The Priesthood of Believers

  Having grown up as a Baptist, I have long been familiar with both the concept and the term “priesthood of the believer.” However, it was not until I was reading about Martin Luther’s conception of that doctrine in the last few days that I really gave it much thought, from a biblical perspective. I’ve always just considered it to be one of the “Baptist distinctives.”

   According to Justo González in The Story of Christianity, Luther’s understanding of the priesthood of believers was as follows:

“While it is true that all Christians, by virtue of their baptism, are priests, this does not mean—as some later interpreters have said—that one is self-sufficient to approach God for oneself. There is a direct communion with God that all Christians can and should enjoy. But there is also an organic reality within which all communion with God takes place, and that reality is the church. To be priests does not mean primarily that we are our own individual priests, but rather that we are priests for the entire community of belief, and that they are priests for us. Rather than setting aside the need for the community of the church, the doctrine of universal priesthood of the believer strengthens it.” (Vol. 2, pg. 33)

   The thing that immediately struck me about this view of the doctrine was that this was almost exactly the opposite of what I had understood the doctrine to mean: I thought it meant “I can go to God for myself.” And yet, that is not the role of a priest! A priest goes to God for others. So, I started looking at the various biblical passages that speak of the priesthood of believers. Two things are apparent from the passages that talk about believers' priesthood (1 Peter 2:5, 9; Revelation 1:6; 5:10; 20:6). The first is that Luther's community focus of the doctrine is correct: the passages speak of the Church as a priesthood and believers as priests, but they do not individualize the doctrine. So, while the individual believer is a priest, to emphasize that is to miss the point. The second conclusion is that a major function of all priests is to offer sacrifices, and this is made evident in most of the deeper teaching that I found. A practical consequence of this is that believers should be seeking to understand what sacrifices God expects of them.

   So, why have Baptists considered this one of their distinctive doctrines when virtually all Protestants hold to these conclusions? As far as I can tell, the major way in which this doctrine is applied for Baptists is in the defense of congregational church government. The argument is as follows, “Because all believers are priests with access to and communion with God, they are all competent to help lead the church (though some are more competent than others).” While I believe in a form of congregationalism, I am no longer certain that the above argument is valid at all. In fact, I think that is probably a damaging twist on a vital doctrine. If this doctrine is to support congregationalism at all, it should be said that as the community of believers approach God on each other’s behalf, seeking divine wisdom and grace, they may expect to receive such wisdom and grace as a community of God-ordained mediators.

  Please do not simply co-opt this doctrine to further the Western cultural values of individualism and democracy; rather love the doctrine for its biblical truth!  Let us learn to live as a holy and royal priesthood, mediating for our fellow believers and offering acceptable sacrifices to our God.  For we have a High Priest who mediates for us and has offered the Acceptable Sacrifice which allows us access with confidence to the our beloved Father's Throne of Grace.

An additional link: SBC statements

China vs. America

This article was a very interesting look at the two major political systems thriving in the world today.  It examined both their strengths and their weaknesses - as well as the implications of both.  Will a consumer-driven, populist democracy prove stronger, or will the authoritatian, hampered-enterprise rule triumph?  Good thinking!

Also, an article on China's probable next president...

PBS: "Of God and Caesar"

I got to watch "Of God and Caesar" Episode 6 of PBS's series "God in America" this evening; it was very interesting: How evangelicalism has interacted with her culture and ways in which she has been shaped by it and reacted to it over the course of the last 60 years.

Watch the full episode. See more FRONTLINE.

That it may be well with you - 5th Command

  I have both heard and believed that the child will learn how to deal with God's authority primarily through how they learn to deal with their parental authorities.  Still, I was somewhat surprised to find a very tight connection between the two as I read in Deuteronomy 5 this week.  Verse 16 says:

“‘Honor your father and your mother, as the Lord your God commanded you, that your days may be long, and that it may go well with you in the land that the Lord your God is giving you.

While verses 29 and 33 say:

Oh that they had such a mind as this always, to fear me and to keep all my commandments, that it might go well with them and with their descendants forever! ... You shall walk in all the way that the Lord your God has commanded you, that you may live, and that it may go well with you, and that you may live long in the land that you shall possess.

This pattern of "well-being and long life in the land that is to be a possession" following obedience to God's commands continues throughout Deuteronomy in 6:2-3, 18; 11:8-9; and 32:46-47. Opposites are found in 4:26 and 30:17-20.

Given these commands and this pattern, it matters a great deal when children disrespect their parents and when parents allow such dishonor to go unchecked.  How will a child learn to fear and obey God if they never have been taught to honor and obey their parents with that healthy belief that one who knows better than them and cares for them is guiding them and must be obeyed?  The One who knows best of all and has pure love for His child ought to be held in an awe which understands His greatness and goodness and yields to every command willingly.  May a deep reverence for God fill us, leading us in glad obedience to the King: whether or not we learned this first from our parents. May God graciously teach us the fear of the Lord which is wisdom and the love of God which brings obedience.  Then it will be well with us and we will live long in the Land which our Lord God will give us.

on the Nothingness of Man

     -  Bernard's Fifth Homily on the Dedication of the Temple, quoted by Calvin (Institutes, pg 371-2)

"What then? man doubtless has been made subject to vanity-man here been reduced to nothing-man is nothing. And yet how is he whom God exalts utterly nothing? How is he nothing to whom a divine heart has been given? Let us breath again, brethren. Although we are nothing in our hearts, perhaps something of us may lurk in the heart of God. O Father of mercies! O Father of the miserable! how plantest though thy heart in us? Where thy heart is, there is thy treasure also. But how are we thy treasure if we are nothing? All nations before thee are as nothing. Observe, before thee; not within thee. Such are they in the judgment of thy truth, but not such in regard to thy affection. Thou callest the things which be not as though they were; and they are not, because thou callest them 'things that be not'; and yet they are because thou callest them. For though they are not of themselves, yet they are with thee according to the declaration of Paul: 'Not of works, but of him that calleth'" (Rom 9:11)."

Meditations on the Fourth Command and the Sabbath

"Observe the Sabbath day... Six days you shall labor and do all your work." (Deut 5:12-13)

 The question of Sabbath rest, the observing of the Sabbath (or Sunday), and the meaning and purpose of such rest has been thoroughly contemplated for millennia.  Thus, these thoughts are not presumed to be original or novel, in fact some of them have been drawn from various portions of Calvin's Institutes. 

  As I've been browsing my way through Deuteronomy, the expression of the Ten Commandments here have been very thought-provoking.  The Fourth Command is particularly interesting since the reason for observing/remembering the Sabbath given here is different from the one in Exodus 20.  In Exodus 20, the meaning of the Sabbath is rooted in the post-Creation rest of God (Gen 2).  In Deuteronomy 5:15, the meaning of the Sabbath is further rooted in God's people's deliverance from Egypt (Ex 1-15).

You shall remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt, and the LORD your God brought you out from there with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm. Therefore the Lord your God commanded you to keep the Sabbath day.

 Here the reasoning seems to be that those who were enslaved had been freed to serve a better Master. Their former master had no care for their well-being; their new Master cared deeply for them and would provide a rest for them.  They were to use this rest to remember their former wretched condition, the freeing from that burdensome toil, and the fact that they were to trust their new Master for every provision and protection.  Thus, they would observe each Sabbath "to the LORD." Worshipful remembrance...

 Now, for the people of God who live after the fulfilling of the Mosaic Law in Christ, what does the Sabbath mean?  Certainly, given its significance in the Israelites' lives, it cannot be without theological importance for the followers of Jesus.  Paul made a vital point in this discussion regarding the dogmatic observation of days in Romans 14:5-6a:

 One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. The one who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord.

 However, the fact that the observation of (OT, ritual) days is neither required nor forbidden for the NT believer does not answer the question of what the significance of these days is.  What are we to learn from the Sabbath instructions written in former times?

 Calvin considered the Sabbath to be obsolete for the Christian, because Christ is our Rest, our Sabbath.  Thus, he finds the ultimate significance of the Sabbath to be the fact that believers have laid aside their works and they now rest in Jesus' work on their behalf.  While this point does not address the question of whether we should take a day of rest (which Calvin does address), if we combine this observation with the consideration of Deut 5:15, a helpful point emerges.  It will be beneficial, and is actually necessary, in our Christian lives to take time regularly to ponder the miserable condition we formerly were in, the great deliverance that God has given us, and that such deliverance has come with the guarantee that every need will be supplied.  The One who did not spare His Son will never hesitate to give us every good gift!  Will not this provide a rest for our souls? 

*Scripture citations from ESV

Fathers get nursing break?!?!?

The politics of sameness (disguised as "equality) has finally lost it completely.  Spanish dads are now legally entitled to a 1-hour "breastfeeding break" from work every day till the baby's nine months old!  Read about it here.