I hope you find both reviews helpful.

An entire biblical theology of remembering runs throughout the Scriptures. “Remember the Sabbath day” (Exod. 20:8). “Remember all the commandments of the Lord” (Num. 15:39). “Remember the wondrous works that he has done” (1 Chron. 16:12). “Remember the Lord, who is great and awesome” (Neh. 4:14). Pile up these stones as “a memorial forever” (Josh. 4:7). “Keep your soul diligently, lest you forget” (Deut. 4:9; cf. 4:23; 6:12; 8:11). “Remember it is not you who support the root, but the root that supports you” (Rom. 11:18). “Do this in remembrance of me” (1 Cor. 11:24). “Remember that you were at that time separated from Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world” (Eph. 2:12). “Remember Jesus Christ, risen from the dead, the offspring of David, as preached in my gospel” (2 Tim. 2:8).

Remembering and believing are not cousins. They are twins. To remember biblically is to believe. And to believe, you must remember. Spiritual amnesia is fatal, not like a dose of fast-acting poison, but like cancer. Perhaps it’s best to say, “Spiritual amnesia is terminal.” It slowly takes its toll. But in the end, death is death.

The story of Peter turns out to be, in the classic sense, a comedy. Not because it makes us laugh, but because it ends happily. Remembering led to weeping. Weeping led to repenting. Repenting led to loving. Loving led to following the risen Christ (John 21:15-19).

The cancer of spiritual forgetfulness has a cure. Unlike radiation and chemotherapy that deplete the body, this cure replenishes the soul. Take a large dose of remembering. Take as needed. Take often. Overdosing is not a concern. Underdosing is.

Originally written on Good Friday 2008

Let my peace rule in your heart–
Calming doubt with peaceful rest,
Winning bout o’er Satan’s best,
Binding members a united throng.

Let my Word dwell in your heart–
Taking root as living seed,
Bearing fruit in word and deed,
Bubbling forth a psalm and song.

And through me let thanks be given
To the Father, filling heaven
With my name, Jesus the Lord,
Ever praised through deed and word.

I won’t attempt here to give a comprehensive definition of preaching, but it seems to me that a good sermon should contain at least two elements. First, it should communicate with individuals. Each person should feel that he or she is being spoken to directly. In that sense, preaching should be conversational. Second, this conversation, while based explicitly upon a text of Scripture, should come from the heart. In her novel, Gilead, Marilynne Robinson describes a good sermon as “one side of a passionate conversation.” That’s not everything that goes into a good sermon, but without those aspects one is left with a dry, religious essay.

To write about preaching is a dangerous craft. When you write about such an important and holy subject, people may get the impression that you know what you’re talking about. Or worse, that you think you know what you’re talking about. But theory can be sound when practice is weak, and in light of that, I have written.

Dr. Donald Macleod has summarized this well. He writes, “Christ went further than merely foregoing recognition and acclaim, however. He became in the fullest and most public sense a servant. He did not sit in the place of honour with those who were being waited on but chose, instead, to stand with those who were doing the waiting (Mark 10:45) and whose service was totally unappreciated. Indeed, men were scandalised both at the kind of service he rendered and at the way he rendered it. He could not even vindicate himself. He was in the right and knew that he was in the right. But he allowed himself to be put in the wrong, to be seen only as condemned, outcast, despised and defeated. Not all suffering involves rejection. Very often the sufferer is upheld by the knowledge that his suffering is acclaimed and appreciated and that although he is hated by his persecutors he is lauded by his peers. For Christ, it was far different. He suffered without admiration and without compassion.

But what about a stagnant church? Churches can be doctrinally healthy, even confessional, and yet enter a period where life becomes stale and dull. The routine continues. No one detects heresy in the pulpit. Folks are still friendly. But, like sails without wind, the ship lies still in the water, bobbing up and down but going nowhere.

In the latest issue of Evangelicals Now, Marcus Honeysett discusses this very issue and offers a penetrating analysis of stagnant church life. Here’s one example why churches stall.

Not understanding how to release and encourage everyone in the church to use their spiritual gifts for the building up of the church. This stall can take several different forms: the church (or the leader) that expects the leader to do everything and everyone else to do nothing; the church that thinks that participation is not a matter of identifying and utilising gifts but of exercising a vote at a church meeting; the church that doesn’t want to be challenged out of a cultural comfort zone and that insists that its leaders act as their chaplains for meeting exclusively internal spiritual needs. There are two types of DNA in churches. One type of church says ‘we exist to have our personal spiritual needs met’, the other ‘we exist to impact our locality and the world with the gospel of the grace of God in Christ’. The first type is a stalled church.

I encourage you to read the full article. It’s brief and will only take a couple of minutes, but I believe it will offer you a template against which to examine your own attitude toward the Lord’s work as well as a guide to praying for your church leadership.

Edward VI had a brief reign of only six years. Raised with Protestant influence, Edward’s faith had about it the genuine marks of salvation. During his reign, the Church of England pressed forward with reforms in doctrine and worship. The Mass was abolished, clergy were allowed to marry, and worship services were conducted in English so the common people could understand the Word of God.

Though this successor, Mary I (Bloody Mary), sought to reverse all reforms and return England to the Roman Catholic faith, Edward’s work and that of his archbishop, Thomas Cranmer, was not wasted. The Elizabethan Religious Settlement of 1559 secured a lasting place for Edward’s reformation, and England would yet see a mighty work of God.

If you would like to learn more about this time period, I suggest listening to a lecture on Thomas Cranmer by Rudi Heinze. Given at Oak Hill Theological College, it provides an overview of Cranmer’s ministry as well as some insight into the heart and mind of this Reformer.