How Not To Glorify God as a Local Church

I was raised with reciting Westminster Shorter Catechism as a child. Although I was not converted at the time, it was my first introduction to Christian theology in some systematic fashion. Now as a follower of Christ I really appreciate the catechism even more. The first question in the catechism states: What is the chief end of man? In which the replied answer is: Man’s chief end is to glorify God and to enjoy him forever. To me that is the best theological summation of why God does what he does, namely to glorify himself.

Furthermore, the catechism’s first question and answer is the best theological summation of why you and I are created and what we are called to do in this life, namely we exist to glorify God and to enjoy him forever. But I want you to know that such doctrinal statement did not come from nowhere. Rather, it comes from the Bible, the word of God. With that in mind, I would like to turn to one passage in the Bible where such theological summary is built upon. It is First Corinthians 10:31, which says:

Whether, then, you eat or drink or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God.

That statement in the Bible is the best biblical summary of why we exist and what we are called to do in life. The latter part of verse 31, “Do all to the glory of God” in Greek is imperative in its verb. That is to say, do all to the glory of God is not a suggestion but an explicit command of God to his people. If you want to know what God’s will is for your life this is it: do all to the glory of God! This is the life purpose statement for every Christian.

So by now you have both biblical and theological summary as to why we exist or what our purpose in life is. But let me raise a follow-up question: why? Why do we Christians have to glorify God? The answer is twofold, and the answer has to do with who God is and what we are. First, we have to glorify God because God is our Sovereign Creator and we are his subjects. That is how the Bible begins. That is how the redemptive story begins. In fact, that is how the gospel begins. The fact that God is our Sovereign Creator and that we are his subjects implies that we are accountable to him, and that we exist to serve him and to worship him. That was true before the fall and it is true after the fall. And when we act as though we’re not accountable to our Sovereign Creator and we fail to serve and worship him, then the Bible says that God’s glory is displayed through his judgment. That is precisely the thesis of Romans 1. With that in mind, would you please turn your Bible to Romans 1:18-32?

So the first half of the twofold answer to the question why we Christians have to glorify God, the answer is because God is our Sovereign Creator and we are his subjects. The key is to understand the implications between the Creator and creation relationship.

Now the second half of the twofold answer to why we Christians have to glorify God is because God is not only our Sovereign Creator, but he is also our Sovereign Redeemer and that we are the recipients of his sovereign grace. If you know the gospel, you know that Christians are none other than the recipients of God’s sovereign grace. That is what a Christian is.

But just in case you don’t know the gospel (the story of God’s redemption), here it is: the gospel is that God created man to glorify and to enjoy his creator. However, man chose to disobey and transgressed against his creator. As a result, the man who was once “the image bearer of God” has been tainted with sin and all his descendents now have been born with sinful disposition. Although God could have allowed the whole humanity to remain condemned, he chose to save some. So, God sent his son Jesus to fulfill such mission. As a result of his finished mission, God demands that all men everywhere to repent and be reconciled to their creator and the only redeemer. Hence, that is why Christians are to glorify God. This is true of Christians individually and also Christians corporately as a church.

I now want to shift gear from glorifying God individually as Christians to corporately as a church. I would like for you to know that church was not God’s back-up plan in his redemptive purpose. In other words, church was not Plan B or an alternative plan in case God’s original plan failed. No. Church was in the sovereign plan of God all along. In fact, according to Ephesians 1 God chose the people who would be in the community of God’s redeemed before the foundation of this world.[1] In fact, according Ephesians 3 this is the mystery “which in other generations was not made known to the sons of men, as it has now been revealed to his holy apostles and prophets in the Spirit; to be specific, that the Gentiles are fellow heirs and fellow members of the body, and fellow partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel” (vv. 5-6).

If we agree that Christians are to glorify God individually, isn’t it also true then that Christians are to glorify God corporately as a church? Yes or no? Amen or no? However, I’m sorry to tell you that not all so-called churches glorify God. Just as what Jesus said in his letter to the church in Sardis in Revelation 3:1, “I know your deeds, that you have a name that you are alive, but you are dead,” there are churches that are dead. What’s sad is some of these dead churches don’t even know that they’re dead. As Warren Wiersbe used to say these churches have the stench of grace gone sour and rotten. These churches function as business as usual.

So what I want to speak to you in our remaining time is to point out five ways a church would not glorify God. Although I could have you turn here and there throughout the Bible, I’m going to simply park at one specific book in the Bible, namely the First Corinthians. This is because the church of Corinth teaches us what not to be as a church.

^NAU 1 Corinthians 10:11 Now these things happened to them as an example, and they were written for our instruction, upon whom the ends of the ages have come.

Just as Paul used the disobedient Israel in the OT as an example, we can certainly apply the same principle for Corinthian church as our example of what not to do as a church. When you study First Corinthians I’m certain that you can find more than five ways a church would not glorify God, but due to time, I’ll only address five of them here. So if you’re taking notes, let me begin with the first example how a church would not glorify God.

I. God is not glorified when a church is divided (1:10-13; 3:1-9, 16-17).

This is church was clearly divided over the cult of personalities of the apostles. Today it’s similar to that of churches divided over the celebrity preachers’ groupies. I’m for Piper. I’m for Keller. I’m for so and so. And then there are always those pseudo-pietists who say, “I’m for Jesus.” May I say to you that church is not a fan club for celebrity preachers?

A church may not be divided over celebrity preachers, but sometimes a church is divided over something else – e.g. music, worship, homeschooling, politics, and so on. Sometimes a church is divided by people who are hungry for power and positions in the church.

II. God is not glorified when a church is ignorant of the gospel (1:26-31).

This implies that some in the Corinthian church believed that they were Christians because they had something to boast of or to take credit for their salvation. For Paul he clearly points out things that do not contribute to their salvation – such as, not many wise according to the flesh – i.e., worldly wisdom/intellect/academic achievements. Not many mighty – i.e., not due to their power or powerful positions. Not many noble – i.e., not according to socioeconomic status.

Notice how many times Paul repeats and puts emphasis on the word “calling” and “chosen” in this paragraph. His point is those things are simply beyond us and outside of us. That is, the Christian view of salvation is that it is God who calls and it is God who chooses. Hence, the emphasis is on who God is and what God does.

Isn’t it any wonder that there are many in the church that call themselves Christians but think that salvation is the work of God plus the efforts of man? This type of synergistic theology is so prevalent in churches – e.g. God helps those who help themselves. If you want to know whether people understand the gospel, just ask them why they think they’re a Christian or why they think they’re going to heaven.

III. God is not glorified when a church utterly disregards the church discipline (5:1-2).

According to John Calvin, one of the Magisterial Reformers, a true church is simply known by three things: 1) preaching the gospel, 2) performing sacraments (Lord’s Table and baptism), and 3) practicing church discipline. The key word here is “and” not “or.” That is, a true church will possess all three marks. To say it negatively, if a church fails to possess all three marks, then it’s not a church. Call it something else, but it is not a church.

According to John Dagg, one of the early American Baptist pastors, “If discipline leaves the church, Christ leaves.”

When a church fails to practice church discipline, what does the church say about the holiness of God and holiness for God? What does the church say about man’s sinfulness? What does the church say about the gospel, Christ, his members, membership, and worship? Hence, a church that is not interested in pursuing holiness is not a church. Jesus Christ instituted the process of church discipline as a means to purify his church. That is why a church that fails to practice this Christ-ordained means not only disqualifies herself as a church, but disobeys and dishonors Christ and brings a great judgment. And God’s judgment does not have to be loud and noticeable as fire and brimstone, but often in a subtle form – a slow death by starvation of his word.

^NAU Amos 8:11 “Behold, days are coming,” declares the Lord GOD, “When I will send a famine on the land, Not a famine for bread or a thirst for water, But rather for hearing the words of the LORD.

I want to make one more exegetical observation regarding church discipline. For Paul, he makes the connection between failing to practice church discipline with arrogance. Out of all the epistles of Paul, First Corinthians is the only place where he uses the word “arrogant” the most (e.g., 4:6, 18-19; and 5:2). In other words, a church that fails to practice church discipline is an arrogant or prideful church. And you know what the Bible says: God opposes the proud, but gives grace to the humble (James 4:6). Isn’t it any wonder that when such people of this church came together for the Lord’s Table God killed some?

^NAU 1 Corinthians 11:27 ¶ Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner, shall be guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord. ²⁸ But a man must examine himself, and in so doing he is to eat of the bread and drink of the cup. ²⁹ For he who eats and drinks, eats and drinks judgment to himself if he does not judge the body rightly. ³⁰ For this reason many among you are weak and sick, and a number sleep.

IV. God is not glorified when a church does not have a sense of order (14:40).

This church was known for having charismatic chaos during their so called worship service. You can read about that in regards to how the church used or misused spiritual gifts and so on.

However, for some churches a sense of order does not have to be about charismatic chaos but simply having chaos, namely disorderly conduct or communication where there is no accountability, responsibility, failing to honor a chain of command, or usurping authority.

V. God is not glorified when a church does not stand for what honors God (11:17-19).

Church is known by what she stands for. At the same time, a church is known by what she refuses to stand for. The Psalmist says:

^NAU Psalm 1:1 ¶ How blessed is the man who does not walk in the counsel of the wicked, Nor stand in the path of sinners, Nor sit in the seat of scoffers!

Although there is sinful divisiveness that Paul warns, not all factions are bad, sinful, or evil. That is, there is (and should be) legitimate factions. In fact, Paul commands for biblical separation.

^NAU 1 Corinthians 11:19 For there must also be factions among you, so that those who are approved may become evident among you.

“What Does It Mean To Be Reformed?” is a short blog that I wrote a few years ago. On this Reformation month, let us ponder once again on some of its implications.

1. Our Lord and Master Jesus Christ, in saying “Repent ye, etc.” [Matt. 4:17], meant the whole life of the faithful to be an act of repentance.

2. This saying cannot be understood of the sacrament of penance (i.e. of confession and absolution) which is administered by the priesthood.

3. Yet he does not mean interior repentance only; nay, interior repentance is void if it does not externally produce different kinds of mortifications of the flesh.

4. And so penance remains while self-hate remains (i.e. true interior penitence); namely right up to entrance into the kingdom of heaven.

5. The pope has neither the wish nor the power to remit any penalties save those which he has imposed at his own will or according to the will of the canons.

6. The pope has no power to remit guilt, save by declaring and confirming that it has been remitted by God; or, to be sure, by remitting the cases reserved to himself. If he neglected to observe these limitations the guilt would remain.

7. God does not remit the guilt of any without subjecting him to be humbled in all respects before the priest, God’s vicar.

8. The canons of penance are imposed only on the living, and nothing ought to be imposed on the dying in accordance with them.

9. Hence the Holy Spirit does well for us through the pope, by always making exception in his decrees, in the case of the article of death and of necessity.

10. Those priests who, in the case of dying, reserve canonical penances for purgatory, act ignorantly and unrightly.

11. That tares concerning the changing of canonical penance into penance in purgatory seem surely to have been sown when the bishops were asleep.

12. Canonical penances were of old imposed not after absolution but before, as evidence of true contrition.

13. The dying pay all their dues by their death and are already dead to the laws of the canons, having relaxation from their jurisdiction.

14. Any deficiency in spiritual health or in charity on the part of a dying man must needs bring with it fear, and the greater the deficiency the greater the fear.

15. This fear and dread is enough of itself (to pass over all else) to effect the penance of purgatory, since it is but little removed from the dread of despair.

16. In fact, the difference between Hell, Purgatory, and Heaven seems to be the same as that between despair, almost despair and confidence.

17. It seems certain that for souls in purgatory charity is increased in proportion as dread is diminished.

18. It does not seem to be proved, either by any arguments or from Scripture, that such souls are debarred from earning merit or from increasing in charity.

19. Nor does this seem to be proved; that they are sure and confident of their own blessedness; or, at least that all are so, though we may be quite sure of it.

20. The pope by his plenary remission of all penalties does not understand the remission of all penalties absolutely, but only of those imposed by himself.

21. Therefore those preachers of indulgences are in error who allege that through the indulgences of the pope a man is freed from every penalty.

22. For he remits to souls in purgatory no penalty which they had been bound, according to the canons, to pay in this life.

23. If any complete remission of penalties can be given to any one it is sure that it can be given only to the most perfect; that is, to very few:

24. And therefore it follows that the greater part of the people is deceived by this indiscriminate and liberal promising of freedom from penalty.

25. The same power over purgatory which the pope has in general, is possessed by every bishop and curate in his particular diocese and parish.

26. The pope does well in giving remission to souls, not by the power of the keys (he has no such power) but through intercession.

27. Those who assert that a soul straightway flies out (of purgatory) as a coin tinkles in the collection-box, are preaching an invention of man (hominem praedicant).

28. It is sure that when a coin tinkles greed and avarice are increased; but the intercession of the church is in the will of God alone.

29. Who knows whether all souls in purgatory wish to be redeemed? (Remember the story told of S. Severinus and S. Paschal.) [Note: Paschal I, pope 817-24. The legend is that he and Severinus were willing to endure the pains of purgatory for the benefit of the faithful].

30. No one is sure of the truth of his contrition, must less about the consequence of plenary remission.

31. A man who truly buys his indulgences is as rare as a true penitent, that is, very rare.

32. Those who think themselves sure of salvation through their letters of pardon will be damned for ever along with their teachers.

33. We must especially beware of those who say that those pardons of the pope are that inestimable gift of God by which man is reconciled to God.

34. For these gifts of pardon apply only to the penances of sacramental satisfaction which have been established by man.

35. Those who teach that contrition is not needed to procure redemption or indulgence are preaching doctrines inconsistent with Christianity.

36. Every Christian who is truly contrite has plenary remission both of penance and of guilt as his due, even without a letter of pardon.

37. Any true Christian, living or dead, partakes of all the benefits of Christ and the Church, which is the gift of God, even without letters of pardon.

38. Still the pope’s distribution and pardon is not to be despised, since it is, as I have said, a declaration of divine remission.

39. It is very difficult, even for the most learned theologians, to emphasize, in their public preaching, the bounty of indulgences and, at the same time, the need for true contrition.

40. True contrition asks for penance and accepts it with love; but the bounty of indulgences relaxes the penalty and induces hatred of it. Such at least is its tendency.

41. Apostolic pardons are to be preached with caution lest the people should suppose that they are more important than other works of charity.

42. Christians must be taught that it is not the intention of the pope that the buying of pardons is to be regarded as comparable with works of mercy.

43. Christians are to be taught that to give to the poor or to lend to the needy is a better work than the purchase of pardons.

44. And that because through a work of charity charity is increased and a man advances in goodness; whereas through pardons there is no advance in goodness but merely an increased freedom from penalty.

45. Christians are to be taught that a man who sees a brother in need and passes him by to give his money for the purchase of pardon wins for himself not the indulgences of the pope but the indignation of God.

46. Christians are to be taught that unless they have an abundant superfluity of means they are bound to keep back what is needful for their own households and in no wise to squander their substance on the purchase of pardons.

47. Christians are to be taught that the purchase of pardons is a matter of free choice, not of commandment.

48. Christians are to be taught that in dispensing pardons the pope has more desire (as he has more need) for devout prayer on his behalf than of ready money.

49. Christians are to be taught that the pope’s pardons are useful if they do not put their trust in them, but most harmful if through them they lose the fear of God.

50. Christians must be taught that if the pope knew the exactions of the preachers of indulgences he would rather have Saint Peter’s basilica reduced to ashes than built with the skin, flesh and bones of his sheep.

51. Christians are to be taught that the pope (as is his duty) would desire to give of his own substance to those poor men from many of whom certain sellers of pardons are extracting money; that to this end he wound even, if need be, sell the basilica of Saint Peter.

52. Confidence in salvation through letters of indulgence is vain; and that even if the commissary, nay, even if the pope himself, should pledge his soul as a guarantee.

53. They are the enemies of Christ and of the people who, on account of the preaching of indulgences, bid the word of God be silent in other churches.

54. A wrong is done to the word of God when in the same sermon an equal or a longer time is devoted to indulgences than to God’s word.

55. This must needs be the intention of the pope; that if the granting of pardons, which is an affair of little importance, is celebrated with a single bell, with single processions and ceremonies, then the Gospel, which is the most important thing, should be preached with the accompaniment of a hundred bells, a hundred processions, a hundred ceremonies.

56. The treasures of the church, whence the pope gives indulgences, are neither sufficiently designated nor known among the people of Christ.

57. It is at least clear that they are not temporal treasures, for they are not scattered abroad but only collected by these numerous sellers of indulgences.

58. Nor are they the merits of Christ and the saints, for these, without the pope’s aid, work the grace of the inner man and the crucifixion, death and descent to hell of the outer man.

59. Saint Lawrence said that the poor were the treasures of the Church, but in speaking thus he was using the language of his own time.

60. Without rashness we say that the keys of the Church, given by the merit of Christ, are that treasure.

61. For it is clear that for the remission of penalties and the absolution of (special) cases the power of the pope alone suffices.

62. The true measure fo the Church is the sacrosanct Gospel of the glory and grace of God.

63. But this is deservedly most hated, since it makes the first last.

64. Whereas the treasure of indulgences is deservedly most popular, since it makes the last first.

65. Thus the Gospel treasures are nets, with which of old they finished for men of riches.

66. The treasures of indulgences are nets, with which they now fish for the riches of men.

67. Indulgences, according to the declarations of those who preach them, are the greatest graces; but ‘greatest’ is to be understood to refer to them as producers of revenue.

68. They are in fact of little account as compared with the grace of God and the piety of the cross.

69. Bishops and curates are bound to admit the commissaries of the apostolic pardons with all reverence.

70. But still more are they bound to apply their eyes and ears to the task of making sure that they do not preach the figments of their own imagination instead of the pope’s commission.

71. If any one speaks against the truth of the apostolic pardons, let him be anathema and accursed.

72. But blessed be he that strives against the wanton and disorderly preaching of the sellers of pardons.

73. As the pope justly inveighs against those who by any device contrive the detriment of the business of pardons.

74. So much the more he intends to inveigh against those who use the pretext of pardons to contrive the detriment of holy charity and truth.

75. To hold that papal pardons are of such power that they could absolve even a man who (to assume the impossible) had violated the mother of God is to rave like a lunatic.

76. We say, on the contrary, that papal pardons cannot take away the least of venial sins, as regards guilt.

77. To say that not even if Saint Peter were pope could he give greater graces, is a blasphemy against Saint Peter and the pope.

78. We say, as against this, that any pope, even Saint Peter, has greater graces than these, to wit, the Gospel, virtues, graces of administrations [or of healings], etc. as in 1 Corinthians 12.

79. It is blasphemy to say that the cross adorned with the papal arms is as effectual as the cross of Christ.

80. Bishops, curates and theologians who allow such teaching to be preached to the people will have to render an account.

81. This wanton preaching of pardons makes it hard even for learned men to defend the honour of the pope against calumny, or at least against the shrewd questions of the laity.

82. They ask: Why does not the pope empty purgatory on account of most holy charity and the great need of souls, the most righteous of causes, seeing that he redeems as infinite number of souls on account of sordid money, given for the erection of a basilica, which is a most trivial cause?

83. Why do requiems and anniversaries of the departed continue, and why does he not return the benefactions offered on their behalf, or suffer them to be taken back, since it is now wrong to pray for the redeemed?

84. What is this piety of God and the pope, in allowing the impious and hostile to secure, on payment of money, a pious soul, in friendship with God, while they do not redeem of free charity a soul that is of itself pious and beloved, on account of its need?

85. The penitential canons have long been repealed and are dead in effect and by disuse. Why then are dispensations from them still conceded by indulgences, for payment, as if they were still in full force?

86. The pope’s riches at this day far exceed the wealth of the riches millionaires, cannot he therefore build one single basilica of St. Peter out of his own money, rather than out of the money of the faithful poor?

87. What does the pope remit or dispense to those who through perfect contrition have the right to plenary remission and dispensation?

88. What greater good would be gained by the Church if the pope were to do a hundred times a day what he does once a day; i.e. distribute these remissions and dispensations to any of the faithful?

89. If the pope by means of his pardons now seeks the salvation of souls rather than payment, why does he suspend letters and pardons formerly granted, since they are equally efficacious?

90. To suppress these careful arguments of the laity merely by papal authority, instead of clearing them up by a reasoned reply, is to expose the Church and the pope to the ridicule of the enemy and to render Christians unhappy.

91. Now if pardons were preached according to the spirit and mind of the pope all these questions would easily be disposed of; nay, they would not arise.

92. And so let all those prophets depart who say to Christ’s people ‘Peace, peace’ and there is no peace.

93. And farewell to all those prophets who say to Christ’s people ‘the cross, the cross’ and there is no cross.

94. Christians are to be exhorted to endeavour to follow Christ, their head, through pains, deaths, and hells.

95. And so let them trust to ender heaven rather through many tribulations than through the false confidence of peace.

From Documents of the Christian Church (Second Edition) by Henry Bettenson