Christian Persecution Is Not An Occasion For Outrage And Government Intervention But For Revealing God’s Great Love For His Enemies

Posted on December 1, 2014 by Pastor Foley

Logo 071414“Satan keeps people in darkness by means of their fear of death,” writes Josef Ton, the distinguished octogenarian Romanian theologian and author of the seminal Suffering, Martyrdom, and Rewards in Heaven. “When a witness to Christ demonstrates that she is free from that fear, by accepting to die out of love for the very people who kill her, the bondage of slavery to fear is broken.”

In other words, when with the love and character of Christ, by the power of the Holy Spirit we willingly and even joyfully endure taunting, abuse, and death, we spread in blessed contagion the freedom from the fear of death that, according to Hebrews 2:14-15, is back of all of our cowardice as Christians, as well as the cowardice of our human race. As my friend and colleague, Doug McKenzie, CEO of Voice of the Martyrs Canada, says, “This is a faith worth dying for.”

It is not, however, a faith worth killing for, whether that murder comes in the form of “protecting” Christians from martyrdom through military intervention or strongly-worded denunciations and expressions of outrage. “Violence and murder are part of Satan’s nature,” Ton reminds. “Christ could not use violence and murder as His methods of operation.”

What method was left for Christ to use? He was confronting the one who was evil, who used lies to deceive people, who was hateful, and who used all forms of violence and ultimately murder. In stark contrast to this, Jesus was all goodness and truth and love, and He was in no way inclined to use violence and murder. He came with goodness, expressing the truth of God, and doing it in love. But what was His ultimate weapon? We know it, don’t we? His supreme weapon was self-sacrifice, a process by which He absorbed into Himself all the evil, all the deception, and all the hate of the world and died with them on the cross, melting them in His own blood!

Therefore, we should not respond to the persecution of Christians by holding them in admiration and awe, nor should we teach or encourage others to do so. This causes Christians to think of martyrdom as an extroardinary and commendable action, when truly it is distinguishable from the rest of the Christian life in degree but not in kind, i.e., taking up your cross daily across the whole of your lifetime is not different than taking up your cross in a moment, unless you inappropriately spiritualize the daily carrying of the cross.

Nor should we respond to reports of Christian persecution with outrage and anger, as if what was happening was tragic. Outrage and anger are not the weapons with which Christ has armed us. He disallowed their use during his own persecution (crying out for all time, “No more of this!”), and when he is shown addressing a persecutor, there is no outrage in his countenance or speech. When martyrs call out for him to be outraged, they are instructed in no uncertain terms to be patient. There is a purpose for persecution, and Christ himself knows experientially (and perfectly, according to the author of Hebrews) that there is no other way for this purpose to be accomplished. Writes Ton:

Satan no longer has a legal right to anyone, yet people are free to believe his lies and to fulfill his evil desires. Thus, they remain enslaved by him. As Jesus explained to Nicodemus, when the Light came into the world many people preferred to remain in darkness, because their deeds were evil (John 3:19). The Father sent Jesus Christ as a Lamb, that is, as a totally gentle and defenseless being, to meet the cruel and merciless beasts of this world. He was to defeat them with the Word of truth, proclaimed in goodness and love and sealed with self-sacrifice. And He did it! Now, however, He turns to us, His branches. The Lamb of God says to us: Although I have won a major and decisive victory, the war is not yet over. It must continue, so that we may win more people for our Kingdom. You are the ones who must engage in this war! I send you out as lambs, totally defenseless and vulnerable, to the cruel wolves of this world. You are equipped now with the Gospel of Truth, which you will impart to them in goodness and love, and if need be, you will testify to this Truth to the point of self-sacrifice.

Provocatively, Ton notes that self-sacrificial love is not a way that the gospel is spread, but the way, which reminds us once again that martyrdom is the liminal edge of self-sacrificial love but not a different plane. Ton says he learned this through his own suffering:

Jesus addressed me personally when He said: “As My Father sent Me, so send I you.” I came to see that for two thousand years, Christ has been conquering more and more territories on this earth through people who accept to go and preach the Gospel to evil and hateful and cruel people, and who accept to give their very lives in the process. Most of the places conquered by Christ were won when a martyr sprinkled that territory with her blood! In short, I understood that martyrdom is not a tragedy. On the contrary, it is a method of conquest!

Persecuting Christians may be a strategy of the enemy, but enduring persecution in love unto death is God’s strategy, his only one. That we turn to other less costly strategies is a sign that we do not understand the enemy’s power of deception nor the reliance of human beings on sin in all its forms as a life-sustaining oxygen. That we can free the mind of others without suffering in our own bodies is a tragically poor reading of Scripture. The disciples’ hearts may have burned within them when the resurrected Jesus opened their minds to the centrality of divine suffering in Scripture, but it was not until he broke bread–and thus reminded them of his sacrifice unto death in the sacrament given for that express purpose–that they recognized him and were “at once” transformed into evangelists.

As Ton notes, this is why in the early church the believers did not respond to incidents of persecution with calls for government intervention and protection but instead “when a persecution started in Smyrna and some of the Christians were arrested, tortured, and martyred [between A.D. 156 and 163], others rushed to the authorities and tried to turn themselves in so they could become martyrs as well.”

So how should we respond when we hear reports of brothers and sisters being persecuted and martyred?

  1. By praying for the Lord’s continued provision to them in the time of trial.
  2. By giving thanks to God for the “better resurrection” that awaits them.
  3. By repenting at the reminder that suffering disgrace for the Name is a privilege, not a tragedy.
  4. By explaining to others that what is happening is not a tragedy or surprise but rather God’s great love for sinners on display through his children, calling all to repent and believe. Invite them to receive this same love.
  5. By living a life of self-sacrifice so that everything you do is consistent with rather than in stark contrast to those being martyred. This is your reasonable service, nothing more.

We conclude with Ton’s note that

In the cruel act of crucifixion, the true nature of God was revealed. His essence was shown to be perfect love, utterly and unconditionally giving itself to others, even enduring torture and death for them. The glory of God shines through the beauty and splendor of self-sacrifice as nowhere else and, most importantly, this glory of God, the glory of His self-sacrificial love, shines out again and again in each martyrdom. For this reason, John referred to the martyrdom of Peter as the “kind of death” by which Peter “would glorify God” (John 21:19). It was also the reason why Paul was so determined to glorify Christ by his own death (see Philippians 1:20).

So we also should be determined–joyfully determined–to take up the cross, that the glory of God would shine most brightly in our own lives, whether as martyrs in an instant or martyrs across a lifetime.

Posted in persecution | Tagged , , , , | 12 Comments

Thankfulness Is Not As Counter-cultural As You Think

Posted on November 28, 2014 by tdillmuth

WLO_doinggoodPost by Pastor Tim – It always seemed a bit counter-cultural and spiritual for my family to go around the table and say what we were thankful for on Thanksgiving.  Upon further reflection, though, this type of spirituality is actually readily accepted and even expected by most people.  This is the type of spirituality that says “faith matters” but the object of our faith is not as important.  This same type of spirituality would say that “thankfulness matters,” but not so much to who or what our thankfulness is directed.

Any of us can say that we are thankful for our home or our family – but who are we thanking when we declare those positive confessions on Thanksgiving?

This past week while teaching a group of underground seminary students, we had them practice the biblical work of mercy of doing good to each other.  This looked very simple and practical, with the students doing things like getting hot water for someone else, cleaning the dormitory bathroom, and sharing their snacks with each other throughout the day.  But they found that one of the keys to doing good biblically was the way they responded when thanks was given for what they had done.

For example, if I cleaned the dormitory bathroom and simply said, “You’re welcome,” when someone gave me thanks, then I’m really only directing people to look at me.  In other words, even if I didn’t actually feel any pride or selfishness, I still took the credit for cleaning the bathroom.  The thanks began and ended with me!

The truth of the matter is, I really didn’t want to clean the bathroom. I only did it because I felt like it was the right thing to do, according to the example set by Jesus in the Scriptures.  If it was up to me, I wouldn’t have cleaned the bathroom, I would have left it for someone else to do.  So, when I’m thanked for cleaning the bathroom, I could be honest and point to Jesus by saying,

You know, I really didn’t want to clean the bathroom at all.  I felt like the Lord wanted me to do it.  So don’t thank me, thank the Lord because without him I would have never cleaned the bathroom in the first place!

Let me give you another example so that you can better see the pattern.  My friend recently gave a co-worker some money, because she noticed that her co-worker was experiencing some difficulties.  This is what she said when her the co-worker thanked her:

I’m pretty selfish by nature, so to be honest with you, I wanted to keep that money for myself.  Please thank God, because if it was simply up to me, I wouldn’t have given you the money.  Through this gift of money, I feel like the Lord wants to remind you of His love and care for you.

Now that Thanksgiving has passed, let’s examine how we give thanks and, even more importantly, how we receive it. Is the object of your thanksgiving important, or is it more important to you that you are simply giving thanks?  Or, when someone thanks you, do you turn their attention to Jesus, or does it start and end only with you?

Posted in Doing Good | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

The Three Wrong Responses Christians Make To Persecution And The One Right Response

Posted on November 24, 2014 by Pastor Foley

Logo 071414How should churches respond when governments oppose and outlaw them and their message?

Many Pentecostal Christians in Eastern Europe responded to religiously repressive Marxist governments in three erroneous ways, while others found and embraced one productive and biblical path.

That is the contention of Gordon-Conwell Seminary Distinguished Professor of World Missions and European Studies Peter Kuzmic in his article entitled “Pentecostal Theology and Communist Europe” in Kay & Dyer’s 2001 European Pentecostalism (Global Pentecostal and Charismatic Studies). It’s worth a careful read since clearly the challenges–and the responses–were not limited to Soviet Europe but are instead quite relevant today.

Kuzmic notes that the first unproductive response of Eastern European churches to communist oppression was resignation:

The first defensive reaction of many minority Christian communities who have suddenly found themselves surrounded by a powerful enemy and ruled over by an atheistic system is to withdraw from the society, literally to ‘flee the world’ (340).

Kuzmic explains that this fleeing took two forms among Eastern European Christians: internal emigration (withdrawing from society) and external emigration (fleeing the country). Provocatively, he contends that each was equally problematic and that both arose out of the same sinful root: fear. “Both are caused by fear of engaging the new system which is conceived as evil” (340). Kuzmic shares that while external emigration might appear the more problematic course of action (in that some areas were left without a Christian witness), through internal emigration (staying put but withdrawing from society), the church was “by and large also lost for social impact and effective evangelism.” Adds Kuzmic, by opting for internal emigration the church

very often developed a sectarian ghetto mentality with a passive if not reactionary legalism and insulation that made them incapable of a Gospel-prescribed ‘salt and light’ influence on their society. They often developed their own pietistic subcultures with their own patterns of behavior, language, dress code, and even hymnology and modes of prayer.” (342)

Kuzmic continues with a second problematic response to government opposition: resistance. That is,

to react by fighting, taking a posture of active opposition to the government and its policies… The simple reasoning behind this crusader mentality was that the new system is ungodly and evil, inspired by the devil and should neither be obeyed nor tolerated, but rather actively opposed in the name of Christ (p. 343).

This, contends Kuzmic, was the response most likely to result in repression, “countless Christian martyrs” and “devastation of church property and institutions.” By assuming the role of the resistance, Christians became “ideological enemies in the service of the ‘imperialist nations’ and thus unpatriotic political traitors” (344). He adds, “[W]herever Christians were trapped into the assumption that their major task was to fight communism they handicapped themselves by becoming incapable of practicing forgiveness and being living (or dying) witnesses to their communist enemies” (344). Concludes Kuzmic, “It is always a betrayal of the Gospel when Christian faith is reduced, in reality or by perception, to a politico-ideological force” (344).

The third error Eastern European Christians committed in response to communist oppression, according to Kuzmic, was accommodation,

the temptation to conform or compromise, to tailor the message to the new situation and to accommodate to the prevailing ideology (344).

Think three-self church in China. And just as with the three-self church and the unregistered church in China, accommodation “often caused splits between those denominations that registered with the government and agreed to observe the letter of the law and those who rejected any compromises with the authorities and refused the observance of legal restrictions thus choosing to operate in a [sic] clandestine ways as ‘underground churches'” (344). For Christians willing to abide by the government’s restrictions, governments typically responded with “the three-designates policy: designated place, personnel, and areas” (346). This, says Kuzmic, always led to a compromise of the church’s role and message.

So if resignation, resistance, and accommodation represented the wrong theological moves of Eastern European Christians in response to communism, what was the correct response discovered by some churches? Kuzmic says it was the theology of the cross:

The words of Jesus–‘If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow me’ (Mark 8:34)–had a deep experiential meaning for them. Their contextual reading of Scriptures convinced them that suffering was an essential mark of true discipleship (349).

Living according to a theology of the cross entailed total commitment to all the demands of Jesus, including the whole spectrum of ethical (personal and social) requirements that are inherent in the biblical kerygma.” (352). In short, it meant living the Christian life in response to the call of Christ, not in reaction to the government. This included accepting the consequences the government meted out, as a way of conveying that Christians are citizens of a different kingdom. This necessarily entailed suffering. The willingness to suffer without retaliation while continuing to love their enemies became the most attractive characteristic of authentic Christians under communism.

Kuzmic’s thoughts should challenge us to assess our own response to Christians experiencing persecution today. Perhaps because we are ambivalent toward suffering and persecution in our own lives, we may uncritically support Christians who respond to persecution according to one of the three theologically erroneous approaches rather than challenging and encouraging them to repent of such approaches and embrace the way of the cross. After all, who are we comfortable, affluent Western Christians to call persecuted believers (or anyone) to repentance? And if we encourage persecuted believers to take up their crosses, we risk needing to repent and to embrace the way of the cross ourselves.

The failure to hold persecuted believers accountable is costlier still, however. If we continue to export to persecuted Christians our own ambivalence toward suffering–that is, if we fund projects that encourage resignation, resistance, or accommodation in the face of persecution–we will further foster expressions of the Christian faith that are biblically insufficient and that compromise the witness of Christ exactly where and when it is needed most.

So as you consider your financial and prayer support to various projects of aid for persecuted believers, ask yourself: Does this project encourage resignation, resistance, accommodation, or the theology of the cross? And as I make this gift, am I embodying the theology of the cross in my own Christian walk? If not, how can I do so?

Your commitment to take up your own cross daily may be the most significant help and encouragement that you can offer to Christians facing persecution who must make that same choice daily as well.

Posted in persecution | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment