Lord, where the women wove hangings for the Asherah. … And he broke down the high places of the gates that were at the entrance of the gate of Joshua the governor of the city, which were on one’s left at the gate of the city. … 10 And he defiled Topheth, which is in the Valley of the Son of Hinnom, that no one might burn his son or his daughter as an offering to Molech. 11 And he removed the horses that the kings of Judah had dedicated to the sun, at the entrance to the house of the Lord, by the chamber of Nathan-melech the chamberlain, which was in the precincts. And he burned the chariots of the sun with fire. 12 And the altars on the roof of the upper chamber of Ahaz, which the kings of Judah had made, and the altars that Manasseh had made in the two courts of the house of the Lord, he pulled down and broke in pieces and cast the dust of them into the brook Kidron. 13 And the king defiled the high places that were east of Jerusalem, to the south of the mount of corruption, which Solomon the king of Israel had built for Ashtoreth the abomination of the Sidonians, and for Chemosh the abomination of Moab, and for Milcom the abomination of the Ammonites. 14 And he broke in pieces the pillars and cut down the Asherim and filled their places with the bones of men. …24 Moreover, Josiah put away the mediums and the necromancers and the household gods and the idols and all the abominations that were seen in the land of Judah and in Jerusalem, that he might establish the words of the law that were written in the book that Hilkiah the priest found in the house of the Lord. 2 Kings 23
Jerusalem and Judah were a disaster. While Joash had repaired the temple, the idolatry he permitted eventually led to the defilement of the temple: high places, altars to false gods, Asherah pole, temple prostitutes. His passivity permitted profane worship to proliferate.
Unaddressed sin spreads and deepens. It started with the high places and got worse and worse. The “problem” was the covenant.
Difficult Decisions
17 At that time Hazael king of Syria went up and fought against Gath and took it. But when Hazael set his face to go up against Jerusalem, … 2 Kings 12
Here came Hazael! Due to their apostasy God was bringing Hazael to batter them so they would cry out to Him. The king of Syria invaded Judah.
What would Judah, and Joash, do? Would they actually cry out?
… 18 Jehoash king of Judah took all the sacred gifts that Jehoshaphat and Jehoram and Ahaziah his fathers, the kings of Judah, had dedicated, and his own sacred gifts, and all the gold that was found in the treasuries of the house of the Lord and of the king’s house, and sent these to Hazael king of Syria. Then Hazael went away from Jerusalem.
Joash (Jehoash) plundered the treasury and Temple and bought off Hazael. He became subject to Hazael as a vassal state.
Fear leads us to make bad decisions. Fear leads us to forget God and His promises. Joash’s personal piety faltered in this time of trial.
Ministry presents opportunities to exercise faith or fall into fear. Will you turn to God in faith or seek to solve it in your own flesh and wisdom? Like Judah, there may have been temporary relief but they suffered long term. Joash’s passivity put him in this position and he faltered.
Godly leaders can make bad decisions. Good leaders can make bad decisions.
Betrayal
But it got worse.
20 His servants arose and made a conspiracy and struck down Joash in the house of Millo, on the way that goes down to Silla. 21 It was Jozacar the son of Shimeath and Jehozabad the son of Shomer, his servants, who struck him down, so that he died. And they buried him with his fathers in the city of David, and Amaziah his son reigned in his place.
In the NLT “servants” is translated as trusted advisers. Either way Joash was betrayed. His weakness wound out leading to his death. The deep state, or administrative state, of Judah eliminated Joash.
]]>“A classic follower response in certain situations is the palace coup. This is the point when the mutiny begins flexing destructive muscles and everyone but the leader realizes a corner has been turned. We all know of situations where a powerful and evil despot abused followers…We are less convinced that simply misguided, or even evil, followers can bring down an otherwise competent leader on their own. However, there should not always be a presumption of innocence when confronting followers who have an agenda, as they can eventually destroy leaders and organizations” (p. 59). Handbook for Battered Leaders, Wesley and Janis Balda
Pastors can suffer a palace coup after difficult decisions. Some fall victim to a culture of niceness when they get honest, maybe even showing emotion. The Baldas mention this later in their book.
“While it is entirely a good thing that courtesy and civility attend our day-to-day work, niceness can be used to apply unfair standards and gloss over vulnerabilities. Passive-aggressive organizations employ niceness to avoid healthy confrontation and positive conflict…The fear of being seen as a complainer or even whistleblower quashes many situations where a little righteous anger might be helpful. And God help the leader who allows followers a glimpse of actual frustration or negative emotion in nice organizations – gossip and mobbing may quickly ensue, and a ride out of town sometimes follows” (p. 112). The Handbook for Battered Leaders
Many a good pastor has fallen victim to mobbing. The nice congregation can strike quickly and unexpectedly. A number of pastors end up wonder what in the world happened. In You Probably Have a Good Pastor by Tod Pruitt, he explores this problem of pastors betrayed and abused. They trust people but those people panic or over-react and force the pastor out. They are like the deep state, angry that the pastor didn’t do things the way they wanted to do it. He may have wanted to excise their cherished program which no longer fits their needs. It could be an unpopular staffing decision.
Ministry is dangerous. If we are not careful we bring our own trauma into ministry and harm others, often unintentionally. Ministry, as Pruitt mentions, is to volunteers who pay you which provides disincentive to confront their problems. That passivity even by a godly pastor leads to spiritual declension and disaster. Ministry means you will make some bad decisions. Ministry is fraught with betrayal.
Good thing Jesus is for us. He knows the burden of betrayal and can bind up our broken hearts. He can forgive our passivity. He can renewed churches in decline. Ministry is not just dangerous, but is also profitable.

































