My Adventures with God 50: Prayer and Preaching

50: Prayer and Preaching

Things were changing at St. Luke's Church. Mostly invisible things. Nick and Shirley's admirers were still in many of the “up-front” roles in church – leading services, prayers, preaching, music team and so on. In these they were very much doing their own thing without any restraint from me. I think I even kept my mouth shut the time the extempore prayers of intercession went for longer than the sermon had! But change was happening and being noticed.

The first reason for things changing was that I was doing a great deal of praying. I said earlier that one problem with the group of people who had infiltrated and then dominated leadership roles was that they wanted the power of spiritual gifts without the “sanctification” aspect of being changed into the image of Jesus. God's Holy Spirit is first of all holy. Faith in the real Christ – not some false concept of a “Buddy Jesus” who is content for you to remain an ego worshipper – is a pre-requisite for the Holy Spirit to work openly in one's life!

There had been a sort of fake-Charismatic air to many of the church services.

Now, I generally only pray in tongues in crisis moments, but at that time I frequently found myself praying under my breath in tongues throughout some of these services.

In my private prayer times I was of course continually praying (with my mind) both for all the congregation individually and also for wisdom myself in handling things. So why the “tongues”? Actually I take my being moved by the Spirit to pray in tongues as part of that kindness of God which I find so beautiful and so overwhelming. If I was praying concerning particular people – perhaps the one leading the service or the singing at that time – any problem they had was strictly between them and the Heavenly Father – theirs as well as mine. It was not my business to know what it was. Indeed we should all be relieved that God does not tell people everything he knows about us! Obediently praying where I did not know the content of the prayers let me be part of the solution without having to know the problem!

However, while I was not doing anything physically to change what these people did, God was - spiritually. Service leaders were complaining that they felt stifled. When they blamed that on the liturgy, then for the more casual evening service I told them they could start with a blank page and write their own service format. They still felt stifled.

They started to say that I must have grieved the Spirit, or that the Spirit no longer flowed in the services, or that the Holy Spirit had left St. Luke's. Nick with Shirley's both wrote letters to the church council to try to get them to set up a “worship advisory committee” Nick said in his letter: “to hear the mind of God through the feedback of those in our midst who have a heart and sensibility and commitment to the work of God at St' Luke's”. Shirley urged the council (which was dominated by her supporters) to: “consider, to pray, and ask the Lord for a vision regarding our services. We need a team to make decisions about what we desire to accomplish during our services” As Anglican services are strictly under the authority of the minister (within some pretty strict regulations, naturally), I did not allow this.

What was really happening was that the real Holy Spirit was being more pro-active and putting a damper on their fake performances.

Preaching which faithfully expounds the Bible is divisive. One does not have to read far through the book of Acts to see this in operation. Paul manages to cause riots in nearly every town he preached in. Some might say part of this was his style or his personality, and since he was fallible human like the rest of us maybe it was. Maybe Stephen should have kept his mouth shut instead of giving that sermon which got him martyred. We can go on like that through all the prophets who were killed for delivering God's message to their generation, but the excuse of human error starts to wear a bit thin!

When we come to Jesus, there is no getting round it. He was perfect. Perfect Love, perfect image of God, faithfully and truthfully expounding the things of God. Yet look at the reaction to his preaching. It was divisive. The middle chapters of John's Gospel to me bring this out most clearly. As he goes on some become more devoted followers, some walk away, and the opposition of the religious elite becomes more and more strident.

If you still want to think that one can preach (outside the confines of your clique) and not cause division this is what Jesus himself said: “Blessed are you when people hate you, when they exclude you and insult you and reject your name as evil because of the Son of Man. Rejoice …. for that is how their ancestors treated the prophets. … But woe to you when everyone speaks well of you, for that is how their ancestors treated the false prophets.” (Luke 6)

So my preaching was causing a division. There were a large number – even at that stage the majority of the congregation - who held to sound Christian doctrine – they loved it and were growing stronger in their faith. Then there were the ones who held to the gospel of Self. They were being challenged. Some came good – possibly not even realising what had changed in them. Others were, like the religious elite in Jesus day becoming more and more bitter in their opposition.

Jane, the music leader and Nick's wife (the one who before I was even inducted as Vicar had asked the Bishop how to get rid of me!) told me she felt “violated” whenever I preached. Really? “Violated” She did also tell me that she didn't need to hear sermons on sin because she “had no sin”. No, I did not quote the Bible's “But if anyone says they have no sin they deceive themselves and the truth is not in them” - that would have only pushed her further away. And I was to the very end trying to win all of these people back for Christ.

Nick took things even further. In November 1992 there was a baptism in church. I baptised three children of regular church attenders. Nick was the one rostered on to lead the service that morning, although as the priest I read the actual baptism liturgy.

At next Tuesday's staff meeting attacked me with abuse. He did not believe in infant Baptism. However St Luke's was an Anglican Church, and Infant baptism is held to be “most agreeable with the institution of Christ” Nick said he refused to take part in any service where there was infant baptism, and to round things off he refused to take part in any service where I preached.

Since Nick was only employed one-quarter-time (he had a regular job as well) and since a third of his time was meant to be taking part in services this was a refusal to do his job. He challenged me to sack him. I didn't.

However crunch time was approaching.