[Our blogger for May is Mike Wilkerson. Mike is a pastor and director of Biblical Counseling at Mars Hill Church. He leads the Redemption Groups ministry, wrote Redemption: Freed by Jesus from the Idols We Worship and the Wounds We Carry, and co-authored a chapter on the ministry of the Holy Spirit in counseling in Christ-Centered Biblical Counseling. (The chapter is available as  free download.)]

So far in this series, I’ve suggested that triperspectivalism is a helpful way to approach the question: What does it mean to follow the leading of the Holy Spirit in counseling? Then we looked at the question from the normative perspective and asked: What has God revealed about the kind of work the Spirit does, and how might that shed light on what the Spirit may be up to in a given counseling moment? In this post, we’ll look at the question from the situational perspective and ask: How does the Spirit relate to human situations involving realities like embodiment (including, for example, the brain), and social embeddedness (including, for example, many social influences past and present)?

Here’s the big idea: the Holy Spirit is wise and loves creation. The wisdom in which he guides is not limited to “religious” categories. We should follow his lead and  grow in his wisdom, gaining an ever deeper understanding of creation and how the creation has been damaged since the Fall, especially with regard to human functioning, dysfunction, and healing.

There’s an aberrant way of thinking that undermines this basic insight about the Spirit’s wisdom and concern for creation. Eric L. Johnson, in his Foundations for Soul Care calls it “religious dualism.”

Religious dualists focus on the highest order of human life—the spiritual—and see it as so much more important than the other orders of the creation that the latter are neglected or seen as unworthy of serious attention, or, in the most extreme versions, are interpreted as being antithetical to the spiritual realm.¹

One way this error might hinder a counselor when trying to follow the Spirit’s lead in counseling is by first separating religious or spiritual categories from material or physical ones, and then proceeding as if the Spirit cares only about the spiritual ones. As a result, a counselor who is trying to be “spiritual” might therefore pay too little attention to the “other orders of creation” that the Spirit cares very much about.

A particular form of religious dualism that might give rise to such an error is what Johnson calls “fall-redemption dualism.” This religious dualist “tends to so emphasize the impact of the Fall that the creation is basically swallowed up by sin, so that the created order (and culture, and in some cases, technology and science—like the science of psychology) is perceived purely from the standpoint of the Fall.”² The tragic result of such thinking threatens to skew one’s perception of the Spirit’s leading in counseling:

Without a robust doctrine of creation grace…this form of dualism functionally pits God’s grace in redemption against God’s grace in creation, undermining their unity in God’s purposes.³

Our whole goal in asking the question about following the Spirit’s lead in counseling has to do with discerning his purposes in a given moment. But if we pit the Spirit’s purposes against one another, then we’re sure to be fundamentally misaligned with him from the outset.

Here again you can see how important the normative perspective is for tuning our understanding of everything. After all, it’s not science that tells us that God cares about his creation; it’s the Bible that tells us that (cf. Psalm 104).

So far, this is not an argument for integrating theology with secular psychology; it’s an argument that “biblical counseling must be comprehensive in understanding,”⁴ because the Spirit is comprehensive in his understanding of how people actually work, and he leads us in the direction of reality: truth, not error.

So, how do we know how the Spirit is leading in a given moment? He’s probably doing something that addresses how people actually work, how they are actually broken, and how they actually get better. If we’re following the Spirit of wisdom (Eph. 1:17), we’ll be continually growing in love for and wisdom pertaining to people and all that affects them.

¹ Eric L. Johnson, Foundations for Soul Care: A Christian Psychology Proposal (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2007), 357.

² Ibid., 357–358.

³ Ibid., 358.

⁴ See the Biblical Counseling Coalition’s Confessional Statement, under the heading with this phrase.

[Our blogger for May is Mike Wilkerson. Mike is a pastor and director of Biblical Counseling at Mars Hill Church. He leads the Redemption Groups ministry, wrote Redemption: Freed by Jesus from the Idols We Worship and the Wounds We Carry, and co-authored a chapter on the ministry of the Holy Spirit in counseling in Christ-Centered Biblical Counseling. (The chapter is available as  free download.)]

In the previous post in this series, I suggested that we could understand what it means to be led by the Holy Spirit in biblical counseling by looking at the issue from three perspectives: the normative, the situational and the existential. In this post, we’ll look especially from the normative perspective. In other words, we’ll ask: What has God revealed about the kind of work the Spirit does, and how might that shed light on what the Spirit may be up to in a given counseling moment?

Lest we speculate about what the Spirit is up to, or merely assert that he’s up to whatever we may be most excited about at the moment, the normative perspective clues us in to what the Bible says the Spirit likes to do.

For example, he convicts of sin, righteousness and judgment (John 16:8). He intercedes for us in our weakness (Rom. 8:26). He strengthens us to know the love of Christ (Eph. 3:16–19), and he pours God’s love into our hearts (Rom. 5:5). He transforms us as we look to Jesus (2 Cor. 3:18). He teaches truth, gives wisdom and reveals Jesus to us (John 14:17, Eph. 1:17). Usually, he works through the Word, since all Scripture ultimately points to Jesus (Luke 24:27; Heb. 4:12).

The Holy Spirit’s ministry has been helpfully summarized by J.I. Packer as a “floodlight ministry”: the Spirit throws light onto Jesus, making Jesus more visible to us.1 Similarly, Gordon Fee says:

In terms of his relationship to us, the Spirit is first of all the revealer [1 Cor. 2:10–11], the one who, to use John’s language, “takes the things of Christ and makes them known to us.” He is therefore the instructor in the ways of God and Christ [1 Cor. 2:2–13].2

These are some of the things we know the Spirit loves to do. We know because the Bible tells us so. So at any given moment, it’s a safe bet that he’s probably doing something along these lines. Remembering this will help us to get in line with what the Spirit wants to do in a given moment.

If this is the case, then counselors who want to know how to follow the Spirit’s lead should be continually growing in a knowledge of Bible and Theology. Why again? Because much of the time what the Spirit wants to do is to illuminate the Word for counselees, “enlightening the eyes of their hearts” (Eph. 1:18). This will require not just a knowing of the Word in a cognitive sense, but also in a way that is deeply connected and relevant to one’s life situation (we’ll see that more clearly from the situational perspective), and in a way that resonates personally and experientially (which we’ll see more clearly from the existential perspective).

1 J.I. Packer, Keep in Step With the Spirit, (Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity, 1984), 65–66, quoted in Graham A. Cole, He Who Gives Life: The Doctrine of the Holy Spirit (Wheaton,IL: Crossway, 2008), Kindle Edition, Kindle Locations 2544-2545.

2 Gordon Fee, God’s Empowering Presence (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2009), 911, quoted in Graham A. Cole, He Who Gives Life: The Doctrine of the Holy Spirit (Wheaton,IL: Crossway, 2008), Kindle Edition, Kindle Locations 3654-3656.

[Our blogger for May is Mike Wilkerson. Mike is a pastor and director of Biblical Counseling at Mars Hill Church. He leads the Redemption Groups ministry, wrote Redemption: Freed by Jesus from the Idols We Worship and the Wounds We Carry, and co-authored a chapter on the ministry of the Holy Spirit in counseling in Christ-Centered Biblical Counseling. (The chapter is available as  free download.)]

What does it mean to follow the leading of the Holy Spirit in counseling? As a pastor, I spend a good deal of time training biblical counselors in the local church. I want them to be Spirit-led in their counseling, but what does that mean? If I were to simply say that phrase, “be Spirit-led in your counseling,” what would they think that means?

Recently, we held a training for biblical counselors from various churches around the country. As I supervised the counseling labs, I listened for talk of the Holy Spirit’s leading.

My hunch is that what people mainly have in mind when they mention their perception of the Spirit’s activity is an experience of feeling or intuition. I think that’s basically right—we can “sense” the Spirit’s movement.

But surely, if the Holy Spirit is the divine presence doing something powerful in this moment, then what he is doing is more than what we feel. I expect there are times when he’s up to something that we might perceive—for those who have ears to hear—though our feelings may not be the primary way to perceive it. There may even be times when our feelings lead us astray, such that our emotional experiences are more indicative of some other factors at play other than the Spirit’s work.

Thus, there is a danger of unreflectively identifying our emotional states as sure signs of the Holy Spirit’s work. I am reminded of Jonathan Edwards’ humbling assessment of how easily affections—necessary though they are—can be misguided.⁠(1) Their fervor is no certain sign that the Holy Spirit is the one at work.

My objective is not to debunk the idea of following the leading of the Holy Spirit in biblical counseling, nor is it to undermine the part our emotions play in that. Rather, it is to get a broader view of it so that we might better keep in step with the Spirit.

After all, I’m not so much into the idea of “getting out of God’s way” in counseling. I prefer getting in God’s way; that is, finding out his way, and then getting there.

In this series of blog posts, I’ll explore one approach to shedding light on this question, applying triperspectivalism. You can read up on this epistemological toolset from John Frame in his brief “Primer on Perspectivalism.”

Frame makes the point that we only ever see things from one limited perspective at a time. God alone sees and knows everything from all perspectives at once, which is the only way to know perfectly.

We humans know in part, and we should just get used to that, accepting the humility that comes with it. However, we shouldn’t therefore be “lazy knowers,” only thinking about things from whatever perspective happens to come easiest. The servant who buried his talent did not please his master; so let’s be good stewards of our knowing. Frame elsewhere calls this “servant-thinking.” (2)

So it’s good stewardship to see things triperspectivally, from three perspectives: the normative, which has to do with God’s revelation, his standard of truth, his authority to define reality; the situational, which has to do with the facts and circumstances of the world; and the existential, which has to do with human experience. Here’s how they come together, according to Frame: “Every item of true human knowledge is the application of God’s authoritative norm [normative] to a fact of creation [situational], by a person in God’s image [existential]” (Frame, “Primer”).

With those perspectives in mind, it should come as no surprise that the existential perspective is the most natural frame of reference for understanding the leading of the Holy Spirit in counseling. The existential has to do with our perception, our feelings, our experience of God. Yet, Frame also says that you can’t have one perspective without the others; they depend upon each other.

My concern is that when it comes to understanding the leading of the Holy Spirit in counseling too much emphasis on the existential, without being “calibrated” by the normative and situational, will lead to error. Emotionalism is not the only error that we want to avoid. There’s also the possibility of being out of step with the Spirit as a result of spiritual myopia, having a nearsighted view of what the Spirit is up to.

My working hypothesis is that being led by the Holy Spirit in biblical counseling has to do with an orienting and an overflowing of our human capacities. The overflowing aspect has to do with an empowerment that takes us beyond merely human capacities. My focus in this blog series will be on the orienting part. I propose that we’ll be better oriented to the Spirit’s work when we look at it from all three perspectives. For the remainder of the series, we’ll do just that, one perspective at a time.

1 Jonathan Edwards (2011-01-23). The Religious Affections. Kindle Edition.

2 John M. Frame. The Doctrine of the Knowledge of God (A Theology of Lordship) (Kindle Location 336). Kindle Edition.

[Shannon Wolf, PhD, LPC-S, is an Associate Professor in the Master of Arts in Counseling program at Dallas Baptist University. She specializes in trauma counseling and in combating human trafficking. She is our blogger for the month of April and this is her fourth and final post.]

Over the last few of weeks, I’ve shared my thoughts on a distinctly Christian Psychology pedagogical approach to be used in graduate programs. This week’s blog concludes those thoughts but not the conversation. There is still much work to be done in our universities and seminaries as we work to glorify our Lord through our disciplines.

Transdisciplinary Approach

During the 2010 Society for Christian Psychology conference, Alan Tjeltveit suggested that the term transdisciplinary could replace the better known term, interdisciplinary. Transdisciplinary connotes the sum of knowledge concerning individuals which encompasses a variety of disciplines and professions. While most members of the Society for Christian Psychology are typically psychologists and therapists, Eric Johnson began a collaborative effort with theologians, philosophers, and other specialists in their disciplines in order to gain more knowledge about people and how to best provide soul care. By creating a community of those interested in the human condition, a deeper understanding of God’s work can be achieved.

In fact, the Society for Christian Psychology’s firm commitment to promoting a multiple disciple approach to learning is confirmed to by the renaming of their journal, Edification: The Transdisciplinary Journal of Christian Psychology. Authors from various disciplines, such as theologians and philosophers, frequently contribute to this journal.

Johnson’s appeal for expanded dialogue echoes that of others. A prime example is McMinn and Moon’s work with the disciplines of theology and philosophy as seen in their call for the exploration of the spiritual classics; which they termed soul-o-logy. By emphasizing the writings of the early church fathers and philosophical thinkers, soul-o-logy encourages professionals to think deeply about biblical truths and the intricacies of the heart. Therefore, to best understand the intricacies of the heart, a transdisciplinary approach is necessary.

In developing a transdisciplinary Christian Psychology program, consider the following suggestions:

1. Professors from the human science disciplines meet regularly to discuss current interests in their fields, thereby creating a transdisciplinary culture.

2. Counseling program requires students to take classes in another human science discipline or even minor in a discipline such as theology or philosophy.

3. Guest speakers from different fields of study are invited to lecture in counseling classes.

4. Human science professors offer symposiums throughout the semester for students from all disciplines.

5. Research papers require information from various disciplines.

The list of recommendations is not exhaustive but a starting point. The necessity of exposing counseling students to knowledge and wisdom outside of the counseling field is vital. Indeed, a uniqueness of Christian Psychology programs is found in the appreciation of contributions made by various disciplines as they work in conjunction to glorify God.

Concluding the Discussion

“Worldviews are like sand at a picnic; they get into everything” (Bufford, 2007, p. 293). As well they should! That worldviews permeate all areas of life is the precise reason that professors of Christian Psychology programs must develop curricula that purposefully engages students’ foundational assumptions about life. Consider the words of C. S. Lewis (1955, p. 22): “The task of the modern educator is not to cut down jungles but to irrigate deserts.” The mission is not to eliminate students’ core beliefs from the counseling process—even if that were possible. Rather, it is to engage, challenge, and refine those presuppositions that students bring with them to counseling programs.

The task of exploring worldviews in the classroom can be, however, challenging. When educators lack a mental framework for how to navigate a discourse on core presuppositions, the notion of including a worldview approach to pedagogy is easily dismissed. In the absence of a well-articulated life-view, student counselors learn to compartmentalize that which pertains to their profession and the way they view human nature. Without a holistic approach to counseling instruction, new professionals may lack awareness of that which most influences their decisions inside the counseling room.

The goal of assisting students in developing professional worldviews is a worthy one. This task may require more than re-shaping traditional teaching methods; it may also require students to adjust the way they learn. By engaging new information is such a way that it is evaluated in light of existing worldviews, students are able to examine both the new material and their assumptions. When this method of instruction is accompanied by introducing students to knowledge from other disciplines, the problem of information fragmentation and compartmentalization is accounted for as students are encouraged to think broadly about the human condition. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, for students to fully grasp how personal life-views influence the counseling profession, professors must become authentic models of professional worldviews; allowing students to witness the practical application of a belief system in the profession.

That professors influence students’ life-views is not the question—we do. At times our influence is subtle and at other times overt. A colleague once commented, “As a professor, whatever I do, however I do it, I am creating changes – for better or worse” (Rick Yount, personal communication, 2011). For Christian Psychology professors, the challenge is to intentionally focus on the hearts of our students as we present our science in hopes that those changes will impact our profession for the glory of God.

References

Bufford, R. K. (2007). Philosophical foundations for clinical supervision within a
Christian worldview. Journal of Psychology and Christianity 26 (4), 293-297.

Lewis, C. S. (1955). The abolition of man: Reflections on education with special
reference to the teaching of English in the upper forms of schools. New York, NY: Macmillian.

[Shannon Wolf, PhD, LPC-S, is an Associate Professor in the Master of Arts in Counseling program at Dallas Baptist University. She specializes in trauma counseling and in combating human trafficking. She is our blogger for the month of April and this is her third post.]

Students enter counseling programs with their worldviews in tow. For some, these views have been well thought through. Others may be unaware of the core beliefs that drive them and so hold a sloppily constructed understanding of the world. Regardless of how aware students are of their foundational assumptions, these personal beliefs strongly influence how they view human nature. Thus, each student counselor has a psychological perspective that is supported by personal assumptions.

As well as providing a psychological perspective, worldviews influence students in conceptualizing client problems and determine how those problems will be treated. How student counselors explain or interpret what they see is dependent upon what they believe about the world in which they live—it depends upon their worldview. In truth, counseling problems are frequently complex, and where information is ambiguous—the counselor’s worldview provides interpretation. Everyone holds a mental model of the world – a subjective representation of reality. In the counseling room, these mental maps, or worldviews, guide the choice of skills that are used, influence the emotions that are reflected, and choose the concerns that are pursued as well as those that are ignored.

Psychological perspectives are not developed personality theories. However, worldviews do make some theories more attractive than others. Questions regarding how problems begin and how they are resolved depend largely on personal assumptions. Therefore, worldviews are like compasses that counselors navigate by, making the exploration of these views imperative for the student counselor.

A Logos-Centered Approach

Professors of Christian psychology and counseling programs are responsible for many areas of counselor development including helping students engaging their worldviews. Indeed, refining students’ worldviews and assisting them in applying those views to the counseling profession is a challenging task.

Working with material on the human condition while simultaneously working through matters of faith demands a new approach to pedagogy. A logos-centered pedagogy re-shapes traditional methods of teaching by allowing Christ to first filter and then permeate all areas of subject matter. The process must be one of adopting, adapting, and transforming theories and models in psychology within a biblical Christian worldview. Some professors contend that the process of adapting and transforming theories and healing models within the framework of a Christian worldview must begin early in the educational process for it is undeniably a method of learning as well as a method of teaching.

In a recent conversation with a colleague, it was observed that the Christian worldview is directly linked to curricula and methods of teaching in particular. If the goal of Christ-centered counselor education is to produce a holistic approach in Christian Psychology, then professors must engage an array of Christian thought and experience with the goal of nurturing a larger Christian worldview. Offering a heuristic pedagogy includes: 1) Providing points for discussing and wrestling with individual questions; 2) Highlighting areas for further study; 3) Suggesting a more comprehensive pattern for reflection, action, and study. This final point calls for professors to require students to synthesize new information with existing knowledge. It also demands that professors engage core beliefs in the reflection and evaluation of the material. However, these classroom conversations must be more than theoretical— it is essential that the information be linked to practical application. Professors may choose to offer personal examples, engage in classroom role plays, or provide case studies in order to assist the student in making the connection between theory and practice. Once the new information becomes part of an existing construct, it lays the foundation for the next piece of information. Hence, the learning process is somewhat cyclical in nature.

A chart is offered here to help explain how to develop teaching methods that are aimed at nurturing a Christian worldview. The heart of the Christian worldview begins with the primacy of Scripture and includes various areas of the Christian life. Note that all areas flow from Scripture but also influences the understanding of Scripture. Biblical revelation is at the center of Christian belief and practice, but of course, our own particular Christian tradition shapes how we read and understand that revelation. This holistic approach to the Christian life interacting with scientific knowledge is crucial in assisting the student in avoiding fragmenting or compartmentalizing material. For example, when teaching on grief, a professor might include a biblical exegesis on select Scripture passages that address that particular topic, accompanied by a discussion on how the students understand grief in light of their Christian doctrines and traditions. Additionally, the instructor might examine literary works on grief such as the writings of C. S. Lewis. From this discussion, scientific knowledge is added followed by examples of application in the counseling room.

When learning is based on the Christian faith, students gain a much deeper understanding of the material and how it impacts the field of counseling.

[Shannon Wolf, PhD, LPC-S, is an Associate Professor in the Master of Arts in Counseling program at Dallas Baptist University. She specializes in trauma counseling and in combating human trafficking. She is our blogger for the month of April and this is her second post.]

Historically, Christian universities have displayed a strong dedication to preserving the tenets of the Christian faith while tirelessly exploring scientific knowledge. Sadly, today many of our institutions of higher education struggle to retain their Christian distinctiveness. Recently, Christian professors have expressed great concern over the dearth of the influence of biblical faith within the halls of these universities. Modern educators have pondered matters of faith and knowledge that identify a university as distinctly Christian and have urged others to join in the conversation. A leader in this dialogue, Cornelius Plantinga, contends that education is a spiritual journey that ought to lead to a more complete understanding of God. Hence, the Christian scholar has more to be Christian with.

This renewed call for the development of the Christian mind alongside academic coursework is best noted in the work of Dallas Willard. He stresses that spiritual formation must flow from spiritual disciplines, biblical revelation, and liturgical life and urges Christian universities to include such in their curriculum. The consensus is that rather than blending faith and knowledge, faith precedes knowledge. The popular conviction to just add Jesus and stir is not an adequate recipe for the development of a distinctly Christian mind.

Spiritual formation focuses on a person’s foundational beliefs about the Christian life and serves as a type of lens from which we make sense of life events. Our view of life, then, guides our thought processes and ultimately our decisions. Perhaps Kierkegaard explains this task best. He contends that each person has a duty to understand himself, his foundational assumptions of life, and the conclusions he draws about the world. Each person must determine the meaning of life for himself. What was once termed life-view is now more commonly referred to as worldview.

For Christians, a worldview is much more than agreeing with others on basic theological doctrines. It is a set of overarching assumptions an individual holds about the sense of self, how the world works, one’s place in the world, what is important, what is to be valued, and what is to be devalued. These presuppositions explain the relationship between things and describe the meaning of life and our role in society. In addition, a worldview attempts to bring cohesiveness to a person’s thoughts, experiences, and emotions and is therefore unique to the individual.

Worldviews are not rigid but continue to develop throughout adulthood. As students grow spiritually and gain knowledge, their worldviews have the opportunity to become better refined.

A biblically sound Christian worldview is much more than faith added to secular thinking or scholarship taking place in a Christian environment. Rather, a Christian worldview provides the structure for Christian scholarship in all disciplines. Since worldviews are involved in guiding life decisions, care must be taken to assist students in the crucial task of examining closely held beliefs. Therefore, there must be consistency between Christian faith and scientific knowledge. For this to happen, the inclusion of Christian doctrines and the writings of wise and insightful individuals are imperative for all disciplines. Ultimately, Christian thinking flows from the recognition of God’s sovereignty in all areas of study; whether in the arts, sciences, humanities, education, or business.

Given the influence of worldviews on the individual, it is reasonable to conclude that worldviews also impact professional assumptions. A professional worldview is not and should not be separated from a personal worldview; rather those basic personal presuppositions found in one’s most basic beliefs, direct professional theory and practice. In order for those views to be explored, it is necessary for professors to focus educational discussions on the student’s worldview.

Pioneers of Christian Psychology have long argued for the purposeful development of a depth of understanding of humans and how they live that based on foundational doctrines of our faith. In fact, a hallmark of Christian Psychology is a firm theological foundation whose core element is a personal relationship with Christ. A well-articulated and insightful understanding of central Christian beliefs is what makes a counselor distinctly Christian. Just as adding Bible verses and prayer to lectures does not make a curriculum Christian, the same can be said of Christian counseling. A firm Christian foundation, built on spiritual disciplines and philosophical discussions is necessary for the development of distinctly Christian counselors.

The development, examination, and articulation of a distinctly Christian worldview, specifically those core values that guide Christian Psychology, is the result of much effort on the part of the professor and the student and is the result of purposeful instruction. In order for student counselors to develop a strong biblically based foundation, professors of Christian counseling programs must mindfully assist in the development of a distinctly Christian Psychology.

That professors shape students’ worldviews is not the question. Rather, it can be argued that at times they lack awareness of how profoundly they impact students’ views of Christian counseling. Such unawareness can result in the implicit message that Christianity is to be tacked on to whatever theory is being used.

The task of transforming foundational life assumptions is fraught with challenges; however, the value of a biblically based, or logos-centered, approach to counselor education is well worth the effort.

[Shannon Wolf, PhD, LPC-S, is an Associate Professor in the Master of Arts in Counseling program at Dallas Baptist University. She specializes in trauma counseling and in combating human trafficking. She is our blogger for the month of April and this is her first post.]

Fix these words of mine in your hearts and minds; tie them as symbols on your hands and bind them on your foreheads. Teach them to your children, talking about them when you sit at home and when you walk along the road, when you lie down and when you get up. Write them on the doorframes of your houses and on your gates” (Deut. 11:18-20 ESV).

For many of us, the Easter season is chock-full of traditions. In my family, we decorate our home and fill colorful baskets with all our favorite goodies. We color Easter eggs—dozens of them—and participate in our neighborhood’s annual Easter egg hunt. I particularly love watching the classic Easter movie, “The Ten Commandments” with my family. But the three traditions that I hold most dear are all held in the latter part of Holy Week. The first is our church’s Silent Lord’s Supper service, observed on the Thursday evening before Easter Sunday, the second is the sunrise service on Easter morning, and finally, the reading of John’s account of the resurrection story. All of these events help me to focus on the meaning of Easter and the foundational tenets of my faith.

One of my earliest memories is of my father opening his heavy black Bible on the eve before Easter Sunday and gathering our family around him. He would read the resurrection story and then pray before sending my brother and me off to bed.

Years later, when I married, my husband and I continued my cherished childhood tradition. As we’ve raised our own family, we’ve added some new customs and tweaked a few of the older ones, but the one that has remained the same is the reading of the resurrection story followed by a conversation on who Jesus is, the significance of the cross and the reality of the resurrection. A few days ago, my husband again read the words I so love:

Early on the first day of the week, while it was still dark, Mary Magdalene went to the tomb and saw that the stone had been removed from the entrance. ² So she came running to Simon Peter and the other disciple, the one Jesus loved, and said, “They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, and we don’t know where they have put him!”³ So Peter and the other disciple started for the tomb. ⁴ Both were running, but the other disciple outran Peter and reached the tomb first. ⁵ He bent over and looked in at the strips of linen lying there but did not go in. ⁶ Then Simon Peter came along behind him and went straight into the tomb. He saw the strips of linen lying there, ⁷ as well as the cloth that had been wrapped around Jesus’ head. The cloth was still lying in its place, separate from the linen. ⁸ Finally the other disciple, who had reached the tomb first, also went inside. He saw and believed. (John 20:1-8 NIV)

So just how important are traditions? They seem to be very important to God. In fact, the Lord put many traditions in place—from Passover to the Day of Atonement, to baptism and communion.

Our sacred celebrations and observances help us teach our children, grandchildren and other loved ones about who God is, what He has done, and what He will do. Traditions are something that we pass down and will live on long after we’re gone.

Traditions help combat the human tendency to forget. They remind us that in the midst all the busyness of life, there is a God who gave up His place in Heaven to join us here on earth, who died on a cross as an atonement for our sins, and conquered death by rising again. Traditions keep us focused on what is truly meaningful.

I encourage you to continue celebrating your traditions—and maybe even develop new ones that focus on the hope Jesus offers us. “Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God—  children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God” (John 1:12-13 NIV).

The tomb is empty. Christ is risen! He is risen, indeed! (Luke 24: 5b-6a).

[Michael D. Cook, Ph.D, is our blogger for the month of March and this is his fourth post. Mike currently serves as an Associate Professor in Huntington University’s Graduate Counseling Program.  Mike is a Licensed Marriage and Family Therapist (IN) and has served in several mental health facilities and in several churches.  He specializes in marital therapy, trauma therapy, spiritual formation and formational counseling.]

In this fourth and final post, I will uphold the Apostle Paul as an exemplar of a reconciling identity, and characterize his journey toward said identity as a normative experience in Christ’s Kingdom. Further, I will highlight several processes that facilitated Paul’s transformation and suggest some applications for all believers.

Conformity: Prior to his conversion, Paul described himself as “a Hebrew of Hebrews” and “a Pharisee” (Phil. 3:4-6; see also Gal. 1:11-14, Acts 7:58, 8:1-3 & 9:1-2 for other references). Then, known as Saul, he was ethnically-encapsulated, viewing Jewish believers in Jesus as the Messiah as ethnic traitors, and was zealous in his intent to persecute and exterminate this “heretical” new sect before it progressed. We can assume that his vision of YHWH’s Kingdom did not include Gentiles, except for proselytes that adopted the Jewish faith and customs. Further, in keeping with Pharisaical beliefs and practices, Saul would have likely held great disdain for all Gentile ethnicities, considering Jews – particularly faithful Jews – to be superior to other ethnic groups. Like Saul, perhaps most of us begin, prior to our conversion and maybe even afterward for some of us, in a context of ethnic-encapsulation in which our religious, moral, and cultural framework is ethnocentric, and we may even be blind to our own ethnocentrism, given its enshrinement in our theology and ideology.

Conversion: After his Damascus Road conversion (Acts 9:1-9) and subsequent preparation for and initiation into the burgeoning Church, Paul begins several short missionary forays, beginning with a trip to Damascus (Acts 9:19-25). Given that Paul’s early missionary activity was limited to Jewish outreach, it seems likely that he continues to assume an ethnocentric vision of the Kingdom. However, the Church, particularly the Church leadership, soon faced a dilemma in Peter’s report of the manifestation of the Spirit upon Gentiles (Acts 10-11); the decision faced by James and the elders in Jerusalem was one reflected throughout the history of Israel, namely a retreat to an ethnocentric vision of the Kingdom or an advance to an ethnically diverse Kingdom. Not long after the decision of the elders to embrace the inclusive work of the Spirit, Paul and Barnabas are commissioned for their first, broader missionary journey (Acts 13:1-3), but, not long into it, they face significant Jewish opposition (again, likely related to their ethnocentric vision) and turn to working exclusively among the Gentiles (Acts 13:44-52). For the remainder of this first missionary journey, Paul continued to initiate his ministry through the synagogues, though focusing on Gentiles – perhaps proselytes – and to face strong Jewish opposition. (Acts 14). Thus what the Spirit of God began on the Damascus Road in conversion to Jesus as the Christ, He continued in Paul’s turning toward the Gentiles. For all of us, conversion represents not only a reconciling to Jesus as the Son of God, but also a reconciling to the Family of God in all of its ethnic diversity. And, for many of us, embracing our new Family in all of its ethnic diversity may result in opposition – perhaps even rejection – by those who remain ethnically-encapsulated.

Formation: During Paul’s first missionary journey, some Jewish believers attempt to impose an ethnocentric requirement upon the Gentile converts (Acts 15:1-2), but Paul vigorously renounced this requirement, resulting in an inquiry to the Apostles and elders in Jerusalem. Again, the leadership of the Church, in their decision (Acts 15:1-29) affirmed the work of the Spirit among the Gentiles and an ethnically-diverse, inclusive vision of the Kingdom. Though the description of the debate does not describe it, it is quite possible that Paul’s argument for this ethnically-expansive vision of the Kingdom was vigorous (though it is Peter’s testimony and address that seems to be pivotal in this decision), and his action is further evidence of the formative work of the Spirit in and through Paul to recast a much more expansive vision of the Kingdom. In subsequent missionary journeys, Paul would less frequently initiate his missionary activity in an area through the synagogues. In like manner, for all of us, the formative work of the Spirit will move us toward an embrace of our ethnically-diverse Family, and toward a vision of the Kingdom that is ethnically-diverse but unified; we will also be moved toward championing this unity in diversity even against voices and forces that clamor for an ethnically-encapsulated orthodoxy and orthopraxy.

Integration: After the events of Acts 13, Paul’s missionary endeavors were devoted exclusively toward inclusion of Gentile ethnicities in the Kingdom. Moreover, Paul became a strong advocate for ethnic reconciliation in the Family and championed a trans-ethnic identity as the telos of sanctification (see my earlier treatment of this theme in the Epistles in post #2). However, for Paul, sanctification is not Henry Ford’s “Melting Pot” (see post #2), in which we forsake all ethnic expression. The Apostle Paul was an early advocate for an ethnic-cultural contextualization of the Gospel, becoming “all things to all men” (1 Cor. 9:19-23) in order to advance the Kingdom, and it would seem that Paul’s principle teaching on this matter was that we are free to adopt, even promote, a redeemed, ethno-cultural expression of the Gospel as long as we don’t become ethnically-encapsulated. Further, Paul was quick to address any ethnically-encapsulated attitudes and expressions that promoted anything less than reconciliation and unity in the Family of God (Gal. 2:11-21).

Paul’s journey toward a reconciling identity is instructive for all within the Kingdom, and, though our journeys might differ to some degree, much is likely to be similar to his path of transformation. And in this journey is an irony; the development into a trans-ethnic, Eucharistic identity is the very means that affords the adoption, even celebration, of ethno-cultural expressions of Christianity. In my own journey toward a reconciling identity, I have found that I can celebrate both my Southern Euro-American and African-American ethno-cultural heritages, particularly in a redeemed Christian contextualization, and do so without tension. Moreover, as the Spirit continues his transformative work in my soul, my identity is becoming more reconciled into a Eucharistic, trans-ethnic identity that also more and more propels me to engage in a ministry of reconciliation and unity-building in the Family of God. May we all work toward the fulfillment of our Lord’s priestly prayer that we may “be one” (John 17), looking forward to the consummation and full reconciliation of all in Him at His return.

[Michael D. Cook, Ph.D, is our blogger for the month of March and this is his third post. Mike currently serves as an Associate Professor in Huntington University’s Graduate Counseling Program.  Mike is a Licensed Marriage and Family Therapist (IN) and has served in several mental health facilities and in several churches.  He specializes in marital therapy, trauma therapy, spiritual formation and formational counseling.]

In my previous posts (the reader is encouraged to read my two previous blog posts), I raised the issue of a Christian understanding of racial-ethnic identity development and racial-ethnic relations and demonstrated that ethnicity, ethnic identity, and ethnic relations are central themes in the Bible, particularly in the Epistles. Further, I asserted that the telos of Christ’s work, in life, death and resurrection, is a new ethnicity, and the sanctification process requires believers to divest from their “tribal” ethnicities and invest in this new Eucharistic, ethnic identity. In this post, my intent is to describe briefly some of the implications, and associated inner dynamics, of becoming this new ethnicity for individual believers.

Though embracing our new ethnicity as Euchariots (my term for communicating that our identity is grounded in the death and resurrection of Christ) as the primary construct of our identity is the intent of the Spirit’s work of sanctification within us, this process, like all other aspects of sanctification, is a life-long work. But how does this transition proceed? How do we facilitate the work of the Spirit here? Though space limitations will not allow me to fully address this concern, I would like to assert several proposed dynamics. First, I propose that the American Church needs to recapture the themes of ethnic relations, specifically ethnic reconciliation and a new ethnic identity, in our biblical and theological discourse. Particularly, for White, American Evangelicals, these themes have been conspicuously absent from our biblical interpretation and our ministries of proclamation, and one has to wonder to what degree our privileged position in the larger American society has influenced us in this regard. I am encouraged that many younger Evangelicals embrace unity across ethnic diversity, and, further, that a biblical moral vision appears to be the primary motive for reconciliation and unity in ethnic diversity. (See McNeil, B., and Richardson, R., 2004, for an example.) Discouragingly, these themes have not yet surfaced prominently in most of our churches or in most of our seminaries.

Beyond recapturing and recasting ethic reconciliation and trans-ethnic identity as a prominent thread in the tapestry of the biblical narrative, what would significantly facilitate the work of the Spirit toward embracing our identity as Euchariots? Here is where an understanding of deeper interpersonal and interpersonal dynamics for spiritual growth is relevant. I have found that developing progressively deepening cross-racial and cross-ethnic relationships, characterized by understanding and grace, with other believers to best facilitate the work of the Spirit in this transformation process. Further, what seems to best facilitate these relationships is an understanding that racial-ethnic prejudice and stereotyping is endemic to all human groups (for a helpful summation of supportive research, see Myers, 2012 ) and a commitment to avoid labeling. I have also found that a biblical understanding of inner dynamics – namely, that sin operates often in deep, intrapsychic processes (i.e., double-mindedness) and that the work of the Spirit is toward intrapsychic integration – is helpful. More, the primary process through which the Spirit works to facilitate this intrapersonal reconciliation is through redemptive, particularly confessional, relationships. As we deepen the confessional, corrective discourse in our cross-ethnic relationships, we facilitate greater union both interpersonally and intrapersonally in the Body of Christ.

One implication of this sanctification process for me as a White American is that I have needed to repent (and in some ways, this remains ongoing) of my American hyper- individualism and wrestle with its influence on my Christian orthodoxy and orthopraxy, and I am finding that my Eucharistic identity is significantly characterized by a strong-group orientation (for a helpful description of strong-group, Christian identity, see Hellerman, J., 2009) toward the family of God. One of my missionary friends expressed this repentance process well when he stated that his most difficult adjustment process on the mission field was “separating my ‘Americanism’ from authentic, biblical Christianity.” Finally, as we move from ethnic encapsulation toward our trans-ethnic identity in Christ, we will progressively engage in ministries of reconciliation within the Body of Christ, and become increasingly identified by our posture of reconciliation and unity-making. Empowered by the Spirit of God, we seek to fulfill the plea of our Savior for “one-ness” (John 17) among those who are called by His name, and, thus, we develop a reconciling identity. As is true in other ways, the process of ethnic reconciliation toward a trans-ethnic identity and unity is most aptly characterized as sanctification from the inside out – intrapersonal reconciliation through redemptive relationships leads to interpersonal reconciliation and increasing unity in the Body of Christ.

Though much more could be written of these themes, I have simply attempted to raise awareness and relate several pointers that I have found to be helpful and true in my own journey toward a reconciling identity. My focus has been on interpersonal and intrapersonal dynamics in ethnic reconciliation, and I regret that I have not been able to address other equally weighty concerns, such as institutional forms of prejudice and discrimination with the Church. For now, I would encourage interested readers to digest D. Perry’s (2002) Building Unity in the Church of the Millennium for more in this regard. In my next post, my hope is to identify several phases and nodal points of an exemplar of a reconciling identity familiar to us all. Again, I welcome dialogue.

REFERENCES

McNeil, B., and Richardson, R. (2004). The Heart of Racial Justice: How Soul Change Leads to Social Change. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity.

Hellerman, J. (2009). When the Church Was a Family: Recapturing Jesus’ Vision for Authentic Christian Community. Nashville: B & H Publishing.

Myers, D. (2012). Social Psychology (11th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Perry, D. (2002). Building Unity in the Church of the New Millennium. Chicago: Moody Press.

[Michael D. Cook, Ph.D, is our blogger for the month of March and this is his second post. Mike currently serves as an Associate Professor in Huntington University’s Graduate Counseling Program.  Mike is a Licensed Marriage and Family Therapist (IN) and has served in several mental health facilities and in several churches.  He specializes in marital therapy, trauma therapy, spiritual formation and formational counseling.]

It was said of Henry Ford that his real business was not in making cars but in making men (Colt, 2013).  European immigrants to America found new life and prosperity working on Ford’s assembly lines, but realization of the American dream came with a price.  To prepare these immigrant workers for citizenship and factory life, Ford required them to enroll in courses on such subjects as English, family life, finances and more.  This acculturation process was marked by a ceremony known as “Henry Ford’s Melting Pot,” where the immigrant worker would enter a man-sized, mock kettle in the traditional attire of their homeland and exit wearing a dark, American-styled suit and straw hat.  The symbolism was striking; the worker left behind the mores, practices, and even attire of their ethnic culture to become thoroughly “American” (given Mr. Ford’s vision of America).

As I searched the Scriptures for wisdom in resolving the conflict regarding my own racial-ethnic identity [the reader is encouraged to read the previous post for background], I realized that ethnicity and ethnic relations was neither absent nor tangential in the biblical narrative.  Though there are hints of these themes in the gospels (for example, in the account of the woman at the well and in Jesus’ high priestly prayer), ethnicity and particularly cross-ethnic reconciliation is a central theme in the rest of the New Testament. Ethnicity and ethnic reconciliation are prominent themes in the book of Acts.  At Pentecost (Acts 2), the astute reader will observe a reversal of the Tower of Babel (Gen.11); in the upper room, God, the Spirit, comes down upon the obedient believers, and speaks the languages of all ethnicities through Peter and the other apostles to usher them into one Body.  Soon afterward, an office of the Church is created to address a matter of discrimination (Acts 6). Hereafter, the Spirit moves in a near-reversal of Old Testament chronology, reconciling Judeans, Samaritans, and then Gentile ethnicities into the Body of Christ.  More than a debate regarding membership requirements, the Gentile question (Acts 15) represented a decision between an ethnocentric gospel and a trans-ethnic gospel, for beneath the few words dedicated to the decision rested hundreds of years of Jewish ethnic pride and nationalism. In Acts, the astute reader discerns that the Church, impelled by the Spirit, was confronted consistently between a decision to retreat to ethnic pride and encapsulation or to embrace an all-encompassing (ethnically) vision of the Kingdom.   Even a casual reading of Acts would surely affirm that ethnic reconciliation is central to the mission of the Spirit of Christ in the formation of the Church.

Many other passages throughout the New Testament address matters of ethnicity, ethnic identity, and ethnic relations in Christ’s Kingdom.  Ethnic conflict between Jews and Gentiles appears to be at least one impetus for Paul’s authorship of Romans (see specifically chapters 9-11), and, in Galatians, Paul writes, “there is neither Jew nor Greek” (Gal. 3:28), but rather we are “one” in Christ. In Ephesians, Paul asserts again that Christ has broken down the wall of division between Jews and Gentiles, making them into one “new man” (Eph. 2).  In Philippians, Paul labels his former investment in ethnic pedigree as a source of identity as “rubbish”, and he admonishes the Philippian believers to “put no confidence in the flesh.” (3:3). Ethnicity, ethnic identity, and ethnic relations are prominent themes in many of Paul’s other epistles, as well.

The book of Hebrews seems to be written in a Jewish ethnic discourse to Jewish believers who appear to be in danger of rejecting grace and returning to a former ethnocentric theology. In his first epistle, Peter described the Church as a “holy ethnicity” (1 Pet. 2:9, ethnos hagion in Greek), again implying that the Church is not simply a collection of ethnicities but is, rather, becoming a trans-ethnicity. And, in John’s revelation, the Lamb of God is found worthy to open the scroll due to His sacrifice for the purpose of redeeming “people for God from every tribe, and language and people and nation (ethnos),” making them to be “a kingdom , and priests to our God.” (Rev. 5)  Finally, in the consummation of the Kingdom portrayed in Revelation 22, we discover that the leaves of the Tree of Life are for the “healing” of the “nations” (ethnon) or “ethnicities”.

Though matters of racial-ethnic relations have been absent in much of the proclamation ministry of the Evangelical Church in America, matters of ethnic identity and ethnic reconciliation are central in the ministry of the gospel in the New Testament.  Though I have focused exclusively on the New Testament, one perspective of the Old Testament is to view it as the record of an identity conflict for Israel, one propelled by ethnic pride and ethnic-encapsulation against a greater, trans-ethnic vision of dominion under God.  Taken together, the accounts of the Tower of Babel (Gen. 11) and the Adoration of the Lamb (Rev. 5) seem to serve as anchoring columns between which the tapestry of the biblical narrative, replete with ethnic pride, ethnic conflict, and ethnic reconciliation, is hung. Further, the practical implication of the cross is that repentance from our ethnocentrism and reconciliation toward unity is essential in our spiritual formation, for a new, Eucharistic ethnos is the telos of Christ’s sacrifice and resurrection.  The gospel invitation is no less than an invitation to be transformed into a new, trans-cultural ethnicity that supercedes our former ethnic identities.

Given that the Church is a “holy ethnicity”, what are the implications for us as individual believers?  How does this process of transformation occur?  What are the dynamics of the process?  Is this a complete divorce from our former ethnic expressions (as symbolized in Ford’s melting pot ceremony) or is there any “allowance” for a diversity of ethnic expression in the Kingdom?  In the subsequent post, I will briefly explore these concerns and more. Please feel free to post comments, questions and reflections below; I welcome dialogue.

References

Colt, S. (Producer & Director). (2013). Henry Ford. [Television series episode]. In M. Samuels [Executive producer], An American Experience.  Boston: PBS.