Thursday, December 17, 2009
Book Reviews
What follows (or those book reviews just posted on this blog) are book reviews of professional resources for ministry in Russia. I wanted to make available to you a great resource as fruit from the ERBB North and South Best Practices meetings that involved select women (the wives of our team leaders). The meetings were designed to promote fellowship and encouragement of course, but they also had the specific purpose of sharing best practices and fostering professional development in the weeks leading up to the meetings. As a result, each participant was asked to give a professional review of a popular resource. Specific books relating to Russian Orthodoxy, Women in Leadership, and Missions were chosen for review. Those posted are the fruit of those collaborative meetings.
Book Review: A Long Walk to Church: A Contemporary History of Russian Orthodoxy
Reviewed by Svetlana Parish
Summary
The author, Nathaniel Davis, describes his book as “a secular examination of the history of the Russian Orthodox Church in recent times.” He acknowledges the difficulty of examining belief from the outside since the only observables are numbers: of believers, of priests and church workers, of churches; and not the reality and depth of faith within any person. The book begins its examination with the revolution of 1917 and concludes in 2001.
The author served in the U. S. Foreign Service for 36 years including time in Moscow and as Lyndon B. Johnson’s senior advisor on Soviet and Eastern European affairs. He identifies himself as being a member of the United Church of Christ.
I chose this book because of a desire to learn more about the Orthodox Church and its struggle during the time of communism. Also because of a desire to hear of the personal struggle of believers during that time.
Application and Reflection
I was disappointed with much of this book. Many of the chapters are basically statistical summaries of numbers of churches, priests, believers gleaned from Soviet government documents and church documents of the period. There was very little of a “personal” nature in terms of individual’s struggles and triumphs during the time. There is mention made of church leaders bowing to pressure to cooperate with the communists – their desire described as being for the purpose of saving the church – but no examination of these actions or events. Although the author says this is a secular examination and claims personal membership in the United Church of Christ, the book almost has an apologetic feel to it as though the desire is to present the Orthodox Church as a noble organization that struggled mightily against a larger enemy and won.
I must here admit to a personal bias. Having lived in Russia a large part of my life and seen the Orthodox Church and their actions I have no “warm fuzzies” for them. Especially now with their open support of the law prohibiting missionary work. I found this quote from the book to be enlightening, “the church serves the believers who find their own way to faith and practice; they did not seem to see a proselytizing, evangelizing church at the heart of things” The thought seems to be that this is Russia, the people are Orthodox, our buildings are beautiful and obvious, they will find us when they are ready. There also was expressed a desire among church leaders to suppress lay groups, rather than encourage and nurture, for fear of losing power and control.
The question of how this book could apply to my ministry is a difficult one to consider. If I take the view of looking for ways to present the Orthodox Church in a questionable light in order to help someone question their trust or faith in the church and it’s institutions for salvation, there are some things of value here. If I desire not to be argumentative or confrontational there are sprinkled within the pages stories of individuals who did not waver in their faith and who suffered as a result. There are also the many statistics that show how the church suffered at the hands of the communists.
On the first page of the introduction the author identifies 2 occasions when he says the Orthodox Church almost ceased to exist as an institution in Russia. He then asks why it survived. “Was it luck, which could change? Was it something intrinsic in the natural order that prevents the triumph of anti-religion? Was it the constancy of God, which ultimately rules human history?” Unfortunately I don’t think he answered his questions.
Summary
The author, Nathaniel Davis, describes his book as “a secular examination of the history of the Russian Orthodox Church in recent times.” He acknowledges the difficulty of examining belief from the outside since the only observables are numbers: of believers, of priests and church workers, of churches; and not the reality and depth of faith within any person. The book begins its examination with the revolution of 1917 and concludes in 2001.
The author served in the U. S. Foreign Service for 36 years including time in Moscow and as Lyndon B. Johnson’s senior advisor on Soviet and Eastern European affairs. He identifies himself as being a member of the United Church of Christ.
I chose this book because of a desire to learn more about the Orthodox Church and its struggle during the time of communism. Also because of a desire to hear of the personal struggle of believers during that time.
Application and Reflection
I was disappointed with much of this book. Many of the chapters are basically statistical summaries of numbers of churches, priests, believers gleaned from Soviet government documents and church documents of the period. There was very little of a “personal” nature in terms of individual’s struggles and triumphs during the time. There is mention made of church leaders bowing to pressure to cooperate with the communists – their desire described as being for the purpose of saving the church – but no examination of these actions or events. Although the author says this is a secular examination and claims personal membership in the United Church of Christ, the book almost has an apologetic feel to it as though the desire is to present the Orthodox Church as a noble organization that struggled mightily against a larger enemy and won.
I must here admit to a personal bias. Having lived in Russia a large part of my life and seen the Orthodox Church and their actions I have no “warm fuzzies” for them. Especially now with their open support of the law prohibiting missionary work. I found this quote from the book to be enlightening, “the church serves the believers who find their own way to faith and practice; they did not seem to see a proselytizing, evangelizing church at the heart of things” The thought seems to be that this is Russia, the people are Orthodox, our buildings are beautiful and obvious, they will find us when they are ready. There also was expressed a desire among church leaders to suppress lay groups, rather than encourage and nurture, for fear of losing power and control.
The question of how this book could apply to my ministry is a difficult one to consider. If I take the view of looking for ways to present the Orthodox Church in a questionable light in order to help someone question their trust or faith in the church and it’s institutions for salvation, there are some things of value here. If I desire not to be argumentative or confrontational there are sprinkled within the pages stories of individuals who did not waver in their faith and who suffered as a result. There are also the many statistics that show how the church suffered at the hands of the communists.
On the first page of the introduction the author identifies 2 occasions when he says the Orthodox Church almost ceased to exist as an institution in Russia. He then asks why it survived. “Was it luck, which could change? Was it something intrinsic in the natural order that prevents the triumph of anti-religion? Was it the constancy of God, which ultimately rules human history?” Unfortunately I don’t think he answered his questions.
Book Review: Teaching Cross-Culturally: An Incarnational Model for Learning and Teaching
Reviewed by Lori Upchurch
Summary
In “Teaching Cross-Culturally: An Incarnational Model for Learning and Teaching” Judith and Sherwood Lingenfelter attempt to help people who are teaching in a cross-cultural context to reevaluate their methods and mindset. They describe the goals of their book in the following manner. “The first goal is to help teachers understand their own culture of teaching and learning…The second is to equip teachers to become effective learners in another cultural context, with specific focus on learning for teaching…The third goal is to help teachers reflect on the cultural differences and conflicts they have with others, using the perspectives of Scripture and faith in Jesus Christ…The fourth is simple. We would like teachers working outside their home culture to enjoy their teaching experience and fell as though they are helping to disciple the people to whom God has called them.”
They try to achieve these four goals by encouraging cross-cultural teachers to think through several key issues using Jesus as an example of the ideal cross-cultural teacher. They attempt to help the reader know when it appropriate to give up his own cultural practices and values and adopt those of the students with which he is working. They want to help teachers in a cross-cultural context value the differences between cultures while at the same time being ready for the inevitable conflicts that will arise between these cultures. In the end they hope that cross-cultural teachers can find common ground spiritually with their students and can develop effective strategies for teaching them.
Author’s Right to Discuss Topic
I chose this book because I thought it could be very helpful to me in teaching ESL. I had high hopes that the authors would be able to help me in this, because they themselves have studied the differences in cultures for years and lived and taught in several cross-cultural situations both in the USA and in other countries.
Application and Reflection
When I first started reading this book, I had hopes that it would help me to understand how to communicate the Gospel more clearly to my ESL students. I was looking for practical suggestions not theories about teaching cross-culturally. However, the authors seemed more intent on discussing theoretical concepts. Nevertheless, some of these were somewhat helpful to me.
The concept of “hidden curriculum”, describes the cultural assumptions and practices that students and teachers bring with them into the classroom and which affect the learning and teaching process. This reminded me that I need to take into account the personal and cultural background of those I am teaching. I need to try to understand how their culture and past impact them as people and as learner.
When talking about the concept of “the cultural understanding of the role of teacher” the authors reminded me that not all cultures look at a teacher in the same way. In American culture today, teachers are not overall highly respected. They are seen often as babysitters or helpers for the parents. In Belarusian culture, teachers are still highly respected because they possess a knowledge that the student does not have but wants to attain.
I appreciated the authors’ attempt to discuss the concept of Jesus as the ideal cross-cultural teacher. It was good to be reminded of the great lengths that Jesus went to meet people where they were and to take them to where they needed to go. I want to do the same in my ministry with my ESL students. However, I was disappointed with the fact that the authors did not discuss this concept in length. They simply mentioned it in passing a few times.
This book would be more advantageous for a teacher who was coming to teach in school setting in a foreign country. It is not designed for missionaries or for teaching ESL. Therefore, it was not very helpful for me.
Summary
In “Teaching Cross-Culturally: An Incarnational Model for Learning and Teaching” Judith and Sherwood Lingenfelter attempt to help people who are teaching in a cross-cultural context to reevaluate their methods and mindset. They describe the goals of their book in the following manner. “The first goal is to help teachers understand their own culture of teaching and learning…The second is to equip teachers to become effective learners in another cultural context, with specific focus on learning for teaching…The third goal is to help teachers reflect on the cultural differences and conflicts they have with others, using the perspectives of Scripture and faith in Jesus Christ…The fourth is simple. We would like teachers working outside their home culture to enjoy their teaching experience and fell as though they are helping to disciple the people to whom God has called them.”
They try to achieve these four goals by encouraging cross-cultural teachers to think through several key issues using Jesus as an example of the ideal cross-cultural teacher. They attempt to help the reader know when it appropriate to give up his own cultural practices and values and adopt those of the students with which he is working. They want to help teachers in a cross-cultural context value the differences between cultures while at the same time being ready for the inevitable conflicts that will arise between these cultures. In the end they hope that cross-cultural teachers can find common ground spiritually with their students and can develop effective strategies for teaching them.
Author’s Right to Discuss Topic
I chose this book because I thought it could be very helpful to me in teaching ESL. I had high hopes that the authors would be able to help me in this, because they themselves have studied the differences in cultures for years and lived and taught in several cross-cultural situations both in the USA and in other countries.
Application and Reflection
When I first started reading this book, I had hopes that it would help me to understand how to communicate the Gospel more clearly to my ESL students. I was looking for practical suggestions not theories about teaching cross-culturally. However, the authors seemed more intent on discussing theoretical concepts. Nevertheless, some of these were somewhat helpful to me.
The concept of “hidden curriculum”, describes the cultural assumptions and practices that students and teachers bring with them into the classroom and which affect the learning and teaching process. This reminded me that I need to take into account the personal and cultural background of those I am teaching. I need to try to understand how their culture and past impact them as people and as learner.
When talking about the concept of “the cultural understanding of the role of teacher” the authors reminded me that not all cultures look at a teacher in the same way. In American culture today, teachers are not overall highly respected. They are seen often as babysitters or helpers for the parents. In Belarusian culture, teachers are still highly respected because they possess a knowledge that the student does not have but wants to attain.
I appreciated the authors’ attempt to discuss the concept of Jesus as the ideal cross-cultural teacher. It was good to be reminded of the great lengths that Jesus went to meet people where they were and to take them to where they needed to go. I want to do the same in my ministry with my ESL students. However, I was disappointed with the fact that the authors did not discuss this concept in length. They simply mentioned it in passing a few times.
This book would be more advantageous for a teacher who was coming to teach in school setting in a foreign country. It is not designed for missionaries or for teaching ESL. Therefore, it was not very helpful for me.
Book Review: Women in Mission: From the New Testament to Today (American Society of Missiology)
Reviewed by Leslie Burch
Author’s Right to Discuss Topic
In this reading, Women in Mission, Smith (2007) has the right to speak on the subject, because she served in overseas work. She was in Bangladesh, Papua New Guinea and Ethiopia. She also worked with an organization for justice development and lived among the Maori tribe of New Zealand. Her involvement there played a huge role in the understanding “of European people in their involvement with indigenous peoples” (p. xiii).
Summary
The author presented various types of mission work, mostly from the Catholic faith or perspective. Seemingly the most successful works were those with efforts to help the poor. Especially where women in mission were concerned, the female workers were respected and given the opportunity to participate in humanitarian helps. These types of deeds were considered a possibility for women, but a leadership role of any form was not allowed for many years. Many eventually proved their loyalty and knowledge of business and were given the right to run a convent, home or school. Also a woman who lived a life of service and suffering was respected more and recognized as a true missionary—a devoted servant. The missionary that empathized more with her people was placed in a higher position of influence, thus being allowed to present request and seek permissions before male leadership. Eventually an authoritarian role may have been granted.
Mother Teresa was one such example; though, she valued more what she taught her disciples (followers) than what position or title she held. According to the author, Mother Teresa’s “lack of enthusiasm for a feminist agenda and her acceptance of the economic, political, and ecclesiastical status quo in the countries where her sisters work have gained here many admirers who regard her as a role model for contemporary Catholic women missionaries…For them the immediate physical needs of the destitute have remained their apostolic priority” (Smith, 2007, p. 133-134).
In the first few chapters, the author defends in favor of women in leadership as she references various scriptures to prove her point. Nevertheless, I did not agree with her observations in many cases, but I definitely learned some ideas and beliefs that feminist hermeneutics present. For example, I was surprised that the author sought to validate a point for godly women leaders, but the women were actually living a lie to make their stand. In 1 Timothy 5 we read on the topic of widows. Smith concludes that “the order of widows might have been attracting celibate women, who remembering the freedom and equality of the first generation Christian communities, believed that widowhood would have allowed them to assume public leadership roles in the community” (2007, p. 34).
The author referenced the era, mostly from Paul’s writings, as a patriarchal time period where wives were subject to their husbands and the father figure was in control. The culture in this age of the New Testament writings presented a hardship for women to be recognized or accepted to any position of authority; however, she referred to some of Paul’s writings, specifically his earlier ones or in her opinion writings before his death, as letters in favor of women as co-workers or apostles with Paul. I disagree with several of the statements she presented, but I am now aware of other theological and philosophical views that I did not know existed. But I do understand some of her viewpoints and accept them as possible means in support of women in respected roles of leadership. For instance, in the New Testament we are aware that women were helpers in encouraging, discipling and leading other believers. There are multiple names mentioned in the Bible where women were seen as those who were faithful to their tasks (i.e, Mary Magdalene [Mark 15:40-41], Mother of Zebedee’s sons [Matthew 27:56], Anna, the prophetess [Luke 2:36], Phoebe [Romans 16:1], Priscilla [Romans 16:3], etc.). Also in many of Paul’s letters women were seen and recognized as influential “to the church in thy house” (Philemon 2).
Application and Reflection
The focal point of the book that I wish to elaborate and reflect on is how or what type of mission work was most successful in the Catholic faith, not how she attempted to prove a woman’s right to lead. After reading the book, I discovered that I was not using some of these avenues of missions in my own life. Also while contemplating where the Catholic faith is strong in missions, I began to question where I sensed the IMB’s strongest emphasis was. When I think of Catholic work, the first thought that surfaces is humanitarian aid. For IMB work I concluded that the dominant push is for church planting. Most of the ladies in our Best Practices Meeting from ERBB (European Russia, Baltics and Belarus) agreed with my conclusions. Of course, IMB participates in the humanitarian field of service, but it is not the most known area. And in many instances and situations, we have to be secure, whereas the Catholic faith is very vocal.
I considered the following a huge step in my new findings. As missionary women we can be better leaders and professionals by evaluating our work on a regular basis. We must keep an open mind and step outside of our “boxes” or normal way of doing missions to improve methods for leading the masses (nations) to the Savior, especially in our assigned areas of responsibility. It is wise to look at other organizations and determine where they are most effective and incorporate their ideas as well.
Briefly I will first explain by means of application. I have noticed more homeless narcotics even at our church, and I am discipling a lady whose husband is an alcoholic—a form of lifestyle that I have no close relation. Honestly in the beginning, I wanted to toss this book away, because I did not agree with some of the author’s interpretation of Scripture. I am glad that I continued to read this book for this very reason—noticing these two people in need.
According to Smith (2007, pp. 147-160), Catholic mission work reported success with health care, various people groups, “foreign” missions, charity for the poor, social justice work, women in mission to the orphans, castaways, sick and needy, secular institutions and presence (suffering) among the people, why should we not? As IMB missionaries we have a huge responsibility to our Russian brothers and sisters in Christ to help with one of the strongest growing movements for salvations, baptism and church growth today for one such model—work through rehabilitation centers. Especially with the recent regulations under discussion concerning the Baptist’s ministry outside the church building ceasing, we need to pray about these services. How we can partner with our local union for these efforts to continue? I would hate for us to walk away 10 years from now and wish we had done more, especially when this ministry has been in existence for at least six years already. Unfortunately as Southern Baptist or just missionaries in general, sometimes we do not take action until a decade later or a generation too late—a lost one.
Our church planting push may have more success in Russia if we tweak our focus or at least make sure that we include this type of mission work in our vision, masterplan, strategy and personal daily witness, instead of only attempting to start new churches with students, existing church small groups, English ministries, intelligentsia, etc., for example. Actually if we look at the study of the meaning of the Russian word intelligentsia or in Latin intelligentia, we discover that this is a group of people who study a better means for assisting society and to disseminate (broadcast influence) in one’s culture. This would be another interesting topic of further study, particularly in the Russian culture. If we befriended or partnered with more people of influence, we may have a better chance for the Lord’s work to be accomplished on a larger, communal scale.
One of my main ministries is at Golgotha Baptist Church in Moscow, Russia. I teach, disciple and mentor English students and Sunday school teachers to use their spiritual gifts for the building up of the body of Christ. How can I lead them if I am not seeking to be more Christ-like myself and love and help those in need? Jesus said in a parable in Matthew 25:40: “Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.”
Author’s Right to Discuss Topic
In this reading, Women in Mission, Smith (2007) has the right to speak on the subject, because she served in overseas work. She was in Bangladesh, Papua New Guinea and Ethiopia. She also worked with an organization for justice development and lived among the Maori tribe of New Zealand. Her involvement there played a huge role in the understanding “of European people in their involvement with indigenous peoples” (p. xiii).
Summary
The author presented various types of mission work, mostly from the Catholic faith or perspective. Seemingly the most successful works were those with efforts to help the poor. Especially where women in mission were concerned, the female workers were respected and given the opportunity to participate in humanitarian helps. These types of deeds were considered a possibility for women, but a leadership role of any form was not allowed for many years. Many eventually proved their loyalty and knowledge of business and were given the right to run a convent, home or school. Also a woman who lived a life of service and suffering was respected more and recognized as a true missionary—a devoted servant. The missionary that empathized more with her people was placed in a higher position of influence, thus being allowed to present request and seek permissions before male leadership. Eventually an authoritarian role may have been granted.
Mother Teresa was one such example; though, she valued more what she taught her disciples (followers) than what position or title she held. According to the author, Mother Teresa’s “lack of enthusiasm for a feminist agenda and her acceptance of the economic, political, and ecclesiastical status quo in the countries where her sisters work have gained here many admirers who regard her as a role model for contemporary Catholic women missionaries…For them the immediate physical needs of the destitute have remained their apostolic priority” (Smith, 2007, p. 133-134).
In the first few chapters, the author defends in favor of women in leadership as she references various scriptures to prove her point. Nevertheless, I did not agree with her observations in many cases, but I definitely learned some ideas and beliefs that feminist hermeneutics present. For example, I was surprised that the author sought to validate a point for godly women leaders, but the women were actually living a lie to make their stand. In 1 Timothy 5 we read on the topic of widows. Smith concludes that “the order of widows might have been attracting celibate women, who remembering the freedom and equality of the first generation Christian communities, believed that widowhood would have allowed them to assume public leadership roles in the community” (2007, p. 34).
The author referenced the era, mostly from Paul’s writings, as a patriarchal time period where wives were subject to their husbands and the father figure was in control. The culture in this age of the New Testament writings presented a hardship for women to be recognized or accepted to any position of authority; however, she referred to some of Paul’s writings, specifically his earlier ones or in her opinion writings before his death, as letters in favor of women as co-workers or apostles with Paul. I disagree with several of the statements she presented, but I am now aware of other theological and philosophical views that I did not know existed. But I do understand some of her viewpoints and accept them as possible means in support of women in respected roles of leadership. For instance, in the New Testament we are aware that women were helpers in encouraging, discipling and leading other believers. There are multiple names mentioned in the Bible where women were seen as those who were faithful to their tasks (i.e, Mary Magdalene [Mark 15:40-41], Mother of Zebedee’s sons [Matthew 27:56], Anna, the prophetess [Luke 2:36], Phoebe [Romans 16:1], Priscilla [Romans 16:3], etc.). Also in many of Paul’s letters women were seen and recognized as influential “to the church in thy house” (Philemon 2).
Application and Reflection
The focal point of the book that I wish to elaborate and reflect on is how or what type of mission work was most successful in the Catholic faith, not how she attempted to prove a woman’s right to lead. After reading the book, I discovered that I was not using some of these avenues of missions in my own life. Also while contemplating where the Catholic faith is strong in missions, I began to question where I sensed the IMB’s strongest emphasis was. When I think of Catholic work, the first thought that surfaces is humanitarian aid. For IMB work I concluded that the dominant push is for church planting. Most of the ladies in our Best Practices Meeting from ERBB (European Russia, Baltics and Belarus) agreed with my conclusions. Of course, IMB participates in the humanitarian field of service, but it is not the most known area. And in many instances and situations, we have to be secure, whereas the Catholic faith is very vocal.
I considered the following a huge step in my new findings. As missionary women we can be better leaders and professionals by evaluating our work on a regular basis. We must keep an open mind and step outside of our “boxes” or normal way of doing missions to improve methods for leading the masses (nations) to the Savior, especially in our assigned areas of responsibility. It is wise to look at other organizations and determine where they are most effective and incorporate their ideas as well.
Briefly I will first explain by means of application. I have noticed more homeless narcotics even at our church, and I am discipling a lady whose husband is an alcoholic—a form of lifestyle that I have no close relation. Honestly in the beginning, I wanted to toss this book away, because I did not agree with some of the author’s interpretation of Scripture. I am glad that I continued to read this book for this very reason—noticing these two people in need.
According to Smith (2007, pp. 147-160), Catholic mission work reported success with health care, various people groups, “foreign” missions, charity for the poor, social justice work, women in mission to the orphans, castaways, sick and needy, secular institutions and presence (suffering) among the people, why should we not? As IMB missionaries we have a huge responsibility to our Russian brothers and sisters in Christ to help with one of the strongest growing movements for salvations, baptism and church growth today for one such model—work through rehabilitation centers. Especially with the recent regulations under discussion concerning the Baptist’s ministry outside the church building ceasing, we need to pray about these services. How we can partner with our local union for these efforts to continue? I would hate for us to walk away 10 years from now and wish we had done more, especially when this ministry has been in existence for at least six years already. Unfortunately as Southern Baptist or just missionaries in general, sometimes we do not take action until a decade later or a generation too late—a lost one.
Our church planting push may have more success in Russia if we tweak our focus or at least make sure that we include this type of mission work in our vision, masterplan, strategy and personal daily witness, instead of only attempting to start new churches with students, existing church small groups, English ministries, intelligentsia, etc., for example. Actually if we look at the study of the meaning of the Russian word intelligentsia or in Latin intelligentia, we discover that this is a group of people who study a better means for assisting society and to disseminate (broadcast influence) in one’s culture. This would be another interesting topic of further study, particularly in the Russian culture. If we befriended or partnered with more people of influence, we may have a better chance for the Lord’s work to be accomplished on a larger, communal scale.
One of my main ministries is at Golgotha Baptist Church in Moscow, Russia. I teach, disciple and mentor English students and Sunday school teachers to use their spiritual gifts for the building up of the body of Christ. How can I lead them if I am not seeking to be more Christ-like myself and love and help those in need? Jesus said in a parable in Matthew 25:40: “Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.”
Book Review: Alexander Men: A Witness for Contemporary Russia (A Man for Our Times)
Reviewed by Cathy Ramey
Alexander Men was a Russian Orthodox priest who lived his whole life in Russia. He was considered a controversial priest for several reasons. One, he preached in the common language the people could understand. Two, he was considered a priest to the intellectuals. Three, he wrote and published books abroad when it was illegal to do so in Russia. Four, he was Jewish. Fifth, he was open to other Christian religions, mainly Catholic, but also Protestant. He saw all these as brothers in Christ.
He was born January 22, 1935. Stalin was the leader of Russia at that time and the "Great Terror" was in progress. More than 95% of Orthodox churches were closed. There were no seminaries or monasteries. Only a few bishops were still tolerated. The majority had been sent to the gulags or killed.
Alexander's father was a textile engineer. He was of Jewish origin, but lost his faith in childhood through the influence of one of his teachers. He wasn't, though, a militant atheist. He was tolerant of religious ideas. His mother Elena also was Jewish and was raised by her mother to love God as Creator. From childhood she was attracted to Christianity and even began going to services in a Baptist community. This caused conflict in her family. Her cousin Vera came to Kharkov where they lived and took her to Moscow where she married and lived permanently. Vera was searching as well. Through her Elena became involved with an Orthodox group that centered around a certain priest. Just after Alexander's birth the two women were baptized secretly as well as the infant Alexander. Alexander grew up traveling frequently from Moscow to Zagorsk where this priest lived. It was an underground church, and the priest was like a grandfather to Alexander. There was also an elderly nun who participated in his spiritual development. Alexander also had contact with Christian intellectuals. He was a precocious child and his mother, as well as the others around him, encouraged him in his reading and studying. He spent long hours reading and studying a great variety of things. He was also very friendly and had as many friends as books. He loved to study literature, poetry, music, painting, history, nature, astronomy, and biology. He used to say that God has given us two books, the Bible and nature.
At the age of 12 he felt a personal call to the priesthood. Times were a little more open then, and a seminary was just opening. Alexander hoped to attend when of age. He had a friend who was a chemistry professor who gave him books to read each week. This professor had been converted through contact with Baptists, and he helped Alexander learn more about Western Christianity. Alexander read books from the church fathers. He began to write at a young age. He wrote his first theological essay when 15. He finished high school in 1953, a few months before Stalin died. Since he'd already on his own assimilated the whole seminary curriculum, he decided to attend university; however, because of his Jewish roots he wasn't allowed. Instead he attended the Moscow Fur Institute where he could study biology. He continued his theological studies on his own. The Fur Institute closed in 1955 and the students were transferred to Irkutsk to a school. In time it became clear that he was an active Orthodox. He planned to finish the institute and then work in that field for 3 years to get his final certification before attending seminary in Zagorsk. When final exams were starting, though, he was excluded on the grounds that he hadn't taken some required courses. The institute had found out his connections with a local bishop. He left school without any diploma.
He returned to Moscow and was ordained as a deacon even without having started seminary. He was sent to a parish to serve for two years with his wife and small son. He began his first series of lectures on the life of Christ and also took correspondence courses from Leningrad Seminary. In 1960 he was ordained a priest and was sent as a second priest to a place 30 miles outside Moscow. In a year he became the pastor. His parishioners were devoted to him, and he had good relationships with the city officials. He wrote articles for the Orthodox journal. An active community of Christians grew up around him. He visited and baptized in people's homes and went to the cemeteries for memorial services.
Alexander carried out his duties as a priest for many years without a change in the conditions of his ministry. He always tried to work in the shadows and avoid open confrontation with authorities. He wanted to be available to the next generation of Russians who were disillusioned and seeking new answers. He patiently led them to discover Jesus. His fame spread by word of mouth and more and more people were coming to see him. In 1970 he was transferred to the parish of Novaya Derevnia where he served there until his death in 1990. His home was about 90 minutes from Moscow by train.
His church had the usual babushki, but when he arrived, new people started to come, even from Moscow. He attracted young people and intellectuals. The newcomers didn't know how to behave in an Orthodox church, and the babushki didn't like that. They didn't like the babushki either because they were uneducated. Fr. Alexander was patient and skillful in eventually getting the two groups to accept one another. He was considered a priest for intellectuals, but never forgot the simple. He visited in all their homes. He even traveled to Moscow often to visit those who came to him and became believers. He often baptized the adults and children at their apartments at great risk to them all.
He wrote: When I became a priest, I tried to unite the parish, to make it one community and not just a group of people who knew very little about each other, whom fortune had thrown together. I wanted all the members to help one another, to pray together, to study the Scriptures together, and to receive communion together.
Many of those who came to him even rented summer dachas near him. Their community would grow closer together in the summer. As those who came to him increased, he set up groups that met weekly. These groups centered on prayer and mutual help. Some groups were for preparing the attendees for baptism. Others concentrated on Bible studies. Others read books on church history or theological works published before the revolution or published in other countries. These groups met in apartments.
He didn't baptize immediately when asked, but told people to wait and read the Gospel and let it soak in. He was careful to teach those who wanted to be baptized. He would take their confession and spend time with them listening and giving advice. He encouraged his followers to attend communion at least monthly. He didn't command them to do or not to do certain things. He wanted to lead them to the point of deciding for themselves. He was like a midwife who was there to help another give birth.
His teaching centered on Jesus. He used to say, "Christianity is not first and foremost a set of dogmas and moral precepts, but is above all Jesus Christ Himself." He compared Christianity to mountain climbing, a difficult and dangerous undertaking. Some stay at the bottom and read the guidebook and imagine they are already on the top. He said the same thing happens to us when we read the books of the mystics, repeat their words, and imagine we have arrived at the summit. He didn't want his spiritual children to turn away from life and lost interest in their professional and social activities. He said that faith should sanctify everything positive in their existence. He taught that every aspect of life should link us to God.
In regards to the Old Church Slavonic, he wanted things changed, but never proceeded ahead of the church. He felt there was wisdom in waiting on the church as a hierarchy to come to that change. He didn't want people to confuse Tradition and traditions and reminded people that liturgical forms changed over the centuries and couldn't remain unchangeable. He didn't want people to confuse the symbol to pass for the divine. But on the other hand he never worked to abolish religious rites. He was in favor of icons. At his core he was Orthodox.
He was open to other Christian confessions, especially Catholicism. "I have arrived at the conviction that in reality, the Church is one and that Christians have been divided especially by their narrowness and their sins." However, he felt like leaving the Orthodox Church to become Catholic didn't permit people to enter into an active church life since there were so few Catholics there.
His first book was The Son of Man, the story of Jesus Christ. This book came out of conversations he had with newly baptized people. He said that the purpose of his books was to help Christians, especially new ones, to discover the basic principles of the gospel in a language they could understand. He felt like his first book overcame a barrier people had to reading the Bible. It made the Bible more understandable. He included all of the data from history, archaeology, and other biblical writers to present the story as if the reader were an eye-witness of the events. It was through a Frenchwoman of Russian descent (a Catholic lady) who moved to Moscow to work in the French embassy that he was able to smuggle his manuscripts out to be printed in Belgium. These books were used by Orthodox in other areas of the world as well as being smuggled back into Russia. He also wrote Heaven on Earth about the Orthodox liturgy. In Search of the Way, the Truth, and the Life was a 6 volume work on the history of man's religions. He also wrote How to Read the Bible, commentaries of different books in the New Testament, and a 7 volume dictionary of Biblical studies. He also wrote books for children for catechism.
He put together a slide show called "In Jesus' Steps" with the help of a French priest. Thousands of copies were made for free and smuggled back into Russia. These were used, especially by the Baptists!
Father Alexander was often under surveillance by the Russian authorities and was also unpopular with many in the Orthodox Church. He was so well-received by the people that others were jealous. He also had an independent spirit and not one of conformity. He was often summoned to appear before Russian authorities. Friends asked him to leave Russia for the West, but he never approved of those who left. He felt his spiritual children were in Russia and needed him.
Under Gorbachev things eased considerably. In 1987 the Russian government announced the restoration to the church of two monasteries. In 1988 the Orthodox Church celebrated its 1,000 year anniversary. Permission to celebrate was given by the government who even took part. Father Alexander was allowed to give public lectures, even in state schools. He worked tirelessly during these years, lecturing, writing articles for journals, working with his own parishioners. He was prepared for the new freedom, to take advantage of it and spread the gospel. At this same time there were many who wanted to return to the ultra Orthodox ways of the past and reject everything foreign and any reform. He said, "If we do not convert our hearts, if we do not change our way of life, these buildings will be nothing more than empty shells."
Father Alexander, along with other Orthodox, Protestants, and Catholics, founded the Russian Bible Society. When the Baptists had a large rally in the Moscow Olympic Stadium on Easter of 1990, they invited the Patriarchate to participate. No one attended expect for Father Alexander. He spoke there of Christ's Last Supper with his disciples.
He worked tirelessly during his last years, as if he knew that his time was short. He said, "At present I am like the sower in the parable. I have been given a unique chance to spread the seed. True, the vast majority of it will fall on rocky ground and will never sprout. You think I don't know what kind of mush people have in their heads? Nonetheless, if after having heard me, only a few people wake up, or even only one person, that's something, isn't it? You know, I have the feeling that this is not going to last long, at least not for me."
On Sunday, September 9, 1990, he arose to walk to church as he did every Sunday morning. As he left out of his garden, someone met him and struck him down with an ax to the back of his head. Father Alexander was killed, but his work lives on.
Author's Right to Discuss Topic:
I chose this book because I have heard people speak of Alexander Men with great respect. His books are still available and read. I wanted to know more about him.
The author Is Yves Hamant. He completed advanced studies in Russian and has a PhD in political science. He teaches Russian civilization at the University of Paris. He lived for years in Russia during the Breshnev period. He knew Father Alexander personally, having first met him in 1970. Mr. Hamant was chosen to be a member of the commission created by the Patriarchate of Moscow to preserve and make known Father Alexander's works. Solzhenitsyn said of him, "He was very much in love with Russian culture and helped us a great deal at that time."
Application and Reflection:
This book enabled me to understand more about Russian history as the chapters on Father Alexander were interspersed with chapters about the different times under different Soviet leaders. I understood more about the persecution of the church and the state of the Orthodox Church with varying periods of Soviet history. I can more understand where the Orthodox are today from reading about the past and how they came to be what they are. As far as how this applies to my ministry, I see the following.
1) This book encourages me that there are evangelical Orthodox who genuinely teach and preach the gospel. This encourages me to pray for more leaders like Alexander Men and to pray that the Orthodox Church will reach many with the true gospel. I may not agree with them on all points, but we do share belief in Jesus Christ as God's Son and the propitiation for our sins. This book rebukes me when I assume that only we Baptists have the truth.
2) This book gives me something to talk about with the Orthodox that I encounter. Many have heard of Father Men and some have read his books. I can use something from their own faith to start a religious conversation at a point of connection and agreement. I can use something from their own culture as a bridge to the gospel. Just last week we were riding with two ladies in our back seat. One is a baptized believer of our Baptist church who came out of an Orthodox background. The other is a Russian speaking Catholic. They were actually the ones who brought up Alexander Men and had both read "The Son of Man." I was able to participate in the discussion with them as well.
3) I can perhaps use his book, Son of Man to give out to selected people. I have read some of this book on the internet in English. That parts that were available free were very interesting, accurate, and centered on the gospel accounts of Christ. This could be a wonderful tool to introduce Orthodox to the Christ they claim to believe in. This would also be an excellent book for Jewish people. Since Father Alexander was Jewish himself, this could also be a bridge to them. He never gave up his "Jewishness" but instead felt that this was a wonderful part of who he was, having blood ties to Jesus as well. I have also thought that this could perhaps be a book that we could use for a book club, to read together and discuss. I would next like to obtain the entire copy of whichever of his books I can locate in English, to read them for myself.
Alexander Men was a Russian Orthodox priest who lived his whole life in Russia. He was considered a controversial priest for several reasons. One, he preached in the common language the people could understand. Two, he was considered a priest to the intellectuals. Three, he wrote and published books abroad when it was illegal to do so in Russia. Four, he was Jewish. Fifth, he was open to other Christian religions, mainly Catholic, but also Protestant. He saw all these as brothers in Christ.
He was born January 22, 1935. Stalin was the leader of Russia at that time and the "Great Terror" was in progress. More than 95% of Orthodox churches were closed. There were no seminaries or monasteries. Only a few bishops were still tolerated. The majority had been sent to the gulags or killed.
Alexander's father was a textile engineer. He was of Jewish origin, but lost his faith in childhood through the influence of one of his teachers. He wasn't, though, a militant atheist. He was tolerant of religious ideas. His mother Elena also was Jewish and was raised by her mother to love God as Creator. From childhood she was attracted to Christianity and even began going to services in a Baptist community. This caused conflict in her family. Her cousin Vera came to Kharkov where they lived and took her to Moscow where she married and lived permanently. Vera was searching as well. Through her Elena became involved with an Orthodox group that centered around a certain priest. Just after Alexander's birth the two women were baptized secretly as well as the infant Alexander. Alexander grew up traveling frequently from Moscow to Zagorsk where this priest lived. It was an underground church, and the priest was like a grandfather to Alexander. There was also an elderly nun who participated in his spiritual development. Alexander also had contact with Christian intellectuals. He was a precocious child and his mother, as well as the others around him, encouraged him in his reading and studying. He spent long hours reading and studying a great variety of things. He was also very friendly and had as many friends as books. He loved to study literature, poetry, music, painting, history, nature, astronomy, and biology. He used to say that God has given us two books, the Bible and nature.
At the age of 12 he felt a personal call to the priesthood. Times were a little more open then, and a seminary was just opening. Alexander hoped to attend when of age. He had a friend who was a chemistry professor who gave him books to read each week. This professor had been converted through contact with Baptists, and he helped Alexander learn more about Western Christianity. Alexander read books from the church fathers. He began to write at a young age. He wrote his first theological essay when 15. He finished high school in 1953, a few months before Stalin died. Since he'd already on his own assimilated the whole seminary curriculum, he decided to attend university; however, because of his Jewish roots he wasn't allowed. Instead he attended the Moscow Fur Institute where he could study biology. He continued his theological studies on his own. The Fur Institute closed in 1955 and the students were transferred to Irkutsk to a school. In time it became clear that he was an active Orthodox. He planned to finish the institute and then work in that field for 3 years to get his final certification before attending seminary in Zagorsk. When final exams were starting, though, he was excluded on the grounds that he hadn't taken some required courses. The institute had found out his connections with a local bishop. He left school without any diploma.
He returned to Moscow and was ordained as a deacon even without having started seminary. He was sent to a parish to serve for two years with his wife and small son. He began his first series of lectures on the life of Christ and also took correspondence courses from Leningrad Seminary. In 1960 he was ordained a priest and was sent as a second priest to a place 30 miles outside Moscow. In a year he became the pastor. His parishioners were devoted to him, and he had good relationships with the city officials. He wrote articles for the Orthodox journal. An active community of Christians grew up around him. He visited and baptized in people's homes and went to the cemeteries for memorial services.
Alexander carried out his duties as a priest for many years without a change in the conditions of his ministry. He always tried to work in the shadows and avoid open confrontation with authorities. He wanted to be available to the next generation of Russians who were disillusioned and seeking new answers. He patiently led them to discover Jesus. His fame spread by word of mouth and more and more people were coming to see him. In 1970 he was transferred to the parish of Novaya Derevnia where he served there until his death in 1990. His home was about 90 minutes from Moscow by train.
His church had the usual babushki, but when he arrived, new people started to come, even from Moscow. He attracted young people and intellectuals. The newcomers didn't know how to behave in an Orthodox church, and the babushki didn't like that. They didn't like the babushki either because they were uneducated. Fr. Alexander was patient and skillful in eventually getting the two groups to accept one another. He was considered a priest for intellectuals, but never forgot the simple. He visited in all their homes. He even traveled to Moscow often to visit those who came to him and became believers. He often baptized the adults and children at their apartments at great risk to them all.
He wrote: When I became a priest, I tried to unite the parish, to make it one community and not just a group of people who knew very little about each other, whom fortune had thrown together. I wanted all the members to help one another, to pray together, to study the Scriptures together, and to receive communion together.
Many of those who came to him even rented summer dachas near him. Their community would grow closer together in the summer. As those who came to him increased, he set up groups that met weekly. These groups centered on prayer and mutual help. Some groups were for preparing the attendees for baptism. Others concentrated on Bible studies. Others read books on church history or theological works published before the revolution or published in other countries. These groups met in apartments.
He didn't baptize immediately when asked, but told people to wait and read the Gospel and let it soak in. He was careful to teach those who wanted to be baptized. He would take their confession and spend time with them listening and giving advice. He encouraged his followers to attend communion at least monthly. He didn't command them to do or not to do certain things. He wanted to lead them to the point of deciding for themselves. He was like a midwife who was there to help another give birth.
His teaching centered on Jesus. He used to say, "Christianity is not first and foremost a set of dogmas and moral precepts, but is above all Jesus Christ Himself." He compared Christianity to mountain climbing, a difficult and dangerous undertaking. Some stay at the bottom and read the guidebook and imagine they are already on the top. He said the same thing happens to us when we read the books of the mystics, repeat their words, and imagine we have arrived at the summit. He didn't want his spiritual children to turn away from life and lost interest in their professional and social activities. He said that faith should sanctify everything positive in their existence. He taught that every aspect of life should link us to God.
In regards to the Old Church Slavonic, he wanted things changed, but never proceeded ahead of the church. He felt there was wisdom in waiting on the church as a hierarchy to come to that change. He didn't want people to confuse Tradition and traditions and reminded people that liturgical forms changed over the centuries and couldn't remain unchangeable. He didn't want people to confuse the symbol to pass for the divine. But on the other hand he never worked to abolish religious rites. He was in favor of icons. At his core he was Orthodox.
He was open to other Christian confessions, especially Catholicism. "I have arrived at the conviction that in reality, the Church is one and that Christians have been divided especially by their narrowness and their sins." However, he felt like leaving the Orthodox Church to become Catholic didn't permit people to enter into an active church life since there were so few Catholics there.
His first book was The Son of Man, the story of Jesus Christ. This book came out of conversations he had with newly baptized people. He said that the purpose of his books was to help Christians, especially new ones, to discover the basic principles of the gospel in a language they could understand. He felt like his first book overcame a barrier people had to reading the Bible. It made the Bible more understandable. He included all of the data from history, archaeology, and other biblical writers to present the story as if the reader were an eye-witness of the events. It was through a Frenchwoman of Russian descent (a Catholic lady) who moved to Moscow to work in the French embassy that he was able to smuggle his manuscripts out to be printed in Belgium. These books were used by Orthodox in other areas of the world as well as being smuggled back into Russia. He also wrote Heaven on Earth about the Orthodox liturgy. In Search of the Way, the Truth, and the Life was a 6 volume work on the history of man's religions. He also wrote How to Read the Bible, commentaries of different books in the New Testament, and a 7 volume dictionary of Biblical studies. He also wrote books for children for catechism.
He put together a slide show called "In Jesus' Steps" with the help of a French priest. Thousands of copies were made for free and smuggled back into Russia. These were used, especially by the Baptists!
Father Alexander was often under surveillance by the Russian authorities and was also unpopular with many in the Orthodox Church. He was so well-received by the people that others were jealous. He also had an independent spirit and not one of conformity. He was often summoned to appear before Russian authorities. Friends asked him to leave Russia for the West, but he never approved of those who left. He felt his spiritual children were in Russia and needed him.
Under Gorbachev things eased considerably. In 1987 the Russian government announced the restoration to the church of two monasteries. In 1988 the Orthodox Church celebrated its 1,000 year anniversary. Permission to celebrate was given by the government who even took part. Father Alexander was allowed to give public lectures, even in state schools. He worked tirelessly during these years, lecturing, writing articles for journals, working with his own parishioners. He was prepared for the new freedom, to take advantage of it and spread the gospel. At this same time there were many who wanted to return to the ultra Orthodox ways of the past and reject everything foreign and any reform. He said, "If we do not convert our hearts, if we do not change our way of life, these buildings will be nothing more than empty shells."
Father Alexander, along with other Orthodox, Protestants, and Catholics, founded the Russian Bible Society. When the Baptists had a large rally in the Moscow Olympic Stadium on Easter of 1990, they invited the Patriarchate to participate. No one attended expect for Father Alexander. He spoke there of Christ's Last Supper with his disciples.
He worked tirelessly during his last years, as if he knew that his time was short. He said, "At present I am like the sower in the parable. I have been given a unique chance to spread the seed. True, the vast majority of it will fall on rocky ground and will never sprout. You think I don't know what kind of mush people have in their heads? Nonetheless, if after having heard me, only a few people wake up, or even only one person, that's something, isn't it? You know, I have the feeling that this is not going to last long, at least not for me."
On Sunday, September 9, 1990, he arose to walk to church as he did every Sunday morning. As he left out of his garden, someone met him and struck him down with an ax to the back of his head. Father Alexander was killed, but his work lives on.
Author's Right to Discuss Topic:
I chose this book because I have heard people speak of Alexander Men with great respect. His books are still available and read. I wanted to know more about him.
The author Is Yves Hamant. He completed advanced studies in Russian and has a PhD in political science. He teaches Russian civilization at the University of Paris. He lived for years in Russia during the Breshnev period. He knew Father Alexander personally, having first met him in 1970. Mr. Hamant was chosen to be a member of the commission created by the Patriarchate of Moscow to preserve and make known Father Alexander's works. Solzhenitsyn said of him, "He was very much in love with Russian culture and helped us a great deal at that time."
Application and Reflection:
This book enabled me to understand more about Russian history as the chapters on Father Alexander were interspersed with chapters about the different times under different Soviet leaders. I understood more about the persecution of the church and the state of the Orthodox Church with varying periods of Soviet history. I can more understand where the Orthodox are today from reading about the past and how they came to be what they are. As far as how this applies to my ministry, I see the following.
1) This book encourages me that there are evangelical Orthodox who genuinely teach and preach the gospel. This encourages me to pray for more leaders like Alexander Men and to pray that the Orthodox Church will reach many with the true gospel. I may not agree with them on all points, but we do share belief in Jesus Christ as God's Son and the propitiation for our sins. This book rebukes me when I assume that only we Baptists have the truth.
2) This book gives me something to talk about with the Orthodox that I encounter. Many have heard of Father Men and some have read his books. I can use something from their own faith to start a religious conversation at a point of connection and agreement. I can use something from their own culture as a bridge to the gospel. Just last week we were riding with two ladies in our back seat. One is a baptized believer of our Baptist church who came out of an Orthodox background. The other is a Russian speaking Catholic. They were actually the ones who brought up Alexander Men and had both read "The Son of Man." I was able to participate in the discussion with them as well.
3) I can perhaps use his book, Son of Man to give out to selected people. I have read some of this book on the internet in English. That parts that were available free were very interesting, accurate, and centered on the gospel accounts of Christ. This could be a wonderful tool to introduce Orthodox to the Christ they claim to believe in. This would also be an excellent book for Jewish people. Since Father Alexander was Jewish himself, this could also be a bridge to them. He never gave up his "Jewishness" but instead felt that this was a wonderful part of who he was, having blood ties to Jesus as well. I have also thought that this could perhaps be a book that we could use for a book club, to read together and discuss. I would next like to obtain the entire copy of whichever of his books I can locate in English, to read them for myself.
Book Review: Light from the Christian East: An Introduction to the Orthodox Tradition
Report by Tanya Smith (Pseudonym)
I chose this book because I wanted to have a better understanding of Orthodox beliefs and practices since it is the state religion in Russia. In addition, three students in our English club study Orthodox Theology. They refer to themselves as Christians and I wanted to have a better understanding of what they’ve been taught.
This book compares what the author believes is Christianity in the West (including both Catholics and Protestants) verses Christianity in the East. The statements made are often generalized and very wordy. At the beginning of the book it was difficult for me to read and stay focused on the author’s point; but toward the end I got used to the writing style and wordiness.
My first thought with this book is that it is about Christianity and, right from the start in the section on “Acknowledgements,” the author not once thanks the Lord or makes mention of Him. There are references to Bible verses throughout the book, but they are taken out of context and the author states that Eastern (Orthodox) tradition is what Christianity is all about.
History section: Author’s focus: “human reason led to the embrace of the truth” --he doesn’t speak of the Holy Spirit and/or God’s living and active Word. But he does say that Christianity spread as the people heard the message in their own language and as people were able to teach about Christianity not only in church but also in schools.
Author’s statements about Western reactions to Orthodoxy: Protestants think Orthodoxy is similar to Catholicism with view of Virgin Mary, saints, tradition, sacraments, monks and ecclesiastical hierarchy. Author thinks evangelicals are deficient in appreciation of history of church’s worship and in use of the historic liturgies and prayers of the church. (I was looking for the “What Jesus says” section but apparently his ideas were more important than what Jesus said about worship, salvation and prayer.) Author also says that in Eastern Christianity tradition is being proclaimed and that it is the traditional presentation that is important. The author goes on to say that Westerners view tradition as the enemy but author says tradition is what speaks to the church. (Nowhere in this book is a message of a new, changed life in Christ Jesus.)
Orthodoxy’s approach to doctrine: Author says the word “orthodox” means proper or right glory –so, Orthodoxy is that which gives proper glory to God. Eastern Christianity uses Orthodoxy to describe a style of life and worship that is faithful to the Christian message. (He doesn’t speak about the role of the Holy Spirit and isn’t clear what he means by the Christian message.) The author talks about knowing God as communing with Him, living in openness toward and wonder before Him. He speaks of living in mystical devotion to God as being the only path to knowing God –with an emphasis on not studying the Bible –since Truth is really beyond our grasp (which it is without the help of the Holy Spirit).
Talking about God: God is triune –Father, Son and Holy Spirit. But this book talks about God rather than Jesus as being central to Christianity –and the role of the Holy Spirit as our teacher is never mentioned.
Author really downplays the importance of Scripture in God revealing Himself to us. He says that the divine is where human minds cannot reach and leads the reader to the conclusion that God is a distant God and His Word is beyond our understanding. The author stresses personally experiencing God as love is not an individual experience. Rather, God administers His love for the people who are in the church. The corporate dimension of Christian experience is fundamental to Orthodox understanding of the experience of God’s love. (A trusting, one-on-one relationship with the Father is not part of Orthodox teaching.)
Creator and the Creation: Orthodoxy teaches that God remains incommunicable. He sustains His creation and it depends on Him for existence. The goal of creation is to be in communion with God. Jesus’ resurrection broke the power of death and liberated humanity from it and now leads His church to communion with God (author never defines His church but implies those who go to Orthodox church). ALL creation is reclaimed through the work of the Redeemer.
Humanity as created and fallen: “Orthodoxy has steered away from attempts to try to locate or pinpoint where the divine image resides in human beings.” According to Orthodoxy, the physical body of humans is a visible form that uniquely matches the invisible divine glory (although God has no body). Each person bears God’s image and is to grow into God’s likeness. The serpent offered a shortcut to the goal Adam and Eve were to achieve. The serpent offered them another way to be “like God”. Adam and Eve freely chose to become “like God” by a different path; they freely chose to disobey the divine command by going their own way. Adam and Eve foolishly expected to acquire likeness to God by disobedience to God. According to Orthodoxy, the human race does not share in or inherit the guilt of Adam’s sin –it only suffers from the effects of the sin. The idea in orthodoxy is that there is no imputation of Adam’s sin to his descendants –no one but Adam and Eve are guilty of their original sin. Eastern Christianity teaching says that death leads human beings to sin (that is, human beings sin because of death). They say that death is a heavy burden for humanity and as a result, they opt for what is temporarily satisfying rather than what would be conducive to everlasting life with God. However, Eastern Christian teaching also says that human beings are part of God’s created nature; and as God’s creation, “nature” remains good. Sin has no power to destroy what God has made or to alter his creation. According to Orthodoxy, human beings freely choose their own paths and when they choose wrong path, their relationships will be affected because of it (i.e. feeling hostility, alienation, resentment, aloofness etc. in relationships), BUT none of us bears or suffers from a depraved, corrupt or sinful human nature. Orthodoxy rejects the concept of depravity of human nature because human nature remains God’s handiwork; and as God’s creation, Orthodoxy accounts readily for the “good” done by those who do not profess faith in or see to obey God.
The Accomplishment of Salvation: Orthodoxy teaches that Christ’s death was payment for human sin so that all human beings are forgiven and accounted righteous in God’s sight. With the introduction of eternal life to human nature in Christ, humanity is no longer bound to death, as it had been since the fall of Adam and Eve. (Author never speaks of personal trust in Jesus and/or obedience playing a role) Christ became the guarantee of the fulfillment of God’s original creative purpose for all of creation –namely life with God forever. (Interesting thought to reiterate – sin leads to death and since Christ never sinned, He himself did not have to die). (Again, never speaks of new creation in Christ while still living on this earth)
The Application of Salvation: Orthodoxy emphasizes that it’s a trust in God’s mercy and grace to all for their salvation. Orthodoxy teaches that the conformity to the Son of God is not just an attitudinal or moral likeness in the inner person; BUT that the result of salvation will be a visible likeness Christ. The salvation accomplished by Christ sets creation anew on its divinely intended path –communion with God for the whole of creation, but for humanity, likeness to God as well. Another teaching of orthodoxy is that deification is the assured result of salvation. (“edification” is in the Bible but not “deification” –mixed up the “e” and “d”??). Says the work of the Holy Spirit is accomplished through the sacraments (baptism and Eucharist) and through the church. Says through baptism humans are united to Christ and are made children of God. So, Orthodoxy teaches that baptism applies salvation to us. Also, Orthodoxy teaches that the Eucharist is the “medicine of immortality” –the antidote we take in order not to die but to live forever in Christ. Says Christ implants Himself in us through the taking of the Eucharist. Says that only in the church and through the church are people made children of God. Says it’s not an individual thing. Author states that “individual righteousness is not enough for salvation”. Says salvation is not solitary but social. Says we cannot be saved in any other way than through the neighbor.
Coming from a Catholic background, I can see clear similarities with Orthodoxy –with the focus on man’s traditions and works. The author never talks about going to the priest for confession of sins as with the Catholics, but there are many similarities. It was interesting that the author never gave Biblical passages to clarify the Lord’s definition of “worship” and “salvation” –instead the author talked about worship and salvation being a church (corporate), not an individual, experience. There was never mention of the Holy Spirit’s role as our teacher when studying and applying God’s Word. The author clearly is defending the Orthodox religion and picks and chooses Scripture out of context to support his claims.
I chose this book because I wanted to have a better understanding of Orthodox beliefs and practices since it is the state religion in Russia. In addition, three students in our English club study Orthodox Theology. They refer to themselves as Christians and I wanted to have a better understanding of what they’ve been taught.
This book compares what the author believes is Christianity in the West (including both Catholics and Protestants) verses Christianity in the East. The statements made are often generalized and very wordy. At the beginning of the book it was difficult for me to read and stay focused on the author’s point; but toward the end I got used to the writing style and wordiness.
My first thought with this book is that it is about Christianity and, right from the start in the section on “Acknowledgements,” the author not once thanks the Lord or makes mention of Him. There are references to Bible verses throughout the book, but they are taken out of context and the author states that Eastern (Orthodox) tradition is what Christianity is all about.
History section: Author’s focus: “human reason led to the embrace of the truth” --he doesn’t speak of the Holy Spirit and/or God’s living and active Word. But he does say that Christianity spread as the people heard the message in their own language and as people were able to teach about Christianity not only in church but also in schools.
Author’s statements about Western reactions to Orthodoxy: Protestants think Orthodoxy is similar to Catholicism with view of Virgin Mary, saints, tradition, sacraments, monks and ecclesiastical hierarchy. Author thinks evangelicals are deficient in appreciation of history of church’s worship and in use of the historic liturgies and prayers of the church. (I was looking for the “What Jesus says” section but apparently his ideas were more important than what Jesus said about worship, salvation and prayer.) Author also says that in Eastern Christianity tradition is being proclaimed and that it is the traditional presentation that is important. The author goes on to say that Westerners view tradition as the enemy but author says tradition is what speaks to the church. (Nowhere in this book is a message of a new, changed life in Christ Jesus.)
Orthodoxy’s approach to doctrine: Author says the word “orthodox” means proper or right glory –so, Orthodoxy is that which gives proper glory to God. Eastern Christianity uses Orthodoxy to describe a style of life and worship that is faithful to the Christian message. (He doesn’t speak about the role of the Holy Spirit and isn’t clear what he means by the Christian message.) The author talks about knowing God as communing with Him, living in openness toward and wonder before Him. He speaks of living in mystical devotion to God as being the only path to knowing God –with an emphasis on not studying the Bible –since Truth is really beyond our grasp (which it is without the help of the Holy Spirit).
Talking about God: God is triune –Father, Son and Holy Spirit. But this book talks about God rather than Jesus as being central to Christianity –and the role of the Holy Spirit as our teacher is never mentioned.
Author really downplays the importance of Scripture in God revealing Himself to us. He says that the divine is where human minds cannot reach and leads the reader to the conclusion that God is a distant God and His Word is beyond our understanding. The author stresses personally experiencing God as love is not an individual experience. Rather, God administers His love for the people who are in the church. The corporate dimension of Christian experience is fundamental to Orthodox understanding of the experience of God’s love. (A trusting, one-on-one relationship with the Father is not part of Orthodox teaching.)
Creator and the Creation: Orthodoxy teaches that God remains incommunicable. He sustains His creation and it depends on Him for existence. The goal of creation is to be in communion with God. Jesus’ resurrection broke the power of death and liberated humanity from it and now leads His church to communion with God (author never defines His church but implies those who go to Orthodox church). ALL creation is reclaimed through the work of the Redeemer.
Humanity as created and fallen: “Orthodoxy has steered away from attempts to try to locate or pinpoint where the divine image resides in human beings.” According to Orthodoxy, the physical body of humans is a visible form that uniquely matches the invisible divine glory (although God has no body). Each person bears God’s image and is to grow into God’s likeness. The serpent offered a shortcut to the goal Adam and Eve were to achieve. The serpent offered them another way to be “like God”. Adam and Eve freely chose to become “like God” by a different path; they freely chose to disobey the divine command by going their own way. Adam and Eve foolishly expected to acquire likeness to God by disobedience to God. According to Orthodoxy, the human race does not share in or inherit the guilt of Adam’s sin –it only suffers from the effects of the sin. The idea in orthodoxy is that there is no imputation of Adam’s sin to his descendants –no one but Adam and Eve are guilty of their original sin. Eastern Christianity teaching says that death leads human beings to sin (that is, human beings sin because of death). They say that death is a heavy burden for humanity and as a result, they opt for what is temporarily satisfying rather than what would be conducive to everlasting life with God. However, Eastern Christian teaching also says that human beings are part of God’s created nature; and as God’s creation, “nature” remains good. Sin has no power to destroy what God has made or to alter his creation. According to Orthodoxy, human beings freely choose their own paths and when they choose wrong path, their relationships will be affected because of it (i.e. feeling hostility, alienation, resentment, aloofness etc. in relationships), BUT none of us bears or suffers from a depraved, corrupt or sinful human nature. Orthodoxy rejects the concept of depravity of human nature because human nature remains God’s handiwork; and as God’s creation, Orthodoxy accounts readily for the “good” done by those who do not profess faith in or see to obey God.
The Accomplishment of Salvation: Orthodoxy teaches that Christ’s death was payment for human sin so that all human beings are forgiven and accounted righteous in God’s sight. With the introduction of eternal life to human nature in Christ, humanity is no longer bound to death, as it had been since the fall of Adam and Eve. (Author never speaks of personal trust in Jesus and/or obedience playing a role) Christ became the guarantee of the fulfillment of God’s original creative purpose for all of creation –namely life with God forever. (Interesting thought to reiterate – sin leads to death and since Christ never sinned, He himself did not have to die). (Again, never speaks of new creation in Christ while still living on this earth)
The Application of Salvation: Orthodoxy emphasizes that it’s a trust in God’s mercy and grace to all for their salvation. Orthodoxy teaches that the conformity to the Son of God is not just an attitudinal or moral likeness in the inner person; BUT that the result of salvation will be a visible likeness Christ. The salvation accomplished by Christ sets creation anew on its divinely intended path –communion with God for the whole of creation, but for humanity, likeness to God as well. Another teaching of orthodoxy is that deification is the assured result of salvation. (“edification” is in the Bible but not “deification” –mixed up the “e” and “d”??). Says the work of the Holy Spirit is accomplished through the sacraments (baptism and Eucharist) and through the church. Says through baptism humans are united to Christ and are made children of God. So, Orthodoxy teaches that baptism applies salvation to us. Also, Orthodoxy teaches that the Eucharist is the “medicine of immortality” –the antidote we take in order not to die but to live forever in Christ. Says Christ implants Himself in us through the taking of the Eucharist. Says that only in the church and through the church are people made children of God. Says it’s not an individual thing. Author states that “individual righteousness is not enough for salvation”. Says salvation is not solitary but social. Says we cannot be saved in any other way than through the neighbor.
Coming from a Catholic background, I can see clear similarities with Orthodoxy –with the focus on man’s traditions and works. The author never talks about going to the priest for confession of sins as with the Catholics, but there are many similarities. It was interesting that the author never gave Biblical passages to clarify the Lord’s definition of “worship” and “salvation” –instead the author talked about worship and salvation being a church (corporate), not an individual, experience. There was never mention of the Holy Spirit’s role as our teacher when studying and applying God’s Word. The author clearly is defending the Orthodox religion and picks and chooses Scripture out of context to support his claims.
Book Review: Light from the Christian East: An Introduction to the Orthodox Tradition
Review by D.A.D. (Pseudonym)
Light from the Christian East is an introduction to the Orthodox tradition. It is a book for western Christians who want to learn more about Eastern Orthodoxy. It is helpful in giving historical background to explain reasons for differences in western thinking and eastern perspective. Written in a strongly theological manner, it is tedious reading, yet interesting in its details.
Author’s Right to Discuss Topic
James R. Payton, Jr. received his Ph.D. from the University of Waterloo in Canada. He is a professor of history at Redeemer University in Ancaster, Ontario. He has studied and been in dialogue with Eastern Orthodoxy for many years and has written extensively on Protestant-Orthodox relations. He is president of Christians Associated for Relationships with Eastern Europe. Dr. Payton does not state his current church affiliation, but he favors Orthodoxy to a fault. His insistence on the need for the West to learn from the East is well founded, yet tiresome. In any case, his passion shows through his writing.
Application and Reflection
Reading this book has been timely and informative for me. It is amazing how God networks people and circumstances to bring about His purposes. After six years of living in this part of the world, I have collected bits and pieces of an understanding of Orthodoxy, but never was accountable to find a thorough resource. I chose this book because I realized my lack of knowledge and understanding. Two weeks after I started reading the book, an English student approached me after class and said, “Please tell me the difference in Orthodoxy and Protestantism.” I have since had several interesting and in depth discussions with other Orthodox friends. In general, this book has helped me in two ways: 1) It has given me an understanding of specific Orthodox beliefs that I need to know, and 2) it has made it easy to bring up conversations regarding spiritual issues by saying, “ I’m reading a book about Orthodoxy…tell me what you think…” The information and conviction I have gained by reading the book has helped already and will definitely be useful in the future as I add to my collection.
Dr. Payton covered an immense time period as he walked through history explaining the development of Orthodoxy. He then spent much time delving into the theology behind the differences in the Christian East and Christian West, as he calls it. The Christian East is the part of the world that was influenced by Hellenistic thinking, Byzantine, the fall of Constantinople and Greek language. The Christian West is the part of the world influenced by Roman thinking, law, justice, individuality, and Latin language. This term encompasses Roman Catholics and Protestants, including all the subsets of the latter. Questions of merit and debt, satisfaction and payment, justification and condemnation were all natural in this realm, whereas in the East, the focus was on the struggle between light and dark, the process of salvation, and communion with God. It is significant that by 1453, in the East, all but one Orthodox church had fallen under the domination of the Ottoman Turkish Empire. They remained in oppressive environments for more than half a millennium, but they survived. The free Russian Orthodox church was generally controlled by Tsars. All in all, the Christian church in the East has been shaped by different experiences and questions than the Christian church in the West.
For our purposes, I want to outline only the distinctions that make a difference to me in our current setting, namely: salvation issues, church, tradition, icons, and prayer. These are the things I learned and my responses as well.
Ransom. (p. 127) To whom was the ransom paid? Western Christianity says that since God is the judge of human sin on the final day, the ransom to free mankind from punishment is paid by Christ to God. In Orthodoxy the ransom is understood as paid to the devil. This is commonly but not universally embraced. The idea is that Christ offered Himself to Satan in place of mankind, over whom Satan had dominion. In the end Christ had the victory and Satan lost both humanity and the ransom. No scriptures references were given. Why spend time pondering this, when we know Who has already won?
Resurrection. (p.128) Dr. Payton states that Western Christians place more emphasis on the suffering and death of Jesus as the finishing work of salvation. He states that the Orthodox look to the resurrection of Jesus as primary importance. That is why Easter Day is such an elaborate celebration. I do not agree that Christians in the West put more emphasis on Good Friday than on Easter Sunday. Yet, Jesus did not come back to life without having died first.
Deification (Theosis). (p.132) To answer the question, “Are you saved?” a Christian from the West might say that by an instant of faith alone, one can be justified by God and therefore be saved. Whereas a Christian from the East might say, “I trust that by God’s mercy and grace I am being saved.” Because of the influence of ancient Rome with the importance of human reason and legality, the Western Christian understanding of how a person is accepted as righteous in God’s court is justification. That is enough, at least for Evangelicals. Orthodox require much more. In simple terms, they require sanctification and glorification as well. Their word is deification with the connotation of “participating in the divine nature” (II Pet. 1:3-4). Deification is the assured result of salvation. It is the process by which humans increasingly receive likeness to God. It depends on grace, but is a life-long struggle. Basically, Orthodoxy treats the application of salvation as a process, and Western Christians treat it as a step.
To this I would simply say, according to Hebrews 6:19, hope is the secure anchor. We can be sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see. I can be 100% sure that I will have eternal life with God. This is difficult for my Orthodox friends to grasp, yet they desire this kind of confidence.
Church. (p.166) Orthodoxy stresses that a person can be a Christian only in connection with other Christians. To consider someone a Christian apart from his or her regular involvement in a church is not conceivable. As one bishop stated, “Salvation is social and communal, not isolated and individualistic.” Only in the church can people receive the sacraments which are essential to deification. From the Orthodox perspective, “individualistic Christianity” is an oxymoron. The statement is that Jesus gives His salvation to people in concert with and interaction with the others of the church. No verse is given. Dr. Payton explains the bent on individualism in the West as, again, being part of our ancient Roman heritage. Eastern cultures did not pass through the Enlightenment, effects of the French and American revolutions, and the changes of immigration to the new world.
In response, I understand the value of church fellowship. It is necessary for healthy Christian growth. Yet, faith itself is a personal decision. A person can confess with his mouth in a group, but he must believe with his heart individually.
Icons. (p.178) The opponents of icons (iconoclasts) denounced religious imagery as a violation of the second commandment (Ex. 20:4-5). Supporters (iconodules) justified pictures in churches as a help to those who could not read, which, in the sixth century, was a majority. The issue came to a head during the sixteenth century with Protestant reformers citing idolatrous abuse instead of pastoral help. Dr. Payton gives an interesting review of God’s gifting various artisans working on the tabernacle (Ex. 31) and the temple (I Kings 6). He does not, however, address the problem today of people attaching such meaning to artwork that they kiss it, bow down, and generally focus on the art rather than God Himself.
Tradition. (p.193) Orthodoxy continues the pattern of the ancient church in which Scripture and tradition work together to preserve, shape, and transmit the apostolic message. In the West, Scripture alone has become the only unquestioned authority, with Catholics saying Scripture plus tradition. Dr. Payton gives an interesting overview of the situation in the early church. By the time the Gospels and the apostles’ letters were written, the apostolic message had been preached and passed on for several years. Therefore a tradition of Christian proclamation had developed prior to the first New Testament writings. The church existed before the writings of the New Testament and continued during the period in which the various works were accepted into the New Testament canon (fifth century). And the church lasted until the completed biblical canon became available to all. It could thrive because it held to what the apostles taught. So for Orthodoxy, Scripture exists within Tradition. Dr. Payton states that Orthodoxy emphasizes that the same Spirit Who inspired the apostles, has continually indwelled the church since the day of Pentecost. Therefore, the Spirit Who guides the church and keeps it faithful to the apostolic heritage supersedes tradition.
This sounds ideal. It would be ideal. But it is not an accurate picture of today’s society. If the Orthodox churches in our city lived by the Holy Spirit according to this description, there would be no need for other denominations. I cannot criticize the fact that tradition is what kept the Christian church alive for many centuries in the East, during Turkish occupation and communism. But somewhere along the way the freshness of a personal relationship with God Himself was traded for a set of traditions. Dr. Payton did not deal with specifics, as I had hoped, regarding traditions such as incense, robes, and holy water.
Prayer. (p.206) Dr. Payton opens his chapter on prayer by saying that both Western and Eastern Christians alike, deal with the challenge of living a life devoted to God in the midst of a society and culture that calls us away from Him. True. And he then enters a discourse on praying without ceasing. But it comes across as simply a lecture on the value of repeating what he calls “the Jesus Prayer” one thousand times a day. (“Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner.”) He defends this practice against Mt. 6:7 by saying that it is not a vain repetition. I understand his thoughts regarding building up a habit of keeping prayer in the forefront of our minds. But again, the repetition takes away the freshness of a personal relationship. In the end, I cannot get away from my Western, Roman-thinking individualism in my desire to talk to God with my own words rather than quoting a set phrase – no matter how meaningful the words.
The essence of what I want to use from this book for future conversations is as follows:
1) Faith alone saves; works will come naturally as the fruit of salvation.
2) Each believer has direct communication with God Himself, as a priest. We can search the scripture for ourselves, going to priests or pastors for resource, but not for salvation through the church
3) Take the challenge to discern the difference between scripture and traditions.
This book is just one of many resources on Orthodoxy. I can tell it is not my favorite, but it has definitely challenged my thinking and spurred my questions. I have much to learn.
Light from the Christian East is an introduction to the Orthodox tradition. It is a book for western Christians who want to learn more about Eastern Orthodoxy. It is helpful in giving historical background to explain reasons for differences in western thinking and eastern perspective. Written in a strongly theological manner, it is tedious reading, yet interesting in its details.
Author’s Right to Discuss Topic
James R. Payton, Jr. received his Ph.D. from the University of Waterloo in Canada. He is a professor of history at Redeemer University in Ancaster, Ontario. He has studied and been in dialogue with Eastern Orthodoxy for many years and has written extensively on Protestant-Orthodox relations. He is president of Christians Associated for Relationships with Eastern Europe. Dr. Payton does not state his current church affiliation, but he favors Orthodoxy to a fault. His insistence on the need for the West to learn from the East is well founded, yet tiresome. In any case, his passion shows through his writing.
Application and Reflection
Reading this book has been timely and informative for me. It is amazing how God networks people and circumstances to bring about His purposes. After six years of living in this part of the world, I have collected bits and pieces of an understanding of Orthodoxy, but never was accountable to find a thorough resource. I chose this book because I realized my lack of knowledge and understanding. Two weeks after I started reading the book, an English student approached me after class and said, “Please tell me the difference in Orthodoxy and Protestantism.” I have since had several interesting and in depth discussions with other Orthodox friends. In general, this book has helped me in two ways: 1) It has given me an understanding of specific Orthodox beliefs that I need to know, and 2) it has made it easy to bring up conversations regarding spiritual issues by saying, “ I’m reading a book about Orthodoxy…tell me what you think…” The information and conviction I have gained by reading the book has helped already and will definitely be useful in the future as I add to my collection.
Dr. Payton covered an immense time period as he walked through history explaining the development of Orthodoxy. He then spent much time delving into the theology behind the differences in the Christian East and Christian West, as he calls it. The Christian East is the part of the world that was influenced by Hellenistic thinking, Byzantine, the fall of Constantinople and Greek language. The Christian West is the part of the world influenced by Roman thinking, law, justice, individuality, and Latin language. This term encompasses Roman Catholics and Protestants, including all the subsets of the latter. Questions of merit and debt, satisfaction and payment, justification and condemnation were all natural in this realm, whereas in the East, the focus was on the struggle between light and dark, the process of salvation, and communion with God. It is significant that by 1453, in the East, all but one Orthodox church had fallen under the domination of the Ottoman Turkish Empire. They remained in oppressive environments for more than half a millennium, but they survived. The free Russian Orthodox church was generally controlled by Tsars. All in all, the Christian church in the East has been shaped by different experiences and questions than the Christian church in the West.
For our purposes, I want to outline only the distinctions that make a difference to me in our current setting, namely: salvation issues, church, tradition, icons, and prayer. These are the things I learned and my responses as well.
Ransom. (p. 127) To whom was the ransom paid? Western Christianity says that since God is the judge of human sin on the final day, the ransom to free mankind from punishment is paid by Christ to God. In Orthodoxy the ransom is understood as paid to the devil. This is commonly but not universally embraced. The idea is that Christ offered Himself to Satan in place of mankind, over whom Satan had dominion. In the end Christ had the victory and Satan lost both humanity and the ransom. No scriptures references were given. Why spend time pondering this, when we know Who has already won?
Resurrection. (p.128) Dr. Payton states that Western Christians place more emphasis on the suffering and death of Jesus as the finishing work of salvation. He states that the Orthodox look to the resurrection of Jesus as primary importance. That is why Easter Day is such an elaborate celebration. I do not agree that Christians in the West put more emphasis on Good Friday than on Easter Sunday. Yet, Jesus did not come back to life without having died first.
Deification (Theosis). (p.132) To answer the question, “Are you saved?” a Christian from the West might say that by an instant of faith alone, one can be justified by God and therefore be saved. Whereas a Christian from the East might say, “I trust that by God’s mercy and grace I am being saved.” Because of the influence of ancient Rome with the importance of human reason and legality, the Western Christian understanding of how a person is accepted as righteous in God’s court is justification. That is enough, at least for Evangelicals. Orthodox require much more. In simple terms, they require sanctification and glorification as well. Their word is deification with the connotation of “participating in the divine nature” (II Pet. 1:3-4). Deification is the assured result of salvation. It is the process by which humans increasingly receive likeness to God. It depends on grace, but is a life-long struggle. Basically, Orthodoxy treats the application of salvation as a process, and Western Christians treat it as a step.
To this I would simply say, according to Hebrews 6:19, hope is the secure anchor. We can be sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see. I can be 100% sure that I will have eternal life with God. This is difficult for my Orthodox friends to grasp, yet they desire this kind of confidence.
Church. (p.166) Orthodoxy stresses that a person can be a Christian only in connection with other Christians. To consider someone a Christian apart from his or her regular involvement in a church is not conceivable. As one bishop stated, “Salvation is social and communal, not isolated and individualistic.” Only in the church can people receive the sacraments which are essential to deification. From the Orthodox perspective, “individualistic Christianity” is an oxymoron. The statement is that Jesus gives His salvation to people in concert with and interaction with the others of the church. No verse is given. Dr. Payton explains the bent on individualism in the West as, again, being part of our ancient Roman heritage. Eastern cultures did not pass through the Enlightenment, effects of the French and American revolutions, and the changes of immigration to the new world.
In response, I understand the value of church fellowship. It is necessary for healthy Christian growth. Yet, faith itself is a personal decision. A person can confess with his mouth in a group, but he must believe with his heart individually.
Icons. (p.178) The opponents of icons (iconoclasts) denounced religious imagery as a violation of the second commandment (Ex. 20:4-5). Supporters (iconodules) justified pictures in churches as a help to those who could not read, which, in the sixth century, was a majority. The issue came to a head during the sixteenth century with Protestant reformers citing idolatrous abuse instead of pastoral help. Dr. Payton gives an interesting review of God’s gifting various artisans working on the tabernacle (Ex. 31) and the temple (I Kings 6). He does not, however, address the problem today of people attaching such meaning to artwork that they kiss it, bow down, and generally focus on the art rather than God Himself.
Tradition. (p.193) Orthodoxy continues the pattern of the ancient church in which Scripture and tradition work together to preserve, shape, and transmit the apostolic message. In the West, Scripture alone has become the only unquestioned authority, with Catholics saying Scripture plus tradition. Dr. Payton gives an interesting overview of the situation in the early church. By the time the Gospels and the apostles’ letters were written, the apostolic message had been preached and passed on for several years. Therefore a tradition of Christian proclamation had developed prior to the first New Testament writings. The church existed before the writings of the New Testament and continued during the period in which the various works were accepted into the New Testament canon (fifth century). And the church lasted until the completed biblical canon became available to all. It could thrive because it held to what the apostles taught. So for Orthodoxy, Scripture exists within Tradition. Dr. Payton states that Orthodoxy emphasizes that the same Spirit Who inspired the apostles, has continually indwelled the church since the day of Pentecost. Therefore, the Spirit Who guides the church and keeps it faithful to the apostolic heritage supersedes tradition.
This sounds ideal. It would be ideal. But it is not an accurate picture of today’s society. If the Orthodox churches in our city lived by the Holy Spirit according to this description, there would be no need for other denominations. I cannot criticize the fact that tradition is what kept the Christian church alive for many centuries in the East, during Turkish occupation and communism. But somewhere along the way the freshness of a personal relationship with God Himself was traded for a set of traditions. Dr. Payton did not deal with specifics, as I had hoped, regarding traditions such as incense, robes, and holy water.
Prayer. (p.206) Dr. Payton opens his chapter on prayer by saying that both Western and Eastern Christians alike, deal with the challenge of living a life devoted to God in the midst of a society and culture that calls us away from Him. True. And he then enters a discourse on praying without ceasing. But it comes across as simply a lecture on the value of repeating what he calls “the Jesus Prayer” one thousand times a day. (“Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner.”) He defends this practice against Mt. 6:7 by saying that it is not a vain repetition. I understand his thoughts regarding building up a habit of keeping prayer in the forefront of our minds. But again, the repetition takes away the freshness of a personal relationship. In the end, I cannot get away from my Western, Roman-thinking individualism in my desire to talk to God with my own words rather than quoting a set phrase – no matter how meaningful the words.
The essence of what I want to use from this book for future conversations is as follows:
1) Faith alone saves; works will come naturally as the fruit of salvation.
2) Each believer has direct communication with God Himself, as a priest. We can search the scripture for ourselves, going to priests or pastors for resource, but not for salvation through the church
3) Take the challenge to discern the difference between scripture and traditions.
This book is just one of many resources on Orthodoxy. I can tell it is not my favorite, but it has definitely challenged my thinking and spurred my questions. I have much to learn.
Sunday, December 13, 2009
Partnership for Leadership- Enabling a Person of Confluence
Matthew 10 talks about utilizing a person of influence and Luke 10 speaks to finding a person of peace, but what about partnerships beyond entry and evangelism? Is there a biblical basis for partnership in church planting and leadership development? Actually, in Phil. 1:4-5 Paul expresses his thankfulness for having co-laborers or partners in the gospel ministry. It could be argued that Barnabas, Silas, Luke, and Timothy were Paul’s partners in church planting and later leadership development. I would call these guys “persons of confluence”. It’s wonderful when you can find a certain juncture in your ministry that others have a joint vision, a confluence of mission, and begin to walk with you toward that end. After new believers have been gathered, it’s a good thing to have partners to share the load of training them for becoming a church. But let me ask you 3 questions: is it a good idea? Is it theologically sound? Are there any parameters for partnering?
Is Partnering for Leadership a good idea?
Back in the 1990s, Dr. Jim Herrington was the Executive Director of the Union Baptist Association in Houston, TX, at that time having over 500 congregations that were growing by leaps and bounds through strategic networking and building effective partnerships. In an interview with City Partnerships, Jim said "we view strategic planning with churches as an adjustment to God's activity. We want churches to be crystal clear about end results which a church feels God calling them…
We have started 2 year leader development process in learning and changing behavior. It is a coaching process." This process was called LeadersEdge; a Russian pastor and I personally were invited to come be a part of it, and what we experienced in that coaching community was amazing! (Here is a link to the LeadersEdge resources that UBA Houston uses).
Jim explains that "a part of that process is creating networks across denominational lines in order to disciple the city. We have worked closely with DAWN… We believe these 4 principles help explain our process in Houston. We think of these as concentric circles beginning with the inside circle and working outward...”
1. "Leaders - We want them to experience functional unity. We do this through a commitment to pray for one another in a real and personal way. We want to reach the elders of the city to mobilize the resources of prayer."
2. "The second circle contains intercessors - gifted and called people who pray for the city."
3. "The third circle is Information of the harvest force and harvest field. The harvest force information measures the strength of the churches while the harvest field information measures the needs of the cities."
4. "The final circle is mobilization. This is where churches and leaders attach an area of need."
"These go on simultaneously but we work inside to outside. If you start with mobilization you may lose your Christian focus," Jim said.
NAMB has produced a good worksheet/study for considering what it takes to develop an effective partnership. Click here!
Pay particular attention to page 5 about the role of the partnering church.
Ok, so if partnering is important, with whom do you partner for church planting and leadership development? Do you just try to go it alone, or
Is there a theological basis for having these partners?
In May of 2006 at Dallas Theological Seminary, a young Russian scholar named Vasily Dimitrievsky explored this question of partnership in his ThM thesis entitled “Church Partnerships Among Russian Baptists: Theological and Missiological Analysis”. In this 84-page document, Dimitrievsky proposes a theological basis for partnership found in the relationships within the Trinity as well as within the community of believers. His also suggests the biblical purposes of partnership are to unify, to edify, and to evangelize. I’d highly recommend your reading his thesis. Dimitrievsky says Russian Baptists have historically tended to partner with like-minded evangelicals but have also maintained a high level of control of the partnership. Even so, Russian Baptists are changing in their attitudes about partnership, with whom they’ll partner and who they will trust. Just doing a brief survey of Russian Baptist history will reveal several areas where partnerships were developed with “brotherhood Mennonites,” other “Baptists,” other “Christians baptized by faith,” with “Petersburg believers,” or with other “evangelical believers,” and yet I’ve personally seen where a mistrust can develop when there is an unfortunate breach of trust in a partnership. Famous names like Voronin, Pavlov, Ryboshapka, Prohanov, and Pashkov flash across the screen of Russian Baptist history in developing partnerships, so any good Russian missionary should be aware of these heroes of the faith. All of this to say that now more than ever, Russian churches and Russian missionaries need to learn with whom they can really partner.
Sometimes it seems that potential persons of confluence are everywhere; at other times, it seems lonely on the missions trail. But, is there anyone you shouldn’t partner with?
Is there some set of parameters for partnering for leadership development?
IMB has published a hierarchy of levels for partnership (see Rankin, J. To the Ends of the Earth: Churches Fulfilling the Great Commission, pp. 165-69).
Level 1- Access/Entry to Population Segment (partner with persons of influence, ie. government organizations, private institutions).
Level 2- Prayer & Humanitarian Aid (partner with other denominations & agencies).
Level 3- General Evangelism (partner with persons of peace & other evangelicals)
Level 4- Church Planting (partner with other Baptists, Baptist Conventions, Baptist churches).
Level 5- Church Leadership Development (partner with Baptist seminaries)
When I was in Bryansk, I partnered with Kentucky Baptist Convention, the Bryansk Bible Institute, the Alliance for Saturation Church Planting, and some local Baptist church leaders to produce some training for potential church planters on developing small groups and leading leaders. In St. Petersburg, I found the joy of partnering with Luther Rice Seminary, many SBC pastors and professors, the St. Petersburg Baptist Association, St. Petersburg Christian University, and some key Georgia Baptist Convention churches to develop an official quarterly informal training program for pastors, youth pastors, church planters and leaders of women’s ministries. It’s good when you can trust those who will be training to hold to sound doctrine and yet explore untapped ways for expanding ministry.
So, if it is a good idea, if it’s theologically sound with biblical precedence, and if there is some structure for partnership, with whom do you partner? Or do you really think you can do it all yourself?
Is Partnering for Leadership a good idea?
Back in the 1990s, Dr. Jim Herrington was the Executive Director of the Union Baptist Association in Houston, TX, at that time having over 500 congregations that were growing by leaps and bounds through strategic networking and building effective partnerships. In an interview with City Partnerships, Jim said "we view strategic planning with churches as an adjustment to God's activity. We want churches to be crystal clear about end results which a church feels God calling them…
We have started 2 year leader development process in learning and changing behavior. It is a coaching process." This process was called LeadersEdge; a Russian pastor and I personally were invited to come be a part of it, and what we experienced in that coaching community was amazing! (Here is a link to the LeadersEdge resources that UBA Houston uses).
Jim explains that "a part of that process is creating networks across denominational lines in order to disciple the city. We have worked closely with DAWN… We believe these 4 principles help explain our process in Houston. We think of these as concentric circles beginning with the inside circle and working outward...”
1. "Leaders - We want them to experience functional unity. We do this through a commitment to pray for one another in a real and personal way. We want to reach the elders of the city to mobilize the resources of prayer."
2. "The second circle contains intercessors - gifted and called people who pray for the city."
3. "The third circle is Information of the harvest force and harvest field. The harvest force information measures the strength of the churches while the harvest field information measures the needs of the cities."
4. "The final circle is mobilization. This is where churches and leaders attach an area of need."
"These go on simultaneously but we work inside to outside. If you start with mobilization you may lose your Christian focus," Jim said.
NAMB has produced a good worksheet/study for considering what it takes to develop an effective partnership. Click here!
Pay particular attention to page 5 about the role of the partnering church.
Ok, so if partnering is important, with whom do you partner for church planting and leadership development? Do you just try to go it alone, or
Is there a theological basis for having these partners?
In May of 2006 at Dallas Theological Seminary, a young Russian scholar named Vasily Dimitrievsky explored this question of partnership in his ThM thesis entitled “Church Partnerships Among Russian Baptists: Theological and Missiological Analysis”. In this 84-page document, Dimitrievsky proposes a theological basis for partnership found in the relationships within the Trinity as well as within the community of believers. His also suggests the biblical purposes of partnership are to unify, to edify, and to evangelize. I’d highly recommend your reading his thesis. Dimitrievsky says Russian Baptists have historically tended to partner with like-minded evangelicals but have also maintained a high level of control of the partnership. Even so, Russian Baptists are changing in their attitudes about partnership, with whom they’ll partner and who they will trust. Just doing a brief survey of Russian Baptist history will reveal several areas where partnerships were developed with “brotherhood Mennonites,” other “Baptists,” other “Christians baptized by faith,” with “Petersburg believers,” or with other “evangelical believers,” and yet I’ve personally seen where a mistrust can develop when there is an unfortunate breach of trust in a partnership. Famous names like Voronin, Pavlov, Ryboshapka, Prohanov, and Pashkov flash across the screen of Russian Baptist history in developing partnerships, so any good Russian missionary should be aware of these heroes of the faith. All of this to say that now more than ever, Russian churches and Russian missionaries need to learn with whom they can really partner.
Sometimes it seems that potential persons of confluence are everywhere; at other times, it seems lonely on the missions trail. But, is there anyone you shouldn’t partner with?
Is there some set of parameters for partnering for leadership development?
IMB has published a hierarchy of levels for partnership (see Rankin, J. To the Ends of the Earth: Churches Fulfilling the Great Commission, pp. 165-69).
Level 1- Access/Entry to Population Segment (partner with persons of influence, ie. government organizations, private institutions).
Level 2- Prayer & Humanitarian Aid (partner with other denominations & agencies).
Level 3- General Evangelism (partner with persons of peace & other evangelicals)
Level 4- Church Planting (partner with other Baptists, Baptist Conventions, Baptist churches).
Level 5- Church Leadership Development (partner with Baptist seminaries)
When I was in Bryansk, I partnered with Kentucky Baptist Convention, the Bryansk Bible Institute, the Alliance for Saturation Church Planting, and some local Baptist church leaders to produce some training for potential church planters on developing small groups and leading leaders. In St. Petersburg, I found the joy of partnering with Luther Rice Seminary, many SBC pastors and professors, the St. Petersburg Baptist Association, St. Petersburg Christian University, and some key Georgia Baptist Convention churches to develop an official quarterly informal training program for pastors, youth pastors, church planters and leaders of women’s ministries. It’s good when you can trust those who will be training to hold to sound doctrine and yet explore untapped ways for expanding ministry.
So, if it is a good idea, if it’s theologically sound with biblical precedence, and if there is some structure for partnership, with whom do you partner? Or do you really think you can do it all yourself?
Thursday, December 10, 2009
Partnership for Salvation: Finding a Person of Peace
This week we take on the Luke 10 passage where Jesus told his 72 other missionaries to plan to find a person of peace. Notice that Jesus didn’t tell these guys to go set up a massive evangelism campaign; actually he was going to do that later. Instead he wanted them to initiate a base of operations through finding a person of peace.
Just what is a “person of peace”, “man of peace”, or “son of peace”? According to David Watson, former IMB missionary and now VP of Global Church Planting with CityTeam Ministries, the person of peace is “the one God has prepared to receive the Gospel for the first time into a community.” Based on the Luke 10 passage along with some other passages, David Watson developed a “Person of Peace strategy”. Part of this involved sending our missionaries in pairs, asking the Lord for harvest workers, staying focused on the main task, greeting a house by offering peace, and then healing the sick and preaching the Kingdom message. According to Watson, “the Person of Peace teaching is an entry strategy to new communities… this is radically different from traditional church planting methods. In the Person of Peace strategy, the evangelist has one job – Find the Person of Peace. This person may be from any walk of life, but he or she will welcome you, listen to your message, help you with your livelihood, and allow you to stay in the home, and influence his or her family and the community for the sake of the Gospel.” I’d encourage you to look at David’s blog, especially making yourself aware of his mp3 section for CPM Level1 Training and CPM Awareness Videos.
Just what makes a good person of peace search? Can you accomplish this through teaching and preaching? Through street witnessing? Through seminars? Most likely not. Most likely these contacts come through finding one person who accepts your teaching authority in his/her life and allows you to begin training him/her to be an evangelist. Keep in mind that this strategy is specifically geared toward starting a new work in a new community where there are no other existing “voices”.
According to the Luke 10 passage, if you can’t find a person that is ready to accept the gospel and begin a base in his home, you move on to the next place. The goal is to find the place where the gospel can be introduced to a community, an apartment complex, or a subdivision. It is in this type of establishing a base for ministry in a person’s home that the person of peace can be considered a partner in salvation or evangelism. You work through his contacts, his circle of influence. This almost goes in direct contradiction to most popular church growth plans that tend to be attractional rather than missional. Instead of casting a wide net for responders, you move in directly to one person’s oikos and exhaust those contacts by equipping the person of peace to be the soulwinner and trainer of his own friends and family.
So how do find this person of peace? I would give the following biblical steps:
1. Pray- Jesus said to “ask the Lord of the harvest for workers”. This makes sense only when you understand that you’re going out to seek out workers/ persons of peace.
2. Go- like lambs among wolves; realize this is a dangerous task, so go and stay focused. By necessity, this means you can’t sit around and wait for somebody to appear; you have to go find them.
3. Don’t stop- if you don’t find a person of peace, leave a witness, and then move on to find him/her in the next location.
4. Rejoice- we are told in vs. 21 that the report of these 72 returning even made Jesus pretty happy!
Just what is a “person of peace”, “man of peace”, or “son of peace”? According to David Watson, former IMB missionary and now VP of Global Church Planting with CityTeam Ministries, the person of peace is “the one God has prepared to receive the Gospel for the first time into a community.” Based on the Luke 10 passage along with some other passages, David Watson developed a “Person of Peace strategy”. Part of this involved sending our missionaries in pairs, asking the Lord for harvest workers, staying focused on the main task, greeting a house by offering peace, and then healing the sick and preaching the Kingdom message. According to Watson, “the Person of Peace teaching is an entry strategy to new communities… this is radically different from traditional church planting methods. In the Person of Peace strategy, the evangelist has one job – Find the Person of Peace. This person may be from any walk of life, but he or she will welcome you, listen to your message, help you with your livelihood, and allow you to stay in the home, and influence his or her family and the community for the sake of the Gospel.” I’d encourage you to look at David’s blog, especially making yourself aware of his mp3 section for CPM Level1 Training and CPM Awareness Videos.
Just what makes a good person of peace search? Can you accomplish this through teaching and preaching? Through street witnessing? Through seminars? Most likely not. Most likely these contacts come through finding one person who accepts your teaching authority in his/her life and allows you to begin training him/her to be an evangelist. Keep in mind that this strategy is specifically geared toward starting a new work in a new community where there are no other existing “voices”.
According to the Luke 10 passage, if you can’t find a person that is ready to accept the gospel and begin a base in his home, you move on to the next place. The goal is to find the place where the gospel can be introduced to a community, an apartment complex, or a subdivision. It is in this type of establishing a base for ministry in a person’s home that the person of peace can be considered a partner in salvation or evangelism. You work through his contacts, his circle of influence. This almost goes in direct contradiction to most popular church growth plans that tend to be attractional rather than missional. Instead of casting a wide net for responders, you move in directly to one person’s oikos and exhaust those contacts by equipping the person of peace to be the soulwinner and trainer of his own friends and family.
So how do find this person of peace? I would give the following biblical steps:
1. Pray- Jesus said to “ask the Lord of the harvest for workers”. This makes sense only when you understand that you’re going out to seek out workers/ persons of peace.
2. Go- like lambs among wolves; realize this is a dangerous task, so go and stay focused. By necessity, this means you can’t sit around and wait for somebody to appear; you have to go find them.
3. Don’t stop- if you don’t find a person of peace, leave a witness, and then move on to find him/her in the next location.
4. Rejoice- we are told in vs. 21 that the report of these 72 returning even made Jesus pretty happy!
Monday, December 7, 2009
Saturday, December 5, 2009
How to Be Ready
In 1 Peter 3:15, Peter says "In your hearts, make the Lordship of Christ a holy thing; always be ready to give an answer to any man who asks you about your hope with gentleness and respect/awe".
Under the Soviet Union, there was a club for young people called "Pioneers" and their motto was "Always Ready"; but how can we be ready spiritually? There are 5 parts to this command to stay ready:
1. Be prayed up and confessed up. "make it a holy thing". Earlier in verse 7 of this chapter, Peter says to stay confessed up "so that your prayers would not be hindered."
2. Be read up. "in your hearts". Spend time in the Word daily. "Give us this day our daily bread" - Matt. 6:11. We need to develop the discipline of memorizing Scripture by heart. This way, we can stay ready.
3. Be loaded up. "always be ready to give an answer". Tracts, bibles, Christian literature - take them with you everywhere you go. Don't be like the unwise virgins in the parable of the 10 Virgins where some of them forgot to take their oil for their lamps (Matt. 25:1-5).
4. Be on the Lookout. "to any man who asks you" Watch for sniper fire. Questions can come in various forms.
I've had questions come in the form of:
Tamara in Bryansk came to my door. Sasha, her grandson, came later. I met Inna on the train and she asked about my "monk's life". Olya, last Sunday on the metro, gave her question in a very giving and interesting form.
5.Don't worry. "gentleness and awe". Be worry-free about this discipline. God will give you the words at the appointed time (Luke 12:11).
Application: Pray to be ready to give answers today! Don't be ashamed.
(In Russian)
"Господа Бога святите в сердцах ваших; [будьте] всегда готовы всякому, требующему у вас отчета в вашем уповании, дать ответ с кротостью и благоговением." -1 Пет. 3:15
В Советском Союзе, в клубе пионера, молодой пионер был всегда готов. Как Вы можете быть готовы духовно? В этом небольшом приказе есть пять частей.
1. «святите». Святость находится в Вашей жизни. Молитесь часто и признайтесь в своих грехах. « дабы не было вам препятствия в молитвах.» - ст. 7
2. «в сердцах ваших». Читать Слово. Проведите время в слове Бога ежедневно. «хлеб наш насущный дай нам на сей день» Матф. 6:11. Изучите слово наизусть; запомните эго. Развейте дисциплину запоминания и быть готовы.
3. «всегда готовы». Загрузите себя. трактаты, библии, христианская литература. Как эти 10 девственниц без масла для их ламп, они не были готовы, потому что они не брали масла с собой.
«Тогда подобно будет Царство Небесное десяти девам, которые, взяв светильники свои, вышли навстречу жениху. Из них пять было мудрых и пять неразумных. Неразумные, взяв светильники свои, не взяли с собою масла. Мудрые же, вместе со светильниками своими, взяли масла в сосудах своих. И как жених замедлил, то задремали все и уснули.» Матф. 25:1-5.
4. «всякому, требующему у вас». Смотрите за огнем снайпера.
Вопросы прибудут, если Вы будете знать, как интерпретировать (переводить) вопросы.
Тамара в Брянске подошла к двери.
Саша позже пришел.
Инна, молодая женщина, спрашивала о моей жизни монаха.
Оля в метро в воскресенье здесь.
Вопросы входят в различные формы.
5. «дать ответ с кротостью и благоговением». Не волнуйтесь - быть без беспокойств.
В назначенное время бог даст Вам слова.
«Когда же приведут вас в синагоги, к начальствам и властям, не заботьтесь, как или что отвечать, или что говорить, ибо Святый Дух научит вас в тот час, что должно говорить.» Лука 12:11
Итак, молитесь, чтобы быть готовы сегодня. Не стыдитесь.
Under the Soviet Union, there was a club for young people called "Pioneers" and their motto was "Always Ready"; but how can we be ready spiritually? There are 5 parts to this command to stay ready:
1. Be prayed up and confessed up. "make it a holy thing". Earlier in verse 7 of this chapter, Peter says to stay confessed up "so that your prayers would not be hindered."
2. Be read up. "in your hearts". Spend time in the Word daily. "Give us this day our daily bread" - Matt. 6:11. We need to develop the discipline of memorizing Scripture by heart. This way, we can stay ready.
3. Be loaded up. "always be ready to give an answer". Tracts, bibles, Christian literature - take them with you everywhere you go. Don't be like the unwise virgins in the parable of the 10 Virgins where some of them forgot to take their oil for their lamps (Matt. 25:1-5).
4. Be on the Lookout. "to any man who asks you" Watch for sniper fire. Questions can come in various forms.
I've had questions come in the form of:
Tamara in Bryansk came to my door. Sasha, her grandson, came later. I met Inna on the train and she asked about my "monk's life". Olya, last Sunday on the metro, gave her question in a very giving and interesting form.
5.Don't worry. "gentleness and awe". Be worry-free about this discipline. God will give you the words at the appointed time (Luke 12:11).
Application: Pray to be ready to give answers today! Don't be ashamed.
(In Russian)
"Господа Бога святите в сердцах ваших; [будьте] всегда готовы всякому, требующему у вас отчета в вашем уповании, дать ответ с кротостью и благоговением." -1 Пет. 3:15
В Советском Союзе, в клубе пионера, молодой пионер был всегда готов. Как Вы можете быть готовы духовно? В этом небольшом приказе есть пять частей.
1. «святите». Святость находится в Вашей жизни. Молитесь часто и признайтесь в своих грехах. « дабы не было вам препятствия в молитвах.» - ст. 7
2. «в сердцах ваших». Читать Слово. Проведите время в слове Бога ежедневно. «хлеб наш насущный дай нам на сей день» Матф. 6:11. Изучите слово наизусть; запомните эго. Развейте дисциплину запоминания и быть готовы.
3. «всегда готовы». Загрузите себя. трактаты, библии, христианская литература. Как эти 10 девственниц без масла для их ламп, они не были готовы, потому что они не брали масла с собой.
«Тогда подобно будет Царство Небесное десяти девам, которые, взяв светильники свои, вышли навстречу жениху. Из них пять было мудрых и пять неразумных. Неразумные, взяв светильники свои, не взяли с собою масла. Мудрые же, вместе со светильниками своими, взяли масла в сосудах своих. И как жених замедлил, то задремали все и уснули.» Матф. 25:1-5.
4. «всякому, требующему у вас». Смотрите за огнем снайпера.
Вопросы прибудут, если Вы будете знать, как интерпретировать (переводить) вопросы.
Тамара в Брянске подошла к двери.
Саша позже пришел.
Инна, молодая женщина, спрашивала о моей жизни монаха.
Оля в метро в воскресенье здесь.
Вопросы входят в различные формы.
5. «дать ответ с кротостью и благоговением». Не волнуйтесь - быть без беспокойств.
В назначенное время бог даст Вам слова.
«Когда же приведут вас в синагоги, к начальствам и властям, не заботьтесь, как или что отвечать, или что говорить, ибо Святый Дух научит вас в тот час, что должно говорить.» Лука 12:11
Итак, молитесь, чтобы быть готовы сегодня. Не стыдитесь.
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
Partnership for Entry- Utilizing a Person of Influence
It’s time to start talking about partnerships. If you’ve been on the field for any significant length of time, chances are you’ve already started developing some good partners for your church planting ministry. These may be partners who come to join you each summer in the form of volunteer teams or even a student summer worker. They may be national believers who, whether or not they’re Baptist themselves, have a common goal for seeing people get saved and gather them into groups. They may be government partners who work with you to grant you access into schools, institutions, or other places to meet. For the next few weeks, I want us to focus on partnerships- namely, how do you create partnerships, with whom, and what parameters you set. Have you determined your own “theology of Partnership” – Who would you work with? What does IMB allow? How far does a partnership go? What role should we as missionaries play with connecting partners in the states with churches/groups/individuals here in Russia? These are tough questions to answer, but there are answers. When I was Strategy Coordinator in St. Petersburg, we developed some long-term partners with local organizations as well as US volunteers.
But there is a thing that we’ll call “Partnership for Entry”. How you currently utilize a Person of Influence can either make or break your masterplan. The Bible talks about finding persons of peace (Luke 10:6 “сын мира”) when Jesus sent out the 72 other disciples/missionaries, but I like the way the Russian Bible also talks about finding a person of influence (Matthew 10:11,13 “достоин”) when Jesus sent out the original 12 disciples/missionaries. Some think that these are one and the same, but if you study the passages closely, you’ll see that with the person of influence, the missionaries were told to give a greeting and if accepted then peace would rest on the home. (FYI- peace is an interesting word here if you want to do a deeper word study). However, with the person of peace, the missionaries were told to express peace to him personally, and if accepted then peace would rest on him personally. I believe it is important to understand the significance of both the person of influence and person of peace in church planting. Click here for a booklist/web resources for some good resources that discuss these persons of influence more indepth (Disclaimer: I don’t personally endorse all of the books/resources in their entirety, but they are good sources for reading more about persons of influence).
You can maximize your potential as a partner/connector in reaching people for Christ if you find a person who is “worthy” or “influential” in his community. In my experience, these have most often been males who might be quiet-natured but carry some kind of positional authority in the community. They could be female if they hold authority over some workgroup or family. Finding these guys is crucial to developing strongholds or beachheads for potential church planting movements. In Bryansk, one man who was a doctor in the community gave me entry into his circle of friends for witnessing. Another man, a police officer, was influential in allowing us access to his friends. Another man gave me permission for our bible study to meet in a government-owned building. In St. Petersburg, one lady who was the local government administrator gave her blessing for the current St. Petersburg team to hold baseball camps in a city park. Sometimes, these persons of influence may not become the evangelized themselves, but because of the position they hold, they are useful to the Kingdom in opening doors for evangelism. I’m sure you have dozens of stories like these.
When you begin church planting in a new region of your city, you should keep your eyes open for persons of influence, because these “partners” can grant you entry where you might not have thought. The bible says to pray for kings and those in authority (1 Tim 2:2). Sometimes these officials will themselves become believers, sometimes not (Acts 26:28), but sometimes they will be influential in opening doors for others to hear the gospel. In our masterplans, we should plan for activities to help us find these persons of influence. Jesus told his 12 missionaries to plan to find theirs. It usually involves prayer, lots of prayer. I’ve found that prayerwalking is a helpful way to listen to the Holy Spirit and discover persons of influence. I’ve also found that the more I share the gospel with folks in Russia, the more I discover potential partners who open more doors for the gospel. In what ways have you found the Lord leads you to persons of influence?
Next week, we’ll talk about the Luke 10 passage where Jesus told his 72 other missionaries to plan to find a person of peace.
But there is a thing that we’ll call “Partnership for Entry”. How you currently utilize a Person of Influence can either make or break your masterplan. The Bible talks about finding persons of peace (Luke 10:6 “сын мира”) when Jesus sent out the 72 other disciples/missionaries, but I like the way the Russian Bible also talks about finding a person of influence (Matthew 10:11,13 “достоин”) when Jesus sent out the original 12 disciples/missionaries. Some think that these are one and the same, but if you study the passages closely, you’ll see that with the person of influence, the missionaries were told to give a greeting and if accepted then peace would rest on the home. (FYI- peace is an interesting word here if you want to do a deeper word study). However, with the person of peace, the missionaries were told to express peace to him personally, and if accepted then peace would rest on him personally. I believe it is important to understand the significance of both the person of influence and person of peace in church planting. Click here for a booklist/web resources for some good resources that discuss these persons of influence more indepth (Disclaimer: I don’t personally endorse all of the books/resources in their entirety, but they are good sources for reading more about persons of influence).
You can maximize your potential as a partner/connector in reaching people for Christ if you find a person who is “worthy” or “influential” in his community. In my experience, these have most often been males who might be quiet-natured but carry some kind of positional authority in the community. They could be female if they hold authority over some workgroup or family. Finding these guys is crucial to developing strongholds or beachheads for potential church planting movements. In Bryansk, one man who was a doctor in the community gave me entry into his circle of friends for witnessing. Another man, a police officer, was influential in allowing us access to his friends. Another man gave me permission for our bible study to meet in a government-owned building. In St. Petersburg, one lady who was the local government administrator gave her blessing for the current St. Petersburg team to hold baseball camps in a city park. Sometimes, these persons of influence may not become the evangelized themselves, but because of the position they hold, they are useful to the Kingdom in opening doors for evangelism. I’m sure you have dozens of stories like these.
When you begin church planting in a new region of your city, you should keep your eyes open for persons of influence, because these “partners” can grant you entry where you might not have thought. The bible says to pray for kings and those in authority (1 Tim 2:2). Sometimes these officials will themselves become believers, sometimes not (Acts 26:28), but sometimes they will be influential in opening doors for others to hear the gospel. In our masterplans, we should plan for activities to help us find these persons of influence. Jesus told his 12 missionaries to plan to find theirs. It usually involves prayer, lots of prayer. I’ve found that prayerwalking is a helpful way to listen to the Holy Spirit and discover persons of influence. I’ve also found that the more I share the gospel with folks in Russia, the more I discover potential partners who open more doors for the gospel. In what ways have you found the Lord leads you to persons of influence?
Next week, we’ll talk about the Luke 10 passage where Jesus told his 72 other missionaries to plan to find a person of peace.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
4 C's of the Cooperative Program - by Buck Burch
(Reprinted from The Christian Index: https://christianindex.org/stories/commentary-four-cs-of-the-cooperative-program,63306) T o put mysel...
-
(Reprinted from The Christian Index: https://christianindex.org/stories/commentary-four-cs-of-the-cooperative-program,63306) T o put mysel...
-
Missiologists have made broad uses of statistics throughout the history of modern missions. The correct use of statistics has been usefu...
-
Vision of Mission Acts 15:36-41; 16:6-10 I. Mission and Methodology (15:36-41) CONFLICT · Sometimes Dif...
