Search Results

As we finish up this academic year, we are going to be sharing some of our most viewed posts in the last year. Here is our most-viewed post this year... We are excited to let you know about a new phase in the growth of Living Leadership’s ministries, and how we hope it might enable us to serve more Christian leaders, their spouses and churches or organisations. In recent years, we have seen significant growth in the number of leaders, spouses and churches we are able to support. In the last financial year alone, we were able to support more than 350 leaders from around 200 churches. And yet, we are aware that many more leaders, spouses and churches do not know about the support available for them. Following an unexpected and generous donation, we have been able to set aside some money to employ three part-time “Ministry Development Leads” for three years to develop ministries and expand our support in three key areas: the Midlands, the South of England and Women in Ministry. Whilst there are many other regions that we could have devoted energy to, and hope to in future, we are looking forward to being able to serve more people in these areas through One-to-Ones, Refreshment Days and other ministries as we deem necessary. Phil Sweeting will be the Ministry Development Lead for the Midlands, Graham Cooke for the South of England and Melinda Hendry for Women in Ministry. Phil and Graham are already in post, with Melinda starting later this month. If you’d like to find out a bit more about them you can do so on our website, or we recently interviewed Phil on our podcast about his life, ministry and what he hopes for this role. You can listen to that on a podcast app of choice (search Living Leadership) or on our website. We will be doing similar interviews with Graham and Melinda in the coming months. Please pray for them as they take up these new posts, and for the rest of the staff team as we reconfigure after this growth.

As we finish up this academic year, we are going to be sharing some of our most viewed posts in the last year. Here is our second most-viewed post this year... In Psalm 73 the writer Asaph reflects on how his spirit is oppressed by the apparent godlessness, success and ease of the wicked. His heart was grieved and his spirit embittered. What, he asked himself, had been the point of him keeping his heart pure when they hadn't - and had flourished while he had not? Praise God for such realism. Asaph still clings to God, trusting his goodness and sufficiency. However, it is not shallow and sugar-coated religion, but rather real faith in action in real and distressing situations. The verse that sprang out at me is v15: "If I had said "I will speak thus," I would have betrayed your children" This is very hard indeed. What he appears to be saying is that while he is feeling very painful, true things, and even though the wicked are prospering, if he had said it at the time it would have damaged rather than helped the people of God. He doesn’t elaborate on the reasons and, clearly, he feels that now, at the time of writing the Psalm, he is OK to say it. But previously he felt constrained, and the constraining factor was not whether he would have been correct, but the good of God's people. To apply this to Christian leadership, sometimes the good of God's people is served by not saying things that are true and could be said legitimately. Anyone who has been in pastoral ministry for any length of time discovers that making these kinds of judgements is among the hardest things they ever have to do, especially if speaking would not merely be cathartic, but might exonerate them or protect them from some present or future accusation. (I should note that I am talking about pastoral decision-making here, not about things that leaders have a statutory legal duty and responsibility to disclose). I've been in a number of situations over the years where there was no choice but to take a difficult decision, which leaders could only defend at the cost of damaging other people or their church. I praise God for godly people who have chosen to absorb the misunderstanding and flack themselves, or have allowed their personal reputation and trust to take a hit, for the sake of others and of the church, rather than speaking. Taking decisions that could legitimately be defended, but that can't be without damaging the church, is incredibly debilitating. It provokes rumblings and accusations of power-misuse. It might even cause factions or cause people to question people's suitability for ministry. It causes loss of sleep and fretting through the night. Ministries have ended, livelihoods have been damaged and mental health has been destroyed because leaders chose to not defend themselves in hard decisions when they could have done, and done so truthfully. How should church leaders approach these kinds of issues? Processes and plurality are crucial. When decisions cannot be defended, if it is clear to all that there has been a legitimate process, with legitimate scrutineers (either inside or outside the local situation), and that it has been handled not just by one person who takes the decision and then carries all the responsibility alone, then it may be easier to find ways through. Of course, it opens the possibility that a whole group of leaders are then distrusted rather than just one. They are deemed to be "circling the wagons" and moving to protect one of their own rather than being open and honest. Under such circumstances, wider groupings and denominations may have further mechanisms for investigation, but independent churches do not. They are dependent only on the cache of trust they have placed in their elders and in their processes and policies. I remember a situation in which I decided not to tell my ministry team some things that were happening in the wider organisation, that they would have found distressing and debilitating. Subsequently, they found out from a third party and together asked me why I hadn't told them, and whether it was because I didn't trust them with the information. I told them that it had been to protect them from things that weren't actually their business and that wouldn't have helped them to know. However, seeing as they had heard some details, I had to fill them in on what was actually going on, rather than them relying on rumour and hearsay. When I did, they responded, "you're right, we would rather not have known that and it would have been better if we hadn't." In another ministry situation, I was wrestling with whether to reveal information about a church leader's behaviour. I spoke to a third party who was in the know. They had decided that the likely negative consequences to the church of doing so outweighed the possible benefit, and that speaking - while correct and truthful - carried a significant risk of "leaving a church as a smoking crater". And that is the agonising wisdom issue for leaders. What is it better for them to carry and absorb, and for the church or ministry to not know? What information should they not disclose for the sake of individuals or the church, in the knowledge that if it comes out later people will make incorrect assumptions about why they were silent? In the social media age, it is now normal to assume that silence indicates some kind of complicity in the misuse of power, rather than a prayerful and careful desire to not damage other people or a church. Of course, no leaders make perfect decisions all the time. Sometimes hindsight shows them to be wrong or only partially right, in ways they couldn't know at the time. Sometimes they have to judge, on balance, what a least-bad approach is when there are no obviously good options. After much thought and prayer, I concluded that the other person was probably correct, but it was very much a judgement call "on balance". I am very sympathetic to the wide range of difficult decisions church leaders have to take, some of which are in areas that are simply intractable. They have to make decisions that others will find distressing or deem to be wrong whatever decision is taken. The critical thing is that such decisions are made in trustworthy ways. Are they done plurally? Are they done with appropriate transparency to the appropriate structures and scrutineers in the church (especially elders or church wardens)? Are procedures and policies followed so that the church can trust that leaders haven’t made decisions to benefit themselves at the expense of others? These things create an environment of trust. And, under it all, are leaders, like Asaph, wired to not speak when it would benefit them personally to do so, but in the process would damage and betray God's children? His response is to seek refuge in God, in God’s justice and in his ability to bring things to the right conclusion: “When I tried to understand all this, it was oppressive to me till I entered the sanctuary of God; then I understood their final destiny” v16-17. And refuge in God’s comfort, counsel and eternal security: “Yet I am always with you; you hold me by your right hand. You guide me with your counsel, and afterwards you will take me into glory” v23-24. The mark of shepherds is that, following the example of Jesus, we rather lay down our lives for the sheep than defend ourselves. But we don’t need to defend ourselves because God has us, even when we are at the end of ourselves: “Whom have I in heaven but you? And earth has nothing I desire besides you. My flesh and my heart may fail, but God is the strength of my heart and my portion forever” v25-26.

As we finish up this academic year, we are going to be sharing some of our most viewed posts n the last year. Here is our third most-viewed post this year... Editor’s Note: I (Richard) was very encouraged to receive this post from Phil. The following is a joint effort—Phil’s thoughts with some input from me. Most of all, however, please hear Phil’s voice on this subject. As a leader “in the trenches”, he speaks from personal experience. Here’s our post: But we came here to hear you preach. Just eight words, but eight words that are very revealing. And not in a good way. Indeed, they cut to the heart of what we so often get wrong in our theology of preaching. Because, let’s face it . . . What leader doesn’t want to hear such words? You want to hear me preach? Why, thank you so much! But hold on, because something is not right here. What’s going on when someone says this to a leader? I had cause to consider this question recently when a friend who is contemplating church planting asked about our own church planting experience. First, a word about my own approach to ministry. I had always seen the heart of my role as a pastor in the words of Ephesians 4. So Christ himself gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the pastors and teachers, to equip his people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ. Eph. 4.11-13 To equip the saints for works of service. There it is. There’s my job description. So even though we were only a small group of twenty-five or so, I set up a preaching group. What better way to fulfil my calling to “equip the saints for works of service”? I believe strongly in the call to “equip the saints” so this is something I have done wherever I have been involved in ministry, and I have always found it immensely rewarding. There can be downsides, of course. It has meant that some of the sermons from the trainees have been a bit rough and ready. Perhaps not as bad as my first sermon. If you had heard that, you would never have asked me to preach again! Preaching is a gift that only grows through its use. You cannot improve without actually practising the gift. As a result, we discovered that one or two had different gifts and needed to drop out of the group. However, most grew in their abilities, and this was wonderful to see. Back to those eight words . . . But we came here to hear you preach. This came from a couple who had joined our church plant and didn’t really get this part of our DNA. So they complained to me with the words you read above. Now I don’t know exactly what was going on in their hearts when they uttered those eight words. However, there were several things going on in mine. The first was a sense of smug pride. Good. They like my preaching. Well done me. But the more I reflected on their words, the more I realised what was wrong with my heart response, and as far as I could read it, with theirs. Here, then, are some lessons for both hearer and preacher alike. HEARER, HUMBLE YOURSELF Why do we listen to sermons? To hear God speak. Plain and simple. Though God uses the gift of communication and the personality of the preacher, this should not be our focus. This is not why we come to church. We should be coming to hear God speak—not to hear the wit or wisdom of the preacher, but to hear the living Word of God as He speaks by His Spirit through His Word. If we’re coming to hear a particular preacher, then we’re coming for the wrong reasons. That was why we rarely used to publicise who would be preaching on any given Sunday. If we’re coming to hear God speak, and if we believe that He does so by His Spirit and through His Word, then it follows that we can be fed and encouraged by “terrible sermons.” I know this for a fact, since I have preached some very shoddy sermons. It has encouraged me no end to hear that God, by his grace, has still spoken to people through them. I love the phrase that someone once shared with me: The mature Christian is easily edified. If we’re coming to a gathering longing for and expecting God to speak, then we are very likely to hear His voice. The challenge for us as hearers is not to harden our hearts. I have listened to thousands of sermons over the years, and I know that my own spiritual health is a critical element which often determines how much I get out of any sermon. As a preacher myself, there is always a terrible risk that in my pride I will be judging the sermon (and the preacher) rather than humbly sitting under God’s Word. So, listener—humble yourself. We come to hear God speak. PREACHER, HUMBLE YOURSELF I suspect that most of us who preach regularly have far too high an opinion of our preaching gifts, and far too low a view of God’s sovereignty in speaking to His people and building His church. The longer I’ve served in ministry, the more I’ve come to understand that my preaching belongs to Him—it is His work—and I can trust Him. Of course, I still work hard and try to be as well-equipped as I can be. But as I enter the pulpit, the words in my mind are “I believe in the Holy Spirit, I believe in the Holy Spirit.”[1] Because unless He is working, then I am waffling on in vain. It puts me in mind of Numbers 22.28. If God can speak through a donkey’s mouth, He doesn’t need me or you! As Exodus 4.11 reminds us, God is the one who gave human beings mouths. He is able to achieve what he wants with them. Preacher, surely the gospel makes it clear. We live to glorify God. So, humble yourself. We want to hear God’s voice not yours. Does this mean we are absolved from working hard to study God’s Word and prepare our sermons? Of course not. Indeed, according to 2 Timothy 2.15, we are encouraged to “rightly handle the word of truth.” Two more Scriptures are helpful here. Now to him who is able to do immeasurably more than all we ask or imagine, according to his power that is at work within us. Eph. 3.20 If his power is at work in us, when we rise to speak, we know that He is working, He is speaking through us. To this end I strenuously contend with all the energy Christ so powerfully works in me. Col. 1.29 How encouraging to know that the energy within us comes from the Lord Jesus. Notice, however, that Paul says “I strenuously contend.” (In other translations, we read, “striving” or “struggling”.) Effort on the part of the preacher is expected but Paul argues that this striving, contending, struggling is with the energy Christ works within us. Imagine that. We prepare. We speak. We strive. We struggle. But He’s right there within us. He will have His way, and He will speak. Of that we can be sure. THE FRUIT OF OUR LABOURS Who produces the fruit of our labours? The farmer sows the seed and harvests, but God sends the soil, the water, the nutrients and of course, the sunshine. We work; God causes the crop to grow. When you feel overwhelmed, when you’ve not managed to prepare quite as well as you would have liked, be encouraged. There is no need to be anxious. If they have come to hear you speak, they are there for the wrong reason. But if they have come to hear God, then He will speak. He always speaks to those with ears to hear, with those of humble heart eager to hear His voice. After all, if He can speak through a donkey, He can speak through you. 1. The prayer that Spurgeon reportedly prayed every time he entered the pulpit.

“Above all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires. They will say, “Where is this ‘coming’ he promised?” 2 Peter 3:3-4 Scoffers who deny the coming of the Lord Jesus in glory as judge. That is what the apostle Peter prophesied would come “in the last days”. It is clear as we read 2 Peter that he was not simply speaking about the very final days before Jesus’ return, but the whole period from the birth of the Church until that day. In chapter 2 of this short letter, he describes these people in some detail and it is clear he is not merely saying they will come, but that they have already appeared in some of the churches. As far as I am aware, there are not many evangelicals in our time who actively deny the return of Christ in glory as judge. It is in our doctrinal bases. We believe it. But I cannot help thinking that it sits on our theological shelves and is seldom dusted down. We are not rejecting it, but we are neglecting it. And I fear neglect is often a step towards denial. The denial of this doctrine by the false teachers Peter warns of had drastic consequences, so I need to ask if our neglect has already set us on a similar path. No return of Christ in glory means no decisive final judgement. No decisive final judgement means no giving account for our lives and teaching. No prospect of giving account means we will do as 2 Peter 2:10 says: “Follow the corrupt desire of the flesh and despise authority”. Anti-authority indulgers of fleshly desires. That almost sounds like a precis of contemporary Britain and Ireland. But this passage is not about the culture surrounding Christians. This is not Romans 1 or the middle of Ephesians 4. Peter is describing people within the Christian community. 2 Peter 2:20-22 make it clear that they had (at least) seemed by all appearances to be genuine believers. More sobering, they had presumably been recognised as true teachers. Now it may not surprise you that teachers of the truth can become false teachers. I suppose we have seen enough examples to realise it is not as rare as we wish. But 2 Peter 2 raises a ‘chicken and egg’ question here. Which came first – their immoral lives or their false doctrine? I cannot be sure, since Peter does not say, but my experience suggests that theological innovation is most often an attempt to justify desires to live a certain way or to relate to others in an affirmative way. Authority is rejected because it gets in the way of our desires. Once we dismiss authority, we soon ditch the less palatable aspects of biblical truth. Whichever came first, there is no doubt that these false teachers were idolators at heart. Their true gods are exposed in 2 Peter 2:14, which says three things about them: first, they have “eyes full of adultery”; second, they “seduce the unstable”; and, third, they are “experts in greed”. They are sexually immoral, they abuse others and they love money. They have problems with money, sex and power – the three classic areas of temptation the monastic vows of poverty, chastity and obedience sought to counter. John Piper calls these three things, “God-given means of showing what you value”. If we are to handle them, and the temptation to idolise them, well, God’s glory must be greater to us than they are. So, please join me in reflecting on what Peter says about each of the three in this chapter. We need to examine our hearts for signs of idolatry in these areas. Firstly, money. They were experts in greed. 2 Peter 2:3 says it is a major motivator for their false teaching. They have, 2 Peter 2:15 says, followed the way of Balaam, “who loved the wages of wickedness”. So, what about us? Are we greedy? Do we handle money honestly with transparency and accountability? Do we guard against the love of money that breeds dissatisfaction? You may not be an expert in greed, yet, but don’t let it get a grip. Secondly, sex. Their eyes were full of adultery. They saw everyone as a sexual object and, 2 Peter 2:13 suggests they were sexually licentious and proud of it. They followed desires for whomever to do whatever. So, what about us? Are we lustful? Do we relate to people to whom we may be sexually attracted with purity and accountability? Do we guard against pornography, sexualised joking and sexualised media, all of which dishonour those portrayed in them and feed lust? Your eyes may not yet be full of adultery, but don’t let them linger on sexual temptation. Thirdly, power. They seduced the unstable. 2 Peter 2:18-19 says they, “mouth empty, boastful words and, by appealing to the lustful desires of the flesh, they entice people who are just escaping from those who live in error”. I find this perhaps the most tragic aspect of the chapter. Not only do these false teachers practise sin; they also lead others into sin, especially new believers. Instead of helping them make a break with the sin they have been immersed in, they encourage them to think it’s acceptable. That is abuse of power. So, what about us? Are we abusive? Do we manipulate unstable or immature believers into doing what we want them to instead of helping them grow to maturity in relationship with their Lord? Even if the goal we have in mind is good, domineering leadership is never godly. Do we guard against controlling others? You may not be a seducer of unstable people yet but stay well away from any hint of forcing people to act as you think they should. Now, hope I am right in suggesting this passage does not describe people likely to be reading this. But it is quite possible that someone reading this has fallen into serious sin in these areas. If that is you, I urge you to repent. Confess to your spouse if you are married. Tell those who have oversight of your ministry. If helpful, you can trust our Living Leadership ministry staff and Associates to listen to you and to support you in doing the right thing. Be aware that we cannot, and will not, keep confidence about illegal behaviour and we will always encourage you to bring what is hidden into the light. But we will walk with you through the process of confession and restoration. But even if no one reading this is ensnared in major sin in these areas, I know some may face temptation in one or more of them and some have sinned. I know that because I am here, and I know my own heart. And because the Scriptures lead me to expect that every one of us will face temptation in these ways. So, let’s help each other to remain faithful. If you want one-to-one help with that, let us know so we can link you to an Associate or ministry staff member. And in your groups, if you have built up trust with others, share something of your struggles. Saying that, let me remind all the groups to treat such sharing confidentially. In a culture that rejects authority and indulges the corrupt desires of the flesh, we must be distinctively different. We are people under authority. We have a Lord. He has given us his word through his apostles. We know his power to restrain our fleshly desires. In short, if we want to be faithful teachers, we need to be leaders of integrity. 2 Peter 2:4-9 recounts three Old Testament examples of God’s judgement. The first case – fallen angels – has no note of hope, but the other two included people God protected and rescued – Noah with seven others from the Flood and Lot from Sodom. Why were they saved? Noah, 2 Peter 2:5 says, was a “preacher of righteousness”. He proclaimed God’s justice and truth. We must do so too. With clarity and conviction, with gentleness and love, we must explain why we see things differently – because we have a Lord – and we must call those we teach to holiness. Being preachers of righteousness after the cross also means preaching the righteousness from God that is by faith, justification through faith in Jesus as a gift of God’s grace. So, we need to explain lovingly both that God’s wrath is coming on sinners when Christ returns in glory as Judge and that the same Christ is Saviour for those who believe. There is no record of Lot preaching of righteousness, but 2 Peter 2:7-8 calls him a “righteous man” with a “righteous soul”. Because of that, the lawless things he saw and heard tormented him. Here is another test of our hearts’ condition. Does the sin around us and in our own lives trouble us? Are we tormented by what we see? If not, we are in danger! We be filled by the Spirit of God if we do not feel his grief at sin. We must not merely be preachers of righteousness. We must also be righteous preachers of righteousness. Amidst his warnings, Peter gives us hope that we can stand firm as righteous preachers of righteousness until the end. 2 Peter 2:9 says, “the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from trials and to hold the unrighteous for punishment on the day of judgement”. Our Lord knows what he is doing. He is able to make you stand and to keep you from falling. He will vindicate his holy people on that day even as he brings judgement on the ungodly. That is our glorious hope. He will return and we will see the one who not seeing now we love. And in seeing him we will be made perfectly like him. Does that not thrill your heart? Does that not make you want to be like him now? Does it not motivate you to put to death the desires of the flesh for money, sex and power and to offer what you have of each of these and what you long for through them to him for his glory and service. In the meantime, he can keep us and empower us to serve him as righteous preachers of righteousness. Let us commit ourselves to him again for that purpose and let us help one another to persevere.

Following in the pattern established when the risen Jesus restored Simon Peter beside the Sea of Galilee, Christian ministers are called to be shepherds who feed the Lord Jesus’ sheep.[i] But how can we do this? I suspect most ministers have occasionally found themselves sitting at a desk on a weekday staring at a passage of Scripture, a commentary or a blank screen wondering how they can possibly bring anything of value to their church on the following Sunday morning. If that has been your experience, then spare a thought for the apostles in the early weeks of the life of the Church. Within their first few weeks of ministry, they had to handle the growth of their church from around 120 [ii] to 5000 men (plus an unspecified number of women and children).[iii] That would be like a typical, respectably-sized UK congregation mushrooming into a US megachurch in the space of a month or two, except without any buildings, bank accounts, or training institutions! One of the unfortunate side effects of careful attention to a passage of Scripture during sermon preparation (and for our people as we deliver the sermon) is the risk of losing sight of the bigger picture of the book it is contained within (and of the sweeping story of Scripture as a whole). So, it is a good habit for preachers to read the whole book before starting to prepare a sermon based on a section of it. Or, if it is a very long book, we should at least read the surrounding chapters. That will help us know where to place our emphasis and how to help people weave together the message of the whole book. When it comes to the early chapters of Acts, it is helpful to remember that these events come hot on the heels of those described in the closing chapters of Luke’s Gospel. It is easy to forget that the apostles described in Acts 4 are the same men who fled when Jesus was arrested outside Jerusalem just a few weeks earlier. Remembering that helps me appreciate two things. Firstly, I remember the dramatic impact the resurrection of the Lord Jesus and the baptism of the Holy Spirit described in Acts 2 had on these men. Their transformation was truly miraculous. It is inexplicable without the twin miracles of the resurrection and Pentecost. Only the combination of the clear conviction that the Jesus who was crucified was now alive and the working within them of the same power that raised him could explain their boldness in Acts 4. Secondly, I realise how excellently the Lord Jesus had prepared these men for ministry over three years on the road. That is just as significant as the Holy Spirit’s work in explaining how a rag-tag bunch of under-educated men became apostles who wisely guided the Church through its infancy. In Acts, the Spirit is reminding them of what Jesus had taught them as well as teaching them new things they could not receive before his death and resurrection.[iv] And they were fulfilling Jesus’ commission by making disciples who would understand and obey what they had learned from him.[v} Here, then, is a basic principle of Christian formation: the work of the Spirit in people’s lives is intertwined with the work of the teachers the Spirit equips. Faith and Christlikeness do not grow in us without the Spirit giving the increase, but they do not normally grow without people sowing the seed of the Word and watering it.[vi] Those who minister the word depend utterly on the Spirit’s work in them and in others, but they also work hard in the Spirit’s strength for the sake of those they serve. Challenges arose for the apostles in those early months, as they always do in ministry, threatening to derail them. Their first challenge was opposition from those who had plotted Jesus’ death. For some – Stephen in Acts 6-7 and James in Acts 12 – that led to death. For others – Peter and John – God brought deliverance through unlikely means – Gamaliel’s reasoning in Acts 5 and an angelic escapologist in Acts 12. Their second challenge was dishonesty in the community (Ananias and Sapphira in Acts 5), which threatened to undermine its sincere fellowship before it spread beyond Jerusalem to other places. God brought that to a decisive end by acting in direct judgement. Since these first two challenges were overcome miraculously, we might expect that God would overcome every challenge in the Church directly, but that is not the case. Think ahead to the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15), which responded to the biggest theological challenge to face the Jerusalem church – what was required of believers in Jesus from Gentile backgrounds? Yes, God gave the assurance of his inclusion of the Gentiles through a vision to Peter and the gift of the Spirit to the household of Cornelius as well as to the converts Paul and Barnabas reported on from other regions, but the apostles and elders had to engage in discussion to discern the Lord’s will in relation to Gentile believers. But that was not the first instance of the apostles having to find a solution to a problem without a miraculous intervention from God. That challenge came earlier, in Acts 6, when one group of Jewish believers (the Hellenists, who spoke Greek and followed many Greek customs) were neglected in the distribution of food to widows. No manna appeared from heaven to meet their needs as it had for the Israelites in the wilderness (Exodus 16). No ravens carried bread and meat to them as they did to Elijah (1 Kings 17). The apostles had to lead the Church to a solution. They oversaw the appointing of seven godly men to administer the distribution of food fairly so that they could focus on “prayer and the ministry of the word”. Note again, their work (ministering the Word) in dependence on the work only God can do (hence they prayed!) How had Jesus prepared the apostles for this wise step? I think there is a clue in the reference to 5000 men in Acts 4. How could we read that without remembering the only other time 5000 men are mentioned in the New Testament? Of course, that was when Jesus miraculously fed a crowd from five loaves and two fish. It is the only miracle other than the resurrection recorded in all four Gospels. I think that is for two reasons. Firstly, this miracle was particularly significant in affirming Jesus’ identity. That is drawn out in John 6 where, following the miracle, Jesus describes himself as the “Bread of Life”. I will never forget my German friend Dietmar nearly 30 years ago explaining to me on a mountainside in Ireland how Mark’s account of the feeding of the 5000 (Mark 6) parallels Psalm 23: Jesus sees the crowd as sheep without a shepherd; he gets them to sit down on green grass; then he provides still waters for the disciples by calming a storm on the Sea of Galilee. Here is Israel’s true Shepherd and only source of spiritual sustenance. Secondly, though, the miracle was also a vital element of the disciples’ education. Having fed four thousand plus people on a later date, Mark 8 recounts how Jesus jogs their memory about the number of baskets of food left over on each occasion. He does not spell out this signifies, but he clearly wants them to reflect and learn a lesson. Jesus’ intention to teach them something is also clear within the accounts of the miracle itself. They wanted to send the hungry people away, but Jesus told them to feed them. It was clearly a provocative statement. They knew they could not possibly feed such a crowd – not with only a boy’s packed lunch. But they knew wrong! Their logic was sound from a merely human perspective, but they had not reckoned with Jesus. Yet, interestingly, he did not feed the people himself. He blessed the food and multiplied it, but the disciples were tasked with organising the people into groups, distributing the food to them, and collecting the leftovers. They did exactly what they had told Jesus they could not do. He made it possible. What was this meant to teach them? Well, this is the pattern of ministry. Ministers do not create food for people’s souls any more than we can create food for our bodies. Physical food, whether it comes from the local supermarket or from your back garden, it is a gift from God, the Creator and Sustainer of life. When it comes to spiritual food, this fact is even more evident. You could preach your own ideas, but that would bring life to no one (indeed it is likely to poison them!) But, if you speak the words of God and present to them the Bread of Life (Jesus), you will feed them richly and they will be satisfied. We receive from Jesus and distribute what we receive. But, “Hang on,” you might say, “the problem is the blank screen and fuzzy head in the study you mentioned earlier. How can I turn my paltry thoughts into food for a flock?” Well, I suggest you remember that it is not your job to multiply the food. That is what Jesus does by the Spirit. What you must do is receive from him what he supplies and distribute it to others. So, do not focus so much on the cleverness of your words or the ingenuity of your sermon structure. Rather, focus on Jesus. Worship him in the Word when you study it and then worship him over the Word when you preach it. If you give them Jesus, they won’t have reason to be dissatisfied. “But”, you might say, “how can I feed others when I am empty myself?” In this is the great paradox of ministry. You cannot feed others without being fed yourself, but often it is after you have fed others that you receive yourself. That is what the disciples discovered. How many baskets were left over? Twelve! One for each of them. Exactly enough to sustain them as they supplied others’ needs. That too is promised to you as you minister the Word. You are fed as you receive from Jesus and distribute it to others. He will supply your needs as you serve him. Of course, he will often do that through others, so make sure you have people who are ministering to you as you minister to others. If you are wondering where you might find such people, reach out to Living Leadership, either by joining a Refresh Group or asking for support from an Associate. Jesus will supply your soul's needs as you serve others with what he supplies. At least, he will do that if you keep your focus on what he calls you to do. The disciples learned that too from the feeding of the 5000+. They could only supply the needs of others by listening to Christ, receiving from him, and obeying him. When they became feeders of the flock after the resurrection and Pentecost, they had to continue to do that, and they knew they could not keep their focus if they allowed themselves to be taken up with waiting on tables for the 5000+ strong Church they now had. So, wisely, they appointed the Seven. How often do we go hungry because our minds are distracted by a million things other than Jesus? Some of those things are idols of the world – the things you long for or indulge in that are soul poison rather than soul food. Others are idols in ministry – the longing for significance or success that breeds dissatisfaction with your present lot. Some idols look more pretty than others, but all must be torn down. But there is another, more subtle reason why we can end up soul-hungry in ministry. That is when we give our energy and time to practical arrangements that keep us from the Word and prayer. So, let me ask you, what things take up your working week that are keeping you from the ministry of the Word and prayer? Let me clarify two things that are not unnecessary distractions. Firstly, your family. They need your prayers and guidance and your presence and support as much as, probably more than, the flock of which God has made you a shepherd. They are never a distraction from ministry! Secondly, pastoral visitation and consultations are not a distraction from ministry. They are no less the ministry of the Word and prayer than preaching is. If you do not know the sheep, how can you feed them? If you do not come close to them, how can you bind their wounds and save them from the threats they face? As a minister of the Word and prayer, you must pray and preach to the whole church and, equally, intercede for and instruct each believer as the opportunity and need arises. But I suspect many other things fill your working diary. Why not engage this week in one of the most fruitful ministry exercises – the ministry of the red pen? See what things you are tied up in that are unnecessary distractions. But what meetings can work without you? What tasks can be delegated to reliable people? Who can you trust to get on with the practical arrangements that are vital for the church to keep operating but are not what God has given to you as a minister of the Word and prayer? You may not have 5000+ souls to feed. Neither did each of the apostles. They worked together as a group of Twelve+ and there were elders in that church soon as well. But God has given you some souls to feed. Make your relentless focus the health of those souls. Care about the health of their bodies too, but do not lose your focus on the core of their relationship to God and to others. Receive from Jesus what he provides, pass it on to them with the same love and passion with which he gave it to you, and trust him to supply what you need for the health of your own soul as you do so. [i] John 21:15-19 [ii] Acts 1:15 [iii] Acts 4:4 [iv] John 14:26 [v] Matthew 28: [vi] 1 Corinthians 3:5-9

We are excited to let you know about a new phase in the growth of Living Leadership’s ministries, and how we hope it might enable us to serve more Christian leaders, their spouses and churches or organisations. In recent years, we have seen significant growth in the number of leaders, spouses and churches we are able to support. In the last financial year alone, we were able to support more than 350 leaders from around 200 churches. And yet, we are aware that many more leaders, spouses and churches do not know about the support available for them. Following an unexpected and generous donation, we have been able to set aside some money to employ three part-time “Ministry Development Leads” for three years to develop ministries and expand our support in three key areas: the Midlands, the South of England and Women in Ministry. Whilst there are many other regions that we could have devoted energy to, and hope to in future, we are looking forward to being able to serve more people in these areas through One-to-Ones, Refreshment Days and other ministries as we deem necessary. Phil Sweeting will be the Ministry Development Lead for the Midlands, Graham Cooke for the South of England and Melinda Hendry for Women in Ministry. Phil and Graham are already in post, with Melinda starting later this month. If you’d like to find out a bit more about them you can do so on our website, or we recently interviewed Phil on our podcast about his life, ministry and what he hopes for this role. You can listen to that on a podcast app of choice (search Living Leadership) or on our website. We will be doing similar interviews with Graham and Melinda in the coming months. Please pray for them as they take up these new posts, and for the rest of the staff team as we reconfigure after this growth.

In Psalm 73 the writer Asaph reflects on how his spirit is oppressed by the apparent godlessness, success and ease of the wicked. His heart was grieved and his spirit embittered. What, he asked himself, had been the point of him keeping his heart pure when they hadn't - and had flourished while he had not? Praise God for such realism. Asaph still clings to God, trusting his goodness and sufficiency. However, it is not shallow and sugar-coated religion, but rather real faith in action in real and distressing situations. The verse that sprang out at me is v15: "If I had said "I will speak thus," I would have betrayed your children" This is very hard indeed. What he appears to be saying is that while he is feeling very painful, true things, and even though the wicked are prospering, if he had said it at the time it would have damaged rather than helped the people of God. He doesn’t elaborate on the reasons and, clearly, he feels that now, at the time of writing the Psalm, he is OK to say it. But previously he felt constrained, and the constraining factor was not whether he would have been correct, but the good of God's people. To apply this to Christian leadership, sometimes the good of God's people is served by not saying things that are true and could be said legitimately. Anyone who has been in pastoral ministry for any length of time discovers that making these kinds of judgements is among the hardest things they ever have to do, especially if speaking would not merely be cathartic, but might exonerate them or protect them from some present or future accusation. (I should note that I am talking about pastoral decision-making here, not about things that leaders have a statutory legal duty and responsibility to disclose). I've been in a number of situations over the years where there was no choice but to take a difficult decision, which leaders could only defend at the cost of damaging other people or their church. I praise God for godly people who have chosen to absorb the misunderstanding and flack themselves, or have allowed their personal reputation and trust to take a hit, for the sake of others and of the church, rather than speaking. Taking decisions that could legitimately be defended, but that can't be without damaging the church, is incredibly debilitating. It provokes rumblings and accusations of power-misuse. It might even cause factions or cause people to question people's suitability for ministry. It causes loss of sleep and fretting through the night. Ministries have ended, livelihoods have been damaged and mental health has been destroyed because leaders chose to not defend themselves in hard decisions when they could have done, and done so truthfully. How should church leaders approach these kinds of issues? Processes and plurality are crucial. When decisions cannot be defended, if it is clear to all that there has been a legitimate process, with legitimate scrutineers (either inside or outside the local situation), and that it has been handled not just by one person who takes the decision and then carries all the responsibility alone, then it may be easier to find ways through. Of course, it opens the possibility that a whole group of leaders are then distrusted rather than just one. They are deemed to be "circling the wagons" and moving to protect one of their own rather than being open and honest. Under such circumstances, wider groupings and denominations may have further mechanisms for investigation, but independent churches do not. They are dependent only on the cache of trust they have placed in their elders and in their processes and policies. I remember a situation in which I decided not to tell my ministry team some things that were happening in the wider organisation, that they would have found distressing and debilitating. Subsequently, they found out from a third party and together asked me why I hadn't told them, and whether it was because I didn't trust them with the information. I told them that it had been to protect them from things that weren't actually their business and that wouldn't have helped them to know. However, seeing as they had heard some details, I had to fill them in on what was actually going on, rather than them relying on rumour and hearsay. When I did, they responded, "you're right, we would rather not have known that and it would have been better if we hadn't." In another ministry situation, I was wrestling with whether to reveal information about a church leader's behaviour. I spoke to a third party who was in the know. They had decided that the likely negative consequences to the church of doing so outweighed the possible benefit, and that speaking - while correct and truthful - carried a significant risk of "leaving a church as a smoking crater". And that is the agonising wisdom issue for leaders. What is it better for them to carry and absorb, and for the church or ministry to not know? What information should they not disclose for the sake of individuals or the church, in the knowledge that if it comes out later people will make incorrect assumptions about why they were silent? In the social media age, it is now normal to assume that silence indicates some kind of complicity in the misuse of power, rather than a prayerful and careful desire to not damage other people or a church. Of course, no leaders make perfect decisions all the time. Sometimes hindsight shows them to be wrong or only partially right, in ways they couldn't know at the time. Sometimes they have to judge, on balance, what a least-bad approach is when there are no obviously good options. After much thought and prayer, I concluded that the other person was probably correct, but it was very much a judgement call "on balance". I am very sympathetic to the wide range of difficult decisions church leaders have to take, some of which are in areas that are simply intractable. They have to make decisions that others will find distressing or deem to be wrong whatever decision is taken. The critical thing is that such decisions are made in trustworthy ways. Are they done plurally? Are they done with appropriate transparency to the appropriate structures and scrutineers in the church (especially elders or church wardens)? Are procedures and policies followed so that the church can trust that leaders haven’t made decisions to benefit themselves at the expense of others? These things create an environment of trust. And, under it all, are leaders, like Asaph, wired to not speak when it would benefit them personally to do so, but in the process would damage and betray God's children? His response is to seek refuge in God, in God’s justice and in his ability to bring things to the right conclusion: “When I tried to understand all this, it was oppressive to me till I entered the sanctuary of God; then I understood their final destiny” v16-17. And refuge in God’s comfort, counsel and eternal security: “Yet I am always with you; you hold me by your right hand. You guide me with your counsel, and afterwards you will take me into glory” v23-24. The mark of shepherds is that, following the example of Jesus, we rather lay down our lives for the sheep than defend ourselves. But we don’t need to defend ourselves because God has us, even when we are at the end of ourselves: “Whom have I in heaven but you? And earth has nothing I desire besides you. My flesh and my heart may fail, but God is the strength of my heart and my portion forever” v25-26.

You may remember that craze from the 90s, fuelled by the merchandising opportunities spotted by enterprising Christian marketers: What Would Jesus Do? It was on wristbands, t-shirts, mugs. You could probably even get a tattoo. It's a helpful question in lots of ways, but I’ve adopted a slightly different verb in recent years and found it to be much more helpful in many contexts. (More of that soon). But first a profound revelation! “It’s all about Jesus – the rest is just footnotes.” This is a phrase I’ve found myself saying often recently – I don’t know whether I coined it (unlikely) but I can’t remember hearing it from anyone else first. But in essence this distils the learning of the last 20 years of walking with Jesus in the context of full time paid Christian ministry. When we first become a Christian we know that we need Jesus. We’re full of joy about what He has done for us. The gospel is good news of great joy! But as we continue as a Christian, the more we realise the depth of our sin, and the revel in the wonder and breadth of His grace. And the more we come to understand the otherwise puzzling phrase of Paul – “for me to live is Christ and to die is gain.” (Phil 1:21) We don’t move on from the gospel – but we grow in our understanding and application of it. To my mind that ends the otherwise interminable debates I used to have with a former colleague about which should have priority – evangelism or discipleship. As Glen Scrivener brilliantly captured it – “Evangelism is discipling non-believers; discipleship is evangelising believers” – that is in both cases we are applying the gospel to people’s lives but with a slightly different focus in each case. But one thing I’ve noticed recently, especially as I have been more involved in encouraging and coaching leaders, is that though we ‘know’ this, we often forget to apply it to ourselves. Which takes us back to my new verb. Let me paint a hypothetical conversation. I’m talking to a church leader, and they share with me some intractable pastoral problem. They’ve made a few missteps on the way and now they’re wondering how on earth to move forward. When we’ve explored the problem in a bit of detail I will often say something like this: “Imagine Jesus were (physically[1]) with us right now, sitting on the sofa next to you. What would Jesus say to you.” Boom. There’s the verb you were waiting for. But the power of this question is it personalises Jesus’ involvement in your situation. It forces you to look at Him, and see Him looking back at you with love and compassion. It reminds you that He has not forgotten you or forsaken you. And that His grace is sufficient both for any mistakes you might have made in the past, and for any challenges you face in the future. Nine times out of ten the church leader then begins applying the gospel to their heart and situation in a wonderful and profound way as the Spirit does His work. (This, by the way, is one of my favourite things about gospel coaching, that you get to sit in and watch this process happen as you simply try to ask some helpful and direct questions.) So I offer it up to you as a question to ask yourself when you’re feeling discouraged or challenged in your life and ministry. WWJS? What would Jesus say if He were having a cup of tea with you right now? You probably know the answer – so listen… 1. I know He is always with us by His Spirit. If you'd like to hear more from Phil, check out an interview with him on our podcast!

Bully Pulpit: Confronting the Problem of Spiritual Abuse in the Church by Michael J. Kruger. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Reflective, 2022. 164 pages. ISBN 9780310136385. Abusive leadership in Christian settings is devastating for its victims and harms the cause of the gospel. Sadly, it is more common than many Christians would like to admit. In this fresh contribution on the subject, Michael J. Kruger sets out to help churches and their leaders to identify “spiritual abuse”, to understand its impact, to stop abusive pastors and to prevent the problem arising. The book’s seven concise chapters offer many revealing insights into abusive leadership and practical pointers in response. After helpfully defining some key terms in his introduction, Kruger’s first chapter identifies the problem of bully pastors. He summarises a few high-profile cases and presents one “paradigmatic case” (from the UK) before asking how this problem can arise in the contemporary church. Kruger acknowledges that we cannot know whether cases are on the increase or simply more likely to be reported than in previous times. He nevertheless suggests some factors that may contribute to the phenomenon: celebrity pastors, emphasising gifts over character, filling leadership boards with ‘yes men’, a misunderstanding of authority, and a posture of defensiveness. Chapter 2 defines “spiritual abuse” as the misuse of a “position of spiritual authority” by a ”spiritual leader” to maintain power and control by manipulating or coercing others. In Chapter 3, Kruger reflects on abusive leadership in light of biblical criteria for leadership. Subsequent chapters consider the reasons why churches do not stop spiritual abuse (Chapter 4), the tactics abusive leaders use to avoid being held to account (Chapter 5), and the effect such abuse has on its victims (Chapter 6). In his final chapter (Chapter 7), Kruger suggests measures churches can take to prevent appointing abusive leaders, to hold leaders to account and to protect those who expose abusive leadership, while his Epilogue adds advice for leaders who are eager not to be abusive. Bully Pulpit flows smoothly from diagnosis of the disease of abusive leadership, through an exploration of its symptoms and consequences, to a proposed course of treatment and preventative measures. Kruger writes with sensitivity and pastoral concern for victims of abusive leadership. His account of their suffering is moving, while his outline of the retaliatory tactics employed by abusive leaders is chilling. I found myself, in equal measure, challenged to examine my own leadership and reminded of painful experiences in my own past. Anyone who opens the book unconvinced of the seriousness of abuses of power in Christian settings could have no remaining doubts by the time they finish reading. Equally helpful are Kruger’s suggestions for creating healthier cultures in churches. In my view, his call for churches to prize character above competency is especially important. To ensure this priority, he suggests that churches should seek comment on the character of candidates to be a pastor from a wider range of people than just the standard referees, including people who have previously worked under him and all the elders of his previous church. This is just one example of several highly practical suggestions from Kruger. Other principles he argues for include prizing team work, establishing accountability, providing real and sincere feedback, and having clear procedures for complaints to be dealt with. There is much here for any church to consider and adapt. Whilst Kruger has provided a helpful analysis of leadership that is clearly abusive, he acknowledges in his Epilogue that some pastors who start with good intentions slide into abusive leadership, but he does not delineate the steps through which that occurs. Marcus Honeysett’s Powerful Leaders (2022, IVP) is a more complete consideration of the categories of misuse of power in churches. Bully Pulpit sits alongside that more foundational book, providing additional insights into the category Honeysett calls “the most serious abuses”. Considering the diagnostic category of “spiritual abuse”, I was not convinced by Kruger’s use of the term. As I reflected on his definition, I realised that is largely because it rests on a concept of “spiritual authority” of which I am uncertain and that he does not define. This lack of clarity about the nature and limits of leaders’ authority is potentially hugely problematic when seeking to identify misuses of power. Without knowing what a leader can legitimately ask people to do, how can we be clear about what constitutes overstepping authority or misusing power? Bully Pulpit emerges from a specific context and recounts real stories that occurred in English speaking countries. Readers outside the USA, or whose churches do not fit into the dominant pastor-led model of church governance among American evangelical churches, will have to work to contextualise Kruger’s proposals. Some may argue that Kruger’s inclusion of true stories of abusive leadership makes the book more engaging, but I felt somewhat uneasy reading brief summaries of complex cases and wondered how fairly the issues and people could be presented in so few words. I felt more confident when Kruger stepped into Scripture and when he drew out generalised principles he had identified across numerous anonymised real-life situations. In the round, Kruger’s treatment of abusive leadership is generally balanced, although his helpful proposals to keep pastors accountable and protect victims could do with matching proposals for the support and development of pastors. There is no excuse for abusive leadership, but the problem of leaders who misuse power cannot be divorced from the issue of churches that mistreat their leaders. A similar concern arose in Kruger’s expectation that leaders will always speak gently. He is surely right to encourage pastors to default to a gentle approach in most pastoral encounters, but he could have said more to clarify the boldness and, at times, sharp rebuke, that is described and expected in Scripture when confronting sin. Clarity about the locus of authority, which is lacking in the book, may help here. If Scripture is clear and forceful, should the leader not be likewise, so long as he or she is clearly resting on the Word and not his or her own will? How can leaders and churches distinguish appropriate rebuke and admonishment from bully tactics amidst a dominant culture in which the greatest ‘sin’ appears to be hurting the feelings of others? Whether you agree or disagree with my concerns about the term “spiritual abuse”, Bully Pulpit is an immensely helpful book on the subject of abusive leadership in churches. It deserves a place in theological college libraries and on the bookshelves of pastors and is a useful resource for churches seeking to prevent or recover from abusive leadership.

Last Sunday, we celebrated Resurrection Day—a high point in the year. In fact, it’s the summit. So what comes afterwards? It’s a hard act to follow. Here is a suggestion, starting with a rather unusual choice of passage. If you, then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good gifts to those who ask him! Matt 7.11 If we lived back then, you could imagine a few of us sitting around later discussing this. “That bit about good gifts from our Father in heaven, I loved that.” “Me too. But did you hear what he said?” “What?” “He called us evil.” “Are you sure? I must have missed that.” “Yup. He said, ‘though you are evil.’” “That’s a bit strong, isn’t it?” “I thought so too.” We are evil. Not just bad. Evil. Let’s just take that in for a moment. The Lord calls us evil. It’s such a reminder of how dualistic the Bible is. (Dualistic here doesn’t have to do with balance, as much as distinction or opposition.) Light – Dark Life – Death God – Satan Good- Evil Spirit – Flesh Right – Wrong Love – Hate Church – World And in this dualism, we are described as evil. It’s so far from our modern sensibilities, isn’t it? Nowadays, we like to think of ourselves as a bit of a mixture. Part good, part bad. But given a choice, we often characterise ourselves as good. He’s a good person, we say. So consider this. There are essentially two ways of looking at the world. The problem is out there—in society, government, institutions. We are fundamentally good, but we’re damaged by external forces. The problem is in here—we are evil, and so we damage our governments, institutions and society. Enter the prophet Jeremiah. The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked; Who can know it? I, the Lord, search the heart, I test the mind, even to give every man according to his ways, According to the fruit of his doings. Jer 17.9-10 The Lord Jesus doesn’t lack clarity when he simply re-affirms Jeremiah’s observation. Human beings are evil. That doesn’t mean we are incapable of noble acts or good choices, but deep inside, we are idolators and rebels. We are sinners. And that means, in Jesus’ words, we’re evil. Evil. By contrast, God is always described as good and holy. Both of those. What is to become of us? For never the twain shall meet. So let’s follow Simon Peter after the Crucifixion. There he is, reflecting on what’s happened, and one can only imagine that he’s in despair. He has betrayed his Lord. He has fled. He has abandoned his Lord. And he remembers too that his Lord and friend described him as evil. How further down could he go? Which brings us to a party on the lake shore. An after-party. Not only is Simon Peter now sitting with his Lord, who is alive again, he is sharing food with him. Yet the shame weighs heavily on him still. So three times the Lord Jesus asks his friend, “Do you love me?” I, who denied him, who fled, who is evil, even I am invited back in and more than that, He gives me an important job—to feed his sheep. No wonder we sing of grace so much. Our hymns and carols are full of this theme. Come, Thou Fount of every blessing, Tune my heart to sing Thy grace; Hail him who saves you by his grace, and crown him Lord of all. Silent night, holy night! Son of God love’s pure light. Radiant beams from Thy holy face With the dawn of redeeming grace, Jesus Lord, at Thy birth Jesus Lord, at Thy birth Amazing grace! How sweet the sound That saved a wretch like me! I once was lost, but now am found; Was blind, but now I see. This is amazing grace This is unfailing love That You would take my place That You would bear my cross Grace is the air we breathe, the wind in our sails, the very oxygen of our lives. We are saved by grace and live each day by God’s grace. It is the beginning, middle, and end of all we have in Christ Jesus, for once we were lost, but now we are found. We were blind, but now we see. Little wonder that on that lake shore, Jesus makes grace the major theme of his interaction with his dear friend, Peter. He reinstates him and speaks this deep truth into his heart: I have called you, chosen you, and I forgive you. You, Peter, are the recipient of the extravagant grace of God. Live in it. Live to share it. It turns out, then, that the after-party isn’t a disappointment at all. It’s not a gathering of the deflated after the high of Easter morning. Instead, it is where grace is first shared and then experienced. All made possible by the events of the Easter story. I wonder how much grace is shared among your community. If a stranger spent time with you all, would they conclude, “This is a place where grace and more grace is extended and shared every day”? So, to finish, here are some questions to consider this week. Take some time sitting before the Lord, reflecting on how he is speaking to you. What difference does grace make in my own life? Is there anyone to whom I need to extend grace? What has God taught me during Lent and the Easter period about his grace? May the Lord bless you as you serve him.

Happy Easter! He is Risen! He is risen indeed! Each year, we greet each other with these timeless words. What hope! What joy! And so we rejoice on this most important day of the year—Resurrection Day. Hallelujah! End of post? Not quite. CROSS OR RESURRECTION? The life and death of Jesus is often presented as a means by which God solves our greatest problem—sin. We have a sin problem, we are cut off from our creator, so God sends Jesus to save us. He does this, wonderfully, on the cross, bearing our sin, taking our punishment. Problem solved. But then we’re left with pieces of the story that seem superfluous. What about his life? The early creeds don’t have one single mention of his life. It’s “born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate.” His entire life, all his teaching, everything he accomplished on earth, completely absent. He might as well have hidden in a cave for thirty-three years, and appeared for the last week of his life, to suffer and die. But there’s a further problem, because we are then presented with his Resurrection, and I’m capitalising Resurrection for a purpose. Resurrection, capital R, is often poorly understood, even today. I’ve heard a number of options, all of them incomplete. The Resurrection proves that he was who he claimed to be—the Son of God. The Resurrection showed that he was sinless, because death could not hold him. The Resurrection showed that he had triumphed over death (though the speaker often doesn’t quite know what that means.) None of these responses is wrong. They’re all part of the picture, but they’re inadequate. They don’t express the enormity of what took place on that first Easter Sunday. Because what took place explains why the life of Jesus has relevance; it explains the very nature of what it means for us to be embodied human beings. And not only that, it communicates a message of hope that completely transforms the way we are called to live our lives. STILL UP IN THE CLOUDS Sadly, there are many believers who are hoping for a disembodied life. As the hymn by Sanford Fillmore Bennett states, In the sweet by and by. Indeed, some of our most cherished hymns seem to allude to this hope. Take this section from How Great Thou Art, for example. When Christ shall come with shout of acclimation And take me home, what joy shall fill my heart. Without wanting to ruffle too many feathers, let me just say that I love this hymn. It’s considered one of the greatest for a reason. The poetry is beautiful; it deserves its place among our most treasured favourites. However . . . Take me home. Just three words, but I’m afraid this isn’t Christian hope. The hope of heaven quickly conjures up images of clouds and harps and . . . the indescribable. We’ll be right there with God, being seen by him and seeing him on his throne. It all sounds wonderful, but the bible doesn’t present this as our ultimate hope. Certainly, when we die, our spirits may be in the presence of God—there are actually very few sections of Scripture which describe this—but this isn’t our destiny. That’s not where we’re headed. That’s not our ultimate hope. BROILED FISH Our ideas about the future, God’s future with us, and our ultimate destiny really matter. Either this world is doomed, to be consumed and tossed aside, or remade in some way, restored, re-fashioned to be a place in which God dwells with us as our king. You can’t have both. The key passages are Romans 8 and 1 Corinthians 15. 1 Corinthians deals directly with the Resurrection itself. For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, and then to the Twelve. 1 Cor 15.3-5 Paul hangs the entire Christian faith on an historical event. That’s a bold move. Most religions contain all sorts of interlocking beliefs, some of which might be rejected. Christianity is completely different. It ALL hangs the Resurrection. This is the event that both the apostles and St. Paul believed was the one key event that changed everything. Absolutely everything. Why? Romans 8. This is the chapter in which St. Paul writes about the Spirit. Take verse 11, for example. And if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies because of his Spirit who lives in you. Rom 8.11 Notice that the Spirit “gives life to your mortal bodies.” Both Spirit and bodies are in view. Later, he sheds more light on this subject. For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the freedom and glory of the children of God. We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time. Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption to sonship, the redemption of our bodies. Rom 8.20-23 Physical life, embodied life, is under a curse (Gen 3). Yet one day it “will be liberated from its bondage to decay”. We, as embodied souls, “wait eagerly for our adoption to sonship, the redemption of our bodies”. The “already but not yet” of Christian belief is wonderfully expressed here. Yes, we have “the firstfruits of the Spirit” but we’re not there yet. The creation will be “brought into the freedom and glory of the children of God”. God hasn’t given up on this world in which we live. It is not destined for destruction, but renewal. Enter the Resurrection, and all that it shows us. For Christ’s resurrected body gives us a glimpse of life in the new creation—just a glimpse, and with some rather strange elements, but a glimpse, nevertheless. Here’s Luke’s account. While they were still talking about this, Jesus himself stood among them and said to them, ‘Peace be with you.’ They were startled and frightened, thinking they saw a ghost. He said to them, ‘Why are you troubled, and why do doubts rise in your minds? Look at my hands and my feet. It is I myself! Touch me and see; a ghost does not have flesh and bones, as you see I have.’ When he had said this, he showed them his hands and feet. And while they still did not believe it because of joy and amazement, he asked them, ‘Do you have anything here to eat?’ They gave him a piece of broiled fish, and he took it and ate it in their presence. Luke 24.36-43 Touch me and see. I have a physical body. They gave him a piece of broiled fish, and he took it and ate it. I have properly functioning body which means my mouth, oesophagus, and stomach are all required to make it work. I’m not just a bag of bones floating around but an integrated system designed to do the same kinds of things that you do. For example, eat. We still live with many Greek ideas, made worse by the Gnostic heresy, which divide physical and spiritual, elevating the latter and sometimes condemning the former as somehow terminally corrupted. But that’s a mistake. Sin hasn’t simply corrupted the physical at all, and the Resurrection demonstrates this clearly. The issue of whether Christ walked through walls is a bit of a red herring. The verse in John (20.19) isn’t clear about that. What is much more important is what we read in 1 Corinthians 15. So will it be with the resurrection of the dead. The body that is sown is perishable, it is raised imperishable. 1 Cor 15.42 Resurrection involves bodies, but they are not the same as before. For the perishable must clothe itself with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality. When the perishable has been clothed with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality, then the saying that is written will come true: ‘Death has been swallowed up in victory.’ 1 Cor 15.53-54 This is our destiny in the new creation—imperishable bodies. An imperishable body isn’t something we can fully understand, but one thing is for certain—it’s a body, not just a spirit. That’s what’s important. And this is what Christ showed us in his Resurrection: a kind of proto-type of a resurrected body. So, when I hear people speculating about “going to heaven when we die”, I despair a little because while it is, of course, wonderful to be united with Christ after death, this isn’t where Christian hope is found. Instead, in theologian Tom Wright’s words, Christian hope is “life after life after death”. It is what follows after death has been fully defeated and Christ returns in triumph. Hence, one of the most glorious passages in Scripture—Revelation 21. I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband. Rev 21.2 God comes to earth; we don’t ascend to heaven. He comes to make his dwelling place with us, being fully known and experienced by his chosen ones in the new creation. Do I know what this will be like? No, but I look forward to it. Why does this make a difference? Because embodied life has meaning. The Resurrection is a declaration by God that the physical lives we live have meaning and value. That’s why it was essential that Christ lived a human life and didn’t just parachute down to die on a cross. He lived among us in a human body, teaching us about his kingdom, a kingdom in which God’s ways are to be demonstrated by those who worship him, follow him, and love him. Here on earth. Using our bodies. Tom Wright expresses it this way. What you do in the present—by painting, preaching, singing, sewing, praying, teaching, building hospitals, digging wells, campaigning for justice, writing poems, caring for the needy, loving your neighbor as yourself—will last into God’s future. These activities are not simply ways of making the present life a little less beastly, a little more bearable, until the day when we leave it behind altogether. They are part of what we may call building for God’s kingdom. Surprised by Hope. Tom Wright. Resurrection Day. The day when we celebrate God’s triumph over sin, death and the Enemy. It’s also the day when we catch a vision of life in the new creation, one in which we will live together in imperishable bodies. We face terrible suffering here on earth. It is very tempting, therefore, to preach a kind of gospel which tells people that we’ll be able to escape it all. Sometimes we steer very close to the idea that God has made a big mistake, but he’s fixing it by rescuing some from this hell where we live and giving us a future without our painful, wretched bodies that we keep misusing. That isn’t Christian hope. Hope, instead, is expressed when we rejoice in the Resurrection of Jesus, living embodied lives that carry the message of God’s kingdom in every act of compassion and care for the creation he loves. When we love and forgive, are patient, longsuffering, when we go the extra mile, are merciful, make sacrifices for others, when we demonstrate God’s gospel of forgiveness through his Son, this is how we express Christian hope. It’s why our lives matter. Every single second of life matters, because Christ is risen, and he makes all of life meaningful. For it contains the hope of a glorious future, expressed now in love, and received joyfully and in full, when Christ returns in triumph. Not to carry us away, but to live among us by his Spirit. That’s the message of Resurrection Day.

The Book Your Pastor Wishes You Would Read (But is Too Embarrassed to Ask) by Christopher Ash. Epsom: The Good Book Company, 2019. 126 pages. Cover price £5.99. ISBN 9781784983635. Your pastor is a person too, so someone needs to know your pastor and your pastor needs care from you. This is the central claim of this brief and highly readable book from Christopher Ash. Writing as someone who has been both a pastor and, latterly, a church member, Ash aims to help Christians understand the needs of their pastors. The result is a challenging and practical guide to some important principles for care for Christian leaders which will need some thought or help (cue Living Leadership!) to be worked out in practice. After explaining why he wrote the book, Ash presents us with ten pen portraits of fictional pastors that resonate with my experience as a pastor and as a mentor to numerous pastors. It is clear that he understands the kinds of struggles pastors often have, from the sense of never bringing work to completion to the struggles that come from relatively low incomes. Ash then presents his case for why we should care for our pastors – because we have a responsibility to make their work a joy and to help them be motivated to fulfil the task God has given them. The core of the book is seven chapters each of which outlines a virtue that church members can cultivate and display towards their pastors: daily repentance and eager faith, committed belonging, open honesty, thoughtful watchfulness , loving kindness, high expectations and zealous submission. After presenting these, Ash argues that someone needs to know the pastor, suggesting five key areas that will affect the pastor’s attitudes and expectations: upbringing, models of ministry the pastor has experienced, past material lifestyle, personality, and the attitude of the pastor’s spouse if married. Ash writes with clarity and warmth. Reading this book feels like sitting across a coffee table as he shares insights and wisdom. His use of fictional or fictionalised stories throughout the book helps to earth it in reality. In the course exploring his seven virtues, Ash proposes numerous practical ideas for helping pastors. Especially helpful are his comments about reading, conferences, study leave (or sabbaticals), days off and vacations (pp.73-78). I found it especially helpful that he did not only consider this in terms of words of encouragement, noticing the pastor’s needs and responding with acts of kindness, but also setting high expectations of our pastors in their character and behaviour. He also outlines clearly the responsibility of church members to maintain their own spiritual health and to submit to their leaders. This book is calling church members and pastors alike to a relationship of mutual support based on a deep faith in the Lord. It is challenging, practical, and relatable. Ash suggests that “You will be a better Christian in a better church” (p.10) if you read his book (and presumably also put into action what it says). I think he is justified in this claim and, with him, “I want you to read this book … very much” (p.10). My chief criticism of this book is Ash’s assumption that each congregation (what he calls a ‘local church’) will have one senior pastor. This first pops up implicitly, for example when he says that those who cannot remove a false teacher from a pastoral position, “must leave their church” (p.42, italics mine), or, “Even if you have been an associate minister of an assistant pastor, nothing quite prepares you for the day when you are entrusted with senior leadership of a church” (p.49-50, italics mine). His belief in a single senior leader becomes explicit near the end of the book when he writes, “Even with shared leadership, we should let one entrusted with senior leadership actually lead” (p.104). I recognise this is a widely held view, but Ash assumes it rather than arguing for it. Personally, I found it jarred with his references to biblical passages, such as 1 Timothy 5, Hebrews 13 and 1 Peter 5, where leaders are consistently referred to in the plural. I wonder where the biblical case is for a single senior leader and would hope that those who do advocate it could be more clear in exactly what they think the limits of that individual’s authority should be. I suspect some of the problems we face with leadership, and with the experience church members have of leaders, arise from a poor understanding and flawed operation of plurality. I would have liked to hear Ash calling church members to step up to the hard work of shouldering leadership responsibility alongside paid pastors and to encourage their leaders to be truly accountable to a collective team of suitably gifted people. Ash’s focus on the single senior leader led to a few other weaknesses of the book. He assumes that leader will be paid to minister full-time in a congregation, and probably just one congregation at that. The book is less clearly applicable to bivocational pastors, lay elders or ministers with the charge of multiple congregations. In this same vein, I felt Ash was a little too quick to assume that a pastor’s leadership is “entrusted to them by God” (p.68) without considering the degree to which it is also affirmed by the Church (whether a congregational vote or a bishop’s anointing) and therefore accountable to it. This high view of divinely appointed leadership leads to a lack of differentiation in his chapter on submission between legitimate authority and illegitimate use of power. Ash argues that if a leader’s vision is not ungodly, then “We need to learn gladly to submit to the gospel authority of our pastors as they lead our churches” (p.107-108). I find the phrase “gospel authority” here confusing. I would assume it should refer to a pastor’s authority to command obedience to the gospel and to Scripture (as in Titus 2:15), but that a leader’s call to commit to his ideas that are not explicitly commanded in Scripture must carry a lesser level of authority. I think this is a distinction that wise leaders and careful churches will be eager to make and that leaders should think carefully about the degree of uniformity of commitment to their visions they expect from their members. In drawing this review to a close, I am aware that my comments on the book’s limitations emerge from the fact that my work in Living Leadership brings me up close to the things that go wrong when leaders overstep their authority or when churches do not care well for their leaders. This ministry involvement that makes me glad that Ash has written this helpful book, but also makes me eager for it to be integrated with other books and resources that can tease out what Ash does not. My colleague Marcus Honeysett’s book Powerful Leaders? is the best resource I know for distinguishing legitimate authority from misuses of power in leadership. I am more hesitant about suggesting where greater clarity may be found on plurality in leadership as that question is inseparable from one’s view of church governance. I do think, however, that all churches could benefit from a better understanding and more robust operation of collective leadership whether our plurality is within the congregation or within denominational oversight of the congregation. This book does a great job of highlighting a problem and pointing readers towards some ways to put it right. Ash urges us not merely to read it but to make changes as a result (p.122). It is at this point that Living Leadership can help you, in two chief ways. Firstly, we can provide your leaders with the support they need to maintain their joy in faithful service for the Lord through our Pastoral Refreshment Conferences, Refreshment Days and Refresh Network Online as well as personalised mentoring and care as needed. Secondly, our Leadership Commitments Scheme is designed expressly to help churches and organisations towards increasingly healthy cultures of mutual responsibility and care between leaders and people. It centres on Codes of Best Practice in both leader conduct and leader care which provide a standard you can commit to and members receive access to helpful toolkits to work these commitments out in practice. Living Leadership is a vehicle that can help those who get the message of The Book Your Pastor Wishes You Would Read move forward to a better place.