i am a c. . .i am a c-h. . .

christian. the term is used with such flippancy today that it is almost nullifying. frankly, i have heard it so much, that when someone tells me that they are a christian, i think no more of it than if they were to tell me that they were say, a republican. the terms are almost synonymous in nature. both today have come to refer to ideologies and political stances, as opposed to the true meaning of the word "christian".

the term christian was first used during the early days of Christianity, while it was still considered a sect of judaism. in the book of Acts, we see that the disciples were first called "Christians" at antioch. at the time, the term was derogatory in the eyes of the public. they were in essence, mocking the disciples. the term Christ, was recognized to mean "saviour" to the people of the day, and by calling them "christians", they were calling them "little Christs". however, this was the ultimate compliment. the disciples were acting enough like Christ that they were being compared to Him. today, we could hardly compare to those heroes of the early church. yet, everyone who says that they believe that God exists are now labeled "christians." i have a tremendous problem with this. first, let us look at the aspects of those early christians that qualified them as earning the label "christian". they were known as those who hung out with Christ. they lived lives of sacrifice, forsaking all, including their freedom and safety, to spread the gospel. they performed miracles. all of these are mirror images of the example Christ set for them. it was only natural for them to be compared to the Saviour Himself.

now, let us look at those today who would so boldly dare to even place themselves in the same category as those early disciples and call themselves "christian". how many self-labeled "christians" today can honestly say that they "hang out" with Christ everyday? many don't even crack open their Bible once a week, let alone every day. and as for prayer, saying grace before meals is a stretch, and is the closest they get to communicating with Christ. how many of them even know what the word sacrifice means, much less practice it? for many, even opening their mouth at work to share the gospel with a co-worker is not an option out of fear of rejection or embarrassment. and finally, other than the charlatans such as benny hinn who claim to perform miracles, i do not see any of those persons who refer to themselves as "christian" claiming to perform miracles.

what can we take from this? one, none of us deserves the title "little Christ." it is said that the thing a person speaks the loudest against is the vice they are the most susceptible to. i cannot deny this. i am one of those who does not deserve the title of "christian". i tend to refer to myself as a "Christ-follower", but even that is a stretch sometimes. i echo the sentiment of the apostle paul, when he said that he "does the things which he does not want to do, and does not do the things he should do." in thomas a' kempis' imitatio a Christi, he discusses how we are to be like those early disciples, imitating Christ to the point that others cannot help but comparing us to our Saviour. this is the ultimate goal for a true follower of Christ: to become like the Saviour, to be molded in the likeness of Christ. this is the role of the Holy Spirit in the life of a true Christ-follower. however, we must not get in the way and sacrifice ourselves, our lives, and our pride in order to be moldable. if we go on claiming a status that we have not yet achieved, we see no need in working toward that status.

and second, in order to imitate Christ, we must be a student of Christ. He tells us in Matthew to take His yoke upon us and learn of Him. one cannot learn from someone with whom they do not spend countless hours observing, studying, and talking. i have been teaching my son gavin, to play golf. it was amazing to see how i could show him how to hold his club, how to swing it, and where to hit the ball, yet it wasn't until he stepped back and watched me swing, that he actually figured it out and hit the ball surprisingly well! it must be the same way with Christ. we must both learn of Him, as well as spend time with Him, to truly start imitating Him, and therefore begin working toward the title of "little Christ."

do you live up to the title you are claiming?

ashes, ashes, we all fall down

today is fat tuesday, the day of gluttony observed by those of the catholic faith, as well as anyone else looking for an excuse to binge on anything, whether it be red meat, alcohol, tobacco, etc., on the day before ash wednesday, the start of the lenten season. during lent, a person is asked to give up something that is dear to them for the 40 day period before crucifixion friday. i used to be amused by my classmates that would say "i'm giving up broccoli!", or "i'm giving up homework!" not being catholic, even i knew there was something hokey about that! i remember thinking, "i'm not sure that is how it works," but i always held my tongue. hollywood took a jab at the observance a few years back with the movie "40 days and 40 nights", starring josh hartnett, about a young man who gave up sex for lent, and all of the struggles, hijinx, and temptations that went along with that decision. tonight in new orleans, bourbon street (or rue bourbon for you "saints") is crawling with people partying and binging. how many of them will actually observe lent in the morning, is yet to be seen. having personally been to french quarter during mardi gras, as much as everyone was drinking, i don't imagine they would even want to look at an alcoholic beverage for 40 days!

every year, my wife and i give up something for lent. our church back home in tupelo, ms is also having an ash wednesday service tomorrow. they also observe the advent season, the period leading up to CHRISTmas. "but chris, aren't you baptist?" you ask. the answer is yes. have i given up my baptist doctrine? have i been voted out of the convention? no! absolutely not! as a matter of fact, our church back home is a baptist church. "so why are you observing catholic rituals?" i assume is the next question. if you will give me a second, and not begin the gathering of the deacons to revoke my ordination, i shall explain.

first of all, let me say that i am not one of these people who say that the baptists are right and everyone else is wrong and bound for hell. i just line up with the baptist doctrine more than any other faith. that being said, let me also say that in practice, baptists have a lot of things right, but sometimes we steer so clear of anything related to liturgy and catholicism, that we throw the baby out with the bathwater.

while in rhode island, there were no baptist churches to attend. let me rephrase that, there were no southern baptist churches. there were plenty of american baptists, but those churches in the area have a very bad reputation of corruptness and liberalism. so, while there i attended st. john the evangelist anglican church, and i gained a new appreciation for the reverance paid to the sacred. but going back to the subject of lent, i must explain why i observe it. i must issue a disclaimer in that i do not believe that there is anything salvific in the observance of lent. however, there is a biblical principle that permeates the season of lent: fasting. donald s. whitney, in his book "spiritual disciplines for the christian life" (a must-read for every Christ-follower) lists fasting as one of the most powerful discipline for strengthening your walk with Christ. i observe lent as a reminder and as a preparation of my heart for crucifixion friday (i never understood why they call it good friday) and the subsequent resurrection sunday. (i also do not like the term easter as it is a modification of the word ishtar, a pagan festival of fertility) during this time, i give up something that is a daily part of my life, so that whenever i am tempted to partake in the given up item, i am reminded of the sacrifice Christ made for me in leaving His throne in Heaven to become a ridiculed, poverty-stricken, unpopular, unattractive man in an oppressive government with an ultimate end of torture and abandon, all so i could have a daily relationship with Him. i have given up things such as cheeseburgers (you laugh, but ask my wife how much i love a good cheeseburger), sodas (another hard one, dr. pepper anyone?), and even television one year. did it grant me favor with God? no. did it earn me a spot in Heaven? no. did it mean i was better than others who did not observe it? absolutely not. i am just a sinner, undeserving, saved by grace. however, it did cause me to focus more on Christ and His love for me.

so what am i giving up for lent this year? i respond by saying that i choose to keep that between myself and God, as well as my wife to help keep me accountable. in the Bible, we are told not to broadcast our sacrifices, but to put on a spirit of humility when we fast. this year, even if you are not catholic, or any of the other "catholic-light" versions of Christendom, i encourage you to consider a fast for the season of lent. if you desire a deeper walk with God, i know of no better way. many think of a fast as giving up food and going hungry. that is an extreme version, but there are all kinds of fasts. the point of a fast is to give up something that you will miss, so that during the times that those cravings or longings come up, you can instead turn your focus on God and pray. (an important note: if you are married, and you choose the abstinence route for lent, remember that the Bible says that it must be done in agreement with your spouse. sorry if you thought you suddenly had a better excuse than "i have a headache"!) during the times of longing, instead pray, read scripture, memorize scripture, or sing praises to God (as we see the disciples doing during their many imprisonments). I pray that this lent season will draw you closer to our Saviour and strengthen your relationship with the One who owns everything and gives and takes away! aei pistos!
-C.

love...twue love

for those of you that follow this blog, a lot has happened since i last posted. i am now on active duty with the navy as deputy chaplain for mag-31 at the marine corps air station in beaufort, sc. a majority of my work so far involves trying to fix marriages that are on the verge of calling it quits. the command sergeant major came and talked to me and asked me what i thought the problem might be. i told him that i believed a lot had to do with immaturity. however, last night, my prognosis was called into question.

while sitting down with my bride and watching one of our favorite guilty pleasures, "the bachelor", jake, this season's bachelor, was talking about his decision to eliminate one of the four remaining girls. in his many interviews, he kept repeating the phrase, "i am falling in love with her", referring to the four girls in question. i began thinking about that phrase, "falling in love". i myself have used it many times. however, i believe this is a large part of the problem with marriages today. we have a very skewed idea of what love actually is. hence the phrase, "falling in love".

think about that phrase for a second. what is love? a ditch? a grave? it must be if it's something you can fall into. i think a more proper phrasing would be "falling in lust". after all, that's what it is a majority of the time. and lust is definitely a rut, or a grave. and you can definitely fall into it. but isn't that the picture that is painted for us on the tv and in the movies? love is shown as a trivial feeling that is usually based on a sexual attraction or intimacy. love has been trivialized down to nothing more than a feeling. and marriages built on the shallowness of this viewpoint sprout quickly, like a seed that falls on the patch of dirt on top of a rock, but as soon as adversity hits, the "love" that bloomed so quickly withers and fades and the marriage ends.

so the question that is left is "what is true love?" one definition we can find is in 1 corinthians 13. in the list that is presented there, nowhere do we see that love is a feeling. nowhere do we see that love is based on physical attraction. instead, love is portrayed a very selfless action. i used to say that love is a decision. however, in recent days i have realized something. love is more than a decision. in order to truly define love, we need only to look to the One who personified love. Christ. He came to this earth out of love for us, denied everything that was rightfully His, and sacrificed Himself out of love for us. in that portrait of love, we do not see in any way that Christ's love for us was based on anything about us. in fact, we give Him every day reason after reason NOT to love us. yet He loves us still. in corinthians, husbands are told to love their wives the way that Christ loves the church and gave Himself for her. so the answer: love is CHRIST.

if love is Christ, then we are to look to His example of love. even in the face of infidelity, Christ's love for us remains true. why? because His love is not based on trivial and shallow ideals. it is pure love, the love that we are to have for our neighbor. if we are to have it for our neighbor, it is reasonable to expect that we have it that much more for our spouse. if we seek to love as Christ loves us, then it will not matter how mad our spouse makes us, nor how many pounds they put on in that third or fourth year of marriage. it will not matter if they return our love, or if they give it to someone else. we will still love them because we are modeling Christ.

this valentine's day, remember what love really is. it isn't flowers or candy or romance or candlelight dinners. those are all expressions of love. but they are not love. flowers wilt, chocolate gets eaten, candles go out, and romance comes and goes. love, Christ-like love, lasts forever.