There were two brothers who both had sons. Each man loved his son very, very much. One year, when the two sons came of age, the two fathers decided together that they would both give their sons a brand new car for Christmas. It would take great hard work to pay for such an expensive gift, but each father, with great love for his son, set out to do all that he could do to make the gift possible.
Throughout the year, both fathers worked extra hours to earn enough money. They denied themselves personal pleasure - all for the sake of acquiring the one goal towards which they were working.
Finally, as Christmas neared, each man had put in enough blood, sweat, and tears to earn enough extra cash to buy the brand new car. With great joy and love, the fathers picked out the cars their sons would surely want. When the two boys were not around, they drove the cars into their garages until they would be unveiled Christmas morning.
When Christmas morning came, each father had butterflies. They were so excited about the joy they would surely see on the faces of each of their sons.
Both fathers decided to place the key for the cars into a small box, wrap it in beautiful wrapping paper, and present it to their sons after all the other presents were opened.
Finally, the time arrived. At their respective homes, each father happily plodded to the Christmas tree, retrieved the small box and then handed it to his son.
As the first father handed the small box to his son, unable to contain his excitement, he joyfully explained how exciting the gift was. "You will absolutely love this gift," he exclaimed. "It is going to be the best gift you have ever gotten." He had to exert extra energy to make sure that he didn't spill the beans as to the contents of the gift before his son opened the box.
Without hesitation, and bursting with anticipation, the son ripped apart the wrapping paper, tore open the box, and saw a bright, shiny, silver key lying inside. "Is this what I think it is?" he shouted. "Yes! Yes! It's in the garage!" his father responded.
Before anyone could blink an eye, the son darted out the front door and ran around to the garage. There, in front of him, was the most beautiful car he had ever seen. He quickly jumped into the front seat, shoved the key into the ignition, and peeled out of the driveway while yelling, "I have to go show my cousin my new car!"
Meanwhile, at the second father's house, things were going a little differently. The second father took a different tactical approach. As he handed the small box to his son, he immediately began explaining to him, "Son, I spent a lot of time working overtime to buy you this gift. But you have to remember something: no matter how much I have put into the gift and how it is free, you still have to open the box." Almost bewildered, the son responded, "What do you mean?"
"Well, I did pay for it. I put in a lot of my blood, sweat and tears. But, technically, the gift is not yours until you open it. You have a part to play in this." He continued, "Granted, opening the gift does not mean you are 'earning,' it, but it isn't yours unless you do open it - you know, put in a little effort yourself. You have to take off the wrapping paper, open the box . . . "
The son was clearly confused. He was having a hard time comprehending what his father was trying to convey. He just stood in the middle of the room, box fully wrapped in hand, mouth open, puzzled by the whole scenario.
At that precise moment, his mother, standing near a window, yelled out, "Hey, there's your cousin, driving a brand new car! He must have gotten it for Christmas!"
"Oh, that must mean that he opened the present - just like you are supposed to do, son!" the father called out. "His father gave him a wonderful present too, but he couldn't enjoy it unless he first opened it."
Utterly confused, the young man sat down on the couch that was directly behind him.
He slumped down in the soft cushions and let out a great big sigh.
As his cousin drove around his new, shiny car all around the neighborhood, he just stared blankly at the ceiling.
Thursday, June 21, 2012
Saturday, May 19, 2012
This is My Home
I was born and raised in Massachusetts, one of the three states that comprises what is known as southern New England. For much of my childhood, the three New England states that were north of the Massachusetts border - Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine - were anything but relevant to me. Yes, I had aunts and uncles and cousins that lived there, but I had no experience in those three states that captured my imagination - or heart.
In fact, I remember that I would often snicker when I read the bottom of Maine's license plate: Vacationland. "Vacationland?" I used to think, "Who in the world is going to Maine for vacation?" To me, the state - and, to some extent, New Hampshire and Vermont as well - was comprised of remote trailer homes and beat up cars and truck stops and places one would pass through to get somewhere else.
But the summer I turned 13, everything changed.
Growing up, I used to attend Camp Winnekeag, our Seventh-day Adventist youth camp in Massachusetts, just about year-round, it seemed. I would go there for pastors' retreats with my dad, church winter retreats with our church, and summer camp in the summer. Somewhere along the line, I got Camp Winnekeag-ed out. I think it had a lot to do with the fact that when I was there as a summer camper when I was nine or ten, I came down with terrible nausea and I ended up going home early because I was so sick, vomiting everywhere. It was not a pleasant experience.
A few years later, I got the fateful invitation. My cousin, Devin, who lived - and still lives - in New Hampshire, invited me to go with him to Teen Camp at Camp Lawroweld, our Seventh-day Adventist summer camp in East Podunk, err, Weld, Maine. I don't know if I deliberated much over it, or whether I needed much convincing, but I decided to give it a shot and see if the "unsophisticated" folk in Maine could show me a good time.
My uncle Terry, Devin's Dad, drove us from their house in North Conway, New Hampshire, to Weld, Maine. I still remember the drive to this day. After passing beautiful lakes and rushing rivers, we turned onto the dirt road that led to the old camp.
And then it happened. We took the right-hand turn into the entrance of Camp Lawroweld, and it was like a virus was injected into my bloodstream. Northern New England had instantly stolen my heart.
No longer was northern New England trailer homes and trucks stops. It was the sound of a crying, lonely loon, echoing through the night sky across a serene lake. It was singalongs beside a crackling campfire. It was whitewater rafting down daring rivers. It was magnificent views from breathtaking mountaintops.
It was home.
For the next few summers, I returned as a camper to Camp Lawroweld. And then, when I was old enough, I was granted the privilege of working there. It turned into a seven year affair, coupled with trips north for Music Clinics and Camp Meetings and any event I could participate in.
I soon discovered the even greater charm of Maine and northern New England. Lighthouses along the rocky coast. Old fishing villages, lined with lobster traps. White-steepled churches, surrounded by the most brilliant fall colors. Mountaintop lakes, that felt blissful after strenuous hikes. It was nothing but charm and beauty and near-heavenly scenery and experiences.
My senior year of college, I sent my resume to every single Seventh-day Adventist conference in North America. The dozen or so conferences that actually responded all had the same message: thanks, but we're not hiring. I worked that following summer at camp, once again, and then I was prepared to return to Andrews University to enter into the Seminary.
But about a week before camp was over, I got an interesting question from our camp director. He said he got a call from the conference, and they wanted to know how committed I was to going to the Seminary. What started as an innocent question turned into an interview to serve as an interim pastor in Vermont. A few days later, as I was driving with Camille to our place in Nova Scotia, I got the phone call from the conference secretary, asking me if I would be willing to accept the invitation (I still remember the exact spot I turned off route 9 - also affectionately called the "airline" - to field the call on my cell phone. It is, ironically, just a hop, skip, and a jump from where I now pastor).
Since that fateful day 18 years ago, I have wedded my Maine girlfriend, had two children in these northern woods (though not literally, of course), and pastored seven churches. Over the last few years, I have had opportunities to move on; to pastor West or South or somewhere else. But the Lord hasn't nudged me away from this heaven on earth.
It is, after all, the greatest mission field in America as well. And it is mine to conquer.
All because I made a seemingly insignificant decision to attend summer camp at a place I had never heard of.
Thursday, April 12, 2012
It's About a Person
The New Testament phrase "in Christ" (Greek, en christo) has been the topic of much debate throughout its history. Ever since Paul (or Peter, depending on who wrote his epistle first) coined the phrase in the first century AD, the meaning of the phrase has been greatly contested.
I am not necessarily interested in the larger debate, nor am I interested in discussing the nuanced-Adventist debate about whether all were "in Christ" at the cross, etc. That is a discussion for another day. What has piqued my interest is borne out of personal study that I was doing this morning in Paul's first epistle to the Corinthians.
In 1 Corinthians 1:4, Paul writes, "I thank my God always concerning you for the grace of God which was given to you by Christ Jesus." This is how the New King James Version renders it, at least. The phrase "by Christ" is a translation of the Greek en christo, however, which has caused most other major translations to render it "in Christ Jesus."
The difference may seem nuanced and minor but the theological distinction is interesting - however subtle it may seem. What Paul is thankful for is that the Corinthians have been given the "grace of God." But how has that grace been given? One way renders it "by," the other "in."
Is there a difference?
Does it make a difference?
The first way, "by," seems to imply agency or means. In other words, God gave the Corinthians grace, and the instrument by which He gave that grace was through Jesus. Thus, Jesus simply becomes a vehicle by which God gives us something. God "uses" Jesus, in some ways, to accomplish an end. Subsequently, the Corinthians also "use" Jesus to receive that which God wants to give them.
This almost makes Jesus an impersonal instrument. He is simply a go-between, a middle Man.
While there may be some truth to the overall concept, it seems to betray our attitudes more than Paul's intent. We seem to use Jesus more as a means to an end rather than as an end itself. Jesus went to the cross to die for our sins, we essentially think, so that God could give us grace, be happy with us, and we can live forever. Then we go to Jesus so we can receive something from God through Him.
And Jesus is only good insofar as He provides something for us.
But I don't think this is what Paul meant when he used the phrase en christo. I think many versions are correct when they translate the phrase "in Christ," which is its most natural rendering. When Paul says that the Corinthians were given the "grace of God . . . in Christ," I believe that Paul was saying that Christ, Himself, was the grace. Though I am probably not on strong syntactical grounds, the Greek construct that is used (a dative) perhaps could be that of content or material. Thus, we do not go to Jesus to receive grace; we go to Jesus because He essentially consists of grace.
So instead of going to Jesus to receive grace, we go to Jesus Himself because He is grace. When God gave grace, He gave us Jesus - not as an instrument to deliver that grace to us, but as the grace itself.
Let us, therefore, not go to Jesus to receive something, but to receive someone - namely, Christ Himself.
I am not necessarily interested in the larger debate, nor am I interested in discussing the nuanced-Adventist debate about whether all were "in Christ" at the cross, etc. That is a discussion for another day. What has piqued my interest is borne out of personal study that I was doing this morning in Paul's first epistle to the Corinthians.
In 1 Corinthians 1:4, Paul writes, "I thank my God always concerning you for the grace of God which was given to you by Christ Jesus." This is how the New King James Version renders it, at least. The phrase "by Christ" is a translation of the Greek en christo, however, which has caused most other major translations to render it "in Christ Jesus."
The difference may seem nuanced and minor but the theological distinction is interesting - however subtle it may seem. What Paul is thankful for is that the Corinthians have been given the "grace of God." But how has that grace been given? One way renders it "by," the other "in."
Is there a difference?
Does it make a difference?
The first way, "by," seems to imply agency or means. In other words, God gave the Corinthians grace, and the instrument by which He gave that grace was through Jesus. Thus, Jesus simply becomes a vehicle by which God gives us something. God "uses" Jesus, in some ways, to accomplish an end. Subsequently, the Corinthians also "use" Jesus to receive that which God wants to give them.
This almost makes Jesus an impersonal instrument. He is simply a go-between, a middle Man.
While there may be some truth to the overall concept, it seems to betray our attitudes more than Paul's intent. We seem to use Jesus more as a means to an end rather than as an end itself. Jesus went to the cross to die for our sins, we essentially think, so that God could give us grace, be happy with us, and we can live forever. Then we go to Jesus so we can receive something from God through Him.
And Jesus is only good insofar as He provides something for us.
But I don't think this is what Paul meant when he used the phrase en christo. I think many versions are correct when they translate the phrase "in Christ," which is its most natural rendering. When Paul says that the Corinthians were given the "grace of God . . . in Christ," I believe that Paul was saying that Christ, Himself, was the grace. Though I am probably not on strong syntactical grounds, the Greek construct that is used (a dative) perhaps could be that of content or material. Thus, we do not go to Jesus to receive grace; we go to Jesus because He essentially consists of grace.
So instead of going to Jesus to receive grace, we go to Jesus Himself because He is grace. When God gave grace, He gave us Jesus - not as an instrument to deliver that grace to us, but as the grace itself.
Let us, therefore, not go to Jesus to receive something, but to receive someone - namely, Christ Himself.
Tuesday, April 3, 2012
More Grace-Oriented Than Jesus
(While searching through the archives of our magazine New England Pastor, I came across this editorial I wrote in May 2009. I thought it might scratch where someone is itching today.)
I don’t know about you, but I continue to grapple with the balance between emphasizing the so-called “positive” elements of the Gospel and the not-so-glorious components of it. There is a constant tension in my mind between calling sin by its right name and yet uplifting the love and forgiveness of the Savior. This tension plays out in the sermons I preach, the articles I write, the interactions I share with members and non-members alike.
I don’t know about you, but I continue to grapple with the balance between emphasizing the so-called “positive” elements of the Gospel and the not-so-glorious components of it. There is a constant tension in my mind between calling sin by its right name and yet uplifting the love and forgiveness of the Savior. This tension plays out in the sermons I preach, the articles I write, the interactions I share with members and non-members alike.
This tension also finds its way into the conversations I
have with some of my parishioners. I find that some of the saints want stronger
messages against sin and the follies of this world, while others are quite
uncomfortable with anything other than a “grace-oriented” sermon coming from my
lips. Such individuals have openly told me that they will not invite their
non-Adventist friends so long as they do not feel it is “safe” to bring them,
in fear that they will hear a sermon that talks about the negatives of the
Gospel.
This sentiment is shared by many, of course. I’ve heard
of numerous churches that have moved more towards a “grace-oriented” style of
church, hoping to be more “seeker-friendly” and welcoming to visitors. And,
truth be told, if it were left up to me, I would prefer this type of approach
completely. My personality and interests are such that I enjoy uplifting
Christ’s love and forgiveness and grace more than dwelling on the “negatives”
of Christianity.
The problem is, when we pursue such an approach
exclusively, we may find that we are actually acting a little more
grace-oriented than Christ Himself did. It’s funny how selective we are when it
comes to the Gospel story. After all, the same Jesus who said, “Neither do I
condemn you,” to the woman caught in adultery, also said, “Go and sin no more”
(John 8:11).[i] The same Christ who declared, “My peace I give to you,” (John 14:27) also
curiously stated, “Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not
come to bring peace but a sword,” (Matthew 10:34). This is also the same Guy, by the way, who pulled
no punches when He called the Pharisees “snakes” and a “brood of vipers,”
(Matthew 23:33) and gave no greater endorsement to any human being than to John
the Baptist, whose ministry probably wouldn’t exactly be considered “PC,” were
he alive today.
The other problem is that such an approach is also
incredibly imbalanced. And in an age when the buzz word is “balance,” we cannot
afford to be anything but. Thus, in order to be balanced, we must be willing to
share the good and the bad. A physician’s career would be short-lived if he or
she only gave out positive diagnoses and nice, red lollipops to all of his or
her patients. Similarly, merely dwelling on forgiveness all the time doesn’t do
a whole lot of good if people don’t recognize that they need to be forgiven in
the first place.
Perhaps the biggest problem of all, however, is that such
an emphasis on grace is not really giving a full picture of grace at all. The
truth is, this five-letter word has been incredibly watered-down throughout its
history. You see, grace involves forgiveness and pardon, yes, but that is not
it. Grace is also about power to leave the life of sin and selfishness behind.
“When God goes about providing grace to men and women of faith, it is an
ethical matter and not merely a judicial act leading to legal fiction,” Hebert
Douglass writes. “The gospel is concerned about redemption, not legal
transactions. Grace liberates men and women of faith from their sins by helping
them to overcome them, not cover them by some kind of theological magic or
legal fiction—and then call all this ‘righteousness by faith.’ ”[ii]
This is, after all, certainly what Paul meant when he
talked about grace. “For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to
all men,” he informed Titus. “It teaches us to say ‘No’ to ungodliness and
worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright and godly lives in this
present age” (Titus 2:11, 12, NIV). For Paul, God’s grace could accomplish much
more than simply overlooking past mistakes. It could actually take root in the
believer’s life and teach him or her how to be transformed into the image of
Christ from glory to glory.[iii]
So here’s a call to truly be “grace-oriented.” Let’s give
our parishioners and “seekers” the full picture of grace. Let’s show them a
picture of a Savior who not only pardons their sins, but tells them that they
have a problem to begin with, and can give them the power to overcome. Such
will be the most refreshing picture of grace they have ever seen.
[i] Scriptures taken from the New King James Version unless otherwise indicated.
[ii] Herbert E. Douglass, Should We Ever Say, “I Am Saved”? (Nampa, Idaho: Pacific Press,
2003), 71.
[iii]
See 2 Corinthians 3:18.
Monday, April 2, 2012
Christianity . . . Through the Eyes of Someone Who's Never Read the Great Controversy
I came across an interesting little cartoon yesterday. It was Tweeted by my new friend Andreas Beccai. The cartoon is below. It was created by Saji George, who has a series of cartoons that deal with issues of faith. I think it is a clever cartoon that reveals a lot of our biases and myopia.

As I said, I think the cartoon is clever and thought-provoking. It starts a good dialogue about these important matters. However, I think it is a little misguided. Nothing against its creator.This seems to be a pretty typical view that many non-Adventists, and especially non-religious people, have. Sadly, it is also a view that Seventh-day Adventists are increasingly subscribing to. From the classic Adventist perspective, however, it was clearly created by someone who has never read The Great Controversy - which I happen to think is a reflection of the biblical worldview (or, more accurately, the biblical "universeview").
I realize that one of Adventism's greatest challenges is that it comes across as being arrogant. This is unfortunate. This was, however, the same problem Israel had. It did not change the fact that they were still God's chosen people and, truthfully, arrogance is more a reflection of a misunderstanding of what it means to be "chosen," rather than the truth of one's chosen-ness. To be a part of God's "chosen" is less (in fact, not at all) about being saved as it is about being responsible. So the "remnant" concept is missional in nature, not salvational.
This doesn't deny the fact that God has people in all faiths and perspectives (see John 10:16, reading the whole verse). Nor is it to say that Israel (or, by way of extension, Adventism) is any better than anyone else or more loved by God. It simply says that we have a greater responsibility.
Anyway, this cartoon got me thinking about how I would diagram the history of Christianity and the appropriate attitude one should have in relation to that perspective. So here is what I created. It is not exhaustive. In some ways it is simplistic (then again, so is the original cartoon). In other ways it demands exhaustive explanation. But see if it makes sense to you (I hope I am not violating any copyright issues):
A few bullet-point explanations:

As I said, I think the cartoon is clever and thought-provoking. It starts a good dialogue about these important matters. However, I think it is a little misguided. Nothing against its creator.This seems to be a pretty typical view that many non-Adventists, and especially non-religious people, have. Sadly, it is also a view that Seventh-day Adventists are increasingly subscribing to. From the classic Adventist perspective, however, it was clearly created by someone who has never read The Great Controversy - which I happen to think is a reflection of the biblical worldview (or, more accurately, the biblical "universeview").
I realize that one of Adventism's greatest challenges is that it comes across as being arrogant. This is unfortunate. This was, however, the same problem Israel had. It did not change the fact that they were still God's chosen people and, truthfully, arrogance is more a reflection of a misunderstanding of what it means to be "chosen," rather than the truth of one's chosen-ness. To be a part of God's "chosen" is less (in fact, not at all) about being saved as it is about being responsible. So the "remnant" concept is missional in nature, not salvational.
This doesn't deny the fact that God has people in all faiths and perspectives (see John 10:16, reading the whole verse). Nor is it to say that Israel (or, by way of extension, Adventism) is any better than anyone else or more loved by God. It simply says that we have a greater responsibility.
A few bullet-point explanations:
- This diagram is, in no way, fit to scale as it relates to the periods of Christian history.
- Though some may have a hard time understanding the concept, this diagram - and the point of Christianity - is theocentric (ie., God-centered). When one recognizes the "Great Controversy" theme in scripture, it places the "true church/remnant" concept in perspective.
- This diagram represents systems of doctrine about God, not necessarily the behavior reflected in the lives of all those who espouse those particular doctrines.
- The end goal of Christianity is not only to match the level of the New Testament Church - both in doctrine and in praxis - but excel it, thus vindicating God in the Great Controversy. We are not there yet, of course. In fact, I do not think we have even matched the level of the NT church. But I think we are heading in that direction, by God's grace.
- By God's grace, not only will the truth about God's character be fully restored, but the lives of God's followers will be reflective of that truth. In other words, God's character of love will be fully reflected in God's followers. Perhaps more accurately, the truth about God's character will fully be restored when that truth is seen in the lives of His followers. But this truth can only be seen in the lives of His followers when those followers first understand that truth about Him. So the truth about God and fruit in the life of His followers go hand-in-hand.
- In case you didn't pick up on it, some of the branches of Christianity are now going backward instead of moving forward!
- If the diagram were to be completed prophetically according to the book of Revelation, there would end up being only two lines within Christianity - God's true church and Satan's counterfeit. Perhaps even more startling is the fact that the counterfeit would not only include all of apostate Christianity, but every fallen system of truth (ie., systems of lies).
- Again, this is not to say that people who are presently in those "fallen systems" are bad or lost. It's just that God is now inviting them to "Come out of her, my people" (Revelation 18:4) and be a part of a movement that teaches and lives the full truth of God's character of love - which is what Adventism as a system of truth, I do believe, is working towards. I say this with no arrogance or malice. Just trying to be faithful to what scripture teaches.
I think I will leave it at that for now. For further reflections on this, see my book Waiting at the Altar. For a shorter and more eloquent read, see Ty Gibson's essay, "Why We Exist as a People." I do not believe this is available on the internet anywhere, but contact Ty by going to www.lightbearers.org.
Thursday, March 29, 2012
How to Work with Youth
(I am currently doing some research in Ellen White's writings on a topic I am seeking to write an article on. Searching for "key words" is beneficial on many levels. Perhaps the greatest benefit is that you come across articles and writings on a multitude of subjects that you are not necessarily seeking. This is one example of that: some counsel by Ellen White, written in 1886, on how to do youth ministry. It has great relevance for us today!)
I advise and exhort that those who have charge of the youth shall learn how to adapt themselves to meet the youth where they are, by learning useful lessons themselves of Him who was meek and lowly of heart, that they may bring into their life and character the love of Jesus. They should be kind, cheerful, and courteous, and bind the hearts of the youth to their hearts by the strong cords of love and affection.
Do not be afraid to let them know that you love them. If the love is in the heart give it expression, do not smother it. When they gather about the table to partake of God's precious bounties make this a season of cheerfulness. Do not make it a season of grave decorum as though they were standing about a coffin, but have it a social season where every countenance is full of joy and happiness, where naught but cheerful words are spoken. And the youth should not feel that they are under an eye that is watching them, ready to reprove and condemn. Approve whenever you can; smile whenever you can; do not arrange your countenance as though a smile would bring the condemnation of heaven. Heaven is all smiles and gladness and gratitude. I wish we all knew more about heaven and would bring its pure, healthful, holy influence into our lives, for then we would bring sweet joy into many a life that needs it.
In association with one another we should cultivate habits and ways and manners that would attract and invite the confidence of the young. Satan has abundance of alluring temptations to charm and captivate the youth. If Christians would bring more pleasantness into their lives they would make religion and truth a power for good. I verily believe that few know how to deal with the young. They need more of the spirit that pervades heaven before their own religious life will be as the sweet perfume, and before they can exert a proper influence over the faulty, erring youth who, notwithstanding all their faults, have a depth of love and affection if it could only be called forth by love and affection.
Oh that we could be more like Christ and not repulse but attract. With what judgment ye judge ye shall be judged. With what measure ye mete it shall be measured to you again. God will deal with us as we deal with one another. Then let us be very careful that we do not become pharisaical, but let us be Christlike. This your school in South Lancaster needs.
If anyone has a motherly influence that tries to help and encourage the young do not let the idea be entertained that she is teaching them to be rebellious; because there is a kind, courteous spirit manifested to help the young do not let this be interpreted as working against the instructors of the youth. It will certainly be a contrast to the attitude of some, and the children will prefer to be in the company of those who have a sunny temperament, who possess some joyfulness and gladness; but this should not create envy or jealousy or evil surmisings. This spirit of cheerfulness and hope and joy must be an element in your school, or it will never flourish and grow up and become a missionary field as every school should be. . . .
I will work against this cold, cast-iron, unsympathizing religion as long as I have strength to wield my pen. The Lord knows there is enough of this element in the churches in our land. My soul is pained beyond measure as I see so little of the love of Jesus. We need to live very close to Jesus, to have wise discrimination, to have wisdom to speak a kind word, that will have a soothing and comforting influence at the right time, throwing sunshine into the minds and hearts. Oh for the sunshine of the Son of righteousness to rise in our hearts!--Letter 19, 1886, pp. 4-6. (To Elder S. N. Haskell, July 12, 1886.) [6MR 92-93].
I advise and exhort that those who have charge of the youth shall learn how to adapt themselves to meet the youth where they are, by learning useful lessons themselves of Him who was meek and lowly of heart, that they may bring into their life and character the love of Jesus. They should be kind, cheerful, and courteous, and bind the hearts of the youth to their hearts by the strong cords of love and affection.
Do not be afraid to let them know that you love them. If the love is in the heart give it expression, do not smother it. When they gather about the table to partake of God's precious bounties make this a season of cheerfulness. Do not make it a season of grave decorum as though they were standing about a coffin, but have it a social season where every countenance is full of joy and happiness, where naught but cheerful words are spoken. And the youth should not feel that they are under an eye that is watching them, ready to reprove and condemn. Approve whenever you can; smile whenever you can; do not arrange your countenance as though a smile would bring the condemnation of heaven. Heaven is all smiles and gladness and gratitude. I wish we all knew more about heaven and would bring its pure, healthful, holy influence into our lives, for then we would bring sweet joy into many a life that needs it.
In association with one another we should cultivate habits and ways and manners that would attract and invite the confidence of the young. Satan has abundance of alluring temptations to charm and captivate the youth. If Christians would bring more pleasantness into their lives they would make religion and truth a power for good. I verily believe that few know how to deal with the young. They need more of the spirit that pervades heaven before their own religious life will be as the sweet perfume, and before they can exert a proper influence over the faulty, erring youth who, notwithstanding all their faults, have a depth of love and affection if it could only be called forth by love and affection.
Oh that we could be more like Christ and not repulse but attract. With what judgment ye judge ye shall be judged. With what measure ye mete it shall be measured to you again. God will deal with us as we deal with one another. Then let us be very careful that we do not become pharisaical, but let us be Christlike. This your school in South Lancaster needs.
If anyone has a motherly influence that tries to help and encourage the young do not let the idea be entertained that she is teaching them to be rebellious; because there is a kind, courteous spirit manifested to help the young do not let this be interpreted as working against the instructors of the youth. It will certainly be a contrast to the attitude of some, and the children will prefer to be in the company of those who have a sunny temperament, who possess some joyfulness and gladness; but this should not create envy or jealousy or evil surmisings. This spirit of cheerfulness and hope and joy must be an element in your school, or it will never flourish and grow up and become a missionary field as every school should be. . . .
I will work against this cold, cast-iron, unsympathizing religion as long as I have strength to wield my pen. The Lord knows there is enough of this element in the churches in our land. My soul is pained beyond measure as I see so little of the love of Jesus. We need to live very close to Jesus, to have wise discrimination, to have wisdom to speak a kind word, that will have a soothing and comforting influence at the right time, throwing sunshine into the minds and hearts. Oh for the sunshine of the Son of righteousness to rise in our hearts!--Letter 19, 1886, pp. 4-6. (To Elder S. N. Haskell, July 12, 1886.) [6MR 92-93].
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

