Sproul on Reconciliation

I recently picked up a copy of R.C. Sproul’s book The Hunger for Significance: Seeing the image of God in Man. I bought it in preparation for attending Ligonier Ministry’s national conference. Unfortunately, as with most conferences and events in March, it was cancelled and the lectures were moved online. I was thankful to still listen to the speakers, even if not all of the scheduled topics happened.

But this book by Sproul, which I didn’t even know about until right before the conference, is a pleasant surprise. I’m partway through chapter 2 and am stuck by how Sproul talks about the word reconciliation. On page 63 he writes:

Reconciliation means bringing people together in peace – people who were once estranged from each other. Estrangement is the one indispensable ingredient for reconciliation, for without it no reconciliation is needed. Estrangement is the shattering blow that makes reconciliation necessary if peace is to be achieved and love restored.
R.C. Sproul

I don’t think I’ve thought of it that way, that estrangement is the thing reconciliation addresses in relationships. Sproul goes on to say that Christ’s mission as “made necessary by human estrangement” (p.64). Humanity’s alienation exists on three levels, he writes:

In the first instance, man is alienated from God. I note second instance, man is alienated from his fellow man. In the third instance, man is alienated from himself.
R.C. Sproul

I’ve read a number of existential psychologists and psychotherapists who say basically the same thing. Even many attachment theorists and therapists would see something similar about the human condition and the seriousness of estrangement’s impact in relationships. I think there’s a lot of common ground between Reformed theologians and some schools of psychology when it comes to exploring alienation, reconciliation, the imago dei and human nature.

Common Grace & Imaging God

I’m just finishing up reading Michael Horton’s book “Where in the World is the Church?” and I’m one chapter into Berkouwer’s book Man: The Image of God. I love how Berkouwer quotes so many respected theologians as he makes his argument for how to understand the meaning and implications of the Imago Dei. I can’t say yet if I think Berkouwer agrees with Horton, but I can say that Horton connects two concepts (common grace and imaging God) when he discusses how Christians should view their vocation and work.

Here’s how Horton connects these two concepts at the end of the book on p. 199:

“But as God gave wisdom to Daniel to understand secular literature and philosophy, so He graciously gives His common grace to all men and women bearing His image. It is not saving knowledge or saving wisdom, but it is a gift of the Holy Spirit nonetheless. Apart from this work of the Spirit in creation and providence, the world would be ugly, tyrannical, unjust, and unhappy – with absolutely no insight, education, laughter, pleasure, delight, or singing.
By seeking the interests of our clients or constituents and not using our job or office as a bully-pulpit for our faith, we will win the respect of outsiders – and this, according to the apostle Paul, is a noble goal. By pursuing excellence in art and music, if that is our calling, and not using our crafts merely as a means of preaching, teaching, evangelizing, o rebuking, we bring a smile to the face of the God who created beauty and pleasure as acceptable in its own right.”
Michael Horton

I think that’s a great encouragement for laypersons like myself who need to be reminded from time to time that God is pleased by our work in this common grace era.

Perspective

In the book “Where in the World is the Church?,” Michael Horton writes:

“God adds to the comfort of saving grace the blessing of common grace. As we have already seen, common grace is God’s temporal restraint of both human wickedness and His own wrath that must eventually set things straight. In this present evil age, ‘He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous,’ and requires us to have the same mind. (Matthew 5:45).
This means that if God, being righteous, can endure the evil of our own hearts as His children, much less the rebellion of unbelievers, then surely we, being unrighteous, must bear the unbelief and wickedness of our neighbors and co-workers. This does not mean that we never raise our voices against unbelief and vice, but it does mean that God’s common grace is sufficient for building a common civilization and working together side by side wit those who do not share our beliefs, convictions, attitudes, or worldview.”
Michael Horton, (P. 147)

I found this portion of his book so encouraging. I certainly hope that I remain open to all the good common grace ideas that people come up with in my profession. I have no problem throwing out bad ideas; I think sometimes it’s harder to remain open to good and workable ideas.

Common Grace Order

I just finished reading Lee Irons article outlining Meredith G. Kline’s biblical argument about Scripture’s cultural mandate in our post-fall era. It is amazing and so encouraging to me. I think what I’m most excited about as I write this post is that Kline and Irons lay out very clear reasons why it is a wonderful thing for me (or most anyone in most any job) to invest in my work. They do so in a way that theologically legitimizes what we do and also protects us from unrealistic expectations about the spiritual impact of any cultural work we may do. I think anyone can do with encouragement in that area.

If you’re not familiar with the Reformed Theology discussion about common grace vs special grace, two kingdoms vs one kingdom views I highly recommend you check out Irons article. It lays out clear biblical reasoning and is eminently practical in its application. Here’s a link: Meredith Kline’s View of the Cultural Mandate.

Ordinary is Good

I finished Michael Horton‘s book Ordinary today, so I wanted to share a short reflection on the final chapter in the book. The chapter begins with the statement that “everyone is driven in the present by an expectation of the future.” Horton then presents the view of life from the non-Christian perspective, “According to the spirit of our age, we came from nowhere and are going nowhere, but in between we can make something of ourselves.”

Horton’s perspective resonated with me. I see this sort of fatalistic, meaningless sense of life in many clients and most in my experience are quite anxious when they acknowledge the spirit of our age. Rollo May writes quite a lot about this sort of existential anxiety, so that’s where my mind when as I read Horton’s description of how people deal with going “nowhere” after death.

I interact with people every day in my work who are focused almost exclusively on the now. In fact, one could argue that much of my work as a therapist is very much about improving the present. I would say that what I’m doing with most clients is helping them to focus on improving the present in service of reconciling with their past and also better preparing them for the future. I know for certain that the changes my clients make, especially the couples, echo into future generations and impact anyone they are or become close with. At the same time, I’m not usually addressing spiritual concerns as directly as pastoral counselors or pastors, even with my clients who are followers of Christ. I often say, “people don’t show up in my office until things are very, very bad.” Usually I’m referring to their relationships with important others, so when I read Horton’s description of the common attitude toward life as in between life and death, “make something of ourselves,” I think of making meaningful healthy relationships. I know that many people aren’t thinking of relationships when they think of making something out of their life, but most of us who use attachment theory in therapy would argue that secure relationships are the highest priority for all humans and that is by design.

Horton contrasts the spirit of our age with two common types of gospel perversions “prosperity gospels” among Christians, neither of which is all that satisfying to its adherents. I find his description of these two options, even among believers, just as meaningful. He writes on page 205:

“There are two kinds of prosperity gospels. One promises personal health, wealth and happiness. Another promises social transformation. In both versions, the results are up to us. We bring God’s kingdom to earth, either to ourselves or to society, by following certain spiritual laws or moral and political agendas. Both forget that salvation comes from above, as a gift of God. Both forget that because we are baptized into Christ, the pattern of our lives is suffering leading to glory in that cataclysmic revolution that Christ will bring when he returns. Both miss the point that our lives and the world as they are now and are not as good as it gets. We do not have our best life or world now.”
Michael Horton – Ordinary

I find this quite comforting. But I also find the pilgrim perspective on life comforting. So maybe I’m prone to preferring Horton’s critique of “health and wealth narcissism” and his critique of “next big thing transformationalism.” Part of why I became a therapist is because I found working for positive change in the lives of a smaller number individuals much more fulfilling than working for change on a grander scale. I wanted to go deeper with people and I knew that meant less time for grand endeavors, especially if I wanted to preserve my marriage and have any meaningful role in raising my kids. At the same time, I don’t have a problem with others serving the common good in more systemic ways; in fact, I’m relieved that others have are good at that and find fulfillment in such work. At the same time, I also recognize I am somewhat biased against big things. I think this bias has only increased the longer I work primarily as a therapist. I’m moved by the struggle of families and individuals who have experienced their world and relationships fall apart and are suffering as a result.

I think that’s where attachment theory and Horton’s recommendations for Christians come together. Horton is making the case that some models of church unintentionally minimize or dismiss very effective means of connecting believers with God and with God’s people. If you’re a Christian and communion and baptism don’t mean that much to you, then I think you need to learn about those two means of grace so that they do mean much, much more to you. Those two sacraments along with the ministry of the Word (preaching) and meeting together with the community of faith are what Horton argues in his book are essential for Christian growth and fulfillment.

That is why I would say that reading Michael Horton’s book Ordinary has certainly helped me to more greatly respect the power and appreciate the depth of the ordinary means of grace that Christ has given his church. It has also reinforced my appreciation of attachment theory as so valuable in my vocation. There is so much encouragement and renewal in the ordinary activities of the church and the secure bond with God and his people that can be experienced there. I only wish it hadn’t taken me so long to realize that myself.

Parenting Books

I hate reading parenting books, almost as much as I hate reading books for couples that aren’t founded in attachment theory. It is some combination of the anecdotes, the oversupply of tips and the minimal research validity that bothers me. Sometimes I find that a book is 300 pages and could be easily summed up in two. Among Christian parenting books, I find this irritation is almost guaranteed every time.

That is why I am shocked, happy and, maybe more than anything, received to report that I am 5 chapters into Joel R. Beeke‘s book Parenting By God’s Promises. I love it! I’m not sure if it’s a book for every parent, in part because it’s Reformed, Covenantal, and Presbyterian. But I’m finding that I can already trust it to lean on when my own distress as a parent is triggered. That’s exactly how I’ve come to believe EFT is the best model for couples therapy, because therapists can trust it when everything seems to be going wrong in their sessions.

Instead of trying to summarize the book, I would suggest that anyone interested in it should just go to Joel’s Amazon.com page and view the “author update” video. He explains himself everything you need to know about the book. I’m sure I’ll be writing some posts about what I’m learning and re-learning from this book.