Understanding Anxiety

Anxiety is the experience of being both attracted to and repulsed by the same thing. Some contemporary psychologists have understood this and related anxiety to what they term ‘approach-avoidance conflicts.’… In the human situation we find ourselves being both attracted to and repulsed by the same thing. [Is this similar to the desire in children to explore the unknown, yet to be fearful of it, a sort of adventure, exploring what is strange, risking danger?]

The experience of anxiety gives us humans an awareness of our freedom and responsibility. It helps us see that life consists of choices. We might say that anxiety is a revelatory emotion. It reveals to us our spiritual character by signaling our freedom.

How did sin enter the world? How was it even possible for Adam and Eve to be tempted? God endowed them with freedom, and with freedom came fundamental anxiety. ..To turn from God is to turn away from being our true selves. Anxiety is an awareness that, though God has created me and endowed me with freedom, I can use this freedom to cut myself off from God and will my own destruction. … This possibility both repulses and attracts me. I want to will my own independence and autonomy, even if it means my own destruction. So that the answer to the question about the origin of Adam and Eve’s temptation is that it lies in freedom itself. The temptation was to lay hold of one’s freedom by declaring independence from God. God cannot create free beings to relate freely to him without conceding them this possibility.

Understanding Original Sin

We must understand our sinfulness in a manner that does not let us off the hook by blaming it all on Adam and Eve. Sin cannot be understood simply as an inherited physical ailment; it is a spiritual sickness. The human race is a genuine unity. Without questioning the historicity of Adam, Kierkegaard insists that in some sense Adam is every person, and in some sense every person is Adam. Every person is both himself and the race. When Adam fell into sin, he in some way embodied and represented us all. When we fall into sin, we in some way recapitulate and repeat Adam’s sin.

We cannot say why all human beings sin any more than we can say why Adam sinned. All we can say is that all humans do sin, and they thereby demonstrate the unity of the race. How sin came into the world, each man understands solely by himself. Each of us has to reflect on our own experience? Why have we sinned?

Human beings do not begin with a fresh slate. We are born with a host of sinful inclinations. We are biological creatures, and our sinfulness has shaped our natural desires. None of us can claim to have always done what we could and should; none of us can blame all our misdeeds on our environment and heredity. We put ourselves in Adam’s place. We too have a kind of innocence that we forfeit. By endorsing Adam’s choice, we are saying in effect that we would have done the same thing if we had been in Adam’s place.

Soren Kierkegaard’s Christian Psychology, C. Stephen Evans, pp.60-64

I have just completed reading Helmut Thielicke’s collection of sermons on Genesis 1-11 entitled, How The World Began. At the end he comments on all the theological debate that swirls around the historical documents and the interpretation of the Old Testament. His approach is to speak to the needs of his contemporaries. “The hearer must be able to say after he has listened to the sermon: ‘I was in it’; perhaps also, ‘I was in it in a way that doesn’t suit me at all, because I want to think of myself in a different way, and so I feel challenged to oppose. Nevertheless, I was in it.’

“Dare I say something else that is very harsh?

Corrie ten Boom once said, ‘I have traveled through half the world and I have found that nowhere is there such correct preaching as in Germany, but nowhere else is it so lacking in power and authority.’

The mirror that is held up to us in this statement is inexorable. For its thesis describes a listener’s reaction which may be expressed somewhat as follows: ‘It was perfectly all right, but I wasn’t in it.’”

Germany, the land of Martin Luther, had many great preachers of the Bible in its churches. They were preachers who correctly interpreted the Word of God. Yet they preached academically, and failed to apply the Word to themselves and their hearers. The result was two devastating World Wars, and the Holocaust. The USA may have many fine churches and preachers, but unless we apply the Word of God to our lives, we can become indifferent to God’s truth.

It is possible to interpret and preach the Bible correctly, but fail to make the human connection, either in oneself or in one’s hearers. So much preaching and teaching is ‘correct’ but irrelevant. I once asked my mentor, John Stott, after he had preached a perfectly correct sermon: ‘So what?’ Together we made a pact that we would endeavor to preach sermons that were personal, relevant and applicable to our hearers.

I am planning a series of sermons on Genesis 1-11. I will be dealing with the most high and lofty themes, and controversial subjects, but if I fail to make each sermon apply to myself or my hearers I will have failed. The text of the Bible is about the human condition and God’s salvation. It is about me, my condition, and God’s reaching out to me. It is not an abstract text about the world in general, or the problems of my neighbor. It is about me, my problems, and my need for salvation. It is not just about Adam and Eve, Cain and Abel, or even man and woman, it is about Ted Schroder. If only everyone could see its message so personally it would bring the Bible alive in an arresting way. Beyond the controversies about the interpretation of Scripture lies the necessity to let the Bible speak to us in our need. We need this truth. Our lives depend upon it.

Insights gained from Spiritual Emotions: a psychology of Christian virtues, by Robert C. Roberts, Distinguished Professor of Ethics at Baylor University, Waco, Texas.

Imagination is the medium for the process of infinitizing. (Kierkegaard)

“An essential and important dimension of the human self….is that he can soar in thought beyond the immediate circumstances of his life…Humans are, as far as we know, the only animals that can be transported by a novel or a movie into another world, with its loves and hates, enchantments and terrors, cozy comforts and unnerving suspense. We alone can know, ten years in advance, that the moon will be full on a given day, or sixty years in advance, that we will one day molder in the ground. Only human life can be shaped by an ideal, such as the life of Christ, or an ideology, such as Marxism, or an obsession, like making money.” (51)

“Because of our imagination – ability and compulsion to survey our lives, to see them for what they’re worth – meaninglessness is the destiny of human consciousness, except in the context of eternity.” (55)

The Importance of Living in the Perspective of Eternity.

“The anxiety we feel in the face of death is the consequence of investing this life (from which we must die) with ultimate significance. The despair we feel when forced to reckon with the vanity of all our activities and pleasures is the result of our according ultimate significance to those activities and pleasures – to their being for us the whole story, or the center of the story. If we could manage to see this life as a stage in an eternal life, then it could be accepted honestly and gladly for what it is. If we could see the significance of our present activities and pleasures as deriving from a context beyond this present one of flowering and fading, they could honestly be enjoyed for what they are, no less and no more.”

“Christianity is, among other things, the wonderfully good news that this mortal life is not our whole story. We have been redeemed for an eternal kingdom by a Lord who is the first fruits of the resurrection from the dead. The few years we live in this present body …are a kind of pilgrimage, a sojourn, a preparatory trip on the way to something much greater. They should be understood as the school years. When we are in school we are quite clear (if we are serious students) that our central activities are directed to something beyond school…. The quality of our school life will determine, to some extent, the quality of life after school…. For the Christian, this present existence is provisional. We are aware that every activity we undertake is schooling directed toward a higher end.” (60)

Humanistic Resignation v. Gospel Hope.

“Bertrand Russell’s most famous essay, and one of the most widely read manifestoes of naturalistic humanism of the twentieth century, concludes with these words,

Brief and powerless is Man’s life; on him and all his race the slow, sure doom falls pitiless and dark. Blind to good and evil, reckless of destruction, omnipotent matter rolls on its relentless way; for Man, condemned to-day to lose his dearest, to-morrow himself to pass through the gate of darkness, it remains only to cherish, ere the blow falls, the lofty thoughts that ennoble his little day; disdaining the coward terrors of the slave of Fate, to worship at the shrine that his own hands have built; undismayed by the empire of chance, to preserve a mind free from the wanton tyranny that rules his outward life; proudly defiant of the irresistible that tolerate, for a moment, his knowledge and his condemnation, to sustain alone, a weary but unyielding Atlas, the world that his own ideals have fashioned despite the trampling march of unconscious power. (A Free Man’s Worship, 59)

 “Naturalism is the view that nature with all its processes is all there is, that there is nothing beyond it, nothing eternal, and that moral and spiritual values are inventions of the human mind doomed to perish like everything else. Russell proposes that in this meaningless, crushing physical universe where our bodies are trapped and doomed, we can satisfy our yearning for something eternal by worshipping the product of our own minds – our art, science, and philosophy, and above all, the art of tragedy… The ‘happiness’ he envisions really is resignation.”

“The apostle says, ‘May the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace as you trust in him, so that you may overflow with hope by the power of the Holy Spirit” (Romans 15:13). If Paul had been a naturalist he might have said, ‘May the god of resignation fill you with tolerance for your destiny,’ or ‘May the benign Void enable you to quell your yearnings for eternity,’ or ‘May the god of cosmic process make you magnanimous enough to accept your absorption into his consequential nature.’ But he would not have talked about joy and peace and hope.” (149,150)

September is looking to be an exciting month at the Chapel. I will be back in the pulpit after my vacation. I am planning to complete my series on Second Timothy. On Sunday, September 5, I will be preaching on 2 Timothy 4:6-8, entitled ARE YOU READY? Paul’s last words to us indicated that he was ready to meet his Maker. He was about to be executed for his witness to Jesus. How ready are you and I? How can we get ready? His words are inspiring and challenging.

On Sunday, September 12, I will be preaching on 2 Timothy 4:9-22. In his peroration Paul mentions many of his friends and supporters by name, and also some of his enemies. On this Sunday we will be celebrating ten years of my ministry at the Chapel. It seems only yesterday that I came from San Antonio, Texas, and yet much has been accomplished which we can celebrate together. On that Sunday we will have combined worship at 10.00 a.m.

On Sunday, September 19, Ryan Reeves, of Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary in Jacksonville, will begin teaching a class at 10.30 a.m. on the Gospel of Mark. Fresh from completing his doctorate at the University of Cambridge in England, Ryan will bring enthusiasm and knowledge to share with us his insights.

Also, on that Sunday, I will begin a series of messages on Genesis 1-11. I have been reading on this subject for some time and I think you will enjoy the perspective I will bring to these famous first chapters of the Bible. I have just enjoyed listening to Joseph Haydn’s oratorio, The Creation, and hope that we can incorporate some parts of it into our worship.

On Friday, September 10, Jim Mayo, of Nassau-Baptist Hospital, will be the speaker at our Men’s Breakfast. Sign up and be there men!

Norm Purdue will also be teaching his class on Christian Basics at 8.00 a.m. in the Board Room. Thank you Norm.  

Reflections on rereading The Sickness Unto Death by Soren Kierkegaard.

Faith in God is to believe that all things are possible.

“The decisive thing is, that for God all things are possible…..when a man is brought to the utmost extremity, so that humanly speaking no possibility exists. Then the question is whether he will believe that for God all things are possible – that is to say, whether he will believe…. to believe is precisely to lose one’s understanding in order to win God….salvation is humanly speaking the most impossible thing of all; but for God all things are possible!…For possibility is the only power to save…. The believer possesses the eternally certain antidote to despair, viz. possibility; for with God all things are possible every instant. This is the sound health of faith which resolves contradictions. The contradiction in this case is that, humanly speaking, destruction is certain, and that nevertheless there is possibility. Health consists essentially in being able to resolve contradictions.”

Faith in God makes it possible to pray.

“The fatalist is in despair – he has lost God, and therefore himself as well…He is unable to pray. So to pray is to breathe, and possibility is for the self what oxygen is for breathing…. The fact that God’s will is the possible makes it possible for me to pray.”

Christianity does not need defending.

“One sees how extraordinarily stupid it is to defend Christianity, how little knowledge of men this betrays, and how truly, even though it be unconsciously, it is working in collusion with the enemy, by making of Christianity a miserable something or another which in the end has to be rescued by a defense….To defend anything is always to discredit it. ….Yea, he who defends it has never believed in it. If he believes, then the enthusiasm of faith is…not defense, no, it is attack and victory. The believer is a victor.”

God is to be feared and revered, not taken lightly.

“Paganism generally uttered the name of God with great solemnity, with a certain horror, with a dread of the mysterious, whereas in Christendom the name of God is surely the word which occurs most frequently in daily speech and is absolutely the word to which one attaches the least meaning and uses most carelessly, because this poor revealed God (who was so imprudent and unwise as to become revealed instead of keeping Himself hidden as superior persons always do) has become a personage all too well known by the whole population, to whom one renders an exceedingly great service by going once in a while to church.”

Christopher Hitchens is well known on television and for his polemic against religion, God is Not Great. Lesser known is his brother, Peter Hitchens, who has authored a response to his brother, The Rage Against God, how atheism led me to faith. Peter Hitchens is a British journalist, author and broadcaster. He currently writes for the Mail on Sunday, where he is a columnist and occasional foreign correspondent, reporting most recently from Iran, North Korea, Burma, the Congo, and China. A former revolutionary (Trotskyite), he attributes his return to faith largely to his experience of socialism in practice, which he witnessed during his many years reporting in Eastern Europe and his nearly three years as a resident correspondent in Moscow during the collapse of the Soviet Union.

The book is largely autobiographical, surveying his rebellion against the establishment in England during his teenage years. He describes the decline of Christianity in Europe and the turn to multiculturalism. He sees a commitment to social welfare at home and liberal anti-colonialism abroad as the politically correct substitute for Christian faith. He maintains that God is the leftists’ chief rival.

“Christian belief, by subjecting all men to divine authority and by asserting in the words ‘my kingdom is not of this world’ that the ideal society does not exist in this life, is the most coherent and potent obstacle to secular utopianism….The concepts of sin, of conscience, of eternal life, and of divine justice under an unalterable law are the ultimate defense against the utopian’s belief that ends justify means and that morality is relative. These concepts are safeguards against the worship of human power…..by refusing to teach the previously accepted canon of literature, history, and philosophy, by attempting to turn Christianity into a museum-piece, and by abandoning the concept of authority – has left advanced societies entirely disarmed against intellectual assaults they could once have repulsed with ease.” (134,135)

He addresses the three failed arguments of atheism:

1. “Are Conflicts Fought in the Name of Religion Conflicts About Religion?” Mostly not. Wars are mostly about gaining power, wealth or land.
2. “Is It Possible to Determine What is Right and What is Wrong without God?” No, because, in order to decide what is good, you have to go beyond what is humanly expedient. To be effectively absolute a moral code needs to be beyond human power to alter.
3. “Are Atheist States Not Actually Atheist?” The most compelling section in his book is his description of the way Lenin and his followers tried to stamp out Christianity. Just as faith has often led to cruel violence and intolerant persecution, Godless regimes and movements have given birth to terrible persecutions and massacres. Utopia can only ever be approached across a sea of blood. Atheist states have a consistent tendency to commit mass murders in the name of the greater good.

Finally, he criticizes the claims of Richard Dawkins in The God Delusion, and his brother in his book, that teaching religion to children is a form of child abuse. “This has the stench of totalitarian slander, paving the road to suppression and persecution….. it is ridiculous to pretend that it is a neutral act to inform an infant that the heavens are empty, that the universe is founded on chaos rather than love, and that his grandparents, on dying, have ceased altogether to exist. I personally think it wrong to tell children such things, because I believe them to be false and wrong and roads to misery of various kinds.” (205,206)

The book is an easy read and well worth the attention. It is a wake up call to the dangers of secular utopianism – trying to create the kingdom of good on earth by state power. It has been tried and failed. Russia is now a gangster society because it destroyed conscience, morality and the fear of God. We do not want to go down that road.

I will be on vacation during the month of August.

Thomas E. Reynolds is father to a son who has been diagnosed with Tourette’s syndrome, Asperger’s syndrome, bipolar disorder and obsessive-compulsive disorder. Because of his disability churches they have attended requested that he not be in their Sunday School program. Over the years they have been through behavioral programs, family counseling and psychiatric care. What to do? As the grandfather myself of a lovely grandson who suffers from an autistic disorder I am deeply sympathetic. Reynolds, an associate professor of theology at Emmanuel College in the Toronto School of Theology, University of Toronto, has authored an extremely important book entitled, Vulnerable Communion: A Theology of Disability and Hospitality.

In it he quotes Stanley Hauerwas who says that we suffer from the ‘tyranny of normality.’ Theologian Jurgen Moltmann states, “There is no differentiation between the healthy and those with disabilities. For every human life has its limitations, vulnerabilities, and weaknesses. We are born needy, and we die helpless. It is only the ideals of health of a society of the strong which condemn a part of humanity to being ‘disabled.’”

The basic argument of Reynold’s book is that “wholeness is not he product of self-sufficiency or independence, but rather of the genuinely inclusive communion that results from sharing our humanity with one another in light of the grace of God. To exist as a finite creature is to be contingent and vulnerable. This means we are beings that face limitations and are capable of suffering from a range of impairments. ..It is precisely such vulnerability that God embraces in Christ, entering fully into the frailty of the human condition, even unto a tragic death…God is in solidarity with humanity at its most fundamental level, in weakness and brokenness….God reveal the divine nature as compassion not only by undergoing or suffering with human vulnerability, but also by raising it up into God’s own being.” (18,19)

He explores the cult of normalcy which dominates our definition of what it means to be whole, and healthy, and acceptable to society. Independence is prized above all else. Any kind of dependency is seen to be unacceptable. Yet most of us spend a great part of our lives physically dependent on others. We spend the first two decades of our lives being trained to become independent members of society, and we increasingly spend the last decades of our lives tethered to life-supporting medical care of one sort of another. We are all dependent emotionally upon others for well-being. The ability to reason and be rational is not the only yardstick of health and value. Nor is the ability to be economically productive, and materially successful. The way we treat our children and our elderly is a measure of our understanding of what it means to be human and Christian.

“The basic question of human existence is whether there is welcome at the heart of things, whether we can find a home with others who recognize us, value us, and empower us to be ourselves.” (119) “Vulnerability and dependence is normal. Accordingly, the moral measure of a society lies in the way it treats its most vulnerable.” (129) Indeed, wholeness is not the property of the individual, a quality of self-sufficiency. It is a relational term; we are not complete persons without each other.” (130)

This is an important book and topic. I commend it to you. Let us do unto others what we want them to do unto us if we were disabled – which we all are in one way or another.

Ed Stelzer and Thom S. Rainer led a research team to study transformational churches. They did a phone survey of 7,000 Protestant pastors, personal interviews with 250 congregations, and conducted 15,000 church member surveys. The result of their research is available in their new book, Transformational Church: Creating a New Scorecard for Congregations.

They discovered seven elements or spiritual practices rooted in the Scriptures that God used to deliver transformation. They are as follows:

1. Missionary Mentality. This means that the church understands their community and will minister in contextually appropriate ways to reach local people with the gospel. They make the needs of their community the priority for their ministries and activities. Their external focus pushes the church from doing missions into being on mission as a way of life. They are serious about fulfilling Christ Great Commission, to make disciples of all nations. They are Acts 1:8 churches. They have a mindset to be a missionary in their community and ultimately to the entire world.
2. Vibrant Leadership. The leaders in these churches showed passion for God, His mission, and its transforming power on people. They seek ways to move all believers into places of effective leadership for the mission. Those who followed these leaders often noted that the leaders led more by their examples and values rather than by dictates.
3. Relational Intentionality. The churches helped Christians to deliberately connect with one another. Both accountability and encouragement occur as a church creates an environment where long-term relationships are held in high regard.
4. Prayerful Dependence. They revealed a dependence on prayer rather than a program for prayer. Their need to connect with God in prayer was evident and motivated by mission rather than selfish needs.
5. Worship. The worship witnessed in these churches contains an element that stood out: expectancy. When people arrived for worship, they knew something great was going to happen. They trusted God to deliver transformation rather than musicians to deliver a good show.
6. Community. These churches are serious enough about relational intentionality that they create systems to put people in community with one another. They connect with one another through ministry systems such as Bible study groups, small groups, adult classes and service groups.
7. Mission. Evangelism is not taught as a periodic program but as a natural way of life. Reaching out to others to share the love of God in Christ is always the priority.

One of their presuppositions is that change, though difficult, is desperately needed in North American churches. In order for change to take place, an intervening event must occur. Many times it is through a cathartic experience. A cathartic experience is a moment of decision or change that is beneficial and liberating. These experiences occur because the status quo is unsatisfying or even causing degeneration. The experience can occur because of conflict that must be resolved or a realization that no forward progress is being made. No matter the reason for, the cathartic experience is the moment when a church decides that what they have and what they are doing is not enough. You must then believe that God will transform your church. Finally, you must be willing to deal with the crisis that comes from such change.

One of the problems of established churches is that they become distracted from the mission of the kingdom of Christ. The temptation is to become building-focused, inward, self-absorbed congregations. People become spectators. The building and activities of the church at times become more important than God’s kingdom. When the church is reduced to that place where we go on Sundays, we reduce the church and the kingdom to something smaller than God intended. We have to be outwardly focused, seeking to befriend our neighbors and the people we meet. Mentoring and coaching people is important. We look for opportunities to connect with others and befriend them for Christ.

Their book is a reminder to us to have a vision that transcends our own needs and that seeks to serve and share. Mission is the opposite of self. We have to remember to make it about God and not about us. Jesus explained: “In the same way, let your light shine before men, that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father in heaven.” (Matthew 5:16)

My first recollection of life was August 15, 1945. Over the radio we heard that Japan had surrendered. My mother gave me the dinner gong, that was used to summon guests to meals, and told me I could take it out into the street and ring it. I took the gong and its gavel (a wooden hammer), and proudly banged it for a long time outside. I was four years of age. A week or so later I was dressed in some sort of costume, and, with my sister, who was arrayed as Britannia with a helmet, shield and trident, and entered into the Victory Parade that marched along the street. I remembered being scared by the bagpiper.

While I have read many books about World War II, I had never read a comprehensive account of the war against Japan until I picked up a copy of Max Hasting’s, Retribution: The Battle for Japan, 1944-45.  His accounts of the battles for the Philippines, Iwo Jima and Okinawa, and the sea battles of the Pacific are searing. What a price was paid by those who fought in them. How anyone came out of these conflicts with any sense of sanity is a miracle. The conditions in China, the POW and intern camps, and the devastation caused by the kamikaze pilots and our own bombing in Japan are as horrifying as any accounts of the Holocaust in Europe. Hasting’s conclusions are damning:

“Yet the new Japan proved distressingly reluctant to confront the historic guilt of the old. Its spirit of denial contrasted starkly with the penitence of post-war Germany. Though successive Japanese prime ministers expressed formal regret for Japan’s wartime actions, the country refused to pay reparations to victims, or to acknowledge its record in school history texts…Germany has paid almost $6 billion to 1.5 million victims of the Hitler era…By contrast, modern Japan goes to extraordinary lengths to escape any admission of responsibility, far less of liability for compensation, towards its wartime victims….Both the policy of denial and the alternative doctrine of moral equivalency are unconvincing, when Japanese brutality was institutionalized for many years before the Allies commenced their own excesses, if excesses they were…Many Japanese actions, including the torture and beheading of prisoners, reflected a gratuitous pride in the infliction of suffering. Wartime Japan was responsible for almost as many deaths in Asia as was Nazi Germany. Yet only a few modern Japanese acknowledge as much, and incur the disdain or outright hostility of their fellow countrymen for doing so. The nation is guilty of a collective rejection of historical fact. The treatment of subject peoples and prisoners described in this book is wholly unaccepted by most modern Japanese, even where supported by overwhelming evidence. This sustains a chasm between our culture and ours, which cannot be justified or dismissed by mere reference to differences of attitude between East and West….It seems to me that dismay, indeed repugnance, should concentrate upon the refusal of the Japanese people, including their political, educational and corporate leaders, honestly to acknowledge their history. They still seek to excuse, and even to ennoble, the actions of their parents and grandparents, so many of whom forsook humanity in favor of perversion of honor and an aggressive nationalism which should properly be recalled with shame. As long as such a denial persists, it will remain impossible for the world to believe that Japan has come to terms with the horrors which it inflicted upon Asia almost two-thirds of a century ago.” (pp.548-550)

Why this denial? I once asked a Korean pastor why the Gospel has found such a reception in Korea, and yet has had a minimal impact upon Japan. He said that the difference is that the character of the people is different. The Japanese sense of bushido – the Samurai honor code – is so great that they cannot admit their errors. The military at the end of the war wanted to continue fighting despite its futility because they could not face the reality of defeat. It took the intervention of the Emperor to order them to accept surrender. Many took their own lives rather than surrender.

Consciousness of sin is essential to Judaism and Christianity. Without it a person is self-deluded into thinking that he cannot be wrong. The culture of Shintoism, prevalent in Japan, demonstrates this self-delusion. It can also affect anyone who will not recognize their failures, errors, faults, and rebellion against God. “There is no one righteous, not even one…There is no difference, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus.” (Romans 3:10,23)

The reason many people do not bend the knee to the Savior of the world, and follow him is because they cannot face the facts about themselves. They are self-deluded. Redemption begins with conviction of sin and repentance. There is no other way. 

In rereading Kierkegaard’s Training in Christianity I came across this searching admonition to preachers.

“Hence it is a venturesome thing to preach; for when I mount to that sacred place [the pulpit] – whether the church be crowded or as good as empty – I have, though I myself may not be aware of it, one hearer in addition to those that are visible to me, namely God in heaven, whom I cannot see it is true, but who truly can see me. This hearer listens attentively to discover whether what I say is true, and He looks also to discern (as well He can, for He is invisible, and in that way it is impossible to be on one’s guard against Him) – so He looks to see whether my life expresses what I say. And although I possess no authority to impose an obligation upon any other person, yet what I have said in the course of the sermon puts me under obligation – and God has heard it. Truly it is a venturesome thing to preach! Doubtless most people have a notion that it requires courage to step out on the stage like and actor and venture to encounter the danger of having all eyes fixed upon one. And yet this danger is in a sense, like everything else on the stage, an illusion; for personally the actor is aloof from it all, his part is to deceive, to disguise himself, to represent another, and to transmit accurately the words of another. The preacher of Christian truth, on the other hand, steps out into a place, even if all eyes are not fixed upon him, the eye of omniscience is; his part is to be himself, and that in an environment, God’s house, which, being all eye and ear, requires of him only this, that he be himself, be true. ‘That he be true’ – this means that he himself is what he preaches, or at least strives to be that, or at the very least is sober enough to admit that he is not. Alas, and how many who in mounting to this sacred place to preach Christianity are keen enough of hearing to detect the repugnance and scorn which this sacred place feels for him at hearing him preach with enthusiasm, in moving tones, with tears, the opposite of that which his life expresses.”

Makes one want to spend much time in prayer before preaching, pleading for honesty and authenticity before God and others.