Back to Pastor


Reading William Willamon, in the devotional book, "Bread and Wine", I was struck by his claim near the end: "The only way we shall break the status quo's hold on us is to be transferred to another dominion, to be cut loose from our old certainties, to be thrust under the flood and then pulled froth fresh and new born." I understand this in the light of our book group reading "The Lost Letters of Pergamum" and our conversations on the very real social tensions between the new Christian community and the Roman society. Somehow, baptism signifies a pathway between two kingdoms, or to use Willamon's word, between "dominions." Baptism, which is a kind of death to self, signifies our movement from "the world" into the "Kingdom of God." It turns out, that sin and repentance may have more to do with "allegiance" than we have previously thought. That I have not always thought of sin and repentance in this light may be in part because our "worldly kingdom" often uses and builds on Christian language, values and imagery. For example, our coinage states: "In God we Trust." Is this god the Triune God that was revealed in Jesus, or some of perhaps another God, that is more politically expedient? In a culture that prizes self-help resources so highly (they are shelved with spiritual resources at the bookstore!), Christ's call in our baptisms, to embrace a dying to self, cannot be easily reconciled with salvation as "reaching my full potential as an individual." Willimon's comments act as a charge for me and the church to live into its new born identity as a deeply counter-cultural community (one that values God's Glory and Neighbor's good above self interest), even though we inhabit a culture indebted to the Jeudeo-Christian? heritage and consider ours a so-called "Christian Nation." In my baptism, what is drowned to death, are my "old certainties" those guiding principles and values of the old
dominion that are incompatible with the new life offered in the Kingdom.

---

I believe you and I have significant agreements with respect to the
nature of God's mercy as central to the good news of God in Christ.

To my mind, the penal substitutionary model places too much of the
weight of the atonement on the overcoming the individuals "wages of
sin" (death). This seems to me, a truncated view, which does not do
justice to the fullness of the Biblical text. It leaves out the healing
of nations, the restoration of creation, and final consummation of all
things. Indeed, often those who are most adamant about the necessity of
penal substitution as the one and right way to believe, also ascribe to
a theory of the end times in which the believers are raptured out of
this sin-tainted world which is then cataclysmically destroyed. You
don't have to fix things, just save souls, since the world will burn
anyway.

As such, some conservative evangelicals have over the last century
failed to see the ways in which God's reconciliation of sinners should
also motivate a robust multi-dimensional Christian ethic. For example,
typical evangelical thought has not, until recently, taken seriously the
transformation of social systems of oppression. Consider the example of
racism. The response to racism corresponded with the individual
appropriation of penal substitution. So the typical evangelical
addressed racism with an individual response: find a black friend.
While such a step is useful and commendable, a friendship cannot address
the deep cultural and systemic character of something like racism, as it
it embodied in cultural symbols, economic policies, legal systems, and
the like.

If our thinking about the gospel is bigger than an individual getting a
"get out of eternal hell free card," then our understanding of Christian
ethics and mission also expand. Namely, in Jesus Christ, the battle has
already been won against evil and sin itself (not just oer its effects
on the soul). This means that the end is already present, though not yet
fully manifested in this world, in the Spirit-filed life of the church.
True, we await the final consummation of the Kingdom of God, we are
perpetually an advent people, but while we wait, we pray and act in
faith doing what we can to partner with God to fulfill God's purposes
"on earth as it is in heaven."

To my mind, the story of Adam and Eve and thier sin is useful to our
understanding of God's grace and love--even from the beginning. While no
longer living a paradisaical life, Adam and Eve are still cared for by
God. He does not kill them or even curse them. Rather, he makes them
clothing of animal garments (the first sacrifice for sin?), and gives
Adam a similar charge as he did earlier to till the earth (is this the
working for the redemption of earth?). The story sets out clearly that
God is Good, that God is unchallenged by the evil that plagues humanity
and the created order. Also we can now hope for humanity because while a
flaming sword guards the way to pie in the sky (thank goodness that the
gospel takes the human condition seriously), there are still real ways
(though painful and toilsome) for goodness and purpose to become
manifest in the world God has made.

---

Informed by the Holy Scriptures and by the historic teaching of the
church, I hold to a traditional, orthodox teaching about the person of
Jesus Christ. I believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, who is the only Son
of God. As Son of God, he is the second member of the Holy Trinity, the
preexistent Word through whom all things were made. Yet, he emptied
himself and took on human nature, God incarnate on earth. I believe that
Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit and born of the Virgin Mary. He
was fully human and fully divine. Jesus lived a human life full of grace
and truth. I believe that for us and our salvation, he came to live
among us and he suffered and was crucified by Pontius Pilate. He died. I
believe that God raised him from the dead on the third day, thereby
vindicating Jesus' claims about himself and his Good News concerning the
Kingdom of God. I believe that through his passion and resurrection,
Jesus won victory over sin, death and the devil, reconciling sinners and
the world with their Creator. I believe that he appeared to his
disciples after his resurrection and ascended into heaven, where he is
seated at the right hand of God Almighty. I believe that he will come
once again and in glory, to judge the living and the dead. His kingdom
will have no end.

Far from “just” creedal statements, what we understand about the person
and work of Jesus informs our practical practice of ministry. This is
why the formative years of Covenant theology were marked by controversy
over the atonement. To “talk atonement” in the Evangelical Covenant
Church, one must talk about Waldenstrom's contribution. However, it
helps to have some theological context. Covenant theologian Don Frisk
helpfully distinguishes between the many biblical images and major
theological theories. He points out five types of biblical images
(sacrifice, the marketplace, the law court, battle, and personal
relationship) that, while not being fully developed theologies, provide
different perspectives and insights into the scope and nature of God's
saving work. He continues by presenting a classic three-fold heuristic
for understanding the theologies of atonement. The classical view sees
the atonement primarily as the victory of God over the forces of evil,
classically understood as sin, death, and the devil. The Latin or
objective view understands the atonement as a substitutionary
satisfaction of the guilt of sinners which satisfies the wrath of God
through Jesus' death. The subjective view considers the atonement as the
ultimate demonstration of God's love whereby the sinner is drawn away
from sin and into God's love. Each of these theories have adherents in
the church today.

In his day, Peter Paul Waldenstrom caused a stir among the early
Covenanters by preaching a novel interpretation of the atonement. At the
time, the standard understanding of the atonement was the objective
theory. God was viewed as an angry but divine judge whose wrath had been
kindled by human sin and needed satisfaction through the cross of
Christ. In his blameless death, Christ took the punishment for all
humanity. Waldenstrom questioned the status quo with that most Covenant
of questions, “Where is it written?” and investigated the work of Christ
on the cross. The fruit of his efforts caused controversy and challenged
this dominant view. Waldenstrom argued that scripture does not teach a
change in the heart or character of God. Rather, the atonement, in Jesus
Christ, produced an effect not on God but on human sin. What is rendered
righteous, then, is not an angry God, but an unclean people.

My own thinking is largely influenced by Waldenstrom's theory.
Waldenstrom's theory of atonement has the advantage of avoiding
introducing a conflict within the Trinity, between the Father and Son.
Further, reconciling the apparent tension between God's wrath and God's
mercy, this view casts the atonement in a joyful light. Waldenstrom's
theory, respects the various biblical images and texts, and synthesizing
useful aspects of the earlier three models. For Waldenstrom, that sinful
humanity is made righteous in Jesus' death—is the overflowing of God's
love. Sinful humanity is made clean through God's victory over sin,
death, and the devil. The emphasis of the victory is not on God's
judgment or human guilt, nor is it on the great price that was to be
paid; but lies on God's great divine mercy. It is in harmony with God's
holiness that sin has been conquered and creation reconciled to its
creator. This cosmic change is motivated not by God's wrath, but by
overflowing love. Thus, the good news—that God has raised his servant
Jesus from the dead—comes to sinful humanity not as a fearful word of
judgment and dread, but rather as a gracious outpouring of welcoming
love for his creation. Such a view of the atonement then becomes a
motivating force for missional ecclesiology, evangelism, mercy and
compassion.



Click here for information on our Fonts and Logo's


I had a telephone conversation with Grant Buchholtz, a recent seminary graduate and commissioned covenant missionary. He and his wife Miho are studying abroad, and then headed for season of ministry in Japan with an established Covenant Church. They have a dream of someday planting a church in Japan and equipping others to do so, also.

They are currently looking for churches and individuals to partner with them on their road to Japan.
Check out their website for more information and to find out how you can help them out.



Back to Pastor