Simon Vibert Online

A Personal Introduction to the Teaching of John Piper

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is two-fold. First I intend to grapple with the philosophy of ministry as exemplified at Bethlehem Baptist Church (BBC), Minneapolis, Minnesota. In practice this means I need to understand John Piper’s Theology and how this worked out in the life of the Church where he is senior Pastor.

Secondly I wish to apply some of the insights gained from my reading and exposure to BBC to my situation in South West London. I will briefly try to deal with lessons learned in Theology, Missions, Worship, Encouragement and Preaching (with a great emphasis on the former than latter subjects).

The topics have been selected to demonstrate the popularising process in which Piper is engaged. He gained a D.Th. gained from the University of Munich, now published as Love Your Enemies: Jesus’ Command in the Synoptic Gospels and the Early Christian Paraenesis (Baker Books). Whilst teaching biblical studies at Bethel College, St Paul, he did further academic research in Romans 9:1-23, published under the title The Justification of God. It is here that Piper lays out the technical understanding of the theology of God. For Piper, one’s understanding of the Sovereignty of God underlies the five above mentioned areas:

Our common theme in worship is the infinite worth of God and his purpose to "make known the riches of his glory for the vessels of mercy" (Rom (:23). Our confidence in evangelism comes from God’s freedom to "have mercy on whomever he wills" (Rom 9:18). Our commitment to world missions is fuelled by the passion of God to exert his sovereign power "so that [his] name may be proclaimed in all the earth" (Rom 9:17). And the ground of our conviction that God is reliable in all of life is this: No matter what heart-wrenching perplexities we face, "it is not as though the word of God has failed" (Rom 9:6). (p.11)

 

The process of coming to understand the philosophy of ministry at BBC has involved: Reading all of John Piper’s books (published before the end of 1999); reading a few of the key books which have influenced Piper’s theology (namely by authors Blaise Pascal; Jonathan Edwards and C.S. Lewis); attending BBC for a Sunday morning meeting; attending the 2000 BBC Pastor’s Conference; Meeting with Kenny Stokes (Pastor for Urban Missions) and attending an evening seminar run by him; staying with a family involved in the life of the Church.

I have sought to read the secondary sources (Writings of John Piper) and some of the primary sources (Edwards, et. al.). These books have helped me understand the theological stance and style of BBC. However the interaction with staff, congregation members and visitors from around the world at the BBC Pastors Conference has enabled me to evaluate the influence of John Piper’s theology and thereby resonate with and apply it to my ministry situation.

I shall concentrate on just one area of John Piper’s theology, namely the concept of ‘Christian Hedonism’. I believe there is good reason to make this the main focus of this section as Piper himself states: [Christian Hedonism] comes as close as anything to summing up my entire theology. (Future Grace, p386).

It is this emphasis which has the greatest attraction for people attending the Pastors Conference. The phrase ‘I have a passion for the supremacy of God’ tripped off the lips of many of the Pastor’s I spoke with too very frequently! It is this concept above everything else which has made it difficult for friends and foes to ‘label’ John Piper. For example, though he is a convinced Calvinist, he was informally advertised as being a charismatic when he spoke at the Clarendon Centre in England in April 1997!

Consequently it is important that if we are to understand Piper’s theology, we first must appreciate how he uses this term. The phrase is first used and explained in Desiring God (pp.13ff.).

Piper takes the answer to question one of the Westminster Shorter Catechism and reinterprets it as follows: The chief end of man is to glorify God AND enjoy Him forever (p.13). His argument is that happiness is not an added extra in the Christian life but a core necessity:

‘I came to see that it is unbiblical and arrogant to try to worship God for any other reason than the pleasure to be had in him’, (p.14).

This theology, he believes, has antecedents in the writings of C.S. Lewis, Jonathan Edwards and in Blaise Pascal. For example:

All men seek happiness. This is without exception. Whatever different means they employ, they all tend to this end. The cause of some going to war, and of others avoiding it, is the same desire in both, attended with different views. The will never takes the least step but to this object. This is the motive of every action of every man, even of those who hang themselves (Pascal, p.113, quoted in Desiring God , p.173)

In His book The Pleasures of God Piper points out that God does everything to bring Himself pleasure. Indeed ‘God’s chief end is to glorify God and enjoy himself forever’. God takes delight in His Son; He has so made creation to bring Him pleasure and glory; He sovereignly elects in order that peoples from every nation will come to bring Him glory. Indeed God does all things for His own pleasure!

Doing something to gain pleasure yourself, far from insulting the receiver of the gift, actually dignifies them. This is illustrated in two ways.

In Reflections on the Psalms, Lewis wrote:-

I had never noticed that all enjoyment spontaneously overflows into praise......The world rings with praise – lovers praising their mistresses, readers their favourite poet, walkers praising the countryside, players praising their favourite game..... I think we delight to praise what we enjoy because the praise not merely expresses but completes the enjoyment; it is its appointed consummation. (p.80.)

According to Lewis praise is not merely an activity that issues because the object of praise is worthy, but also because the act of praise itself completes the joy and delight of the activity!

Piper uses the following illustration many times in his sermons. It is recorded in the later edition of Desiring God book too:

Supposing I come home to my wife on our wedding anniversary with a big bunch of red roses. When she opens the door flinging her arms around me and thanks me for the gift, I could make one of two responses . If I say to her, ‘I had to buy these for you - it is my duty. At Wedding Anniversaries these are the things husbands are supposed to do’ she would probably not be very impressed! If however, I respond by saying ‘Darling I love you, and it gives me great pleasure to give you flowers’ she will not turn to me and say: ‘How selfish you are talking about YOUR pleasure’. But rather will respond positively seeing that the pleasure I gain from giving her flowers dignifies both the act and the action! (See Desiring God (Second Edition))

This illustration demonstrates the dignity self-seeking delight in God gives to the concept of Christian Hedonism.

Space does not permit a full critique of ‘Christian Hedonism’. However it is important that as I seek to apply this aspect of Piper’s teaching that I interact with the subject.

In the context of a Reformed Theology which is often perceived as emotionless and characterised by joyless obedience, Christian Hedonism comes as a breathe of fresh air. Piper has challenged me to appreciate that if I am indifferent to my emotional reactions to God’s truth then I am actually being disobedient. If I do not feel joy in life and ministry then I should repent!

[Do not simply] get on with you your duty because feelings are irrelevant! My answer has three steps. First, confess the sin of joylessness. Acknowledge the culpable coldness of your heart...Second, pray earnestly that God would restore the joy of obedience. Third, go ahead and do the outward dimension of your duty in the hope that the doing will rekindle the delight. (p.221)

Piper has clearly received many reactions over the use of the term ‘Hedonism’. (See Appendix 4, p.259ff. in Desiring God). He continues to justify the use of the word. Partly this is a reflection of his rhetorical style. He is a very effective communicator and he likes to shock!

Piper is also anxious that we see pleasure as being found in GOD. In other words he is not a hedonist in the usual sense of the word, namely making pleasure God.

However it is here that we have the most difficulty. Piper seems to be saying: ‘I am a Hedonist as long as I can define Hedonism in this way’ (even though the connotations with this word will probably be widely misunderstood).

Secondly, is it fair to say that the pursuit of please - even pleasure in God - is encouraged in the Bible? Does not Matthew 5:33 imply that pleasure (and ‘all things’) is the by-product of seeking God?

My third complaint is a matter of emphasis. Whilst Piper does say that we should do our duty in the hope that it will rekindle our delight (see above) I am not convinced that he puts enough emphasis on the importance of this. The Biblical language of duty is very powerful. Servanthood appears as a concept on almost every page. Equally powerful are the pictures of being Sportsmen and Soldiers (e.g. 2 Timothy 2:2-5).

I entirely agree that these biblical pictures imply that Servants, Sportsmen and Soldiers in Christ find joy! It is cheerful givers that are commended (2 Cor 9:7). However in his desire to overcome the excesses of arid obedience, I do not feel that Piper sufficiently emphasises the privilege of duty and the powerful motivating factor that it gives. Viewing Christ behind our dutiful activities gives purpose and enabling, but not necessary immediate delight!

Some have expressed concern about the Hedonistic emphasis of BBC leading to introspection and experience based self-interest. However the ambitious plan adopted by BBC is stated in the following terms: '2000 by 2000'. This articulates a desire to see 2000 people converted in the local Minneapolis area and to send 2000 people into short and long term mission and ministry of various kinds, all by the year 2000! Whatever we think of such targets - which remained clear goals even though not fully realised in the millennium year - they do not reek of introspective pietism!

In fact, the theme of the 2000 Conference I attended was ‘Christian Courage’, consequently, missions was never far below the surface. At the annual Conference for 900 Pastor’s Piper gives a lecture on a key historic figure. This year it was on John Paton - missionary to the New Hebrides in middle of the last century.

The first missionaries on those remote islands half way between Hawaii and Australia were John Williams and James Harris from the London Missionary Society. In 1839 they went ashore the island and were killed and eaten by cannibals only minutes after landing.

John Paton had a heart for these lost people 30 years later and prepared to leave his post as a City missionary in Glasgow to go to this unevangelised island.

He got a lot of opposition. Not least from a Mr Dickson, one of the elders of the Church who warned him that he would be eaten by cannibals. To which the spunky 19 year old replied:

Mr Dickson, you are advanced in years now,. And your own prospect is soon to be laid in the grace, there to be eaten by worms; I confess to you , that if I can but live and die serving and honouring the Lord Jesus, it will make no difference to me whether I am eaten by cannibals or by worms; and in the Great Day my Resurrection body will rise as fair as yours in the likeness of our risen Redeemer!

He did duly go to the islands and 85% of the islands got converted to Christ!

Another significant contribution came from a Romanian Pastor called Joseph Tson.

He is a delightful Christian man who exudes joy and love. And yet to hear his testimony you wonder how he is still alive! He has completed a Ph.D. on the subject of ‘Martyrdom’ - but that was very far from an academic exercise! During his ministry in Romania he has been interrogated, beaten and imprisoned several times for his faith. During one period of about six months he was brought in for ‘interview’ every day. In the midst of all this suffering and persecution he baptised 850 new converts!

He lives by the maxim: ‘the one who saves me owns me’. He told us that after he became a Christian he read that Jesus has sent us as sheep among wolves. ‘What chance’, he said, ‘do we have of turning the wolf into a sheep?! Jesus said didn’t He:- As my father sent me, so I send you’.

Missions is very high on the agenda at BBC. They give 20% of their annual budget to missions.

Let the Nations be Glad takes the central thesis of Desiring God and works it out in a theology of missions: ‘Missions exists because worship doesn’t’, says Piper (p.11). The book is not an academic treatise but rather a rallying cry to engage in ‘calling the nations’, as demonstrated by the rich stories of missionary zeal in the second half of the book.

I was intrigued to discover how the priority of mission is worked out practically in the life of the Church. The couple I stayed with whilst attending BBC had fairly recently joined the Church but had already sensed the importance of the Urban Missions programme they run and were being challenged to take seriously the call to move into Urban areas of the city (BBC itself is in an Urban Priority Area). Piper encourages ‘War time’ mentality, particularly for the staff team who live surrounded by the street antics of drug crime, violence and prostitution.

For this reason I spent some time with the Urban Missions Pastor, Kenny Stokes. Before BBC is prepared to support a new Missionary overseas they encourage them to be involved in the Urban missions department on the grounds that if the candidate can not cross cultures in this area they will probably not be able to do so overseas.

During the seminar lead by Kenny Stokes and subsequent interview with him he set out his vision for Urban Ministry in terms of the Supremacy of God. The three reasons why God is Supreme in Urban missions he spelt out as follows:-

1) Because God is passionate for the Supremacy of God (as Piper works our in The Pleasure of God);

2) Because we are passionate for joy and that passion can only be satisfied in God’s passion for His supremacy (the central thesis of ‘Christian hedonism’ in Desiring God and elsewhere);

3) Because we are passionate for the joy of the city and that passion can only be satisfied in God’s passion for his supremacy.

This means that worship is to be seen as the goal of Urban ministry (see Let the Nations be Glad, p.11) and God is further shown to be supreme through prayer, suffering, acts of mercy and living by faith in future grace (see further below, Future Grace).

The interesting thing for me was the way in which the general theological statements of BBC are being worked out in an inner city ministry. In other words the central thesis of ‘working for the spread of the Gospel to all nations’ (Let the Nations be Glad p.222) is spelt out specifically in the Urban Missions department in terms of a goal to see racially diverse communities coming to Christ in the inner cities (based upon Ephesians 2:11-22; Rev 5:9)

Kenny explained the practicalities of what it meant to be engaged in this process. The conversation was illuminating. For example, he said to me ‘we don’t create vision but rather help to flesh it out’. Practically this means that ‘Dreams have to be built into the budget’. Consequently he sees his job as ‘gathering up the people with the dream and helping flesh it out’. Such rhetoric sounds a little empty until one recognises what has issued from it!

The process of developing a vision for reaching the Urban areas of Minneapolis first meant commissioning a survey of the community which identified a key, needy ‘people group’ as the Somalis. From this came the Somali Refugee Outreach. This has birthed the Racial Harmony Task Force (January 1999). Their future goals include starting a Cris Pregnancy Centre in the downtown areas of either Phillips or Elliot Park (areas identified as particularly needy by the Survey) and a the launch of Hope academy, and Urban Christian School (to be opened in Fall 2000).

Kenny sees part of his job to be encouraging the congregation of BBC to see their vocational ministry being worked out in the cities. He used the phrase ‘living on promises’ several times, that is to say, that worked out in Urban centres in Minneapolis are people who take the thesis of Future Grace and live by it. This complements Piper’s teaching on ‘War-time lifestyles’ exemplified in Let the Nations be Glad

Life is War. That is not all it is, but it is always that. Our weakness in prayer is owing largely to our neglect of this truth. Prayer is primarily a wartime walkie-talkie for the mission of the Church as it advances against the powers of darkness and unbelief. It is not surprising that prayer malfunctions when we try to make it a domestic intercom to call upstairs for more comforts in the den. God has given us prayer as a wartime walkie-talkie so that we can call headquarters for everything we need as the kingdom of Christ advances in the world (p.41).

 

It is in the area of intensity of emotional (or rather Affectionate) worship that Piper most reveals his conscious indebtedness to the theology of Jonathan Edwards. For example:

...the impressing divine things on the hearts and affections of men is evidently one great and main end for which God has ordained that His Word delivered in the holy Scriptures should be opened, applied and set home upon men, in preaching (The Religious Affections p.44)

All gracious affections that are a sweet odour to Christ and that fill the soul of a Christian with a heavenly sweetness and fragrancy, are broken-hearted affections. A truly Christian love, either to God or men, is a humble broken-hearted love. The desires of the saints, however earnest, are humble desires. Their hope is a humble hope; and their joy, even when it is unspeakable and full of glory, is a humble broken-hearted joy.... (The Religious Affections p.266)

When John Piper visited in England in 1997 he spoke at Clarendon Fellowship and the Banner of Truth Conference. Clarendon are part of the Pioneer House Church movement verging on restorationist theology. At the same time the review of the conference by Banner of Truth and another journal (CRN) have both criticised Piper’s ‘Christian Hedonism’ primarily on the grounds that the theology is charismatic. Such a claim Piper vigorously denies!

However I appreciate why there is such a misunderstanding. During the time I spent at BBC the senior Pastor certainly displays intense emotional reactions in corporate worship: tears, hand raising and a high sense of the immanence of God were evident.

Nevertheless it is certainly a misunderstanding to equate intense emotions as being ‘charismatic’ and non-intense emotions as being ‘reformed’! Surely this is precisely Piper’s point and the central thrust of ‘Christian Hedonism’. And to this extent Piper is in line with his hero Jonathan Edwards.

Edwards was writing at the time of the great revival in Northampton. He was critical of the excesses in worship that were evident. Religious Affections uses the illustration of the need for ‘Light’ (Truth) and ‘Heat’ (warmth) in worship. But though Edwards was critical of the excesses, the thrust of the book is to endorse ‘Religious Affection’ as the hallmark of true worship. It is the emphasis which Piper sees in Edwards and in Scripture that led Piper to develop the theology ‘Christian Hedonism’. The few criticisms from the Reformed publications I mentioned above indicated to me that they had misread Piper precisely on this point (despite the reservations I mention above).

Having said this I wonder whether Piper is quite fair to Edward’s emphasis on what we would call ‘conviction of sin’. It is true that Edwards says that ‘true religion, in great part, consists in the affections’ (Desiring God pp.219ff.). However the long section on "Grace and Holiness" (in Religious Affectionspp.237ff) emphasis ‘brokenness of spirit’ and ‘humiliation as one of the most essential things pertaining to true Christianity’ (p.241).

The response to the Spirit of God in this regard, are outlined by Edwards as being the duty of self-denial - denying worldly inclinations and renouncing ones own dignity and glory (p.241).

‘In order to judge how much corruption or sin we have remaining in us, we must take our measure from the height to which the rule of our duty extends. The whole of the distance we are at from that height is sin: for failure of duty if sin; otherwise our duty is not our duty, and by how much the more we fall short of our duty, so much the more sin we have’. (p.251)

I am not here suggesting that the ‘true lowliness’ Edwards speaks of is incompatible with Christian Joy. But I am suggesting that pleasure - even Christian Hedonism - is not thought by Edwards to be the summary of our affectionate responses to God’s spirit. The range of our religious affections in this regard is much greater than that.

A second area of interest for me has been the development of the role of Men and Women in the life of the Church flowing our of Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, although I had little opportunity to see how this might look in the makeup and roles of the staff team at BBC.

My appreciation of Piper’s role in this regard is the way he and Grudem have built from their assumptions about the sufficiency and inerrancy of Scripture to try to work out the Biblical teaching on this subject. I appreciate the boldness of the statements such as the following!

I address the men directly for a moment: Do not let the rhetoric of unbiblical feminism cow you into thinking that Christlike leadership from husbands is bad. It is what our homes need more than anything. (Desiring God p.181).

This boldness is tied to the conviction that the Scriptures liberate us and that following the way of the Bible will bring joyful worship in God:

Biblical Headship... and Biblical Submission... is the way of joy. For God loves his people and he loves his glory. And therefore when we follow his idea of marriage ... we are most satisfied and he is most glorified. (Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood pp.52ff.)

At the same time the book is prepared to interact with the best scientific, sociological and psychological thinking in order to demonstrate the veracity of Scriptural wisdom on this subject.

The implications of these statements for the Church of England are enormous, not least in the willingness to be counter-culturally biblical against the dominant feminist world-view.

Kenny Stokes statement: ‘We live by promises’ is a good summary of the central theme of Future Grace. Of all his books I found this one harder to understand. The first part of the book is perhaps the most controversial.

Piper is concerned that so much Christian motivation is based upon a notion that we have to ‘pay God back’. He calls this the debtors ethic (p.33). To illustrate, he says, imagine that a glorious fresh stream is pouring out of the mountainside. You are so grateful for that life-sustaining water. How then do you show your appreciation? Appreciation is not shown by climbing the mountain with bucket fulls of water and trying to replenishing the stream. No, appreciation is shown by drinking deeply from the well of water, and being satisfied. Hence: God is most glorified in us when we are most satisfied in Him.

The danger of the ‘Debtors Ethic’ is an assumption that we can replenish the inexhaustible fountain of God’s grace. What we should rather do is come back again and again to be refilled with fresh supplies of grace - and to trust God for future grace. We should not assume that we can in some way ‘pay God back’.

It is for this reason that he states :

Whatever returns we make to him for all his past goodness to us, we make by relying on his future grace. The only debt that grace creates is the "debt" of relying on more grace for all that God calls us to be and do. (p.42)

This position becomes important for Piper when it comes to understanding what it is that motivates the Christian to love and good works. For it isn’t backward looking gratitude that motivates, but forwards looking faith:

Gratitude is not set forth in the Bible as a primary motive for Christian living. Gratitude is a beautiful thing. There is no Christianity without it. It is at the heart of worship. It should fill the heart of every believer. But when it comes to spelling out the spiritual dynamics of how practical Christian obedience happens, the Bible does not say that it comes from the backward gaze of gratitude, but that it comes from the forward gaze of faith. (p.43)

It is only by faith in God’s future supplies of grace that we can be motivated and equipped for Christian living.

The rest of the book spends the time working out the implications of this statement. For the Christian may step out in daring faith - not supremely because he looks back to God’s grace displayed in the past and is grateful - but because he has been encouraged by God to expect Future Grace, promised to be supplied to those who have faith.

This teaching is tremendous refreshing. We find ourselves satisfied and encouraged in the lavishness of God’s promised future supply of grace. This faith in future grace gives us a taste of Spiritual Beauty; it satisfies us with all that God is for us in Jesus; it overcomes bitterness, lust and despondency and produces holy desires issuing in love and service.

Moreover this biblical emphasis encourages us to take seriously God’s covenant commitment to supply the needs of His followers with all they need for life and godliness. Indeed we can and must live by His promises if ever we are going to be daring and risky for the sake of the Gospel. Without an assurance of ‘future grace’ none of the saints of old (such as those listed in Hebrews 11) could have stepped out with certainty.

My concern about the way in which Piper develops the theme of Future Grace is similar to the comments I made above about the implications of the teaching on Christian Hedonism. His polemical style of writing and speaking may well have led him to overstate his case (perhaps even deliberately in order to feel that he has made the point). Whilst recognising his acknowledgment of ‘The Crucial Place of Bygone Grace’ (pp.101ff.) I believe his emphasis overstates the biblical case.

 Gratitude is a powerful motivator. For example, in Romans 12:1f. Paul assumes that his readers will ‘keep God’s mercy in view’ by looking back to the sacrifice made by Christ, and by way of response offer their own sacrifice - of dedicated lives.

Piper denigrates such gratitude as being ‘The Debtors Ethic’. He uses a marvellous illustration of getting to the end of a fine meal at a friends house and then getting the cheque book to offer to pay for it. This painful social sin to demonstrates the abhorrence of the ‘Debtor’s Ethic’.

But a passage such as the one cited above does imply that pondering the greatness of the sacrifice which we can never pay back will means that we make a sacrifice to live gratefully. To have a friend back for dinner is not inherently an attempt to pay them back, merely a healthy desire that hospitality is returned in order that the friendship may continue to be appreciated.

Once I again I find his point to be powerful and challenging and readily applicable in the parish where I serve. However it is overstated, I believe.

5) Preaching - The Supremacy of God

There is a certain irony in spending a relatively short amount of space on the subject of preaching. This is mainly because out of the three thousand or so pages Piper has written only 120 of them make up the book The Supremacy of God in Preaching.

However this observation does serious injustice to the place and power Piper associates with biblical preaching. To this extent, whilst the book is very valuable, Piper primarily is a practitioner of the art of preaching the supremacy of God.

Whilst at BBC I attending the Sunday morning worship service. Piper was preaching through as series entitled "Education for Exaltation". As part of preparation for building a new Sunday School block at the end of the Church he has been preaching on the purpose of Education - namely the exaltation of Christ.

It is possible to listen to BBC sermons in Real Time on the World Wide Web. The sermon tape ministry is vast and used internationally.

Piper is a preacher above everything else. He spends May away from BBC to write. The rest of the time he will be heard from the pulpit at BBC. Moreover he is he is a preacher who writes well. In other words I think he would state his role as being primarily that of preacher/pastor.

His preaching style is an outworking of the ‘Passion for the supremacy of God in all things’.

This is particularly found to be central in His teaching on the cross. Piper uses Romans 3: 21-26 (on which he has published an extensive academic paper in JSNT 7: 2-32) to show the link between Christian Hedonism and the cross. God could not be glorified in the justification of sinners were it not for the substitutionary work of Christ. 'God finds a way to vindicate the worth of his glory and to give hope to sinners who have scorned it.' Thus Piper works out the relationship between Christian hedonism and the person and work of Christ.

As a consequence, the preaching of the Christian hedonist will aim to move the whole of one’s being. Academically the sermons are challenging, but the weight of the preaching is felt (as Jonathan Edwards would urge they be) not in the mind but in the Religious Affections! This is borne out in the style of The Supremacy of God in Preaching:

Preaching that does not have the aroma of God’s greatness may entertain for a season, but it will not touch the hidden cry of the soul: "Show me thy glory!" (p.9)

The model of preaching employed by Piper is reminiscent of the style Edwards adorns: Stirring up Holy Affections; Enlightening the mind; Saturating with Scripture; Employing analogies; Using threats and warnings; Pleading for a response; Probing the workings of the heart; Yielding to the Holy Spirit in prayer; Being broken and tender hearted; Being intense (see pp. 82ff.).

Moreover, Edwards too believed that all the graces of Christianity are connected:

Charity is a grace which cherishes and promotes the exercise of all other graces, as, particularly, of the graces of faith and hope. Mentioning the graces of believing and hoping, or of faith and hope, the apostle here shews how the exercise of these is promoted by charity (p.268, Charity and its Fruits)

Edwards goes on to say that the fruit of such love is to lead to right thinking (thinking no evil) and good behaviour (rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth)... and that these graces are linked together, and united one to another and within another, as the links of a chain are; and as one does, as it were, hang on another, from one end of the chain to the other... (p.270).

This resonates with the thrust of Piper’s hedonism and his desire that the whole of one’s being will be moved when the supremacy of God is made known through preaching.

The central theme of Piper’s theology: God is most glorified in us when we are most satisfied in Him when first understood is breathtaking. Personally, I have benefited from this collision of themes into a single life and ministry statement: Namely that God’s glory and my satisfaction are not ultimately at odds (see Future Grace pp.9ff. and elsewhere). An apparently subtle twist in theological orientation leads to quite profound results.

First, I am attracted to the simplicity of the statement of the core theology. Piper himself states that his life mission statement and the purpose statement of BBC is summarised in this one phrase. It is easily communicable and can be imbibed quickly by the congregation at large. And yet, as a statement of theology it shines brightly and magnifies under the microscope of more careful academic research.

I have been challenged to try to come up with a simple mission statement (or purpose statement) for our Church for 2000. I am not sure that it is sufficiently comprehensive to outlive the year, nevertheless it has shaped the direction for the Church for at least these 12 months! Based upon my translation of Romans 1:17 "The Gospel – by faith – from beginning to end" at St Luke’s Church we have adopted the focus statement:-

MISSION OVERFLOWS FROM A GOSPEL FOCUSSED CHURCH.

I use this merely as an illustration of a new desire to be succinct and clear in the way which I believe Piper exemplifies.

Secondly, I have been challenged by the appeal to live simple lifestyles. This is particularly pertinent in the driven, time-pressurised world in which the congregation of St Luke’s live and minister. Piper’s appeal to live with a ‘war time’ mentality; to have a missions focussed programme and to give generously - as individuals and as a Church - in time and money rather to building expensive Church plant; and the call to live uncluttered lives, is very challenging.

I have been teaching this to the Men’s Breakfast at St Luke’s on Tuesday mornings. As we have worked through the subject of ‘God and Mammon’ in Luke’s Gospel, it has been provocative for us to see that Jesus is just as interested in what we retain and how we use that as what we actually give to Church and Mission causes beyond (see further below).

However the simplicity in lifestyle which Piper advocates goes beyond finance to a world view that has a heart for the supremacy of God at the centre. I have found myself emphasising that this needs to be worked out by taking away from the programme good things that distract, not just adding new things!

The drivenness of our culture means that people may think that they can add a focus on the supremacy of God without actually adjusting their busy lifestyle. Both for Church and individuals I have been encouraging us to make God supreme by actually taking away from agendas things that distract from that.

A third application has arisen out of the teaching on giving. As we approach our Gift Day on Palm Sunday I have written a summary of some of the principles of "Christian Hedonism" as it is worked out on the subject of generous and joyful giving (see Desiring God, pp.153ff.). The text of this teaching is included in Appendix One.

The fourth point of application relates to a small study group I am engaged in meeting at Oak Hill theological college in North London. One of the purpose of the Ministry Work Group is to formulate a statement on the roles of women in the life of the Church. We are particularly keen to find a biblical rationale for creating full-time paid posts within the structures of the Church of England. I am concerned that as we engage in a political battle on this issue that we keep in mind the central theological themes spelled out in Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood. We are particularly concerned that in this midst of this apologetical task we do not lose sight of affirming the God-given biblical role distinctives. The text (unpublished at present, sorry) seeks to rejoice in our differences and see these as things to be celebrated, not denigrated!

Finally, I have gained personally from the focus of Piper’s life and ministry. The marriage of an academic mind with an affectionate heart is a life-goal of mine and one of the motivations for pursuing the D.Min. degree. I appreciate Piper’s desire to communicate the Gospel with force and argument in such a way that people will respond with their whole of their being, passionate for the supremacy of God in all things. I am quite happy to make that my life statement too!