A Safe Place

I want our church to be a safe place.

 I want it to be a place where the un-churched and those who are groping after the truth or seeking help in their distress, may come and not feel any trace of finger-pointing Pharisaism. A place where the members walk always with a profound sense of God’s grace and, knowing that there is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus, are careful to refrain from condemnatory attitudes and conduct.

For the great good news of the Gospel is that we don’t have to clean up our lives in order to come to Jesus. We come to Jesus and He then makes us right with God, both as we come to faith in Him and then by an ongoing process of becoming like Him in our behaviour and character. Thus the church must open its arms wide to sinners of all descriptions: the Great Physician comes for the sick and not for the healthy, and indeed there is ‘none righteous no not one’. 

The Gospel is inclusive in its essence.

 Yet just as we may not exclude anyone on the grounds of race, gender, nationality, age or any other criterion, for all are in need of God’s salvation, so too we may not exclude anyone from the pursuit of holiness, ‘without which no-one will see the Lord’. We may not presume to lower the bar for anyone, for we all alike must ‘press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus’. It is God who sets the bar and it is nothing less than complete Christ-likeness.

I want our church to be one that demonstrates the Christ-like ability to say not only, “I do not condemn you,” but also, “Go and sin no more.”

A church where one is encouraged to do what is displeasing to God or where sin is winked at, is not a safe place.

A church where one is misled as to the truth of God is not a safe place. 

I want our church to be a safe place.

Science Says!

One quite often encounters, generally in popular publications, the phrase, “Science says” or its variant, “Scientists say,” or “Science has proven.” Generally this is held to be ‘game, set and match’ in any controversy.

Coming from a scientific discipline myself, I maintain an innate skepticism whenever I come across such language.

Here it is helpful to realise that ‘Science’ falls into three broad categories each with its own methodology:

Applied Science

This is my background, the discipline of Engineering and Technology. She is a stern mistress, for if practice does not accord closely with theory one’s bridges fall down and one’s machines fail to work. It is a very public discipline and one can easily get mud on one’s face. This branch of science has a well-established theoretical basis yet it employs a high degree of empiricism. If something breaks, make another one a bit stronger so that it will not break. If something doesn’t work, try another approach until you find something that does work.

Pure Science

This branch of Science uses the classical scientific method consisting of, postulate followed by repeated experiment followed by conclusion and revision of postulate if the conclusion does not confirm the postulate. It is essentially an iterative methodology and depends on the ability to repeat an experiment. Applied scientists stand on the shoulders of pure scientists and use their findings and their theoretical formulations in building their devices and structures.

Speculative Science

Some may object to this term, but I can’t offhand think of a better and ‘Impure Science’ does not seem appropriate.

This is not to imply that the scientific disciplines falling within this category are not respectable, but simply to acknowledge that the methodology employed here is quite different. This is because they deal with past events which by their very nature are not repeatable. Thus they are not susceptible to the classic scientific method which requires repeated experiments. The methodology used here is forensic such that historic data is analysed and evaluated in order to arrive at the truth. It is like Sherlock Holmes examining the body and its situation in order to determine whether the cause of death was murder or suicide.

Often Sherlock will come to a different conclusion to the police as to the cause of death though they both access the same data.

There are obviously blurred boundaries between these branches of science, but what should be noticed is that the first two employ closed-loop methodologies, the third branch is essentially open-loop. This is why it is a happy hunting ground for theorists whose theories cannot easily be proven or disproved.

Accordingly, when encountering an assertion attributed to ‘science,’ a good practice is to establish which branch of science is making the claim. If it is the third branch, then,

KEEP THE JURY OUT A LITTLE LONGER.

Reflections in Reception - Some Days Later

Well the workers were paid on time Lord,

Not from the R18000 although I did receive that eventually.

But of course you know all this,

You know too about the unexpected refund from the Revenue Department

That arrived in the nick of time.

I have no doubt that you arranged this.

I suspect that at some subliminal level

Employees in the Tax Department know that they owe you one,

Because you extended grace and friendship to tax collectors

When they were reckoned the scum of the Earth.

So it seems like an all round win:

The workers have been paid,

I have been paid,

Relationships are in pretty fair shape,

Why the chief even called about a quotation for another machine.

(I hope I may be forgiven for having inflated the price a bit)

But best of all, I have further evidence (as if I needed more)

Of your utter faithfulness!

Reflections in Reception - Day Three

No transfer into account by 10.30 am

So here I am

Back in reception

Wondering what kind of reception

I’ll get.

Wasn’t sure if I’d be allowed

Into the building,

But S… the sweet receptionist

Pressed the button

That opened the door.

So here I am

I have asked the P.A. to let him know I’m here.

I’m leaning on that promise

That I’ll be given the right words.

J… has just come through

Says that the boss has agreed to pay me

Subject to inspection of the machine.

Can it happen to today?

He checks with the attorney.

“No chance before Monday” she says.

I’ll be quite hungry by Monday.

So will my workers.

But God……

Well now the machine needs to be inspected

By big D…

Before the money is released.

When can it be inspected?

I walk to the factory where D… has his office.

I have a good relationship with D…

Forged over the years,

But he is very busy.

He is waiting for the epoxy-coating expert to come

It is now 1 pm

The epoxy man comes.

He comes to solve a problem.

J… comes to watch him solve it.

The chief comes to see if it is solved.

Sees me looking on.

Offers me a job.

I say, “I might as well be on the payroll,

I’m spending so much time here,

But I don’t come cheap:

R18 000 just to start”

This exchange is actually quite cordial!

I’m now back in reception,

Reading magazines,

But I have the feeling

That this is now counter-productive.

I have become part of the furniture.

I am effectively on the payroll

With a salary of zero.

S… the receptionist doesn’t hesitate to let me in

When I tell her my name.

I ask to see J… and she waves me through.

I pass the chief in the corridor

And tell him where I’m going.

No problem.

I am now on friendly first name terms with

W…,J…,V…,P…,S…,N…and D…,

Not to mention Lindiwe

Who makes such excellent coffee.

It was Lincoln who said,

“Do I not defeat my enemy when I make him my friend”

I sit and chat with J…

He is a marvelous man.

Totally genuine.

He assures me that he will do his best

To see that I am paid.

He has already gone the extra mile.

I sense that my time in reception is over

And ask him to give the chief a message

To this effect.

The question is:

Am I not to eat until the money is in my account?

What’s that Lord?

It’s my call?

I’m going to eat.

To be Continued

Reflections in Reception - Day Two

The next day,

Back in reception,

Armed with said document.

I am quickly moved by J… into his office

Lest I be seen by the chief.

J… shares the office with his wife V…

What a great couple!

An air of competence and industry is evident.

J… makes two phone calls to corroborate the contents of my document.

It all tallies.

He undertakes to motivate acceptance to the boss.

The boss is in a meeting.

I plan to wait in reception

Until he is free.

J… pleads with me not to do this.

Apparently if the man sees me he will go wild.

He may even get his ‘boys’ to work me over

And then I will get nothing.

I say I am prepared to be worked over

But will wait outside in my car

For 40 minutes.

After which time if the matter is not settled.

WE ARE COMING IN!

To Reception.

J… pops out the door

To check on a point as I sit in my car.

He is with the chief now.

Ten minutes to go.

Well 40 minutes are up.

Shall I give a small extension?

No, here comes J…

He has put my case,

Recommended its acceptance.

The boss will peruse the document

And come to a decision.

I say that if I do not have proof of payment by 10 am tomorrow

I will be back in reception.

I am prepared to be crucified if need be.

But then I think Whoa!

My namesake said that 2000 years ago

And look what happened to him.

But it’s not my money you see.

I am merely a steward.

So let’s see what tomorrow brings.

I am starting to feel hungry.

……..To be Continued

Reflections in Reception - Day one

Well, here I am Lord

Waiting in Reception

The Reception of the firm which owes me R21 000

R21660 to be exact

Although that includes Value Added Tax

This amount has been owing since

The 28^th of May

It is now the 25^th of September.

I have made repeated requests for payment

Without concrete response.

These are the facts.

And now the man who holds the purse strings

Declines to talk to me.

His P. A. who is very sweet,

Declares always that he is in a meeting.

“I will give him a message.” She says

But he never returns my calls.

-has not communicated with me

For several weeks.

He has had his own cash flow challenges I daresay but,

I have information from a most reliable source

That he has recently received a substantial sum,

So things are not nearly so tight for him now.

Lord! Things are extremely tight for me:

Only just enough money for fuel

To drive to this firm

In whose Reception I sit.

I’m not the type who breaks kneecaps Lord:

Never yet sent out so much as a lawyer’s letter

In all my years in business,

-Rather let myself be defrauded.

Foolishness perhaps.

But I have wages to pay

In just three day’s time,

And not a penny in the till.

If I am concerned to see my workers paid,

How much more will you show Yourself faithful

In paying your servants,

For you are my paymaster:

And how faithful you have been,

Down through the ages

Down through the generations.

Why this very morning I enjoyed

A hearty breakfast,

In comfortable surroundings,

More than comfortable:

In beautiful surroundings.

Still, this may be the last meal I have for a while,

For I have determined on a hunger strike:

A sit in hunger strike,

Here in the Reception

Of the firm that owes me R21 000.

They do not know this yet,

Because the sweet P. A.

Is herself in a meeting.

But when she emerges I will ask her

To convey a message to this effect

To her C. E. O.

Ah, she has just come through,

I have told her my intention,

Though not the fasting bit.

She is going to speak to her boss,

So we will have to wait and see.

I have not a great deal on my plate at the moment,

So this waiting

Is a good opportunity

To write and reflect

Here in Reception.

Each twenty-four hours is a gift from you Lord.

You are entitled to see it filled

With activity or inactivity,

Activity or rest.

So thank you for this time of waiting,

Waiting on You

Waiting in You

Here in Reception

So good to be talking with You

Even though You know my innermost thoughts

Before I utter them

Or commit them to paper.

Well, I’ve just had an audience with the main man,

Not a very likeable man I’m afraid,

Trying to find any excuse for not paying.

Still, I put my case as plainly and firmly as I could

And now I am asked to wait

Back here in Reception.

The receptionist has offered me coffee

Which I have accepted.

After all it is a hunger strike

Which we have in mind.

It is brought by Lindiwe

With the characteristic respect

Of a young Zulu girl for an older person.

Just had another audience with the chief.

He has unilaterally decided

To re-write the contract,

Take it or leave it.

I decline to take it.

He has undertaken to have security

Throw me out.

Until they do,

Here I am,

Back in Reception.

Keep reminding me Lord

That we wrestle not against flesh and blood,

But against principalities and powers,

That the weapons of our warfare are not carnal.

Teach me Your ways,

Your strategy for handling bullies,

Not to be cowed by them,

But neither to respond in kind.

Speech ‘gracious yet seasoned with salt.’

For man has an intrinsic worth and dignity,

Even when he is behaving badly.

Though distorted by sin,

We are yet your workmanship,

Created by You,

Redeemed by You,

If only we allow your redeeming work

To correct the distortion.

Well, I’ve been invited to the office

Of the company’s resident attorney.

A very nice lady.

(All the ladies in this firm are charming)

She is tasked with mediation.

I have offered a reduction of R3000 on the price,

Which she is sure will not be acceptable,

So here I am,

Back in Reception.

On reflection,

I have asked to see her again

With another variation in the firm’s favour.

Still no deal.

She says I will be thrown out,

Against her wishes I think,

But she doesn’t make the calls,

So once again,

I’m here in Reception

Back from the toilet,

I have just been brought

Another cup of coffee

By Lindiwe.

The company abounds in charming ladies.

Above all

I want to be a good witness Lord

I want your name to be honoured.

How can your name be honoured?

If I do not pay my workers and my creditors.

A labourer is worthy of his hire.

I don’t have to remind you of this,

It’s in your Word.

That applies to those who work for me,

But also to me who works for you.

No, that’s not right:

I do not work for you,

Rather,

I do your work,

Kingdom work,

The privileged work

Of a privileged son of the King

Here waiting in reception.

Just waiting now-

Arrived around 9. 30 am

It’s now 1. 15 pm

Just waiting.

The attorney,

A slim, statuesque lady of around 24 years of age

Has just come to Reception

With a written contract variation.

The gap has closed but we’re not quite there.

She says, “If I go to him with your terms I’ll be thrown out.”

“So then we’ll both be sitting on the pavement,” says I,

“I can think of worse things.”

She gives a smile but says she’ll just drive home.

I confess that I’m not sure I have enough fuel to drive home.

She returns to her office,

Seemingly a little put out.

Alone in reception again,

Save for the receptionist,

The top of whose head

Is just visible above the counter:

Yet another sweet young lady.

Seemingly an inexhaustible supply.

I glimpse others down the corridor.

I can’t help wondering

If this makes the company’s overhead structure,

A bit top heavy.

No business of mine really,

Just wondering.

The attorney walks past me

With a large box file under her arm.

We bid each other a courteous farewell

As she exits the building.

She really has done her best.

It’s 2. 30 now

Waiting in Reception

Feeling a mite sleepy,

But not hungry yet

The C.E.O. walks past me with a chuckle,

(or is it a snigger?)

And exits the building.

He doesn’t realize I am in the service of the King,

The one who holds all authority

In Heaven and Earth.

Ten past three now.

Many people are praying for this situation,

Especially my Beloved on the far side of the globe.

3. 45 and the C.E.O. has just returned,

Walking past me without comment.

Four o clock and here comes J…

He is a wonderfully good man.

So much more than the ‘good cop’ in this situation,

For he must tread a fine line,

Maintaining his loyalty

While retaining his integrity,

And this he does wonderfully well.

He is much to be commended.

He calls me into an office

Where we discuss matters coolly and objectively.

It seems that the chief is a bit nonplussed

As to how to deal with someone simply waiting...

Waiting in Reception…

Waiting for payment.

Perhaps to give an old man the bum’s rush

After taking his money,

Might be more embarrassing for him than for me.

He is more at home with litigation and legal battles,

And generally contrives to win these,

According to J…

So J… and I talk,

And I undertake to produce a document

Which both clarifies and commits,

And return therewith tomorrow.

…….To be Continued

Of Myth and Sacrament

The words myth and sacrament are not to be found in Scripture but the concepts are:

The concept of myth is espoused mostly by scholars of the critical school. Here the veracity of the historical narrative is considered of minor importance compared with the spiritual message which it is intended to convey. Although purporting to be historical, the narrative is viewed primarily as a story, a vehicle carrying a spiritual payload. Accordingly, the literal historicity of the narrative may be discounted or even discarded completely so long as the spiritual message is retained.

As one minister holding to this view put it, “Even if nothing in the Bible were shown to be historically true, it would still be true.”

And another, “If one knew where to look for them, Jesus’ bones could be found somewhere in Palestine, the important thing is that He should be risen in one’s heart.”

Quite why the search should be confined to Palestine is not made clear.

This concept of myth closely follows the form of parable which Jesus used so often: “A man had two sons…”, “A man went down to Jericho…” etc. Jesus’ hearers did not think He was referring to actual persons. It was rather like someone saying, “A Catholic Priest and a Jewish Rabbi are on a plane together…”

However those who hold to the concept of myth consider that much of the historical narrative in both Old and New Testaments is to be deemed parabolic. Or at best the narrative gives the “broad brushstrokes” of the historical actuality.

It has always puzzled me why this approach is called, “De-mythologisation”: it should more accurately be referred to as, “Mythologisation,” in other words converting historical narrative to the status of myth.

Theologians of this school would include: Albrecht Ritschl, Wilhelm Herrman, Adolf Von Harnack, Ernst Troeltsch and more recently Rudolf Bultmann. German theologians seem to have a bit of a corner on this market.

I use the term sacrament in a slightly different way to its normal usage in describing the means of grace, - baptism and communion in a Protestant context.

The typical definition of a sacrament to be found in a catechism is that,

“It is an outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual grace.”

However, if one broadens the definition slightly thus:

“A sacrament is an outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual reality.”

then this opens up a whole world of possibilities:

A handshake for instance is a sacrament in that it is the outward and visible sign of an invisible attitude of mutual regard between the persons shaking hands.

The fact that most people would feel uncomfortable walking down the street naked is an ongoing sacrament traceable to the Fall and signifying the invisible reality of the fallenness of man.

The clothes we wear, the cars we drive the way we furnish our houses will usually tell people something about our values and personalities though these latter be invisible.

On a more cosmic scale: “For His invisible attributes namely His eternal power and deity can be clearly perceived ever since the creation of the world, in the things He has made.” (Rom.1. 20) The visible revealing the invisible.

And finally, the crowning Sacrament: “No one has ever seen God, but God the one and only who is at the Father’s side, He has made Him Known.” (Jn. 1. 18)

In the words of Charles Wesley’s Hymn,

“Veiled in flesh the Godhead see,

Hail the incarnate Deity.”

What should be noticed here is that both the visible and invisible components of the sacrament are real and important. Discount the visible sign and one discounts or distorts the invisible reality which it signifies. However, the visible sign is transient while the invisible reality is eternal.(2 Cor 4. 18)

This sacramental principle informs the hermeneutic approach which we adopt towards historical passages in Scripture, for we worship a God who does not stand afar off but who has broken into history over the millennia and supremely in the incarnation. Indeed, even secular historians attest to this by employing a dating system which extends backwards and forwards from this epochal event.

So Jesus was born at a particular town called Bethlehem, He grew up in a particular town called Nazareth. He learnt his trade as a carpenter from his (step)father.  He exercised his ministry mainly in the region surrounding the Sea of Galilee. He was put to death by crucifixion outside the City of Jerusalem. 

Actual nails were driven through His body into the actual wood of a literal cross. The tomb was actually, literally and historically empty after He had risen on the third day.

Roman crucifixions were performed by the hundreds if not the thousands in those times, but connected to this particular crucifixion was an enormous spiritual significance, significant for our salvation and for the redemption of the whole of Creation.

So, in contrast to the mythological approach to Scripture, the Sacramental approach takes seriously the veracity of the historical sections of Scripture, while appropriating by faith the spiritual realities which they signify.

So you wish to marry my Daughter.

So you wish to marry my daughter:

I assure you I will not ask if you can support her

In the accustomed manner or any such banality.

For twenty-five years ago I stood where you now stand,

And my father-in-law was kind to me;

Did not make light of the moment,

Nor yet overreach its seriousness.

Yes, he was kind to me,

Though he had his reservations,

Of that I am certain.

Nor will I speak from the lofty heights of our twenty-five years,

For God’s grace is in these wonderful years,

And to claim merit for such would be vanity.

Yet while I would not sermonize,

Nor speak of trifles,

There is something,

Something on my heart:

(Please bear with me, for this may well be presumption),

Yet it seems that an abyss yawns at our feet,

Yours, mine and hers,

As we seek each other’s happiness.

- - Something I would ask you:

Do not those vows terrify you?

For twenty-five years on they still terrify me.

“ – for better for worse.”

Is having and holding sufficient recompense?

Ah, but I know your answer.

“ – for richer for poorer, in sickness and health.”

Terrifying! Terrifying!

Amidst the splendour and pageantry of the day,

Will you yet take time to tremble

As you take these vows.

“ ‘Til death us do part.”

Celestial Cement from the One who joins,

Our only hope.

What else withstands the stress and press

Of a life together in close vulnerability?

But there, I foreswore all sermonising.

Forgive me this gloomy cast.

It seems the field lies littered

With the corpses of brave spouses-at-arms

Who took these vows and could not keep them.

Why only these past few months:

A close relative and some close friends - -

What was that you said?

Ah yes, my daughter’s hand in marriage.

Of course, of course.

You are welcome in this family

And more than welcome.

May you enjoy a long, happy and fruitful life together.

My blessing on it.

Have you set a date for the wedding?

Peter Frow

Drifting from the Apostolic Faith

In Capetown, a tradition begun in 1903 continues to this day, namely the firing of the ‘Noon Gun’ from the top of Signal Hill. The story goes that at one time the officer charged with firing the cannon would make his way to the hill via a certain clock-maker's shop in whose window stood a ship’s chronometer. He would carefully adjust his watch to the same time as the chronometer and then later fire the cannon at exactly midday according to his watch.

As time passed, there began to be complaints that the cannon was not being fired at the correct time, in fact it seemed to be getting later with each passing day. When this was brought to the attention of the aforementioned officer he thought best to check with the clock-maker how he assured the accuracy of his chronometer.

“O yes it’s dead accurate,” he said, “I always set it according to the gun fired from Signal Hill.”

Well it’s easy to see what had happened: Because sound travels at a finite speed, the clock-maker would have heard the sound of the cannon some seconds after it had been fired, resulting in a steadily increasing departure from the Greenwich Meantime standard.

What was needed was to find a ship that had sailed from England and whose chronometer had been regulated to reflect GMT. 

Now the same kind of drift can occur with a church’s doctrine, if it is not referred back to some Apostolic Standard, a kind of ‘Doctrinal GMT’. 

In this regard, the Methodist Church is particularly vulnerable, as it requires of its ministers, preachers and teachers, only that we believe in ‘Our Doctrine’ without defining too closely what this means. If this doctrine is defined within the confines of the denominational ecosystem but without any external reference, then a distinct danger looms. Take The Jehovah’s Witnesses for example: they certainly believe in their doctrine.

Unless there is an acknowledged mooring of the term ‘our doctrine’ to sound Apostolic Doctrine, over a period of time this can easily result in a drift from the Apostolic Faith.

Clearly the historic creeds such as the Nicene, Apostles’ and Chalcedonion creeds, are important confessions which keep us anchored to the Core Doctrines of our Faith.

These cannot properly be considered ‘Our Doctrines’ in the sense that we may not be proprietary about them, for they are public Truth. They constitute the very guts of our faith, the Gospel, which we both embrace and proclaim.

Yet it seems that there is a certain amount of gnawing at the anchor ropes in our time.

Some of the strands which appear to be fraying are the following:

1.                 The doctrine of the Trinity: Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

There is a feeling amongst certain of our ministers that to only conceive of and address God as Father is excessively patriarchal and sexist, and that addressing Him (her) as ‘mother’ should also be legitimized.

Thus the Trinitarian doctrine would become Father-Mother, Son and Holy Spirit or perhaps Father-Mother, Son-daughter and Holy Spirit.

2.                 The Virgin Birth.

This is called in question as being altogether too fantastic to have been literally true. Various alternatives are postulated: Mary was raped by a member of the Roman occupying force or perhaps she was pregnant by Zechariah, her cousin Elizabeth’s husband. These speculations apart from being clearly contrary to the Biblical record have profound implications for our Christology, namely that Jesus was and is Truly God and Truly Man – both the Son of God and the Son of Man.

3.                 The Substitutionary Atonement

It is called in question that Jesus by His death on the Cross has taken the penalty of our sin upon Himself. This new Soteriology is anchored merely in Jesus’ pacific response to extreme provocation culminating in the crucifixion. Jesus’ shedding of His blood is deemed an irrelevant corollary to Jesus’ conduct on the way to the Cross, something which The Father never intended to happen and which has no particular significance in regard to our salvation.

Should these theological trends continue, there is the distinct possibility that the Methodist Church will become separated from “The Faith that was once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 3) and will float free, to drift wherever it may be borne by every ‘wind of doctrine.’

Then will John Wesley’s fears for the church of which he is considered the founder, be realised, for he said: 

“I do not fear that the people called Methodists will cease to exist, but only that they might become a dead sect, holding to a form of godliness while denying the power thereof. And this they shall surely become unless they hold fast to the doctrine, spirit and discipline with which they first set out.” 

The Pivotal Pronoun

To establish whether a person is identified with a particular group, be it a sports club a church or a political party one has only to listen to the personal pronoun he or she uses when referring to the group. It’s a dead giveaway: If its ‘we’, they’re identified, if it’s ‘they,’ then they’re not; ‘us’ they’re on the inside looking out, ‘them’, they’re on the outside looking in.

If we are identified with a group, then we may share in its glory if the group or one of its members does well, but we must also share in the distress of the group if it does badly or its shame if even one of its members behaves disgracefully. This was well understood in medieval times, for if the head of a family had been born out of wedlock, then the crest of the family would include the heraldic device of a Bend Sinister making this fact public and inclusive of the entire family.

It is natural to want to pull apart from a group which is doing badly and this might be what the Lord requires:

However this is not the soul and substance of the incarnation, for assuredly mankind was doing very badly when Jesus ‘made Himself of no reputation’ and was ‘found in fashion as a man.’ (Philippians 2)

Being incarnate in a messy, an ugly or a shameful situation confers on one the prerogative, the motive, and the urgency to speak and act constructively in that situation.

This is why Nehemiah prays “We have sinned” as a prelude to his remarkable role in the restoration of Jerusalem, its walls, its morale and its worship of the one, true God.

This is why we pray, “Forgive us our trespasses.”

Pigrim's Progress

John Bunyan lived through tumultuous times in the 17^th Century during which he endured a 12-year sojourn in Bedford County jail. Imprisoned for his faith or, as the charge sheet read, “For perniciously abstaining from Divine Service and for holding unlawful meetings.” Bunyan used the time to write. Of his many works, by far the most well known is his grand allegory entitled “Pilgrim’s Progress,” in which first Christian and later his wife Christiana and their four children journey from the City of Destruction to the Celestial City. It has been claimed that only the Bible has enjoyed a wider readership. Pilgrim's Progress has been translated into 200 languages and has never been out of print.

During his pilgrimage, Christian meets with various characters whose speech and actions accord with their names.

Of particular note are the various discourses between Christian and his traveling companions from which a golden vein of sound Gospel truth emerges. Bunyan himself comments at the end of the first part:

What of my dross thou findest here, be bold

To throw away, but yet preserve the gold.

What if my gold be wrapped in ore?

None throws away the apple for the core.

Here is an excerpt in which Hopeful tells of his conversion:

Hopeful:          If a man runs a hundred pounds into the shopkeeper’s debt, and after this shall pay for all that he shall fetch; yet if his old debt stands still in the book uncrossed, the shopkeeper may sue him for it, and cast him in prison till he shall pay the debt.

Christian:          Well and how did you apply this to yourself?

Hopeful:          Why, I thought thus with myself: I have by my sins, run a great way into God’s book, and my now reforming will not pay off that score; therefore I should think still, under all my present amendments, but how shall I be freed from that damnation that I brought myself in danger of by my former transgressions?

Christian:          A very good application: but pray go on.

Hopeful:          Another thing that hath troubled me ever since my late amendment is, that if I look narrowly into the best of what I do now, I still see sin, new sin, mixing itself with the best that I can do; so that now I am forced to conclude, that, notwithstanding my former fond conceits of myself and duties, I have committed enough sin in one day to send me to hell though my former life had been faultless.

Christian:          And what did you then?

Hopeful:          Do! I could not tell what to do, until I broke my mind to Faithful, for he and I were well acquainted. And he told me that unless I could obtain the righteousness of a man who had never sinned, neither mine own nor all the righteousness of the world could save me.

Christian:          And did you think he spake true?

Hopeful:          Had he told me when I was pleased and satisfied with mine own amendments, I had called him a fool for his pains; but now since I see mine own infirmity, and the sin which cleaves to my best performance, I have been forced to be of his opinion.

Christian:          But did you think that when he first suggested it to you that there was such a man to be found, of whom it might justly be said that he never committed sin?

Hopeful:          I must confess that the words at first sounded strangely; but after a little more talk and company with him, I had full conviction of it.

Christian:          And did you ask him what man this was, and how you must be justified by him? (Rom. iv; Col. i; Heb. x,; 2 Pet. i)

Hopeful:          Yes, and he told me it was the Lord Jesus, that dwelleth on the right hand of the Most High: and thus, said he. You must be justified by Him, even by trusting to what he hath done by Himself in the days of His flesh, and suffered when He did hang on the tree. I asked him further, how this man’s righteousness could be of such efficacy as to justify another before God. And he told me that He was the mighty God, and He did what he did, and died the death also, not for Himself but for me, to whom His doings, and the worthiness of them should be imputed, if I believed on Him.

May The Pilgrim’s Progress long continue in print