The Church Militant

It would seem that society’s expectations for peace have never been higher. People believe that peace is attainable in international relations, especially now that the Cold War is ended. Critics of the War on Terror argue that the war is unnecessary and may in fact be the cause of the terrorists’ hostility toward this country or at least be the fuel that continues to enflame it. Peace, they argue, will come when the war is ended.

We demand peace in public discourse. We view personal peace as our “right” and we believe that the church should be a stronghold of peace.

In a world in which personal relationships appear more fragile, jobs are less secure and even our safety is at risk, people sometimes attend church in search of a “peaceful harbor” in the storms of life. They want peace somewhere. The church they believe may be the last stronghold of peace. The continuing debates and crisis over homosexual ordination means, however, that even the church does not offer the peace they seek.

Peace should indeed be a goal of human relationships. But, the natural human yearning for peace can also be so seductive that it becomes an end in itself rather than a gift of the Holy Spirit. Jesus is the Prince of Peace. And visible peace will be ours when “there is no more mourning, or crying or pain” (Rev. 21:4). We should have a vision of peace. Scripture gives us a vision of the way things will one day be in Christ.

Our strong desire for peace, however, can cause us to deny the spiritual battle that Truth provokes until Christ returns and “every knee will bow” (Phil. 2:10). Jesus told his disciples for the here and now, “Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword” (Mt 10:34). Peace is a gift from God and does not exist apart from the struggle for Truth. For peace to exist, Truth must reign, sin must be abolished, and every knee must bow.

Revisionists Argue that Peace is Only Possible when Objective Truth is Denied

In the church, those who promote a revisionist truth-is-relative worldview insist that it is not when God’s objective Truth reigns that we will experience peace. Rather, they hold that it is when the existence of objective Truth is set aside that a new era of peace will be inaugurated. They argue that peace will reign when people are free to define truth for themselves according to their own context and experiences. Each person must be allowed to pursue his or her own road to happiness. The PUP report hopes to achieve peace when every presbytery and every session does what is right in its own eyes.

The truth-is-relative worldview with its lure of peace has gotten a foothold in public politics, as well. In earlier days, the American public expected political candidates to debate and engage one another to peel away the layers of hyperbole, half-truths, and deceptions, to arrive at the truth. Today candidates that seriously engage their opponents are often labeled “mud-slingers.” There is instead a demand that campaigns be “civil,” which means never challenging another candidate’s truth claims.

James Lileks, syndicated columnist, commenting on the election a decade ago wrote, “It’s as though the nation’s political discourse was being supervised by some incorporeal, all-seeing mom, Thou shalt hurt no feelings. Thou shalt play nice.”1

It is this same cry for “civility” and “non-polarization” which permeates the church. We no longer pursue truth with vigorous debate and clear thinking. Instead, there is pressure from truth-is-relative folks that an accommodating peace and unity are preferable to the continuing struggle to witness to the Truth in word and action. Even the writers of the Presbyterian hymnal have done their part in helping us shape a new view of ourselves by eliminating hymns that describe the church as militant and its members as soldiers. No more “Onward Christian Soldiers.” Instead, we are to re-imagine ourselves a kinder, friendlier people whose God wants us to experience peace and fulfillment.

Truth-is-relative Seeks to Harmonize Dualisms

The truth-is-relative folks prop up their claims by asserting it is objective truth that causes conflict. Liberal theologians argue that belief in objective Truth causes wars and strife as competing truth claims vie for first place. In the past, they argue that men defined truth from their experience and then used their patriarchal power to enshrine it for all time as divinely revealed. Men’s truth was dualistic: it spoke of truth and falsehood, righteousness and sin, good and evil, creator and creation. Men’s truth drew boundaries and the boundaries caused division and the division led to bigotry, intolerance and ultimately to war.

According to Walter Ong this male perspective is built into their genes. Ong writes in Fighting for Life that “male hormones produce combative behavior.” “Preaching Jesus’ gospel of faith, hope, and divine love, the church has from the beginning been very much at home in the antagonistic male world….”2

The revisionist folks propose a god reflective of their experiences: a god without boundaries, holistic, nurturing, inclusive, emotional. Revisionists have found support for this new god in Chinese and other Asian religions that emphasize harmony ––with oneself, with the earth and with the community.

Biblical Faith does Draw Boundaries

Biblical faith, with its foundation on objective revealed Truth, understands that peace will come when sin is banished completely and Truth reigns. The revisionist truth-is-relative view argues that when we harmonize good and evil without distinction or boundary then divisions will cease and peace will reign. Biblical faith recognizes an earthly struggle between two forces; the revisionist view seeks to harmonize the forces.

A. W. Tozer, well-known 20th century pastor and author, eloquently described the difference in the worldviews,

Our fathers believed in sin and the devil and hell as constituting one force; and they believed in God and righteousness and heaven as the other. These were opposed to each other in the nature of them forever in deep, grave, irreconcilable hostility. Man, so our fathers held, had to choose sides; he could not be neutral. For him it must be life or death, heaven or hell, and if he chose to come out on God’s side he could expect open war with God’s enemies. The fight would be real and deadly and would last as long as life continued here below.

….How different today: the fact remains the same but the interpretation has changed completely. Men think of the world, not as a battleground but as a playground. We are not here to fight, we are here to frolic. We are not in a foreign land, we are at home. We are not getting ready to live, we are already living, and the best we can do is to rid ourselves of our inhibitions and our frustrations and live this life to the full.3

Biblical faith witnesses to a great spiritual battle being fought here on earth and the church is called to enter the fray and contend for the Truth. The Confessions proclaim, “[The church militant] still wages war on earth, and fights against the flesh, the world and the prince of this world, the devil; against sin and death.” (5.127) And in Ephesians 6, Paul instructs believers to put on the armor of God in order to stand firm, “for our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places.”

Spiritual Struggle is Part of the Church’s Call

Many in the church today are impatient over the struggle to ordain those in same-sex relationships; a struggle that has continued for three decades and has no end in sight. Clergy are weary of having had to engage in this struggle throughout their entire pastoral ministry. They long for peace so that they can do “the work of the church”—evangelism, discipleship and missions.

Scripture however, does not tell us that the church will be that “peaceful harbor” of spiritual growth and good deeds. Paul tells pastor Timothy to “command certain men not to teach false doctrines.” Paul explains that “the goal of this command is love.” After all, Paul says, “the church of the living God, [is] the pillar and support of the truth” (1 Tim 3:15).

Timothy had to take sides in the battle for the Truth. And he did. Fox’s Book of Martyrs describes Timothy’s murder by the mob as he testified to the Truth:

Timothy was the celebrated disciple of St. Paul, and bishop of Ephesus, where he zealously governed the Church until AD 97. At this period, as the pagans were about to celebrate a feast called Catagogion, Timothy, meeting the procession, severely reproved them for their ridiculous idolatry, which so exasperated the people that they fell upon him with their clubs, and beat him in so dreadful a manner that he expired of the bruises two days after” (Fox, p.7).

Timothy denounced the pagan celebration not because he was intolerant or had a pagan-phobia but out of love. He could have turned a blind eye. Love, however, demands commitment and commitment demands testimony. Testimony to the Truth that saves. Failing to contend for the Truth does not demonstrate love toward our brother or sister. It expresses apathy and hatred. Failure to contend for the Truth means we deny God’s forgiving grace to those caught in a web of lies.

Unless we remember that objective revealed Truth by its nature draws a boundary––a boundary which the forces that reject God and His Word will seek to blur and destroy––we will allow our weariness at the battle’s unending demands and our frustration at not achieving a final victory, to draw us into the fold of relative Truth or lead us to withdraw seeking quieter, more peaceful vistas. If we understand, however, the radical nature of the Gospel that stands in judgment over us and our culture, then we will not be so prone to despair and weariness when the next skirmish begins.

Scripture tells us that while the power of sin in our lives is broken, its presence will not be blotted out until we enter glory. We face the spiritual war within ourselves every time the alarm clock goes off in the morning. We still have that old rebellious spirit which opposes God and his ways. It is no wonder then that the church is torn by struggle. It is a church militant, not fighting the forces outside itself, but fighting the sin inside. The issue of Truth was never one the world cared much about. The question, “What is truth?” will always be decided at the foot of the cross.

Presbyterian professor of church history, Richard Lovelace writes, “[Jonathan] Edwards, the foundational theologian of revival, held that any movement is more like a street fight than a Spring morning. That is because the essence of revival is spiritual warfare, taking ground away from the world, the flesh, and the devil.” He quotes, J. Edwin Orr, “When there is spiritual awakening, the first person to wake up is the devil.”4

The apostle Paul saw the struggle from God’s viewpoint when he wrote to the Corinthian church, “I hear that divisions exist among you: and in part, I believe it. For there must also be factions among you, in order that those who are approved may become manifest among you” (1 Cor 11:19). The Second Helvetic Confession testifies, “For thus it pleases God to use the dissensions that arise in the Church to the glory of his name, to illustrate the truth, and in order that those who are in the right might be manifest.”

Lovelace observes, “There is a drama in the struggle of truth against error which apparently pleases God more than the peace of those who have left the battle to seek relief among the like-minded. Like jewels against dark velvet, real Christians shine best when they are confronting darkness.”5

There are, of course, rules to this warfare that are detailed in Scripture. We are to love our enemies, pray for those who persecute us, not bear false witness, let our actions give evidence of the fruits of the Spirit—love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control (Gal 5.:22); always remembering, “The anger of man does not achieve the righteousness of God” (Jas 1:20). This is definitely not a battle where the end justifies the means. For the Christian, the means are in fact the only thing we are called to attend to––the end is God’s purview.

From Genesis to Revelation, Scripture describes the church as engaged in a great spiritual battle. No page of Scripture describes a church at rest. For three short days it looked as if the forces of rebellion had won. But then in the early light of dawn as the haze lifted over the battle field, the cry went out that the tomb was empty—sin had been defeated, peace would one day reign.

Yet the skirmishes go on, and we are called to choose a side and not fear the battle or shrink back in search of peace and contentment because our goal is love. We dare not fear the battle within the church or within ourselves. To reject the spiritual battle is to reject our own battle as we struggle between our flesh and spirit—between our fallen nature and our new being in Christ. To reject the spiritual battle is to reject the special mission of the church as the “pillar and support of the truth.” Only the church can proclaim and defend the Truth. If we follow the One who is the Truth, then our warfare is as inevitable today as the cross was on Golgotha 2000 years ago. Not to understand that is not to understand the Gospel. To fear it or shrink from it, is to reject the One whom we claim to serve. The church is not a peaceful harbor away from storms. It is ground zero. Satan is the father of lies and will attack the Truth wherever it is proclaimed. As long as the church seeks to be the “pillar and support of the Truth”; it will be attacked.

Practical Steps

Our calling, out of love, is to struggle for the Truth so that all men and women might hear the life-giving Truth of Christ. Some practical ways to testify to the Truth of the Gospel and bring renewal are:

• Protect the flock that has been entrusted to us by preaching the whole gospel, teaching the people to read and know the Word and the doctrinal truths of the faith. Don’t pretend that the church is a peaceful harbor. Teach people the truth that discipleship involves “picking up your cross” and following Jesus. Remind them that all of the disciples except John were martyred.
• Meet regularly with other clergy and elders in your presbytery who testify to the truth of Christ in order to pray, encourage and work together for the renewal of this part of the kingdom.
• Be an active member of presbytery by attending meetings and serving on committees.
• Make whatever changes to the process are necessary in order to insure that presbytery commissioners have an opportunity to elect GA commissioners who know Scripture, know and support the confessions, know polity, and are aware of denominational issues. It is our responsibility and calling to send GA commissioners who will seek the truth of Christ. We are not required to honor longevity in the presbytery or to seek theological balance or any other criteria that has been proposed by some in selecting commissioners. There has long been a disconnect between the actions of GA commissioners and the votes of presbyteries. In order for there to be renewal, we have to fulfill our responsibility and calling to choose leadership wisely.
• Work with denominational renewal groups to find qualified potential nominees for national level positions such as the GA Nominating Committee and the GA Permanent Judicial Commission. Work with national renewal groups to write and pass overtures to the GA that will correct inequities at the denominational level.

This article first appeared in Theology Matters, Vol. 12, No. 4 (Sep/Oct 2006).