Breakpoint

Today, the COVID-19 pandemic and associated lockdowns seems, at least to most of us, like an extended nightmare of yesterday. However, some of the ways that our lives changed have stuck with us. For example, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, the number of Americans working primarily from home has tripled since 2019. Many people will never go back to full-time commuting, nor do they want to (though there are signs of a reset on the horizon).

Another change, one even more consequential for individuals and our society, is the large-scale exodus from in-person church services. According to Pew Research, though nearly all houses of worship had resumed regular, in-person services by this time last year, disappointingly few Christians had actually returned. There's the church, there's the steeple, open the door … but where are the people?

Researchers from the Survey Center on American Life and the University of Chicago found that, last year, one-third of Americans admitted to never attending religious services, up from a quarter of Americans before the pandemic. They also found no lockdown-induced surge in atheism nor drop in religious affiliation. Instead, for the most part, "religious identity remained stable through the pandemic."

Apparently, large numbers of people who once identified as Christians have decided they no longer need to attend church. While COVID may have been the impetus behind this exodus, the root causes are preexisting and go much deeper. Too many Christians think of church as they would an event, concert, or TED Talk, optional experiences that can just as easily be consumed remotely.

When combined with pastors and leaders who view the core purpose of church as evangelism rather than discipleship or worship and are therefore willing to do whatever seems to "work," success is just as easily measured by logins and views after the pandemic as it was by attendance numbers and growth size before the pandemic.

Much is behind these shifting numbers. First and foremost, God continues to prune and winnow His Church, seeking the health of His Beloved. The broader cultural shift away from truth-claims and anything that smacks of traditional morality has only intensified in recent years. And, we should at least consider the possibility that the decline in both numbers and influence is, at least in part, a self-inflicted wound.

Like C.S. Lewis' famous image of making mud pies in the slum when offered a trip to the seashore, we've baptized (and watered down) the habits of the world in place of the riches provided in the testimony of Scripture and the God-ordained practices of the Church. Why would our neighbors be drawn to warmed-over versions of the world's leftovers?

To use a pair of homespun metaphors, the kind of bait used determines the kind of fish caught. Or, more prosaically, what you win people with is what you win them to. After decades of appealing first and foremost to whatever people want and editing to whatever they think, we've essentially discipled a generation that will only follow a Church that leads where they want to go.

In every age, a true and real Christianity finds much to critique as well as to affirm. If we aren't willing to challenge the sacred cows of our day, if we aren't up to preaching what Tom Holland called the "weird stuff" of our faith, we will find (and perhaps even now we are finding) that no one is interested in what we have to say because we aren't saying much worth hearing.

Our embodied and relational nature, which required an embodied and relational salvation, is one of those things. Thus, the author of Hebrews warns his readers not to forsake gathering together "as is the habit of some." And thus, when the Apostle Paul sought to explain the relationship between Christ and His Church, he invoked marriage. The love between a husband and wife symbolizes the love Jesus has for His Bride. The profound "mystery" to which Paul refers is the total union (body and soul) between the Savior and His saved people.

Our lives in Christ are just as physical as marriage. If you wouldn't try a purely virtual relationship with your spouse, you shouldn't try a virtual relationship with Christ or His people. Both require and deeply involve our bodies, and Christ could not have made this any clearer than He did by placing a family meal at the center of Christian worship, commanding us to "take and eat."

Unless limited by a health issue, attending a house church, or using creative sanctuary furnishings, Christians should always choose pews over couches. And churches should choose the truth-claims and practices of Holy Scripture over market-driven research.

This Breakpoint was co-authored by Shane Morris. For more resources to live like a Christian in this cultural moment, go to colsoncenter.org.

For more resources to live like a Christian in this cultural moment, visit Colsoncenter.org

This Breakpoint was originally published on February 16, 2023.

It is typically entertaining when two popular intellectuals get into a public spat. Recently, Canadian psychologist and YouTube star Jordan Peterson called out the famous British biologist Richard Dawkins with an "I told you so!"

After Dawkins complained on Twitter about New Zealand elevating traditional Maori stories to the same level as Western science, Peterson retorted, "Welcome to the world of post-humanism, sir. A world which you sadly helped birth. … [I]t wouldn't surprise me at all if the woke polytheistic neopaganists destroy science faster than they destroy Christianity."

On one hand, Dawkins is right that the whole genius of "Western" science is that it isn't just Western. But, as Peterson not so gently noted, Dawkins has spent his career tearing down the religious foundations upon which Western science is built. Without God and all that His existence implies, there is no solid ground for saying that any knowledge, scientific or otherwise, is true for everyone.

For more resources to live like a Christian in this cultural moment, visit Colsoncenter.org

This Point was originally published on July 12, 2023.

Today, January 13, we remember the Hussites who, on this day in 1501, published the first hymnal in history written in the language of the common people. The descendants of the Hussites are known as the Moravian Brethren, who carry on the rich tradition of hymns and church music today.

Christians have good reason to commemorate this event. After all, ours, like Judaism, has always been a singing faith. The longest book in the Bible, and the one at its center, is the Psalms, a word that means "songs." David's plans for the Temple included clans of Levites whose entire job was music. Choirs, soloists, orchestras, and antiphonal singing were prescribed parts of Temple life and practice, and an entire class of Psalms, the Songs of Ascent, were sung by the people as they traveled to Jerusalem for the annual pilgrimage festivals.

Throughout the biblical texts, music is also connected to prophecy and to dealing with evil spirits. Jesus and the apostles sang a hymn after the Last Supper, according to two of the Gospels. The Apostle Paul specifically associates singing with being filled with the Spirit in his epistle to the church at Ephesus. And, in John's Revelation of what is constantly happening around the throne of God, there is lots of singing, sometimes accompanied by harps.

Music also is part of the culmination of the creation story. When Eve is taken from Adam's side, Adam awakes and exclaims, "This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man." Many scholars believe this to essentially be a celebratory song.

Eliminating the musical element from the text of Scripture would be to gut them and the practices that have emerged from them. Monks chanted the Psalms daily, in some cases covering the entire Psalter in a week. Medieval thinkers thought of the human heartbeat, respiration, and daily cycle of sleeping and waking as "music." They also believed the motion of the heavenly bodies was regulated by the "music of the spheres." To the medieval mind, music was a glue holding the universe together. These ideas shaped the imaginations of C.S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkien, who used music as the agent of creation in their respective tales of Narnia and Middle Earth.

In the Reformation, Martin Luther reintroduced congregational singing to the liturgy, an idea that spread through all the branches of Protestantism and, eventually, returned to the Roman Catholic Church. Reformed Christians focused on singing the Psalms and other songs from Scripture, though some also incorporated hymns in their worship.

All of this points to a central truth of a Christian worldview, that God loves music. Because music has been so central to Church worship and the Christian imagination, the first common-language hymnal is a milestone to remember and an opportunity to reflect on how music serves Christian worship today.

While I have no desire to reignite the "worship wars" of recent decades, Christians should not think of music as mere decoration to services that are really about teaching and preaching. The essential question, even as music styles change and new music is created and incorporated, is what is music in worship services for?

The Psalms offer essential guidance. Some are songs of praise, others are confessions, but the largest category of Psalms are laments. In other words, the Psalms cover the full range of human emotions, bringing the totality of human experience into corporate worship.

And yet, the Psalms always direct our attention to God. Even when talking about their own experiences and hardships, they always turn attention outward and upward, from self and toward God. And often, this is done by remembering what God has done and who He has revealed Himself to be.

Too often, music utilized in churches fails to take us past expressing our own thoughts and feelings about God and, too often, only songs that elicit positive and happy emotions are sung. This does not follow the model of Scripture, a model that helps God's people see trouble and sorrow in light of God's faithfulness and character. This also misses what music is for. Music instructs. It is a tool of catechetical instruction, not merely a time of self-expression. In the end, songs centered on the subjective experience of Christians quickly become sources of bad theology.

Another consideration is that music is for the entire congregation. When music in the church is primarily about the performance of professional musicians, the songs are unsingable to much of the congregation. This is not an issue of style or preference. I thank God for modern writers of hymns and songs committed to producing music that is true and excellent for the glory of God and the people of God.

Music is a gift of God, a unique way of connecting His revelation with our hearts and minds. St. Augustine is thought to have said, "he who sings, prays twice." The Church must recover a more robust understanding and practice of music.

This Breakpoint was co-authored by Dr. Glenn Sunshine.

For more resources to live like a Christian in this cultural moment, visit Colsoncenter.org

This Breakpoint was originally published on January 13, 2023.

As we celebrate Christmas today, let's look back at the world into which the Word who became flesh entered human history.

It was a world shaped by the worship of false gods, gods who didn't care about their worshippers with worshippers who didn't care much about each other.

The God who became flesh changed everything. His life, death, and resurrection not only exposed the false gods for the counterfeits they were, but His followers demonstrated a new way. As historian Rodney Stark puts it, Jesus' followers offered "mercy and security" to a world filled with "squalor, misery, illness, and anonymity."

What started in Bethlehem two millennia ago continues today. Jesus is still disarming false "gods," like money, fame, sex, and power, and His followers are still called to to offer a better way of being human than anything currently offered in contemporary society.

This is the gift we have to offer the world.

For more resources to live like a Christian in this cultural moment, visit Colsoncenter.org

This Point was originally published on December 25, 2020.

As you enjoy this Christmas in the company of friends and family, be sure to reflect on how the babe in the manger reveals to us God's wonderful love. But even more, as Chuck Colson explained over a decade ago, remember the cosmic implications of the incarnation … that God would indeed become flesh. Here is Chuck Colson.

"The manger scene inspires a sense of awe and comfort to the hearts of Christians everywhere. But we often forget the staggering implications of Christmas. What image does the mention of Christmas typically conjure up? For most of us, it's a babe lying in a manger while Mary and Joseph, angels, and assorted animals look on.

Heartwarming picture, but Christmas is about far more than a Child's birth—even the Savior's birth. It's about the Incarnation: God Himself, Creator of heaven and Earth, invading planet Earth, becoming flesh and dwelling among us.

It's a staggering thought. Think of it: The Word—that is, Logos in the Greek, which meant all knowledge that could be known, the plan of creation—that is, ultimate reality, becomes mere man? And that He was not born of an earthly king and queen, but of a virgin of a backwater village named Nazareth? Certainly, God delights in confounding worldly wisdom and human expectations.

Thirty years after His humble birth, Jesus increased the Jews' befuddlement when He read from the prophet Isaiah in the synagogue at Nazareth: 'The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because He anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor … to proclaim release to the captives … to set free those who are downtrodden.' Jesus then turned the scroll back and announced, 'Today, this Scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing.'

In effect, the carpenter's son had just announced He was the King.

So yes, the birth of Jesus is a glorious moment, and the manger scene brings comfort and joy and Christmas cheer. But it should also inspire a holy terror in us—that this baby is God incarnate, the King who came to set captives free, through His violent, bloody death on the cross as atonement for us, His unworthy subjects.

It's through the Incarnation God sets His grand plan in motion. He invades planet Earth, establishing His reign through Christ's earthly ministry. And then Christ leaves behind an occupying force, His Church, which is to carry on the work of redemption until His return and the kingdom's final triumph.

Do we get this? I'm afraid most of us are so preoccupied and distracted by last-minute Christmas shopping and consumerism, we fail to see God's cosmic plan of redemption in which we, as fallen creatures, are directly involved.

Well, the average Christian may not "get" this announcement, but those locked behind bars do. Whenever I preach in the prisons, and I read Christ's inaugural sermon, Luke 4:18, and when I quote His promise of freedom for prisoners, they often raise their arms and cheer. The message of Jesus means freedom and victory for those who once had no hope. They're not distracted by the encumbrance of wealth and comfort.

People in the developing world get it, too. Whenever I've shared this message with the poor and oppressed people overseas, I see eyes brightening. Stripped of all material blessings, exploited by earthly powers, they long for the bold new kingdom of Christ.

Today is Christmas. Go ahead, enjoy singing about and celebrating the birth of the Savior. Set up a manger scene in your home. But don't forget this earth-shaking truth: The birth of the Baby in the manger was the thrilling signal that God had invaded the planet. And that gives us real reason to celebrate Christmas.

For all of us at Breakpoint, this is Chuck Colson in Washington, wishing you and your loved ones a very Merry Christmas."

For more resources to live like a Christian in this cultural moment, visit Colsoncenter.org

This Breakpoint was originally published on December 23, 2020.

John and Maria discuss the inconsistencies and fallout from the Pope's decision to "bless" same sex "marriage". A New York Times op-ed criticizes a popular children's program for its dad-affirming story lines. Also, John and Maria take a look at the theology of Christmas.

Recommendations

A Christmas Carol by Charles Dickens

The Muppet Christmas Carol

Let Our Gladness Have No End by Sara Groves

Segment 1: Papal Blessing of Same Sex Marriage

"After approving blessings for same-sex couples, Pope asks Vatican staff to avoid 'rigid ideologies'"

"Pop Francis Allows Priests to Bless Same-Sex Couples"

Segment 2: Bluey Under Attack

"'Bluey' and 'Chip Chilla' Offer a Fantasy of a Fun TV Dad"

Segment 3: Theology of Christmas

For more resources to live like a Christian in this cultural moment, visit Colsoncenter.org

In anticipation of Christmas, let's revisit the account from Luke 1 of the angel Gabriel visiting Zechariah to announce the birth of his son, John. According to Gabriel, John's role was "to make ready for the Lord a people prepared."

Karl Barth, the famous 20th-century theologian, was inspired by a depiction of John the Baptist by Renaissance painter Matthias Grünewald. In it, John stands to the right of the crucified Christ, pointing, as Barth put it, "in an almost impossible way" toward His savior. Barth had a print of the work hanging in his office. It reminded him that his job was not merely critiquing theology but always pointing to Christ.

As we enter Christmas and the New Year, let's do the same—keep pointing to Christ. And as we point to Christ, we point to reality, because in Him, as the Apostle Paul says, "all things hold together."

For more resources to live like a Christian in this cultural moment, visit Colsoncenter.org

This Point was first published 12.23.22.

One overlooked grace from God is that He, in His infinite wisdom, gave us four Gospels, instead of just one or two. For example, if it were up to only Matthew and Mark, we'd have the impression that John the Baptizer appeared out of nowhere and was more than a little weird. After all, it is from their accounts of John that we learn of his odd wardrobe and even odder diet.

A point about John that every one of the Gospels emphasizes is that he was a fulfillment of a promise from the prophets Malachi and Isaiah: "Behold, I send my messenger, and he will prepare the way before me" (Malachi 3:1).

A voice cries:

"In the wilderness prepare the way of the Lord;

make straight in the desert a highway for our God" (Isaiah 40:3).

Neither Matthew, whose Gospel begins with a nativity story, nor Mark, whose Gospel does not contain an account of Jesus' birth, include any details that connect John to the beginning of Jesus' story. Luke and John, however, do make that connection.

Luke's Gospel contains the most details about John's beginning, specifically that, like Jesus, John's birth was miraculous and also involved a visitation from the angel Gabriel. But it is one particular detail, one often overlooked detail, that is especially remarkable and instructive for our cultural moment. Luke reveals that John the Baptist was the first person—other than Mary, who was told by the angel—to recognize Jesus as the Messiah.

While Mary was still pregnant with Jesus, she went to visit John's mother Elizabeth, who was also still pregnant. Luke describes what happened, likely telling the story as he had heard it from Mary herself:

"And when Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, the baby leaped in her womb. And Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit, and she exclaimed with a loud cry, 'Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb! And why is this granted to me that the mother of my Lord should come to me? For behold, when the sound of your greeting came to my ears, the baby in my womb leaped for joy.'"

So, Elizabeth then becomes the third person to recognize Jesus as the Messiah, and she seems to imply that her own preborn child had informed her about the identity of Mary's preborn child. This account, described in only six verses, speaks volumes about how God thinks of life in the womb, when life begins, when our unique identity as human beings begins, the value of preborn human life, and even how God's purpose for our lives means something from the start.

In fact, the angel Gabriel had already informed Zechariah, John's father, about who his son would be:

"[Y]our wife Elizabeth will bear you a son, and you shall call his name John. And you will have joy and gladness, and many will rejoice at his birth, for he will be great before the Lord. And he must not drink wine or strong drink, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit, even from his mother's womb. And he will turn many of the children of Israel to the Lord their God, and he will go before him in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just, to make ready for the Lord a people prepared."

In this interaction between Mary, Elizabeth, and their preborn children, John is already fulfilling the purposes God has for him, in utero. While still in her womb, John helped his own mother prepare for the coming of the Lord. She then encouraged Mary in her preparation for the coming of the Lord, the One she was carrying at that time.

After Elizabeth's encouragement, Mary breaks out into song, the Magnificat, uttering words that have not only instructed and encouraged millions of people throughout Christian history as they prepare for the Lord, but which also definitively answer the question immortalized in another song, "Mary, Did You Know?" Apparently, she knew, and she composed a whole song about it.

As we head to the end of 2023, would you keep Breakpoint and the Colson Center in mind as you plan your year-end giving? These daily commentaries reach and equip hundreds of thousands of people each week, carrying on the vision that God gave Chuck Colson 35 years ago. If Breakpoint has helped you think clearly in 2023 about this cultural moment, you can support the work at colsoncenter.org/give.

For more resources to live like a Christian in this cultural moment, visit Colsoncenter.org

Back in 2016, Steve Tennes, owner of Country Mill Farms, posted on Facebook that because of their deeply held religious beliefs about marriage, the farm would continue to host weddings, but only between a man and a woman. In response, the city of East Lansing, Michigan, passed a regulation to prevent Country Mill Farms from participating in its farmer's market. This despite the fact that the Tenneses had participated for over five years without complaints. The Alliance Defending Freedom filed suit on their behalf.

According to the judge's opinion, the city's policy was "veiled cover for targeting belief or a faith-based practice." Last week, the city of East Lansing agreed to settle and pay $825,000 to Country Mill Farms. According to the ADF press release, "as part of the settlement agreement, the city of East Lansing agreed that Tennes is free to continue running his business in accord with his religious beliefs about marriage without jeopardizing his ability to participate in the city's farmer's market."

This is great news for people of conscience.

For more resources to live like a Christian in this cultural moment, visit Colsoncenter.org

In December 1791, the Bill of Rights was ratified by the United States. Though these 10 amendments to the Constitution are rarely mentioned after high school civics class, recent events here and abroad offer a glimpse of life without those rights and a reminder why they are so important as a defense against ideological overreach.

If a proposed new law passes the legislative process in Ireland, the famous Irish gift of gab will require government approval. As Kristen Waggoner of Alliance Defending Freedom recently noted in Newsweek, this potential restriction is, at best, vague. Even though it targets "hate," it never defines what "hate" is. As she put it,

"How is the public to know what kind of speech could be subject to prosecution? Given that "hate" is an impossible word to define in law (and is not defined in this bill), this paves the way for basically any expression considered unfavorable to be prosecuted in the future."

Vagueness in a national law is, in practice, an open invitation for state-based abuse, yet that is not this particular law's only problem. If it goes forward, refusing to give the police your password if they have a search warrant will be treated as a crime, and merely possessing material that "is likely to incite violence or hatred" might get you two years in jail. In other words, according to this proposed law, a crime doesn't even have to involve actually hating anyone or saying something that could be hateful. Anything that the powers-that-be think could possibly be interpreted as hateful would be sufficient. It's no wonder Waggoner added, "[I]t's not hard to imagine Ireland rapidly descending into an authoritarian state with the passage of this law."

Back in June, Pauline O'Reilly of the Green Party defended the proposed law with a line directly out of the totalitarian playbook: "We are restricting freedom, but we're doing it for the common good." This would include curtailing rights guaranteed in the Irish constitution "if people's views on others cause them deep discomfort." Again, under this view, no crime has to be committed, if someone is caused "deep discomfort." This kind of scrutiny will, of course, target some and not others. To paraphrase George Orwell's great line from Animal Farm, all discomfort is equally wrong, but some are more equal than others.

The way this inverted logic most often plays out is by the argument that not all speech is protected speech. Typically, this reasoning is followed by the necessary caveat, "After all, you can't yell fire in a theater!" This logical-sounding and necessary exception, however, becomes less exceptional when it is applied to more and more speech that a select few deem dangerous. In practice, at least in the United States, appeals to burning theaters have rarely, if ever, held up in court. As Jeff Kosseff notes in his new book Liar in a Crowded Theater, "[O]ne reason that a wider swath of false speech does not fall within an exception to the First Amendment is because regulation is simply not terribly effective at achieving the government's goals."

The First Amendment has, so far, been an effective barrier against unnecessary limits on freedoms, even when done "for our good." On the other hand, situations in European countries that lack anything like our First Amendment, not to mention the selective censorship at America's elite universities, expose how much can go wrong when there's nothing to limit the people in power from acting for our own good.

As C. S. Lewis put it in God in the Dock:

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."

The reason that the speech protections of the First Amendment, with its guarantees of liberty of conscience, do not exclude speech that is merely offensive is that inoffensive speech doesn't need protection. By allowing potentially and even truly wrong things to be said, the Bill of Rights ensures space for the truth to be heard, and for those committed to truth to make the case for it.

This Breakpoint was co-authored by Dr. Timothy Padgett.

For more resources to live like a Christian in this cultural moment, visit Colsoncenter.org