The operation of transformation

Transformation- A Wesleyan perspective

How are we changed, in the process of our life as believers?

A Wesleyan hermeneutic gives priority to the Scriptures as the ground zero of all our beliefs, but also assumes that all truth is existentially perceived and appropriated. That is to say, the Bible is always interpreted through experience, tradition and reason. This is not a subjectivizing of the biblical revelation, but a frank acknowledgement that all truth is mediated in a larger context, rather than merely through a logical and rationalistic framework.

The process is the intersecting points of these trajectories. Scripture, experience, tradition, reason. God speaks, we experience his presence in his word. We understand and receive through our shared history and culture and we think it through.

Not necessarily in that order. I think and reflect within my culture and background, and I experience God and later find my reflection and experience confirmed in Scripture.

To state the obvious: there’s a personal and relational dimension of how we do life, and theology and church. Certainly our personal and corporate histories shape our understanding of Scripture. Sometimes for good, and sometimes not so good. Laurence Wood wrote that “the crucible of life is the laboratory for testing our interpretation of Scripture.” The key phrase is “our interpretation.” We are not testing the Scripture, but our interpretation. Our theology should work: making sense of life, our experience and shaping our life in positive ways. The gospel produces good things in our lives, though often through the worst kind of experiences.

So all this suggests the kind of process that Wesley described as “growth in holiness.” I prefer the idea of ‘the operation of transformation.’ Those whom he termed as ‘entirely sanctified’ – which roughly translates in this context as ‘entirely serious and surrendered to Christ’- these “are more aware of their weaknesses and sins and thus are more capable of growth in grace because of the openness of their hearts to their true situation.” More aware! 

Any emphasis on an arrival point is a mistaken emphasis. Even the phraseology of ‘entirely sanctified’ suggests a completion which can never be claimed (except by those who prove their own lack of understanding by the claim they make!). One cannot insist on words like ‘perfection’ or ‘complete’ or ‘total’ or ‘finished.’ Paul said, quite succinctly, “Not that I have already arrived, but I press on.…” Wesley quoted this on multiple occasions when people tried to corner him into a position of arrival and completion.

Corporate transformation

The personal area of growth and transformation must be tempered by the corporate. We are in this together. This is how Paul instructs the church in Galatias:

“Brothers and sisters, if someone is caught in a sin, you who live by the Spirit should restore that person gently. But watch yourselves, or you also may be tempted. ² Carry each other’s burdens, and in this way you will fulfill the law of Christ. ³ If anyone thinks they are something when they are not, they deceive themselves. ⁴ Each one should test their own actions. Then they can take pride in themselves alone, without comparing themselves to someone else, ⁵ for each one should carry their own load.“

Thus the church is called to take responsibility for the individual. We recognise the paradox of ‘carrying each other’s burden’ while also being responsible to ‘carry our own load.’ But it’s not really a paradox. It’s a realistic picture of both/and.

Tomlinson calls church a ‘mishmash’ of all kinds of people. Reflect on that quote above. Many find it almost offensive, but I can only say that it reflects my own experience of church. At that meal celebrating the restoration of Lazarus (in John 12), we find a table spread for Mary (the worshipper), Martha (the worker), Lazarus (the one ‘reclining’ – just resting), and Judas (the doubter who would become the betrayer). All of us, doubters, workers, worshippers sit and eat and share together, and some do nothing but recline, at least for a while, until they get their strength back! It’s the whole business of family, the whole family. The father welcomes the prodigal and the story finishes with a question to the ‘non-Prodigal’: Will you join us?

And that is the process of transformation. Of course, it’s an obvious thought. To quote Bono from the U2 album, “a broken heart is an open heart.” Inadequacy of any sort is, paradoxically, the entry ticket.

And my reasoning is transformed within the process of fellowship. My understanding of Scripture is renewed and changed through my experience of life, and Jesus, and other people. My church traditions are challenged by my personal experience of God. “Heart strangely warmed” etc. And though in one sense we never arrive, for each new Arrivals Gate is a new Departure Lounge. In another sense, we are we, constantly arriving, discovering, being together in Christ, totally, entirely, completely “in Christ.”

For the operation of transformation is also its own destination.

The Transformation of the Self

The Wesleyan Quadrilateral, is a methodology for theological reflection that is credited to John Wesley in the late 18th century. The term itself was coined by 20th century American Methodist scholar Albert C. Outler. The United Methodist Church asserts that “Wesley believed that the living core of the Christian faith was revealed in Scripture, illumined by tradition, vivified in personal experience, and confirmed by reason. Scripture, however, is primary, revealing the Word of God ‘so far as it is necessary for our salvation.'” So these four sources form the basis of theological and doctrinal development: scripture, along with tradition, reason, and spiritual experience.

Let’s examine these component parts and then consider them in respect to the title question: How is the self transformed? Pictured above is a memorial to Wesley’s own conversion and experience of assurance. That is to say, when we ask this question, we are pursuing the journey that Wesley himself undertook.

So let’s begin, as the Memorial stone does, with experience.

Experience

“What the scriptures promise, I enjoy.” Wesley insisted that we cannot have reasonable assurance of something unless we have experienced it personally. He taught assurance because he had experienced it. What Christianity promised (considered as a doctrine) was accomplished in his inner life. Furthermore, Christianity (considered as an inward principle) is the completion of all those promises. Although traditional proof is complex, experience is simple: “One thing I know; I was blind, but now I see.” Although tradition establishes the evidence a long way off, experience makes it present to all persons. Wesley states that Christianity is “an experience of holiness and happiness, the image of God impressed on a created spirit, a fountain of peace and love springing up into everlasting life.”

Reason

The experience, however, has to be understood and articulated. “Now, of what excellent use is reason, if we would either understand ourselves, or explain it to others? ”  He states quite clearly that without reason we cannot understand the essential truths of Scripture. Reason, however, is not a mere human invention. It must be enabled by the Holy Spirit if we are to understand the mysteries of God.

With regard to justification by faith and sanctification Wesley said that although reason cannot produce faith, when impartial reason speaks we can understand the new birth, inward holiness, and outward holiness.

Tradition

When Wesley speaks of “Tradition”, he does not merely refer to ancient Church Tradition and the writings of the great theologians and Church Fathers of days past, but also of the immediate and present theological influences which contribute to a person’s understanding of God and of Christian theology. “Tradition” may include such influences as the beliefs, values, and instruction of one’s family and upbringing. It may also include the various beliefs and values which one encounters and which have an effect on one’s understanding of Scripture.

Wesley wrote that it is generally supposed that traditional evidence is weakened by length of time, as it must necessarily pass through so many hands in a continued succession of ages. Although other evidence is perhaps stronger, he insisted: “Do not undervalue traditional evidence. Let it have its place and its due honour. It is highly serviceable in its kind, and in its degree.” Wesley states that those of strong and clear understanding should be aware of its full force. For him it supplies a link through 1,700 years of history with Jesus and the apostles. The witness to justification and sanctification is an unbroken chain drawing us into fellowship with those who have finished the race, fought the fight, and who now reign with God in his glory and might.

Scripture

Wesley insisted that scripture is the first authority and contains the only measure whereby all other truth is tested. It was delivered by authors who were divinely inspired. It is a rule sufficient of itself. It neither needs, nor is capable of, any further addition. The scripture references to justification by faith as the gateway to scriptural holiness are: Deut. 30:6; Ps. 130:8; Ezek. 36:25, 29; Matt. 5:48; 22:37; Luke 1:69; John 17:20–23; Rom. 8:3–4; II Cor. 7:1; Eph. 3:14; 5:25–27; I Thess. 5:23; Titus 2:11–14; I John 3:8; 4:17.

In the transformation of the self, these four sources require sanctification. Let’s consider that.

The Powers that be (Daniel 3)

What do you do when your whole culture swirls like a tide against everything you think of as valuable and important? 

How do you retain that important sense of identity? What if you are an immigrant -or a refugee!- and the whole society is dominated by a way of living that you find repulsive, alien, and anti-God?

I was reading Paul Gallico’s 1948 novel, Mrs Harris goes to Paris, and behind the storyline is the immense culture shock that an ordinary working class Londoner feels in visiting Paris for the first time. And the plot’s denouement is in how she overcomes that dissonance and makes real friends, reconciling differences.

Something like that, but forced and elongated, and much more dangerous is the life that Jews experienced under successive oppressive empires. Think of Holocaust Day each year, and what it continues to symbolise.

Daniel is the key character, of course, a young, wise and pious Jew whose gifts make a way for him with even the pagan Babylonians. In Chapter 3, however, Daniel does not appear. Instead, the story tells the tale of three other Jewish men who face dire consequences for their piety.

While the book is set during the Babylonian exile (586-538 BC), it was probably written down during a period of Greek colonization, some 400 years later. The main point is not an historical account of the Babylonian exile, but instead it explores the vulnerability of peoples living under a religiously oppressive regime, a situation that fits the time of the Greek overlord Antiochus IV Epiphanes (167-164 BC). 

The story of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego represents the choices faced by those who must either support an oppressive regime or face certain death.

While loss of cultural identity threatens exiled populations, those who are colonized face a different but no less serious threat. An exiled population often maintains the sense of being “Other” in their new place of residence; even if they try to assimilate, they are often treated as perennial outsiders by native populations. Those who are colonized have their status inverted. Although they are the native population, regimes that practice cultural colonization try to wipe out that native culture and replace it with a foreign one that now becomes hegemonic.

Colonized peoples face different choices than exiles. Often the choices made by a colonized individual affects whole families who still may be trying to preserve property and autonomy. Some choose to cooperate with the colonizers, others subvert it, while still others participate in active resistance. This was as true for the Judeans colonized by the Greeks as it is today.

The story of the three men gives a glimpse into those choices. They could accept the religion of the king as superior to their own. They could go through the motions of bowing to the statue while still maintaining their own belief. Or they could organize a rebellion against this oppressive religious practice. They choose none of these.

Instead, they decide to become living witnesses to what they believe in, offering their bodies as martyrs as an act of faith in their God

It is a form of peaceful resistance often associated today with people like Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Jr., and Bishop Oscar Romero.

Throughout the Christian traditions, these martyr stories ended with the death of the righteous sufferer, whose reward comes in their post-mortem sanctification. The story of the martyrdom of Perpetua preserves visions she had of the reward awaiting her in heaven. Second Maccabees 7, a text in the Old Testament Apocrypha, tells the story of a mother who watches the martyrdom of her seven sons by this same Antiochus, all the while exhorting them to be strong and face death. She and her sons trust that God, who will eventually punish wicked Antiochus, will reward these sons after death.

In contrast to these later stories, this tale of willing martyrdom in Daniel 3 ends with the miraculous rescue of the three men. In fact, the story makes visibly apparent that those who suffer are not alone. There is a heavenly being who accompanies them as they choose to meet their fate (verse 25). The text is wonderfully ambiguous about the identity of this divine figure.

In the resolution of the story, the men not only survive, but earn a job promotion as a result of their ordeal. 

How odd it seems that their reward is their continued service to their king; they now will work for his wellbeing

This ending calls attention to three important elements of the story that could otherwise be missed.

First, the story maintains its pacifistic attitude. Unlike the book of Esther which ends with the Jews slaughtering the Persians who attack them (Esther 9:5-10), there is no retaliation in this story. For this author, the perfect denouement is the conversion of the pagans and the peaceful co-existence of everyone.

Second, the resolution includes the further assimilation of the men into the colonized system. Shadrach and friends are not just Jews; they have a hybrid identity. Here their Babylonian Jewishness mirrors the Greek Jewishness of the book’s original audience.

Third, the fate of these three individuals is really a story about the fate of a whole people. Notice that at the beginning of the chapter, these three stand up for the rights of all those who live under this oppression. At the end of the chapter, the king declares religious protections for all Jews within his empire.

While the story is not a trickster tale, the narrative does subvert the hegemonic discourse of the colonizers. The king’s propaganda rests on his claim of complete power within his realm. All it takes to unravel this claim is the resolute refusal of these three people from the margins of that society to accept his claim as reality. Instead, they replace his claims, not with their own assertion of power, but rather with the statement that Yahweh is God.

What about us?

The story invites contemporary communities of faith to reflect on the long-lasting effects of colonization on themselves and those around them. It provides a model response to violent oppression: the stubborn refusal to be afraid. It seeks a reconciliation of both oppressor and oppressed, through which the world is reoriented to God.

“A whole lot of shoulds”? (Eph 4:17-32)

¹⁷ So I tell you this, and insist on it in the Lord, that you must no longer live as the Gentiles do, in the futility of their thinking. ¹⁸ They are darkened in their understanding and separated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them due to the hardening of their hearts. ¹⁹ Having lost all sensitivity,they have given themselves over to sensuality so as to indulge in every kind of impurity, and they are full of greed.

²⁰ That, however, is not the way of life you learned ²¹ when you heard about Christ and were taught in him in accordance with the truth that is in Jesus.²² You were taught, with regard to your former way of life, to put off your old self,which is being corrupted by its deceitful desires; ²³ to be made new in the attitude of your minds; ²⁴ and to put on the new self, created to be like God in true righteousness and holiness.

²⁵ Therefore each of you must put off falsehood and speak truthfully to your neighbor, for we are all members of one body. ²⁶ “In your anger do not sin”^[d]: Do not let the sun go down while you are still angry, ²⁷ and do not give the devil a foothold. ²⁸ Anyone who has been stealing must steal no longer, but must work,doing something useful with their own hands, that they may have something to share with those in need.

²⁹ Do not let any unwholesome talk come out of your mouths, but only what is helpful for building others up according to their needs, that it may benefit those who listen. ³⁰ And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, with whom you were sealed for the day of redemption. ³¹ Get rid of all bitterness, rage and anger, brawling and slander, along with every form of malice. ³² Be kind and compassionate to one another, forgiving each other, just as in Christ God forgave you.

When you first read this passage, it’s easy to get wrapped up in the idea that it’s a whole load of “Shoulds.” Do this, do that. Good advice, I’m sure, but being told what to do never really stirred me into action in my slightly shady youth. 

Why should it work now? 

Things take on a different focus when you pick up on what most scholars regard as the back-story. That is, that all this is about Baptism and What Comes Next. It’s about how the generous grace of God impacts and transforms our lifestyle together.

Interwoven throughout the letter to the Ephesians are many references to death and life (2:1, 5), putting away the old self (4:22, 25) and being marked with the seal of the Holy Spirit (1:13, 4:30). In other words, instead of simply being exhorted to do good works, the community is continually reminded that it has been engrafted into the body of Christ and that its hope is grounded in Christ’s present and future redemption. The result is a life lived in love, rooted and grounded in the love of Christ (5:2). This is, simply, the Jesus Way to do life.

Be Angry?

In some highly sentimental versions of the Christian faith it is thought that any type of anger is a sin. Paul surprises us here by recognizing that anger has its place. He also says that it has its limits. Even those with a superficial knowledge of the Bible recognize that this is a book acquainted with anger. The prophets (Amos for example!) can hardly contain their outrage at the way the people of Israel have violated God’s covenant.

Jesus was upset when he overturned the tables of the moneychangers or when he encountered almost any form of self-righteous arrogance. And Paul himself was furious with church in Galatians as it fell back into seeing the law as a way to please God (Galatians 3:1-3). Indeed, God may be slow to anger but this does not mean God is never angry. At the risk of anthropomorphism, we may say that God grieves over our idolatry. Love is always outraged at betrayal.

And yet we must be careful. Paul warns the Ephesians not to “let the sun go down on your anger” (4:26). He recognizes that anger can quickly become obsessive. Instead of being upset over a thoughtless word or deed, we have a tendency to make it “personal” in a hurry. We nurse a grudge and cook up schemes for revenge. Once we have slipped into this realm we have opened the door for the devil (4:27). The well-being of the community then becomes secondary and our main purpose is simply to get even. Thus Paul reminds us of the need to let forgiveness have the last word (4:32).

Grieving the Spirit

Paul also says in our text that we must not “grieve” the Holy Spirit. What is meant by this unusual phrase? Paul says in Ephesians that the Spirit has “sealed” us in the promises of Christ (1:13, 4:30), given us access to the Father (2:18), and provided us with the inner power to sustain the life of faith (3:16-17). This is an impressive list of gifts. Perhaps Paul’s use of the word “grieve” can be understood in the context of the human tendency to slip into behavior that undermines our community in Christ (4:31). For example, parents have a hard time conceiving of a situation where they would stop loving their children.

We can all cite examples of mothers and fathers who have gone to extraordinary lengths to help a prodigal son or daughter. These parents have indeed been “grieved” or disappointed by the actions of their loved ones — but they rarely break off the relationship completely. Even in the most dire of cases there is still a flicker of hope for reconciliation and restoration. So it is with God. The “seal” or bond of the Spirit is inviolable.

God’s deep and unfathomable commitment to his people should not be questioned. The inheritance is assured (1:11). Seen in this light, Paul’s warning not to grieve the Spirit is an acknowledgement of our ability to deeply disappoint God by our “bitterness”, “slander” and “malice” (4:31). Our selfishness not only destroys community; it also dishonors the Father who has gone to such great lengths to adopt us as his children (1:5-8).

Imitation Love

This section concludes with the ultimate exhortation: be imitators of God (5:1)! Here is where there is a true break with the typical virtue-vice lists of the ancient world. A standard has now been set that transcends all human morality. It could also lead to despair if not handled carefully. This might be a good opportunity for preachers and teachers to review the meaning of agape love as forms of this word appear three times in 5:1-2. 

Our culture’s interpretation of love might be said to be at war with the biblical understanding of agape. Commercials and conventional usage suggest that love is largely a romantic feeling produced by the right combination of clothes, physical conditioning, smile and make-up. In other words, love is dependent upon being lovable.

This is the exact opposite of agape love which reaches out and extends itself to the most unlovable. As Martin Luther once said, it is characteristic of God’s love that it does not find its object but it creates it. The point may seem subtle but Luther is saying we cannot make ourselves worthy of God, though we often try to do this. Rather, our relationship to God is based on nothing other than God’s decision to love us in Christ. Or as Paul stresses, agape is rooted in Christ’s act of giving himself for us (5:2).

Paul highlights the effects of this love as well. We now inherit the status of “beloved children” (5:1). Our task then is to take this love to the neighbour or “live in love” (5:2) as Paul says. Perfect imitation of this love is not possible. God’s word of forgiveness will always be relevant (4:32).  But the love of Christ dwells in our hearts as well (3:17). And that makes a big difference as we make our way into the world.   

“Casting down imaginations…”

“You may believe that you are responsible for what you do, but not for what you think. The truth is that you are responsible for what you think, because it is only at this level that you can exercise choice. What you do comes from what you think. ”  (Marianne Williamson)

So guard your thinking! 

Satan’s primary attack is in the mind. He begins his battle in our thoughts and thought-processes. Few believers make much of this, even whilst acknowledging it as obvious. It seems that we are content to just let it happen.

Even our own thinking can get cluttered and confused: Sometimes we have thoughts that even we don’t understand. Thoughts that aren’t even true—that aren’t really how we feel—but they’re running through our heads anyway because they’re interesting to think about.

“If you could hear other people’s thoughts, you’d overhear things that are true as well as things that are completely random. And you wouldn’t know one from the other. It’d drive you insane. What’s true? What’s not? A million ideas, but what do they mean?”  (Jay Asher)

The Bible speaks of “the weapons of our warfare” which are to be utilised in day-to-day intellectual war-zones in the battlefield of the mind. 2 Cor 10:4 suggests that the area of our thoughts is a battlefield and the warfare begins in our thinking processes before spreading into other areas of our lives like a computer virus, affecting the whole.

The powerful phrase in the old Authorised Version is “Casting down imaginations,” which Meyer’s NT Commentary translates as “We pull down thoughts (Romans 2:15), i.e. bring to nothing hostile deliberations, resolutions, plans, calculations, and the like, raising themselves like fortresses against Christ.” We have to deal with a whole raft of negative nonsense, pulling out the rubbish as if you’re de-cluttering an attic. There’s stuff that’s redundant and useless, past its sell-by date, and not worth keeping. It’s just cluttering up your head-space and preventing clear thought.

But that word “imagination” is very telling. The Bible tells us tht we have “the mind of Christ“which suggests a new model of thinking. An Old Testament picture of that comes in the poetry of David in the book of Psalms, and the statement: “I will set no wicked thing before mine eyes.”(Psalm 101:3)

Wicked imaginations are from the devil. We are to pull down Satan’s strongholds and cast down his thoughts, which produce wicked imaginations. 

The antidote is also there in the book of Psalms: “Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable in thy sight, O Lord.”(Psalm 19:14).

The meditation of our hearts—or our thought lives—should be acceptable to God. Win the battle in your mind and you will rejoice every day of your life in the victory God gives you over the enemy.

But this is more than a call to “Try harder” (though that call is never redundant and always apt). The only way to counter that “evil imagination” is to provide alternative content.

And this was Paul’s point in Phil 4:8:”Finally, brethren, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is of good repute, if there is any excellence and if anything worthy of praise, dwell on these things.”

A replacement diet

This is not a diet supplement, as if you can eat all that junk food, add sprouts and be virtuous. On the contrary, it’s a total replacement diet. Instead of feasting on gossip, lies and innuendo, you are nourished on truth and honour, goodness and kindness. Instead of feeling slightly sick and headachey because you’ve over-indulged in malice, cruel jokes and unforgiveness, you learn to drink the clean clear water of grace and honesty.

And it tastes wonderful.

Put up with tricky people…like God does? (Eph 4)

The idea of “Putting up with each other” doesn’t sound very holy or nice. Surely we shouldn’t even admit that we need to?

But there it is, in the first paragraph of Ephesians 4. First the plea to live “worthily” and then the explanation of what that entails. It means putting up with each other.

I can see you don’t quite believe me, so here’s the context. Read it slowly:

“I therefore, a prisoner for the Lord, beg you to lead a life worthy of the calling to which you have been called,  with all lowliness and meekness, with patience, forbearing one another in love,  eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.  There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call, one Lord, one faith, one baptism,  one God and Father of us all, who is above all and through all and in all.” (Ephesians 4:1-6)

Are you living “worthy of your calling”? That means worthy of your high position! A bent policeman or a corrupt politician –by contrast- is unworthy of his position.

This doesn’t mean that we should try to deserve our place in God’s favour. It means that we should recognize how much our place in God’s favour deserves from us. The focus is not on our worth but on the worth of our calling.

God chose us for himself (1:4) and predestined us to be his children—and heirs! (1:5). He sent Christ to atone for our sin (1:7) and sealed us with his Holy Spirit. (1:13). We are “destined and appointed to live for the praise of his glory.”  That’s our calling, and it’s a lot to live up to!

And the way to do it, according to 4:3, is to “maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.” How? “With all lowliness and meekness, with patience, forbearing one another in love.”

There it is! God give us the grace to put up with each other.

So the emphasis here is not on doctrinal unity –that’s taken for granted. We’re all on the same page if Jesus is Lord. He gives a short hand sketch: “One faith, one Lord, one baptism…”

No: the emphasis is not on what we believe but on HOW we believe. There are a few, a very few primary points. He lists them here. These are the non-negotiables. But then, after that, think everything through, decide what you think is right and go for it, and don’t pester other people to follow yoou down the same track.

And don’t clutter up your preaching time with non-essentials.

So HOW do we believe? We believe lovingly, consideratelyand corporately.

The key word here is “together.” We believe together,  in lowliness and meekness , in patience and forbearance. “We are each other’s harvest; we are each other’s business; we are each other’s magnitude and bond.” ― Gwendolyn Brooks

We endure one another! Imagine that. Now perfect people don’t need to be endured or forgiven. But we do, often. Paul is not naïve. He knows that there are a few of us who are grumpy or critical or unreliable or finicky, so his counsel here is not how perfect people can live together in unity, but how real, imperfect people can maintain the unity of the Spirit, namely, by enduring each other in love.

There’s a wonderful passage on this in A.W.Tozer’s The pursuit of God:

“Has it ever occurred to you that one hundred pianos all tuned to the same fork are automatically tuned to each other? They are of one accord by being tuned, not to each other, but to another standard to which each one must individually bow. So one hundred worshipers met together, each one looking away to Christ, are in heart nearer to each other than they could possibly be, were they to become ‘unity’ conscious and turn their eyes away from God to strive for closer fellowship.” 

But how can you keep on caring about a person who doesn’t like you? Or a person who opposes you and wants to frustrate your dreams? How do you maintain the unity of the Spirit with them instead of becoming hostile and cold?

Paul’s answer: be lowly in spirit so that you can patiently endure their differences and their sins. A person of lowliness is keenly aware of the size of his debt toward God and how he has dishonoured God through unbelief and disobedience. He is also keenly aware of God’s amazing grace that saved a wretch like him.

When do you write someone off?

• When they are doctrinally inaccurate (in your opinion)?
• When they are behaviourally challenging?
• When they are hateful?

Never. You can never write anybody off.

Because God doesn’t.

(And He never writes you off either).

Ephesians 4 & the Tyranny of the Upper Case

I come from a tradition where a church leader is called the Pastor. It wasn’t so when I was a child. Growing up in the Anglican Church in the UK, as a saintly-looking choirboy, we had a Rector, or Vicar. My teenage years were spent in a Wesleyan denomination, in a church led by a Minister. The tag ‘Rev’ floated about, too. But the P word didn’t come into my purview until adulthood. In the charismatic fellowship I attended, they had elders, and, for a short time, Shepherds.

All those names had Upper Cases firmly attached. In case you forgot yourself and downplayed the honour due the owner of the title.

So it could be that “pastor” is an American import into UK church culture in the last forty or so years. Whether that’s true or not, it’s certainly become the preferred term.

Does it matter?

In some senses, no. If you consider the church to be a business, then every business needs a boss, whether that business is a huge, faceless multinational or a corner-shop. Even if you consider the church as a family, then families also have their leadership structures, right? So the precise name of that boss is not as important as the way that leadership happens. I mean: is it loving and generous, or abusive and controlling?

However, if the church is rooted in New Testament practice, or attempting to be, then it will be building upon the principles it finds there. We’re not talking about ‘mere words’ or titles here but the principles that the words represent. 

So what does the New Testament say about church leadership? There are several answers. Luke (in Acts 13) describes the Antioch church as directed by “prophets and teachers.” In Acts 20, the church at Ephesus is committed to the care of a group of “elders.“

Jesus himself was very egalitarian: Matthew 23:8-12 reads: “But do not be called Rabbi; for One is your Teacher, and you are all brothers.” The idea is even stronger in The Message, in a passage entitled “Religious Fashion Shows”:

23 ^1-3 Now Jesus turned to address his disciples, along with the crowd that had gathered with them. “The religion scholars and Pharisees are competent teachers in God’s Law. You won’t go wrong in following their teachings on Moses. But be careful about following them. They talk a good line, but they don’t live it. They don’t take it into their hearts and live it out in their behavior. It’s all spit-and-polish veneer.

^4-7 “Instead of giving you God’s Law as food and drink by which you can banquet on God, they package it in bundles of rules, loading you down like pack animals. They seem to take pleasure in watching you stagger under these loads, and wouldn’t think of lifting a finger to help. Their lives are perpetual fashion shows, embroidered prayer shawls one day and flowery prayers the next. They love to sit at the head table at church dinners, basking in the most prominent positions, preening in the radiance of public flattery, receiving honorary degrees, and getting called ‘Doctor’ and ‘Reverend.’

^8-10 “Don’t let people do that to you, put you on a pedestal like that. You all have a single Teacher, and you are all classmates. Don’t set people up as experts over your life, letting them tell you what to do. Save that authority for God; let him tell you what to do. No one else should carry the title of ‘Father’; you have only one Father, and he’s in heaven. And don’t let people maneuver you into taking charge of them. There is only one Life-Leader for you and them—Christ.

^11-12 “Do you want to stand out? Then step down. Be a servant. If you puff yourself up, you’ll get the wind knocked out of you. But if you’re content to simply be yourself, your life will count for plenty.”

So this is the underlying principle: one of mutual loving service. But there’s no contradiction between these words of Jesus and the letters of Paul. Paul seems to have a lot to say about structure. Look at that classic passage in Ephesians 4:

“Christ himself gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the pastors and teachers, ¹² to equip his people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up ¹³ 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.“

Centre-stage in this passage are not the leaders, but “his people… the body of Christ.” In fact, those preceding words, “apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the pastors and teachers” don’t even merit capital letters in this translation (NIV) and that’s important. Those capital letters have a way of feeding egos that works wholly counter to the words of Jesus.

But we need leaders, right? What about all those regulations in the letters to Timothy and Titus? 

And that’s a true point. It was the job of Titus to organise things on Crete: “The reason I left you in Crete was that you might …appoint^[a] elders in every town, as I directed you.” (Titus1:5)

Timothy’s role was more that of a teacher, setting them straight: “As I urged you when I went into Macedonia, stay there in Ephesus so that you may command certain people not to teach false doctrines any longer. ” (1 Tim 1:4) However, both had to develop local leadership patterns of “overseers… ” (1 Tim 3) which seems here to be different from elders: “The elders who direct the affairs of the church well are worthy of double honor, especially those whose work is preaching and teaching.” (1 Tim 5:17)

Titus 1:6-7, however, appears to run “elder” and “overseer” into one leadership role:

“An elder must be blameless, faithful to his wife, a man whose children believe^[b] and are not open to the charge of being wild and disobedient. ⁷ Since an overseer manages God’s household, he must be blameless—not overbearing, not quick-tempered…”

So there’s a little ambiguity here, but Paul definitely sees the “people of God” as the central concern, and these others as serving them, with the constant analogy to how families run.

I think that that’s the point. Any leadership in the family is paternal, and protective, rather than power-based and patronising. It’s not a pyramid, nor a circle. It’s not a committee, nor a monarchy. It’s family. And Paul prayed for his friends at Ephesus “¹⁴ For this reason I kneel before the Father, ¹⁵ from whom every family^[a] in heaven and on earth derives its name.” (Eph 2:14,15)

The tyranny of the Upper-Case occurs when we misunderstand that basic principle, and bolster our own positions turning them into career opportunities, rather than grace-opportunities.

And the cohesive energy of grace is essential to avoid tyrannies, and hierarchies. We need all those gifts operating in a loving free-fall, like sky-divers holding hands. Apostles missioning, teachers thinking, evangelists chatting through good news, prophets inspiring with a Big-Picture energy, and pastors cleaning up and calming down.

But please, no drama. No Upper-case self-important ego-games. No wonder churches go stagnant if they’re run by pastors. It’s their job to stabilise, but there are other jobs to do. If we teachers ran the shop, it’d get too bookish. If evangelists were in charge, they’d never be there. No. We need all of them, working together, synchronised into effective action. 

Maybe if we think of those giftings as verbs rather than nouns we wouldn’t get so obsessive about them.

Life in the Together Zone (Ephesians 4)

Lead a life worthy

We’ve been asking the question: What does it look like, “to lead a life worthy of the calling to which you have been called.” Paul’s initial answer is that it means “bearing with one another in love, making every effort to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace” (Eph 4:1-3). He then develops the point about unity with seven explanations: “one body and one Spirit…one hope…one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all” (Ephesians 4:4-6). This language of unity builds on the theological ideas of the first three chapters, where the primary point is that God has brought together all people through Christ.

Everybody. It’s a completely level playing field. Everybody is included ‘in Christ’ – that familiar phrase that Paul repeats over two hundred times.

And in the present case, the most important act of reconciliation is that between Jew and Gentile. Jews and Gentiles together now form “one new humanity in place of the two, thus making peace” (Eph2:15). God’s unified people are the church, which consists of Jews and Gentiles together as God’s temple, the place where God dwells (Eph 2:19-22). As Ephesians 4 moves forward with its explanatory encouragement on how we live together in consequence, this emphasis on unity provides the framework for the instructions given.

Live up to who you now are

Another key principle for the second half of Ephesians is that, since the Gentile audience has been brought by God’s grace into this new body, they must act in accordance with their new status rather than with their old ways prior to Christ. Eph 4:17 puts it bluntly: “you must no longer live as the Gentiles live, in the futility of their minds.” Immediately before our passage the audience is told “to put away your former way of life…and to clothe yourselves with the new self, created according to the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness” (Eph 4:22, 24).

Having been brought into God’s people entails a transformation of identity and character, and with this transformation comes changed moral behavior. Our passage gives mostly very specific moral instructions. What makes the passage rich and not merely pedantic is that these instructions are grounded in the earlier theological ideas.

Speak in both truth and love

Our passage begins with a command to put away falsehood and to “speak the truth to our neighbours” (v 25). It sounds like such an easy command, something we might think only children should need to be told. But note the reason that is then provided for it — “for we are members of one another.” Since the community members form one body (from Eph 4:4, quoted above), lying to one another simply makes no sense. It is a similar idea as in the better-known statement from later in Ephesians, “He who loves his wife loves himself” (5:28).

The unity of the church is the basis for how we live together.

The relational rationale

Similar rationales are given for the instructions in Eph 4:28-29. In verse 28, thieves are told to give up stealing and instead to “labour and work honestly with their own hands, so as to have something to share with the needy.” Note that the prohibition of stealing is based not on the notion of respecting others’ property but solely on the motive of helping others in the community.

Verse 29 likewise prohibits “evil talk” and enjoins speaking “what is useful for building up, as there is need, so that your words may give grace to those who hear.” Both moral action and moral speech are to be guided by the principle of doing what strengthens the community.

The instructions in the following verses, however, are given quite different rationales, and at first glance it may seem as if Paul has moved on from talking about the community to different things altogether. Verse 30 instructs the audience to “not grieve the Holy Spirit of God.” Is offending God now the rationale, rather than building up the community? In fact, this is a false dichotomy. The Spirit is described in Ephesians as the mark of the community, as that which bonds the community together.

The language here in verse 30 echoes that of Eph 1:13 in referring to the Spirit as the “seal,” for example the mark of the community that is a pledge of God’s positive judgment on “the day of redemption.” In Ephesians 2:18 we are told that it is through the Spirit that both Jews and Gentiles have access to God, and in Ephesians 4:3 we saw that maintaining “the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace” is one of the fundamental goals of the letter’s moral exhortation. Hence not grieving the Spirit goes hand in hand with building up the community; the Spirit is what makes the church God’s temple, God’s dwelling place.

Ephesians 4:31 enjoins getting rid of all kinds of destructive attitudes and speech, and verse 32 provides their replacement: “be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another.” Then comes the real kicker — the rationale that forgiveness is to be done “as God in Christ has forgiven you.”

The final two verses of the passage build on this, urging the community to be “imitators of God” (Ephesians 5:1) and to “live in love, as Christ loved us” (Ephesians 5:2). The idea of imitating God both builds on Old Testament traditions — a key Levitical command is “You shall be holy, for I am holy” (Leviticus 11:44-45; 19:2) — and on the earlier language of Ephesians, where God’s plan is said to be to “gather up all things in him” (Ephesians 1:10) and Christians are said “to be filled with all the fullness of God” (Ephesians 3:29).

The church as ‘dwelling place’

If the church is to be the dwelling place for God (Ephesians 2:22), and both Christ and the Spirit are said to be in us (Ephesians 3:16-17), and we are “created in Christ Jesus” Ephesians (2:10) and “created according to the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness” (Ephesians 4:24), then the moral exhortations to imitate God and to live in love as Christ did both follow naturally. Imitating God and loving as Christ did are high standards! These commands may be ambitious challenges for us, but they also remind us of the amazing possibilities for those who have been re-created in Christ and brought into the church, the very dwelling place of God.

The Spirit in the community

Let’s take three passages from the New Testament and sketch something of the description that they offer of the place of the Holy Spirit in the life of the early Church. One has the sense of going upstream, nearer to the source, where the water is a little clearer. These days, there are something like forty thousand different expressions of what being a Christian looks like. In the early days, it wasn’t so.

I have many candidates for selection, but I’m going to go with these: Acts 19, Acts 13 and 1 Thessalonians 5. Acts 19 describes the planting of the church at Ephesus. Acts 13 begins with an account of how the church at Antioch operated, prior to sending out Saul (later, Paul, of course) and Barnabas as missionaries. 1 Thessalonians 5 answers some questions and provides some encouragement for a young church in the early period of its existence.

First, Acts 19 and the crucial importance of the Spirit in the Church

While Apollos was at Corinth, Paul took the road through the interior and arrived at Ephesus. There he found some disciples ² and asked them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when^[a] you believed?”

They answered, “No, we have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit.”

³ So Paul asked, “Then what baptism did you receive?”

“John’s baptism,” they replied.

⁴ Paul said, “John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. He told the people to believe in the one coming after him, that is, in Jesus.” ⁵ On hearing this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. ⁶ When Paul placed his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they spoke in tongues^[b] and prophesied. ⁷ There were about twelve men in all.“

A few important things: first, we have the anointed teachers, Apollos and Paul who will sound impact this major city in an incredible way. Paul always found a connecting point – often the synagogue, where he could talk to people who were more or less on the same page as him.

But this time he finds a group of “disciples” who are identified as being of John the Baptist. They know nothing of the Holy Spirit (despite the Baptist’s recorded teaching on the subject). Luke is stressing the absolute cruciality of the Holy Spirit, and the distinction made between baptism in water and the baptism in the Holy Spirit. And here we see the evidence of that second baptism in that the disciples “spoke in tongues and prophesied.”

The point is that this is where the church plant began – on an emphasis on the centrality of the Holy Spirit.

Second, Acts 13 shows a mature church in co-operation with the Holy Spirit

Now in the church at Antioch there were prophets and teachers: Barnabas, Simeon called Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen (who had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch) and Saul. ² While they were worshiping the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, “Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them.” ³ So after they had fasted and prayed, they placed their hands on them and sent them off.

This is our introduction to a fellowship that became one of the great centres of Christianity for the first generations of believers. Even this short vignette suggests reasons why.

The first aspect to consider is that of diversity.

Sometimes we act as if every church should look and act the same. This comes to the fore with our growing media connectivity, with every young youth band trying to sound like all the others; with an emphasis on ministry, music and outreach that somehow all looks the same. It’s as if Church has become X Factor and we’re desperate to compete.

We assume, for example, that churches should really have one senior leader. At Antioch, it sounds as if that person might have been Barnabas, who has been drafted in from Jerusalem to supervise a season of rapid growth. But the passage goes on to tell how, after prayer, he is sent out from the church on mission. So not him then.

You are left to deduce that there is a plurality of leaders with different areas of gifting. This may be the implication of the phrase “in the church at Antioch there were prophets and teachers.” There was a group of people who brought direction and doctrine. Presumably, they taught from what we call “the Old Testament,” possibly in the way that the letter to the Hebrews is a discourse on aspects of Old Testament History and Theology and centring that exposition on the work of Christ.

And the make-up of this group is also fascinating in its diversity . One shouldn’t read too much into a list of names, but that list is certainly intriguing: “Barnabas, Simeon called Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen (who had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch) and Saul.” We are entitled to read -at the very least- a racial, ethnic, linguistic and class diversity that is startling and powerful.

Their very dissimilarity seems to be a celebration of diversity.  Jewish, African, Greek, Gentile, upper-class, educated…

Did the ethnic mix of the leadership group describe or parallel the demographic mix of the local population at Antioch?

Does yours?

And we have to use the word “charismatic” here. Obviously, that’s not a denominational descriptor but the appropriate term for a group that is animated and directed by the Holy Spirit. This church was charismatic in the fullest sense, operating in the gifts of the Holy Spirit, in a unity of purpose, seeking direction in prayer and fasting and motivated into mission.

One notices the centrality of worship, the intentionality expressed by the word “fasting” and an openness to the prophetic voice. Isaiah had prophesied, centuries before that “Whether you turn to the right or to the left, your ears will hear a voice behind you, saying, “This is the way; walk in it.” (Isaiah 30:21) The church is operating on that very precept, but carefully, prayerfully, and within the context of worship and appetite-denying concentration (as someone called it!).

This is what the church looks like.

And lastly, think about why Luke constructed this passage. He is readying us for the new push forward into God’s kingdom extension in the work (predominantly) of Saul. But he is showing us that where there is a vital Spirit-led church, it will always be focused on mission. Emil Brunner said: “The church exists by mission, as a fire exists by burning.” It’s who we are. It’s what we do.

Could it have been that the Holy Spirit instructed the church at Antioch to send their most capable leaders away on mission?

Third, 1 Thessalonians 5 shows a young church being instructed in Holy Spirit co-operation

Now we ask you, brothers and sisters, to acknowledge those who work hard among you, who care for you in the Lord and who admonish you. ¹³ Hold them in the highest regard in love because of their work. Live in peace with each other. ¹⁴ And we urge you, brothers and sisters, warn those who are idle and disruptive, encourage the disheartened, help the weak, be patient with everyone. ¹⁵ Make sure that nobody pays back wrong for wrong, but always strive to do what is good for each other and for everyone else.

¹⁶ Rejoice always, ¹⁷ pray continually, ¹⁸ give thanks in all circumstances; for this is God’s will for you in Christ Jesus.

¹⁹ Do not quench the Spirit. ²⁰ Do not treat prophecies with contempt ²¹ but test them all; hold on to what is good, ²² reject every kind of evil.

²³ May God himself, the God of peace, sanctify you through and through. May your whole spirit, soul and body be kept blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. ²⁴ The one who calls you is faithful, and he will do it.

We live with the consciousness of a bigger picture of reality

The first way we live in the world is with the consciousness of a bigger picture. Again and again, throughout the two letters to this church, Paul reiterates the concept of the Lord’s soon-return. Does that thought still hold true, two thousand years later? Clearly it makes us rethink Paul’s interpretation, and perhaps the over-visualised picture of it which had confused the church (and for which reason, partly, Paul was now writing). But of course the truth of our hope remains the same. The idea of the “thief in the night” and “no one knows” the exact calendar of events only reminds us that the Lord can come at any moment, unexpectedly, and that, consequently, every moment is truly living in that hope of Christ’s imminent arrival.

So that’s how we live. Hopefully, expectantly, obediently.

We live increasing and overflowing in love

In the verses directly preceding our text, the structure of the community is addressed (respect and esteem in love towards leaders) as well as behaviour (the leaders are in return to encourage, help, be patient, seek to do good). But now a more general appeal is made to the entire community, an appeal that is the foundation of all previous admonitions and counsel, an appeal that lies at the heart of every Christian life. The way of life together in this community that Paul proposes, stands in opposition to everything that believers experience in their relationship to the world.

We live doing good

We sometimes forget the radical nature of that appeal (do good to all, help the weak, do not repay evil for evil). In Paul’s first century context, the standard governing human relationships of course was different. It was about pay back, about maintaining and guarding one’s respect (not giving respect!). I believe we can safely say that it is very much the same today. Everyone is out for him or herself. Paul’s appeal goes against the grain of this self-centered world, admonishing not only to a way of life in the community but in openness towards all. This way of life that characterizes Christian “waiting” breaks open the restrictions and restraints of human interaction focused upon the self. 

We live in the art of the Holy Spirit

But there are other marks of this waiting as well. Paul could not state it more clearly, “Rejoice always, pray without ceasing, give thanks in all circumstances.” Of course we are not being told to keep a law! This is not a command that must somehow be fulfilled. Rather, Paul is naming the work of the Spirit in the midst of the community, in the midst of life. It is the Spirit’s work that awakens and sustains rejoicing and prayer and thanksgiving. In other letters, Paul makes it clear that these things are fruits of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22; Romans 8:15-16).

We have ample indication of the source of this rejoicing, praying and thanksgiving. Psalm 126 speaks directly to it: “When the Lord restored the fortunes of Zion, we were like those who dream. Then our mouth was filled with laughter, and our tongue with shouts of joy…” When the Lord restored, when the Lord did this, when God acts, only when God acts, are we caught up in that action of rejoicing, praying and thanksgiving. Martin Luther writes about thanksgiving in particular as that “art of the Holy Spirit.” And of course prayer is never just the inclinations of the human heart but the Spirit working God’s Word through and in our existence, revealing our need and raising our cry, both of lament and praise.

It is this work, this art of the Holy Spirit that sanctifies each believer and the community entirely (v 23). The believer or the company of believers can never keep themselves sound and blameless. Any such “keeping” is rooted in the Holy Spirit’s action. What does this mean? The imperatives rejoice, pray, give thanks are evangelical imperatives. Paul is naming the action of the Holy Spirit as it manifests itself in the life of the community and he calls on the community to acknowledge, name, live into these gifts.

These gifts are not simply moral obligations or disciplines intended to prepare the believer. No, they are already manifestations of God’s presence in the Spirit that consumes and transfigures spirit, soul and body. Yet, how often do we relegate prayer to “when we have time” and rejoicing to praise songs? How often do we eliminate thanksgiving all together as if it were merely our work rather than the Spirit’s? Do not quench the Spirit!

And all this is happening already

The believer, the community of faith, may be waiting for the imminent parousia but, at the same time, the waiting happens already in the Lord, waiting in the presence of God’s Spirit who is working and shaping the community into a gospel witness. The Spirit works in and out of the community, we do not know how. Yet the community is given these signs: a deep gospel joy, an incessant prayer in words and in silence, a thanksgiving that culminates in Christ’s own body and blood shared in the community.

Christ is faithful (v 24). The believer and the community are constituted by that faithfulness. Christ will accomplish all this in the community through the Spirit. Christ, the one we are waiting for, is already in our midst and we do not know him (John 1:26). It is this faithful one who continually calls the community into this exercise of faith, an exercise that is not just individually accomplished but communally realized. “Greet all the brothers and sisters with a holy kiss.” Greet one another, male and female, with a kiss that breaks social and cultural norms. You are a community rooted in the Spirit.

Live this sign of paradox.

What does “Living worthy of the calling” mean? (Eph 4)

As we’ve read it so far, Paul’s letter to the Ephesian church describes a new reality, that in Jesus, God has broken down the “wall” between Jew and Gentile, now offering through the blood of the new covenant, salvation and koinonia to all persons. The letter speaks directly to its Gentile audience (Ephesians 3:1), believers gathered in communities in cities throughout ancient Asia Minor. These cities, already ancient in Paul’s day, were major urban areas with all the diversity of population one might expect, trade, religious groups, and social classes that was typical of a Greco-Roman city. Ephesus in particular held an important place in Asia Minor as city of substantial population, the location of the great temple of Artemis, and the place where great Asian games were held. During the reign of Augustus (after 27 BC) Ephesus was made the proconsular capital city of the Roman province of Asia.

In the midst of this city, the claim that believers “have been joined together into a holy temple in the Lord, … a dwelling place for God” (Ephesians 2:21-22) is a major claim over against the worship of Artemis or the emperor. In this letter, the writer calls upon these believers to abandon their old ways as Gentiles (Ephesians 4:17) and live as the new “temple” they have become.

This chapter begins with “therefore” which implies that the earlier material in the letter leads directly to the “architecture” of this new life, a life worthy of their having been called into new life (cf. Ephesians 4:1 with Philippians 1:27).

So our question is: What does living ‘worthy of the calling’ mean?

It means a unity of love

In the sixteen verses considered here, believers are called to a unity that is created by and grows in love. The unity is based not in similarity of gifts, but in connections created by the Spirit given and shared in baptism. All has been given; believers have not attained or reached or otherwise brought upon themselves the great gifts of God. (Notice the passive verbs in Ephesians 4:1, 4, 7, and 16.) Even as all has been given, the one Spirit, Lord, baptism, and so forth (Ephesians 4:4-6) such that everyone has been filled with a whole new life (see especially v. 6 in which this uniting bond of oneness is above all AND through AND in all), there is a calling inherent in the bond.

The activities of those called and in-spirited by God, summarized by living worthily (Ephesians 4:1), include bearing with one another, maintaining the unity of the Spirit, speaking the truth in love, growing up into Christ.

Why, one might ask, would a body truly united in one Spirit with one Lord, thoroughly permeated by Godself, need to be reminded of this calling? There are several possible answers, both of which continue to pertain in our own time. 

It means the end of hierarchies and competition

The first is rooted in the self-consciously hierarchical nature of ancient societies based on familial and also patronal loyalties that were seen to serve the general welfare. Benefits and obligations made the ancient world go ‘round. Loyalties and rivalries were taken for granted as part of daily life in the ancient political, social, religious, financial economy. To set such matters aside in this unified body or persons not related by blood or patronage would be very difficult.

In 4:7-13, the NRSV translates the de at the beginning of v7, giving it a full adversative force. These verses explore the gifts given by the ascended Lord to his people. Disunity emerges from the differences among the gifts, differences that could result in competition for authority. Surely such competition (turf wars?) is not unknown among us. The writer reminds us by means of an inclusio using the words metron … tou christou in vv. 7 and 13 that all the gifts God’s people receive were given according the “measure of Christ’s gift”(v. 7) and for the sake of growing into the “measure of the full stature of Christ” (v 13). Gifts are given to us that enable us and call upon us, the recipients, to grow in Christlikeness, “created in Christ for good works” (Ephesians 2:10).

It means growing up into real human beings

A third issue is able to be read in Ephesians 4:14 where believers are seen to be in need of a warning to “grow up.” Growing up in Christ is a very interesting idea for us. If anything, in our age of rapid and unedited communication, the winds of opinion and doctrine fly faster than we can keep up. Scientific studies, poorly reported, spin us from one healthy option to the next without time for reflection and good decision making. How do we slow down enough and build enough trust with one another to speak the truth in love?

Perhaps the most important thing for us in these verses is the clarity of purpose in the lives of believers. In Ephesians 4:12 there is a simple statement of the purpose of God’s gifts, given to believers (not attained or earned by them): to equip the saints for ministry and almost in apposition with that, “to build up the body of Christ.” All gifts are given for the sake of the increase of the whole. Rivalries, competition, judgmental evaluations are precluded.

We don’t have to look very far to see the destructive power of factionalism. What might it look like if we lived worthily of the life of the one who gave himself to and for us? Imagine that.