Sports, Sunday Mornings, and the Meaning of ‘Neglect’

From desiringgod.org

Sports, Sunday Mornings, and the Meaning of ‘Neglect’

A recent Lifeway survey found that 40 percent of evangelical pastors believe it’s never okay to miss church for sports. Only 25 percent of churchgoers agreed. Meanwhile, a study in Review of Religious Research found that among churches experiencing declining attendance, the most commonly cited reason was children’s sports on Sundays.

Sport is a wonderful joy. As Jeremy Treat puts it, “Sport is more than a game, less than a god, and when transformed by the gospel, can be received as a gift to be enjoyed forever.” So, what do we do about sports on Sunday mornings?

Each of us has a knee-jerk response to that question. It might be informed by your upbringing, your tradition, your community, or your past or present decisions. But all of life is to be arranged under Christ — including our sports. How can those of us who love sports — whether we’re pastors, parents, or athletes — consider carefully how to make faithful, godly, and wise decisions about sports on Sunday mornings?

We Need the Gathering

Christian athletes will rightly see their sport as an act of whole-life worship (Romans 12:1). But the question of whether we miss corporate worship in order to play can be harder to navigate.

The temptation to miss church is not a new one. Two thousand years ago, people were finding reasons to miss the gathering of God’s local community. Yet Hebrews 10:24–25 speaks with clarity and urgency:

Let us consider how to stir up one another to love and good works, not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near.

One of the most important habits in the Christian life is the regular gathering of God’s people to sing, pray, sit under God’s word, and receive the Lord’s Supper. It is vital for our spiritual health. And God has designed this weekly gathering not only to sustain our faith but also to make us a means of encouragement to others.

Last year I ran a marathon. Though the race was long, the presence of others made all the difference. The cheers from the crowd, the shared pace, the grunts of encouragement from fellow runners — all of it helped me to press on. That’s what the weekly gathering is: an essential encouragement for weary saints, a mutual “Keep going!”

The gathering is also a guardrail. Elsewhere in Hebrews, the author issues a sobering warning: Isolation leaves us vulnerable to sin’s deceit (Hebrews 3:13). The local church is one of God’s primary means of preserving us week by week, keeping us anchored to the gospel as we await the coming Day. It’s like the marshals during the marathon: pointing the way, keeping me on course, reminding me how far I’ve come and how far I’ve yet to go.

The Sabbath law may be fulfilled in Christ, but the command to meet regularly as God’s people under God’s word still stands. This isn’t legalism. It’s a lifeline. Weekly worship is fuel for the journey and joy for the soul.

We Need All of the Body

Most Christian athletes I know agree that the Christian life isn’t meant to be lived alone. So, they find ways to engage with Christian community at other points in the week — through youth groups, perhaps, or a midweek huddle with fellow sportspeople. Christ, though, came so that all his people can be “one in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:28).

When our regular rhythms only include Christians who share our age, background, or calling, we miss out on something essential. The apostle Paul reminds us, “God arranged the members in the body, each one of them, as he chose. . . . As it is, there are many parts, yet one body” (1 Corinthians 12:1820). The church is not a social club of like-minded peers. It’s a spiritual body — diverse, interdependent, and designed by God for our good. As we gather, we encourage one another by being part of a body made up of different parts. Young and old. Rich and poor. Black and white. The fit and the less so.

We lose out on many blessings when we don’t meet week by week with those different from us. First, we do not learn how to love those different from us, as Paul urges us to (Colossians 3:11–14). Second, we miss an opportunity to display the unifying and reconciling power of the gospel to the watching world, as they see believers loving one another across divides of background and life situation. Caring for those we have little in common with shows God’s love most plainly (Matthew 5:43–48). Third, we miss the wisdom and perspective that come from others’ varied experiences. This includes the blessing of being with people who don’t treat you differently because you are an athlete.

“Neglect is measured not only in Sundays missed but in hearts drifting from Christ and his people.”

One former Premier League football player I spoke to reflected on this with joy: “When my family joined a new church for the first time, we met people who didn’t care about me because of football. They cared about my wife, my children, and me. For the first time in ten years, we felt like we belonged somewhere.”

To run the race well, we need the whole body. That requires deliberate rhythms, making time to gather, worship, and grow alongside brothers and sisters of every kind, not just the sporty ones.

Read the rest of the article here

The Bride

This week, my wife and I celebrated our 43rd wedding anniversary. We are past the cards and flowers stage, but we did go out together for lunch the following day. I am looking forward now to the next “milestone”, the 50th.

When we were married, in our 20’s, we could not imagine that length of time. But looking back, we can see some things as if they happened just yesterday- our wedding, the births of our children, places we lived and friends we have made.

Our marriage has been 99% joyful because we share the same goals and we each put the interests of the other above our own desires. The other 1% was when one or other wanted their own way; that’s where forgiveness and unconditional love get to be practised.

The Bible tells us that when a man and a woman marry, they become “one flesh.” Two people bring their individual personalities and talents into a relationship, and over time they become so close and so knowledgeable of one another that they become almost one person.

In an individualistic society like ours that is the ultimate horror story- losing your individuality, your own sense of self-direction to another. It works out to be the opposite, because we gain far more than we give up. Less a horror story than a romantic comedy!

The Bible describes the relationship of God’s people to Christ as being like a marriage. The book of Revelation describes a big party in heaven where the church, made up of all the believers throughout history, is described as a bride being united with Jesus Christ her bridegroom.

That relationship, we are told, will last not just 43 or 50 years but for all eternity.

The good news is that the wedding is open to everyone, not just invited guests. In a funny way, Jesus’ death on the cross was like a proposal. He is asking you to join Him in the wedding of the ages, to spend eternity with Him.

Will you say “Yes”?

Brian Houston Exnerated Over Father’s Paedophilia

From the ABC, some excellent news after all the mud slinging

#222222;font-family: sans-serif">Hillsong founder Brian Houston found not guilty of concealing his father’s sexual abuse of a child


Hillsong founder Brian Houston has been found not guilty of concealing his father’s sexual abuse of a child.

Key points:

  • Brian Houston pleaded not guilty to concealing a serious indictable offence
  • A Magistrate concluded Brian Houston had a “reasonable excuse” for not reporting the matter
  • Magistrate Christophi said it was ‘the opposite of a cover-up’ 

The 69-year-old has previously told a Sydney court he was left “speechless” in 1999 when he first learned of Frank Houston’s abuse of a seven-year-old boy decades earlier.

But Brian Houston insisted he did not go to the police because he was respecting the wishes of the victim, Brett Sengstock, who by that time was aged in his 30s.

He pleaded not guilty to concealing a serious indictable offence.

Magistrate Gareth Christofi on Thursday found Brian Houston not guilty, after concluding he had a “reasonable excuse” for not reporting the matter.

In his judgement, Magistrate Christofi found Mr Houston knew or reasonably believed that Mr Sengstock did not want the matter reported to police.

a man wearing glasses with his hand up
Frank Houston was stripped of his credentials as a pastor for the Assemblies of God and died in 2004.(ABC News)

The court heard Mr Sengstock gave evidence that his abuse at the hands of Frank Houston was a “hideous secret”, and one he did not wish for others to know.

At a hearing last year, he gave evidence of feeling “betrayed” by his mother when she raised the allegations with a member of their local church in Sydney’s west.

Magistrate Christofi found it would have been consistent with all the evidence that Mr Sengstock would have expressed that sentiment to Brian Houston during a phone call about the abuse in 1999.

“There is little doubt in my view that the accused knew or believed on reasonable grounds that Brett Sengstock did not want the matter reported to police,” the magistrate said.

A man wearing a
The Magistrate found the Hillsong founder spoke openly about his father’s crimes.(AAP: Bianca De Marchi)

He also found that a $10,000 payment arranged by Frank Houston to Mr Sengstock could not be proven to be “hush money”, or that Brian Houston had intended it to be so.

The court heard Mr Sengstock, then in his 30s, met with Frank Houston and another member of the Hills Christian Life Centre — the precursor to Hillsong — at Thornleigh McDonalds in 1999.

He signed a napkin and told the court Frank Houston said: “You’ll get your money we can keep this between ourselves.”

Mr Sengstock told the court he believed the money was to “buy his silence”, and that he did not see the money until he chased up the deal with Brian Houston.

Magistrate Christofi found, however, that the terms of the agreement were “entirely unclear” and there was insufficient evidence that it was intended to stop Mr Sengstock from going to the police.

The Crown’s case was also contradicted by Mr Sengstock’s own evidence that he had not considered going to authorities, he found.

“[Mr Sengstock] did not need to be silenced.”

‘The very opposite of a cover-up’

Magistrate Christophi rejected the Crown’s case that Brian Houston facilitated a “cover up” to protect the church’s reputation, saying the Hillsong founder spoke openly about his father’s crimes.

During the special fixture hearing last year, Brian Houston described his father as a “serial paedophile”.

He said that in 1999 and 2000, more victims had come forward from his father’s time in New Zealand and steps were taken to remove Frank Houston from the ministry.

The court heard Brian Houston told “many people at various levels” of the church about Frank Houston’s predatory behaviour and referenced it in sermons delivered to churchgoers.

Brian Houston also discussed it during an interview with a reporter for the Sydney Morning Herald in 2002, Magistrate Christofi noted.

“That is the very opposite of a cover up,” the magistrate found.

“He spoke widely and freely about the matter in public settings.”

A man in a black suit and white top standing besides a woman in a denim jacket on stage with bright lights
Brian and Bobbie Houston established Hillsong in 1983 in Sydney’s north-west. (Facebook: Hillsong )

Speaking outside court, Mr Sengstock said regardless of today’s outcome he had been handed a “life sentence” having endured a 45-year battle.

“Today I’ve received some recognition for a seven-year-old child who was brutally abused at the hands of a self-confessed child rapist and coward, Frank Houston,” he said.

“Frank Houston was no pioneer for Christianity, his legacy remains a faded memory of a paedophile.”

He thanked prosecutors, police and his family for their support, and all those who worked to give survivors of clergy child sexual abuse “a voice in this country”.

“Blaming the victim is as repulsive as the assaults themselves,” Mr Sengstock said.

“It should not be this hard.”

During last year’s hearing, he gave evidence that in one of their 1999 phone calls an “angry” Brian Houston claimed his father had been “tempted” by a young Mr Sengstock.

Mr Houston denied this while being cross-examined, saying it was “absurd” to suggest he would blame someone who was abused as a child.

“It’s nonsense. I mean, who would say that about a seven-year-old boy, or a 10-year-old boy … it’s just an absurd notion.”

Book Review: Boards That Make A Difference by John Carver- Third Edition Published 2006 by Jossey-Bass

When I left my denomination to plant an independent church, I was determined to have the minimum of committees and unnecessary unproductive meetings. My previous denomination had a beautiful structure of councils and committees at various levels of authority. Between the meetings of these groups and the communication of the decisions of these groups, there was a lot of work being done that contributes little to the core business of the church which is to make disciples and preach the Good News.

John Carver is an expert in the leadership of non-profit organisations and other community groups. He argues for a model of governance in which the Board (the generic term he uses for the leadership group of an organisation) sets the minimum boundaries for itself which will ensure that the interests of the “owners” are preserved while pursuing their vision. Everything else is delegated to the management via a CEO or equivalent.

Carver argues that most CEO’s will feel empowered by a Board that sets them free to be creative in the way that they pursue the mission of the organisation without having a Board breathing down their neck and second guessing their decisions.

In Carver’s model, which he calls Policy Governance, boards should concern themselves with 4 areas in the life of the organisation:

  1. Ends Policies- that is what the organisation is here for . What is the vision of the organisation? What difference will we make in the world? In broad terms, how do we get there?
  2. Executive Limitations Policies- what is not OK in pursuing our vision? Can the CEO break the law in order to make things happen? Can we run a sweat shop as a fund raiser?
  3. Board- Management Policies- how do the board relate to management and vice versa?
  4. Governance Process Policies- these are decisions about how the board goes about doing its own job.

These policies are written down and can be set out in a page or so of narrative.

In this approach, the Board goes about setting the “big picture” parameters of the organisation instead of getting bogged down in finances, HR policies, and all of the other things that get boards and committees bogged down. Everything else is passed down to management to control.

What I like about this book is that it pursues a minimalist vision for governance that can be adapted to a wide range of different groups. It is almost a universal model for governance. For churches, this fits in with the apostolic model that emphasises the gifting of pastors and other leaders, while allowing for oversight and correction where things go off track.

“Boards That Make A Difference” is well argued and is readable. The topic might seem dry and uninteresting, but to everyone who is involved in leading organisations, it will be inspiring.

Carver has also written a book about how to implement this Policy Governance model, “Reinventing Your Board.” I look forward to getting onto that and thinking about the organisations that I am involved with.

Carl Trueman: Why Pro-Abortion Activists Desecrate Churches

From First Things

Since the news broke that the Supreme Court may be poised to overturn Roe v. Wade, some pro-abortion activists have responded by vandalizing Catholic churches and disturbing Masses. While the threats to disrupt worship en masse and even burn the sacramental elements seem to be overblown so far, the backlash against religion is surely a sign of the times. Most obviously, the sartorial choices of some of the activists (dresses inspired by a sermonizing Margaret Atwood novel) speak to the infantilism of our age. Clearly, there is no issue so profound—not even the mystery of the creation of new life—that cannot be reduced to sophomoric silliness. But if the idiom has been that of puerile performance, the focus on churches indicates that desecration is becoming a default strategy for the political class in the modern West. And that bodes ill for some of our most basic freedoms.

In striking at the Catholic Church at worship, the protesters have identified an obvious player in the history of anti-abortion activism. The Catholic Church, and many Catholics, from high-profile figures such as Robert George to countless unknown laypeople who help at crisis pregnancy centers or engage in fundraising work, have been the beating heart of the pro-life movement for decades. And the Catholic judges on the Supreme Court are the key ingredient in the impending decision. But there is surely more to the targeting of churches than the mere fact of Catholic involvement in current events. The protesters target churches because they want to profane the sacred.

Abortion is desecration. That is why it raises such passionate emotions on both sides of the debate. Sex and conception create new life and that means they possess—or should possess—a mysterious aura of the sacred. Attitudes about them therefore go to the heart of what, if anything, society thinks it means to be human. But the case for abortion teaches that new life is simply a biological process that adds a new part to a woman’s body, and that this can be removed when convenient. Terminating a pregnancy is therefore of no more significance than clipping a damaged fingernail or cauterizing an unsightly wart. 

Our society intuitively knows that this is nonsense. That is why the law considers an assault leading to the loss of a fingernail or a wart to be far less heinous than one that ends in rape or miscarriage. In such extreme circumstances, the law acknowledges by escalated penalties that sex and procreation cannot be reduced to merely one more biological function or recreation. These things involve the mystery of life itself and place us on the threshold of the sacred. But a culture of abortion desecrates this mystery, at least as far as such desecration serves the purposes of perceived human autonomy and control.

That is one reason why pro-abortion activists have targeted church services. The church service is not simply a convenient place to intimidate pro-life campaigners. To attack a worship service is not simply to annoy the participants. It is to profane the sacred. It is to enact that which abortion itself represents. It is to spit on the very identity of those worshipping and thus upon the God whom they worship. It is to strike at the very heart of what Christians believe it means to be human, a dependent creature in the presence of a holy God. It is to strip away the aura that shrouds the mystery of life. It is to attempt to make ridiculous that which reminds us we are creatures defined first and foremost by obligations to others—to God and to those dependent upon us, such as the unborn child in the womb. It is an act of intentional amnesia. More than that, it is an act of descration.

Read the rest of the article here

Akos Balogh: 5 Subconscious Lies of Our Therapeutic Age that Can Deceive Christians

From The Daily Declaration:

5 Subconscious Lies of Our Therapeutic Age that Can Deceive Christians

feelings

 

As we shed our traditional Judaeo-Christian values, our worldview has radically changed, including our expectations of life, of others, and what we base our identity upon. Feelings trump reason and suffering is unacceptable.

Over 200 years ago, a revolution was launched across the West.

Or rather, revolutions. Western societies began to move away from Christianity. They moved slowly at first — like a crawling baby. But as that baby grew, it became less and less Christian, shaking off its religious beliefs.

Fast forward to 2022, and this child (to continue the metaphor) has a radically different view of reality and humanity than 200 years ago.

We’re now a society where our feelings are critical to our existence. Or, in the words of sociologist Philip Rieff, we live in the ‘therapeutic age’: we’re driven and defined by our feelings in ways utterly foreign to our ancestors. And this has spawned all sorts of beliefs that shape us and our view of the world.

What’s more, these beliefs are mostly subconscious:

We don’t consciously choose to accept them. Instead, we ‘catch’ them as we swim in the sea of Western culture. Whether through the media we consume (e.g. Disney, Hollywood), our workplaces, social media, or friends.

And because these beliefs are unbiblical, they can wreak havoc on people’s lives. 

Here are 5 of those beliefs:

 

1) Our Feelings Determine Who We Are

This belief is the bedrock of our therapeutic feeling-based age.

You see it everywhere, from Disney (‘just follow your heart’) to the transgender movement (your internal feelings about gender trump your physical biology). Genuine ‘authenticity’ now means living out your inner feelings, no matter what they are (and woe to anyone who tells you otherwise). [1]

But when anyone — including Christians — adopts this belief, it shapes us in strange and ungodly ways:

We can let our feelings trump our given identity in Christ. We can let our emotions drive our moral decision-making. And we can judge our Church not on its faithful teaching and living, but on how it serves our felt needs.

 

2) True Freedom Means Defining Your Own Existence

If our feelings determine our identity, then true freedom means society giving us space to express that identity.

This view of freedom is a bedrock belief that sustains the abortion rights movement across the West. As the US Supreme Court wrote in a ruling about abortion rights:

‘At the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, of the mystery of human life. Beliefs about these matters could not define the attributes of personhood were they formed under the compulsion of the State.’ [2]

With freedom thus redefined, oppression is also redefined: oppression now includes anything — any belief, any law — that prevents people from expressing their own view of existence (the Biblical sexual ethic, anyone?). And so, Christians have moved from being the ‘moral guys’ to being the ‘bad guys’.

While Christians feel this pressure externally, from society, it’s also a belief that shapes us internally:

We’re less willing to submit ourselves to others, like church leaders and religious institutions. We’re less likely to see submission as good. We don’t want others telling us what to do.

And if we’re in positions of leadership, we’re less likely to want to enforce rules like church discipline, as it feels a little unfair.

 

3) Always Trust Your Feelings

Because feelings are essential to who we are, they now hold authority like never before.

If something or someone makes you uncomfortable, then the problem is always the other person and never your feelings. Your interpretation of reality (which leads to those feelings) is always right because we are our feelings.

We see this in the rise of cancel culture, where any person or belief that causes people to feel offended is attacked and shut down. There’s little engagement or understanding with what the other person might mean or why they might hold to that view — let alone whether that view is true or not.

 

4) We’re Meant to Have Good Feelings, So Avoid Anything That Makes You Feel Bad

The aim of life in a therapeutic age has moved from having good character to having good feelings.

Feeling good becomes a moral duty: the big question we ask ourselves is no longer ‘what’s the right thing to do?’, but rather ‘how will it make me feel?’. And so, as a culture, we avoid anything that makes us feel bad:

We avoid the difficult person at Church because they don’t make us feel good.

We avoid having those hard but important conversations because they make us feel uncomfortable.

And we avoid conflict like it’s an out-of-fashion pair of jeans.

We use people and things to help us feel good: life becomes increasingly self-centred.

Of course, this has all sorts of problems because constantly feeling good is an unrealistic goal. We’ll regularly feel frustrated. Yes, we might feel good for a while — when we get that new phone, friend, or partner. But it never lasts.

More perniciously, life lived for self-centred feelings and avoidance of difficulty can leave a trail of damaged relationships.

(Ask almost any celebrity.)

 

5) Suffering Serves No Good Purpose

If life is all about feeling good, then suffering is all bad: it serves no purpose.

Suffering gets in the way of my feeling good. And I’ll do anything to avoid it. There’s no ‘higher purpose’ to my suffering.

But we can’t avoid suffering in a fallen world.

It’s part of our human condition (no matter how much we try to avoid it). Adopting a therapeutic view of suffering leads to anger and even despair when suffering hits us. We’ll feel discombobulated and fearful, worrying about the next bout of suffering that might come our way.

 

These 5 beliefs, these lies, are deeply embedded in Western Culture. But in an upcoming post, we’ll explore how we can respond to each of them in a way that frees us from their grip.

 

___

 

[1] It’s worth mentioning there are still culturally accepted limits to what desires people can live out: e.g. pedophilia is still unacceptable.

 

[2] Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833, 851 (1992). Quoted in Carl Trueman, The Rise and Triumph of the Modern Self – Cultural Amnesia, Expressive Individualism, and the Road to Sexual Revolution (Wheaton, Illinois: Crossway, 2020), 303.