"Put not your trust in princes, in a son of man, in whom there is no salvation." John Piper May Have Written His Most Important Post This Year

Note: Yes, I have not posted here in quite a while. I've been using social media such as Twitter and Facebook to connect about Christ in real time. But there are moments like these where our need as Christians is so urgent, and someone speaks a message we need to hear and reflect upon, that I am compelled to share it. I hope it serves you well.

My friends who belong to Christ, I plead with you to quietly read and ponder this. We cannot deny or evade the harsh reality that we have no fellowship with either the Republican or Democrat candidate in this election. Yet our hopes and ambitions for what politics and government can do have gripped our hearts so tightly that we have been pulled into a sea of idols and we are in desperate danger of clinging to one to keep our heads above water. John Piper has written something I have longed to read from a sound teacher of the Scriptures for a long time. This is, above all, a heart check to test whether you really and truly are devoted to Christ above all. You may still vote either way, or vote a third way. But how you let it grip your heart, and how much you cling to the outcomes of this election, have an eternal influence on your soul. Be for Christ, all the time, all the way to the end. Elections will come and go. Governments will come and go. Christ is our Rock, now and forever.

John Piper is wrestling well with this reality:

https://www.desiringgod.org/articles/policies-persons-and-paths-to-ruin

Here are four reasons I am immensely grateful to John Piper for publicly sharing his heart about this election:

1. He makes it very clear at the beginning and further down that he isn’t insisting every Christian must reach the same conclusions he does. We need more of this: Romans 14-15 and 1 Corinthians 8 emphasize that the church cannot be healthy if we don’t love and support each other in spite of differing convictions and consciences. Christians can disagree about voting without treating each other as fools or traitors.
2. Piper gives so much encouragement here to Christians who are agonizing over feeling trapped into voting for one of two candidates, both of whom are fraught with moral problems. It is possible to choose not to vote for either of them because your conscience won’t let you, and still be a faithful Christian and citizen. I am grateful that Piper demonstrates how a Christian may honor God by choosing not to vote for either candidate. We hear too much simplistic pressure that we must vote for a candidate “who can win” no matter what. Brothers and sisters, if you use your chance to vote as a means to honor Christ by refusing to support candidates whose actions lead to spiritual ruin, that is also a faithful work of Christian citizenship.
3. What Piper has done here is to help us course-correct in our attitude about public sins. He is not saying President Trump’s sins are worse than those of Democrat candidates. He is saying sins on both sides are deadly and lead to cultural and spiritual death, so we should treat them all with gravity and avoid minimizing or excusing them.
4. Perhaps most importantly, he reminds us that our greatest priority is how we display and honor Christ and live out the gospel. This is supremely important compared to any political goal, but we easily compromise it when we are so urgent about winning an election. Politics is a riptide that snatches people and pulls them along even when they are careful and have the best of intentions. We need teachers who will help us step outside the frenzy of elections and political causes and remind us that these things are not the greatest priorities God has given to us. It does not all depend on the outcome of this or any election. God desires us to be faithful witnesses to our neighbors far more than he desires us to accomplish anything by voting. Be wise in how you conduct yourself in front of those around you, and ask yourself what they most need to see from you. Lord, help us here.

Here are two excerpts. Please read the whole thing.

"When I consider the remote possibility that I might do any good by endorsing the devastation already evident in the two choices before me, I am loath to undermine my calling (and the church’s mission) to stand for Christ-exalting faith and hope and love.

"I will be asked to give an account of my devotion to this life-giving calling. The world will ask. And the Lord of heaven will ask. And my conscience will ask. What will I say?

"With a cheerful smile, I will explain to my unbelieving neighbor why my allegiance to Jesus set me at odds with death — death by abortion and death by arrogance. I will take him to Psalm 139 and Romans 1. And if he is willing, I will show him how abortion and arrogance can be forgiven because of Christ (Ephesians 1:7). And I will invite him to become an exile — to have a kingdom that will never be shaken, not even when America is a footnote in the archives of the new creation."

On the dilemma of character versus policies, Piper has made a point we keep overlooking:

"Where does the wickedness of defending child-killing come from? It comes from hearts of self-absorbed arrogance and boasting (James 4:1–2). It comes from hearts that are insubordinate to God. In other words, it comes from the very character that so many Christian leaders are treating as comparatively innocuous, because they think Roe and SCOTUS and Planned Parenthood are more pivotal, more decisive, battlegrounds.

"I think Roe is an evil decision. I think Planned Parenthood is a code name for baby-killing and (historically at least) ethnic cleansing. And I think it is baffling and presumptuous to assume that pro-abortion policies kill more people than a culture-saturating, pro-self pride.

"When a leader models self-absorbed, self-exalting boastfulness, he models the most deadly behavior in the world. He points his nation to destruction. Destruction of more kinds than we can imagine.

"It is naive to think that a man can be effectively pro-life and manifest consistently the character traits that lead to death — temporal and eternal."

Lord, help us listen and cling to you. Please make our hearts wholly true to you, above all and through all. Amen.

Spiritual Coffee: Barnabas Piper Leadership Podcasts (Spiritual Disciplines) - Sports Community Replaces Church - Richard John Neuhaus, Liberal and Orthodox?

Catching up on a week of interesting developments. Here are three of the most useful things I've come across to stimulate and sharpen your Christian thinking. As always, prior selections are under Spiritual Coffee.

5 Leadership Questions podcast: Spiritual Disciplines and Leadership, Todd Akins and Barnabas Piper (with Kevin Spratt)
The bonus here is discovering this podcast by Akins and Piper, which has weekly episodes where they "ask five questions of different guests or about different leadership topics. The aim of the podcast is to inform and encourage Christian leaders whether they serve in the pastorate, the business world, non-profits, or on a volunteer basis." This one has a valuable perspective on why we can't take the spiritual disciplines for granted, or get tired of them. Kind of like we shouldn't get tired of breathing or eating. Some things are so basic that you just can't opt out of them if you want life to work.
In addition to a useful concept, Akins and Piper have quotes from each episode posted below the player so you can skim what they talk about.

“Many times the delta between our knowledge and our application is immense.”“Without the fundamentals you don’t have anything to build off of.”
“There are some things that there simply isn’t a newer better way to do.”
“Character is as valuable now as it ever has been, and there aren’t different versions.”
“You can’t really innovate spiritual disciplines.”
“You can’t lead people in a direction you’re not going yourself.”

Check out the episode with Jon Acuff too. Good thoughts on developing yourself for success and staying away from moral failure.

“I try to surround myself with people who have the kind of lives I want to live.”“Hustle is an act of focus, not frenzy.”

Lessons from Cleveland's Religious Devotion to Its Teams, Ed Uszynski (Athletes in Action)
This is a remarkably well-written comparison that identifies the community-bonding and identity-formation aspects of the investment people have in their cities' sports teams. It contrasts how those aspects used to be served primarily by church community. There are some valuable observations here about what may be missing from our churches, as well as what we need to make sure we are getting from church instead of simply from sports and other recreational friendships.

"They actually fill a void previously filled by church attendance and the experience of being a church member. With the decline of institutional religion as an influential reality in communities across America, a key component of human development and one of the primary areas that Christian education used to fill—identity formation—has been taken over by sport culture."

The Liberalism of Richard John Neuhaus, Matthew Rose (National Affairs)
Neuhaus was founder and editor of the Christian magazine First Things, a commentary on religion and public life, up until his death. He is probably one of the most well-known voices addressing the absence of religion in the public square and civil government. He coined the phrase "the Naked Public Square" with his book in the 1980s, describing what had happened to social and civic discussions by the exclusion of 'religion' as an accepted aspect of those discussions. He was a great champion for the importance and appropriateness of religious thought being applied in society, politics, law, and education, but also a very wise and reasonable thinker who didn't suffer from the extremes that some Christians do in trying to 'put the Bible back in school.' He is a man well worth studying and knowing. It's only fair that I include a link to the reminiscences of First Things writers about Neuhaus as well. This article is by no means the definitive portrait of Neuhaus, but it is a great picture nonetheless.

"At the time of his death in 2009, Richard John Neuhaus had been a public figure for nearly four decades. To admirers and friends, he was arguably the most influential American Christian intellectual since Reinhold Niebuhr or John Courtney Murray. The New York Times described him as a 'theologian who transformed himself from a liberal Lutheran leader of the civil rights and anti-war struggles in the 1960s to a Roman Catholic beacon of the neoconservative movement of today.' It was a conventional biographical arc — Neuhaus's life was defined by exchanging the ideals of liberalism for the dogmas of religious traditionalism."

"But that story is misleading, if not worse, since it distorts the convictions of a man wholly defined by his convictions. Neuhaus spent his life contending for the soul of the liberal tradition. Conversions great and small marked his career, and he often quoted Cardinal Newman, saying that 'to live is to change, and to be perfect is to have changed often.' But his commitment to political liberalism, far from being a youthful error he later repudiated, was one of his life's few consistent threads. The other was his orthodox Christian faith."

Today Is the End of the Christian Right - Mike Farris Sees It Happening

As about 1,000 evangelical leaders met with Donald Trump today at Trump Tower (including Jerry Falwell, Jr., president of Liberty University, tweeting a picture of himself with Trump in front of Trump's wall of magazine covers that includes a framed cover of Playboy magazine), Michael Farris posted this essay declaring that today is the end of the Christian Right. Considering that Farris helped pioneer the Christian Right in the 1980s and beyond, his words carry some serious weight. Please read them. I quoted the main points below.
[In case you may think that Falwell, Jr., likely unaware of all the covers on the wall, would have been scandalized to find a Playboy magazine in the photo he shared: he has shrugged it off and said everyone criticizing him is a hypocrite, because he's proud to be seen with sinners and tax collectors. And, apparently, snap photos with them and their pornography.]

"I attended the very first meeting of the Moral Majority held in Indianapolis in February of 1980. I was the Washington state director of the MM and have been a leader of the "Christian right" ever since.
Today an estimated 1,000 evangelical leaders are making a pilgrimage to Trump Tower to "listen" to Donald Trump."
"This meeting marks the end of the Christian Right. The premise of the meeting in 1980 was that only candidates that reflected a biblical worldview and good character would gain our support."
"In 1980 I believed that Christians could dramatically influence politics. Today, we see politics fully influencing a thousand Christian leaders.
This is a day of mourning."
(Farris, Trump's Meeting with Evangelical Leaders Marks the End of the Christian Right)

He puts it very clearly: the religious right joined together in order to support candidates that would represent biblical values and worldview. Today we see Christian leaders on the right following after a candidate who reflects neither. They are not influencing politics for Christ. Politics is influencing them, so much so that they will not let go of clinging to political power and influence no matter what compromises they are required to make. If you cannot disentangle yourself and your faith from politics over a man like Trump, then politics owns you.

This is shameful for a Christian. Our crucified Lord told his disciples when He was being arrested, knowing torture and death awaited Him, that they should put away their swords. He asked them if they didn't realize He could immediately call upon the Father and have twelve legions of angels fighting for Him. But He did not, for the same reason he told Pilate: His kingdom is not of this world, otherwise his servants would be fighting for it now. And it still isn't. America is not Christ's kingdom. He does not need us to fight for control of America at all costs, no matter what we lose in the process. If America goes the way of Trump, or of Clinton, that is the world's business. Our business as Christians is to remain true to our Lord, put our hope in His coming kingdom, and be sure that we represent it rightly to people in the world. Making certain that the Church looks just like Christ is far more urgent and important than trying to make America look like the Church.

This means we can afford to let go of political power. We can afford to not be influential over immoral candidates. We can afford to have nothing to do with them. We do not have to run off a cliff with Republican candidates. They are not our only hope. In fact, our hope is completely set on something else. Peter, one of the disciples that Jesus had to rebuke in the garden for fighting as if His kingdom was of this world, says it plainly:

Therefore, preparing your minds for action, and being sober-minded, set your hope fully on the grace that will be brought to you at the revelation of Jesus Christ. As obedient children, do not be conformed to the passions of your former ignorance, but as he who called you is holy, you also be holy in all your conduct, since it is written, “You shall be holy, for I am holy.” And if you call on him as Father who judges impartially according to each one's deeds, conduct yourselves with fear throughout the time of your exile, knowing that you were ransomed from the futile ways inherited from your forefathers, not with perishable things such as silver or gold, but with the precious blood of Christ, like that of a lamb without blemish or spot. He was foreknown before the foundation of the world but was made manifest in the last times for the sake of you who through him are believers in God, who raised him from the dead and gave him glory, so that your faith and hope are in God. (1 Peter 1:13-21).

That is where all of our hope is set. This is the kind of people we ought to be before the rest of the world. Mike Farris sees it. Do you?

Spiritual Coffee: Christians, Don't Always Insist on Rights - The Eyes of Wendell Berry in Film - Southern Baptists Find Unity, Humility

Friday's roundup to help you set your mind on things above as we go into the weekend. As usual, I summarized why I think these are worth pondering, and included the quotes that left the strongest impression upon me.

Click on Spiritual Coffee for other good stuff from past posts.

Following Christ, Relinquishing Rights, Brett McCracken (brettmccracken.com)
I believe Christians must have this category in their minds: 'rights I have, but I will choose not to use.' That is what McCracken (a contributor for Mere Orthodoxy) is saying, making a simple but difficult point that Christians are not supposed to be concerned first with protecting the full use of their rights - whether it is the right to own firearms or the legal basis to keep refugees and immigrants from entering the country. With the religious liberty we have enjoyed in the United States being attacked with increasing ferocity, and other rights we are used to depending on being questioned or limited by a government we do not trust (regardless of who is in the White House), it is sadly very easy for us to get indignant and defensive. We often become very vocal about insisting upon total freedom to use our rights however we see fit. But this pattern of thinking doesn't fit the Scriptures. Although I don't agree with every example McCracken gives, and I think many Christians would not need to adopt them all, he does a very good job of confronting the un-Christian attitude of insisting on all of our rights.
Christians do have rights, and we do use them, but we don't need to be insistent about using them every time we have them. And we don't need to use them fully. We can (and should) give up our full rights on many occasions. The reason is that the Christian is supposed to be concerned first with showing what kind of hope we have in God and what security we have in heaven, not with guarding our own security and comfort on earth. Although McCracken didn't quote this, John Calvin summed it up in saying: "There is nothing plainer than this rule, that we are to use our liberty if it tends to the edification of our neighbor, but if inexpedient for our neighbor, we are to abstain from it." [commenting on 1 Cor. 10:23-24.] In other words, only make use of your rights if it will not cause your neighbor to stumble. But if it does, don't use them. "For you were called to freedom, brothers. Only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another." (Galatians 5:13)

"The Christian way is to set our rights aside when they are an an impediment to the love and grace of the gospel, let alone when they endanger the safety of others. Does this mean we never appeal to our rights? No. Paul himself appealed to his rights as a Roman citizen when he was about to be flogged (Acts 22:25). Does this mean we fully surrender our freedom to believe certain beliefs and to live our lives consistently with those beliefs? No. But it may mean we exercise our freedoms more quietly or that we cede some of our freedoms for the sake of others’ flourishing. It may mean we open ourselves up to inconvenience and discomfort and pain.

"This is a hard truth for Christians, but it is a foundational truth in our faith. The New Testament is full of calls to follow Christ’s model of humble, self-effacing and status-relinquishing love (Phil. 2:5-8); to submit to one another out of reverence for Christ (Eph. 5:21), to consider others more important than yourself (Phil. 2:3), to see freedom in Christ not as a weapon but as an opportunity to serve others in love (Gal. 5:13-15), to serve our neighbors before we serve ourselves (Rom. 15:1-3), and so on. 

"This is the upside-down, countercultural nature of the kingdom of God, and Christians in today’s world have an opportunity to reclaim our witness as emissaries of this “others before myself” kingdom."

The Eyes of Wendell Berry: A Cinematic Portrait of a Camera-Shy Man, John Murdock (First Things)
Author Wendell Berry is one of those writers (like Marilynne Robinson) who make a profound impact on many Christians, while transcending any categories such as "Christian fiction" or "Spirituality." Indeed, it would not be fair to label their work in any such terms. It is bigger than any narrow genre or category, and like authors such as John Steinbeck and Flannery O'Connor, we honor its ability to capture human life so completely by calling it "literature." I would like to be more familiar with Berry than I am, and so this brief introduction and the film it describes are very welcome.

"Berry, who lives life without a television or a computer, is about as un-Hollywood as he can be. Yet, the executive producers for Dunn’s labor of love were heavyweights Robert Redford and Terrence Malick[.]"

"Dunn’s film is not your run-of-the-mill biopic, and how could it be? Berry, though very much alive, agreed to participate in the project, but with the complicating condition that he would not appear on camera. The viewer sees recent interviews of his wife Tanya and daughter Mary, but the man himself is present only as a voice and in images from the past. With their differing views of progress, both fans and critics of this farmer/writer, who has done his varied work with draught horses and a 1956 Royal typewriter, will likely see his elusiveness as fitting. 

"The Seer centers on Berry’s debates in the 1970s with Earl Butz, the Secretary of Agriculture under Presidents Nixon and Ford. Butz had rural roots that rivaled Berry’s, but he came to see a decline from 45% of the population working the land at his birth to some 4% at the time of their encounters—what Berry labeled The Unsettling of America—as a positive development. 'Butz’s law,' which he formulated, was 'adapt or die,' and its measure of success was 'P-R-O-F-I-T.' 

"Berry is seen by many as a prophet of a different sort. Archival footage shows him—then with a full head of dark hair—acknowledging that he and Butz would likely never agree, because 'he’s arguing from quantities and I’m arguing from values.' For Berry, the calculus must acknowledge such incalculables as 'the Hebrew-Christian values' of neighborliness and kindness. He concludes, 'I don’t think you can love those old values and love what has come to be American agriculture at the same time.' It is a message that has permeated the more than forty books of fiction, non-fiction, and poetry that have issued from his literary perch overlooking the Kentucky River."

Southern Baptists Elect Steve Gaines as President, Renounce Confederate Flag, and more.
The Southern Baptist Convention met this week to elect a new president and passed several important resolutions. Even if you aren't Southern Baptist (as I am not), this was a historic convention that affected one of the largest bodies of Christians in the United States. Here are a few reasons worth knowing, with some links for details:

• It's significant to know that the election for president, which was evenly divided on the first two ballots and was set to go to an unheard-of third ballot, was also a difference between those in the SBC who hold to Calvinist theology and those who fit with Arminian theology.
• Even more important, the election never went to a third ballot because J.D. Greear, pastor of Summit Church in Raleigh, NC, withdrew his name and pledged his support behind Steve Gaines before the Wednesday morning vote. It was an extraordinary display of humility and unity (he and Gaines met and talked it through and prayed over it the night before) that allowed the convention to move forward together. Here's Greear's explanation, a great example of seeking the good of Christ's body above your own plans or vision.
• The convention voted to renounce the display of the Confederate Flag, passing an even stronger resolution than the one initially proposed. Some may see this as long overdue, others may think it is out of place. But I think this needed to be said: wounds of racial distrust and historical disharmony need to be healed by demonstrations of humility and empathy with each other's pain. The speech by Dr. James Merritt urging that all the flags in the world are not worth the loss of one soul was a powerful moment that seemed to stir the convention to action. Russell Moore praised the decision and explained his support for it.
• A resolution on caring for refugees was passed as well. I hope the example this sets for the church and for individual Christians will help us be wise and generous in our political engagement on this issue in addition to acting it out in our churches and communities.
• Here is a link with a recap by the SBC of the convention, and here is a collection of video of the speeches at the convention.

Spiritual Coffee: Why Read Chesterton? - Challenging Hollywood for Despising Disabilities - How to Spend Your Life on What Matters Most

Here are the top three things that impressed me as worth your thoughts and reflection from the past couple of days. I put some extra thought into summarizing and quoting some of the main ideas and gems because these topics were so interesting. There were several more I came across while out of town, which I'll catch up on posting later this week. In the meantime, past collections of useful links are under Spiritual Coffee.

Why You Should Read G.K. Chesterton (Even When It's Hard), Matt Nelson (Word on Fire blog)
This is the 80th anniversary of Chesterton's death in 1936. Matt Nelson has a nice and simple set of reasons that Chesterton is desirable reading for anyone (especially any Christian), and some good suggestions for how to stick to it even when he may be difficult to grasp. He also links to the American Chesterton Society, which is a goldmine of resources and help for finding a place to start with Chesterton and understanding his ideas. Here are two suggestions of my own for enjoying Chesterton without getting discouraged:
1) There is a sensory expansion that comes by reading Chesterton. You don't have to "get" everything he is saying in order to grow in your awareness. Like learning to recognize certain scents or colors by experience, you can learn to see wisdom even without fully understanding the logic behind it. Chesterton has an extraordinary gift for turning the world around you into a painting or a fairy tale so that you simply see with different eyes. Some of this is just absorbed from spending time in his mind, so that you begin to notice things you didn't observe before. There is even more value, and some protection, in understanding the logic as well, but it's surely worthwhile to get the wisdom even if the logic trails along afterwards. You have to start seeing before you can understand. I wouldn't say this about any writer, but knowing there's so much solidity and brilliance to Chesterton's thinking makes me very comfortable telling people: "Yes, this is definitely the fountain you want to drink from. Trust me on this one."
2) My second encouragement is to simply enjoy Chesterton. Don't feel pressured to work through the meaning of every single thing he is saying. Feel free to just delight in his prose and wit and the wonder of his imagination. He is a giant among storytellers, so by all means just sit and listen to the story. Chesterton's work often refreshes your soul even when you don't work your way through the intellectual ideas, simply because he pours beauty and wonder out of his pen into everything he writes. On some occasions the best use of a work of art is just to admire it and be moved by it, instead of trying to understand it. Feel free to take what comes freely from Chesterton, and at other times ponder over the parts that make you think. Both are full of grace and truth.

[Nelson:] Nonetheless remembering that “angels can fly because they take themselves lightly”, this larger than life apostle of common sense also took himself lightly because he took his faith seriously. He came to know God but he came to know himself better; which made him a better man. He was—to summarize—a joyfully serious thinker and wordsmith whom people loved (and love).Chestertonian scholar, Dale Ahlquist, writes:“There’s a goodness that just exuded from him...The biographical accounts of Chesterton always portray him as being very joyful, and humble, and good, so that everyone was just drawn to that, including his intellectual and philosophical enemies. The people who violently disagreed with Chesterton on the issues were drawn to him as a person because of his charity.” 

Remember that good physical nutrition presupposes “good chewing” to ensure good digestion. Good intellectual nutrition thus also presupposes “good chewing” to ensure good digestion. Chesterton’s words are like steak, not pudding. Hard work will make your head work, and reading Chesterton is hard head work. Hard work in a Culture Of Convenience might seem inconvenient, but adventuring with Chesterton is worth the rigour. As Chesterton himself says:“An adventure is only an inconvenience rightly considered. An inconvenience is only an adventure wrongly considered.” (from “On Running After Ones Hat”)

Would Hollywood Want the Disabled Dead? - John Knight (Desiring God)
Me Before You: Dear Hollywood, Why Do You Want Me Dead? - Ella Frech (Aleteia)
The movie Me Before You, recently released, tells a disappointing and all too familiar tale of a person with a disability who is surrounded by friends who help him make the 'courageous' choice to destroy himself to escape being disabled. Ella Frech, an 11-year-old girl who is paralyzed and in a wheelchair, wrote the most stunningly insightful rebuke of Hollywood's obsession with portraying disabled people as better off dead. Her courage and bluntness, as well as her peace of mind with her life and her clear understanding that there's nothing "wrong" with her, are magnificent. John Knight has some great observations to go along with it, but Ella Frech definitely steals the show here.

"You sit there with your able bodies, and look at people in chairs and think you feel pity for our sad little lives, but the truth is you’re afraid. You don’t want to imagine that you might be one of us one day. You think you can be perfect, and think you’d rather die than have parts that don’t work right. I think that’s sad."

"While you’re sitting in your offices crying about the bravery of this guy who kills himself and leaves everyone else to mourn him, which seems pretty selfish to me, I’m going to be out living the amazing life you didn’t even bother to know was possible. I have friends, and go on sleep-overs, and live a regular life. A life that doesn’t make me want to die. It makes me happy that it’s mine." 

"This could have been a great movie. It could have been the love story of two people and one of them just happens to use a chair. It happens all the time. The people in love don’t think about the chair. It’s the other people who think it’s a big deal."

"You may not believe in God. You don’t have to, and I can’t make you. But I do, and because of that I believe in the value of all people. I believe we are all made in his image and likeness. That’s why I believe all people are worth something. If you believe that people only get their value from each other, then people can take that away. But if our value comes from God, then nobody has the right to say someone who walks is worth more than someone who doesn’t." 

[John Knight:]

Just as interesting are some comments on her article and other articles with the same viewpoint. While the comments for Ella were mostly supportive (who is going to directly attack such an articulate young girl, especially one with a disability?), even her article generated comments that sought to “correct” her perspective. These comments generally fall into one of two camps:

§           * She isn’t qualified to speak on the subject because she has not read the book or watched the movie.

§          * She misses the point about the movie. It isn’t about disability but about “choice.”

Both assertions are absurd. The one who has lived the life doesn’t need to read another book, or watch another movie, to comment on how the culture treats her.

And, of course, the movie is about disability. The whole “choice” argument made by the right-to-die movement is clearly discriminatory against disability. Even the hashtag for the movie (#liveboldly) applies to the lead character who is not disabled, while the one with the disability only gets to die boldly. At least they didn’t have to make up the organization that kills him — that one really exists in Switzerland.

How to Avoid the Worst Form of Failure, Tim Challies (Challies.com)

[Also includes a link to video/audio of his presentation at a Ligonier conference.]
Everyone struggles to keep their time focused on the most valuable tasks instead of the ones that draw away our attention. Smaller, or simpler, or more pleasant tasks that are less important are constantly luring us away from what really matters most. So any help in keeping our discipline is welcome. The quotes below capture why this is such a wise piece of advice. Challies zeroes in on the core of what makes the difference between a productive, or important, task vs. what makes some things less worthy of our time.

Of course, his advice is a general rule of thumb, and sometimes the opposite will be true. But the value of a concept like this is that when we're struggling to decide where our focus should be, it will steer us right most of the time and save us wasted time going in circles or in the wrong direction. That's worth accepting the necessary footnote of figuring out when to make exceptions. 

"Don’t we all live with this fear that we will succeed at the lesser things in life while failing at the greater things? It’s not like those lesser things are always bad things. Some of them are actually very good. It’s just that they are, by definition, lesser things. They are not the matters of first importance. There is an order to life and we all know that sometimes those lesser things can look so attractive. They can be so distracting. They can keep us from giving attention to the things that matter far more." 

"We are so tempted to throw away all the big things to succeed at the lesser things. But we can’t deny it: Succeeding at lesser things at the cost of the greater things is the worst form of failure." 

"The art of productivity is the art of succeeding at things that matter. At its best, productivity is ensuring that you succeed at the things that matter most. It is meant to ensure that you don’t look back over your life someday and realize you’ve only succeeded at the fleeting things, the minor things, the things that just don’t matter." 

"I believe we can read through the Bible and see something like this: Productivity is effectively stewarding your gifts, talents, time, energy, and enthusiasm for the good of others and the glory of God. What matters most in life, what matters most in the universe, what matters most to God, is the glory of God. God calls us to bring glory to him in every way we can in every area of life and especially by doing good to others (see, for example, Matthew 5:16). We do good to others and God gets the glory. That means that the greater things in life are the things we do for others, not the things we do for ourselves. The greater things in life are the things meant to benefit other people. The lesser things are the things meant to benefit ourselves."

Your Display of the Gospel Is Bound to What You Do with Trump

The public face of evangelical Christianity is about to be tested and determined this month.

Evangelical leaders of different ministries and denominations are about to decide what to do about Donald Trump as a candidate for president. A meeting of nearly 500 evangelical leaders is set for June 21 with Trump and his staff. This is a call for all of us to pray, because regardless of what you think they should do, you can pray for discernment and wisdom and faithfulness to God. They will need it. There are all sorts of wrong reasons that could tempt and persuade someone to support a politician, and they will be present in force that day.

It's also time for us to get serious with each other. What these leaders decide to do is going to reflect on Christianity and the entire church. We all have a right to participate in politics and voting as citizens, but nothing can separate the choices we make there from what people see of our faith and our beliefs about God. When people see what you value and support as a Christian, and how you make decisions, you are testifying to them about what is important to you and what you believe is right. Michael Gerson explains why what these evangelical leaders do is going to mark the church, either with the behavior, attitudes, and vices of Trump or with the convictions we stand on in remaining apart from him. The church is much more than just the political involvement of its members and leaders, but we can't convince people to set aside what we do politically as Christians from what they know about our faith and beliefs. Actions demonstrate beliefs. Choices demonstrate values.

We are ambassadors for Christ - each and every one of us - whose entire lives are a witness of the kingdom of God and the Gospel. Every minute we are testifying to what we believe and what the Gospel is about - even when our testimony is false because our actions are out of step with the Gospel. We're still portraying it a certain way to people, and they see the message our actions send even when we are getting the message wrong. Which is why Paul says: “Only let your manner of life be worthy of the gospel of Christ, so that whether I come and see you or am absent, I may hear of you that you are standing firm in one spirit, with one mind striving side by side for the faith of the gospel[.]” (Phil. 1:27). The manner of your whole life. Every part. All your conduct, even in how you eat your lunch - as Paul confronted Peter: “But when I saw that their conduct was not in step with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas before them all, ‘If you, though a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you force the Gentiles to live like Jews?’” (Gal. 2:14.)

The nomination for the Republican Party belongs to Trump now, despite all efforts to prevent that. But we don't belong to any party or kingdom on earth. We belong only to Christ, and the first and absolute priority of how we act in this world is to be faithful to Him and display the Christian faith and Gospel accurately. I shared some of my concerns here about how it harms the Gospel when Christians endorse a candidate as "the Christian choice." But even when we don't say we think Trump is a Christian, or we specifically say we don't agree with his statements on religion or his values, we are still showing the world something if we say we support him. Many of these evangelical leaders may go the same way that Speaker of the House Paul Ryan and other Republican elected officials have gone, submitting to Trump with excuses or resignation. We have to pray and decide whether we will follow those leaders, or whether the great responsibility and privilege of reflecting the Gospel to the world requires us to take a stand and choose between God and political influence.

I pray we have the courage to be faithful to God, even if it requires us becoming irrelevant politically this year. There has never been a clearer example of a candidate who put us to the test of whether we will do that. As Gerson so clearly articulates it: "Support for Trump involves a massive, disorienting shift, especially given the reputation of the religious right. It is, well, unexpected for evangelicals to endorse a political figure who has engaged in creepy sex talk on the radio, boasted about his extramarital affairs, made a fortune from gambling and bragged about his endowment on national television." 

Yet that's the choice before us. Which is why I wrote a couple of months ago that Christians Must Have the Courage to Lose this Election (if Necessary). I stand by it. Ready or not, now is the time for Christians to prove what they worship and who they put their trust in: men or God. There's no halfway here. Either stand firm in faith, waiting on the Lord, or you are bowing your knee to worldly power and saying that political power and control of government is something you can't bear to surrender even if it tarnishes the image of the church. Even if your associations and alliances become the picture of the Gospel and Christian community that the world sees.

"Put not your trust in princes,
in a son of man, in whom there is no salvation."
Psalm 146:3

"Be strong, and let your heart take courage,
all you who wait for the Lord!"
Psalm 31:24

As you ponder how to respond, I commend Matt Lee Anderson's article here, with which I wholeheartedly agree: Evangelicalism After Trump
This is a good example of wrestling with the reality that our choice about Trump is inseparable from what it means to be a Christian.

Spiritual Coffee: Safeguarding Church and Family Culture - Who Is David French? - Know Jonathan Edwards in 30 Minutes

Some evening fuel for thought, or a head start on your morning coffee time.
Prior roundups of current links for feeding the Christian mind under Spiritual Coffee.

Carl Trueman Adopts Rod Dreher's Benedict Option ("Eating Locusts Will Be (Benedict) Optional"),

Carl R. Trueman (First Things)
Rod Dreher has been known for the past two years for the idea of "the Benedict Option," which essentially argues that the Church at this cultural crossroads needs to focus on preserving Christian culture in our churches and families and communities rather than putting all our attention into trying to change the wider culture of the world. Dreher has observed that while we were trying to change the culture in society, we lost track of preserving the unique culture of the Church. Now we're in danger of losing that altogether in the next generations. I think Dreher is right, and the Church needs to hear this, so it's encouraging to see more theologians and scholars affirm this. The namesake for his idea comes from the Order of St. Benedict, and the fact that much of the learning and history and philosophy of the world was preserved through the Middle Ages by monks living in private Christian communities. Dreher doesn't advocate for monasticism itself, but he has some really good points about how we should learn from that concept and apply it to safeguarding Christian community and beliefs.

If you want to read more from Dreher on the Benedict Option, here and here are some good pieces to give you the overview. If you prefer video, then use this.
And if you really want to dig into all his historical and anecdotal examples, this is long but very thoroughly explained.

It's not the only thing the Church should focus on, but I think Dreher is spot on that we have failed to realize we aren't preserving a separate and unique culture and community in the Church. We've been so busy trying to shape the wider culture that we lost track of safeguarding and passing on a uniquely Christian culture in the Church, and largely failed to pass Christian faith and teaching in a coherent form on to the next generation. Moreover, we aren't on the offensive against culture now. We're on defense. We need to give great attention to preserving what is Christian in our lives and churches so it doesn't get pushed out by social pressure, because that's what is most likely to happen if we keep trying to wage a culture war the same way and don't re-examine what's happened to our churches.

Who Is David French? And Why Is He Running?, Denny Burk
This is worth reading not just because David French's third-party candidacy is intriguing, but much more because what Burk shares about French's past words and character is a tremendous demonstration of Christian character and faith put to the test under the harshest conditions. Bookmark this for raising your kids to be men and women who take courage in the Lord and honor Him with all their hearts.

Edwards on the Christian Life: Alive to the Beauty of God, Dane Ortlund (Equipping You in Grace - servantsofgrace.org)
Want to understand what makes Jonathan Edwards such an important Christian theologian, and how some of his remarkable ideas energize faith and the fruit of the spirit in Christian living? Dane Ortlund has got you covered in this podcast. Ortlund is the vice president of Bible publishing at Crossway, and author of several books including Edwards on the Christian Life.

The Narrow Road Between Arrogance and Obscurity in Leadership

Whenever a leader falls publicly because of sin, there is a deafening chorus of criticism, judgment, and "I told you so" declarations. This time it is Darrin Patrick, who was lead pastor of The Journey church in St. Louis and vice-president of Acts 29 church planting network (he has now been removed from both roles, and has been removed from The Gospel Coalition council webpage). This is a time to mourn and grieve over the brokenness that has been caused in The Journey church community and in Patrick's family. Our prayers for them all should outstrip our comments and judgments by at least 10 to 1.

We do want to know what went wrong. Being respectful and mourning with those who mourn doesn't mean we don't learn anything. The main reason I am posting anything is that Scot McKnight has set us a gracious example in how to reflect on what happened. More on this below. I understand that a lot of the anger and disgust in the comments that surge up at a time like this comes from past experiences of seeing church leadership act too slowly in restraining and correcting a leader who is abusing his office or the trust of his congregation. This multiplies the tragedy for the leader and his family and for the people he has betrayed. There is a swell of frustration from people who feel they have watched those with a responsibility to act do nothing, and the comments give vent to that.

Yesterday I was engaged on Twitter by some people about this news. I tried to respond with moderation. My main concern is that when a church does act to remove a leader who is abusing his office, this storm of comments and criticisms has an unintended consequence: the more intense and explosive we make it when a leader is removed, the more hesitant and reluctant churches and ministries will be to actually take action. When we slam churches and their leadership over and over on social media when they announce a leader's removal, we are encouraging exactly the opposite of what we want. We encourage them to avoid such controversy and humiliation for their church and the person they are removing by keeping things quiet and private. If you want public accountability in the church, don't make doing it such a fierce and angry experience.

Accountability: What Went Wrong

Before public accountability, however, there should be private accountability among leaders to prevent things from getting this far. We want to mourn over this now, but also learn how to prevent more of this in the ministries we love. I don't think it could be done more wisely than Scot McKnight's analysis here. I'm sharing some excerpts that I hope will encourage you to read it all. McKnight does three things that make this article worth saving and using: 1) he gets the facts and doesn't hide from the realities of what has been going on, but he also doesn't get detoured by spending a lot of time criticizing; 2) he chooses a positive and compelling example of how to be a servant leader and do accountability right, using the contrasts to make his point (instead of just talking about what someone else did wrong); and 3) he gives us a very wise and solid model summarized from Kent Keith for what kind of heart and development a leader must have in order to faithfully and humbly serve the church.

As McKnight observes, the problem is not simply that people around a leader should be paying more attention or should have acted sooner. The problem is a fundamental difference in the whole pattern and philosophy of leadership. That's what has to change. This is core training for any leader. Bookmark it. Keith's Paradoxical Commandments of Leadership at the end are also brilliant.

McKnight identifies the style of leadership that led to Patrick's crash this way:

In one simple term, authoritarianism. The solution to this requires ... a gradual growth into a leader who fosters the life of others instead of himself. This isn’t something that can be fixed by reading a new book, nor can it be learned over a weekend retreat. It requires working under a skilled servant leader who can supervise the development of new patterns.

People enter into leadership for a variety of reasons, including passion and skills and gifts and a desire to lead and a desire to control and — here comes our theme — a desire to serve. I believe many today who are leaders have gifts and skills and passion but too often are dominated by a desire to control and lead and not a desire to serve and lead through empowering others.

Gospel-shaped leadership is servant leadership, not control leadership and not dominating leadership.

Comparing servant leadership with authoritarianism (or the "power model"):

The servant model of leadership counters the power model, which is focused on “how to accumulate and wield power, how to make people do things, how to attack and win. It is about clever strategies, applying pressure, and manipulating people to get what you want” (19). That is, it is realpolitik — a theory that is distant from a theory of ethics. Servant leadership theory is first established in ethics and then works out that ethic through leadership.

Here are the key practices of servant leadership?

1. Self-awareness.
2. Listening
3. Changing the pyramid.
4. Developing your colleagues.
5. Coaching, not controlling.
6. Unleashing the energy and intelligence of others.
7. Foresight.

McKnight is quoting principles that have been tried and tested over many decades. The crux of servant leadership is that it doesn't try to control or manipulate the outcomes. It isn't about getting what you want by getting everyone to do it your way. It is about serving the people around you, investing in them, setting an example of humble submission to Christ, and helping others reach their greatest potential. The glorious truth is that when you lead like this, you encourage more success and growth from everyone around you and you often reach the right goals as well.

This makes many leaders uncomfortable because it seems like a loss of control. They associate success with having enough power to make things the way they believe they should be. Being a servant leader seems like putting all the power in other people's hands, and ending up following their needs instead of charting the course. In short, it feels like surrendering the power to lead and sinking into obscurity.

The truth is that leaders who serve this way are often the most successful. People support them and follow them because they are supporting and investing in others. People will work much harder with you if they know you care about them and support them than they will if you just order them around and use power to control and direct them. This is how Jesus led His disciples, straight out of Mark 10 and John 13. It is how Paul and the other Apostles served and led. It is even recognized in the secular business world as being the solid road to success. That's the lesson of books like Good to Great: Why Some Companies Make the Leap ... And Others Don't. Some of the most successful leaders - in terms of the health and prosperity of their businesses - are some of the humblest and most unassuming.

The model of power and control appears to many to be the quicker and easier way to achieve their goals, but like most things that appear that way, it ends up being a more unstable and ultimately destructive path. Shortcuts taken at the beginning result in a foundation of sand.

Built-in Accountability

Just as importantly, the path of servant leadership is a path of accountability and cooperation with others. People who lead this way are much more open to correction and to having people look at their lives and decisions and offer input. They value and listen to the advice of others, following the repeated theme of Proverbs: "Plans are established by counsel; by wise guidance wage war." (Proverbs 20:18) and "in abundance of counselors there is victory." (Proverbs 24:6). And they heed the warning: "Whoever isolates himself seeks his own desire; he breaks out against all sound judgment." (Proverbs 18:1). They determine to get the most out of being challenged or corrected, believing that they grow wiser and stronger by listening. (Proverbs 13:18; 15:32).

This style of leadership comes with built in accountability. People don't have to chase after you and press you to get you to let them take a look at what's going on in your life. Servant leaders are wise enough to invite that kind of attention and input. For that reason, they often last a long time as successful leaders instead of rising high and then suddenly crashing. What McKnight has pointed out is that this model is not only biblical and effective for leadership, it is also the model best designed to prevent disasters like what happened to Darrin Patrick. In a multiplicity of counselors, there is safety. (Proverbs 11:14).