Don Hutchinson

Gleanings from the mind of a Christian Leader and Lawyer

Some Thoughts on Revival

by

How do we define revival? That’s the question a friend asked as I joined Christians on social media abuzz with news of revival “breaking out” at Asbury University in Kentucky.

About twenty students gathered for a regular Wednesday morning prayer time, then found themselves unable to leave. Word spread about the tangible presence of God in the building and more students as well as staff joined. There was report that on all four sides of the building the wind was blowing into Hughes Auditorium. As word spread farther afield, students and staff from two dozen other schools made their way to the school in Wilmore. Saturday, the auditorium was standing room only with a crowd of over 3,000 and hundreds more gathered outside while non-stop worship and prayer continued in this remarkable sensation of God’s near presence.

I’m not an expert on revival, but I have experienced it. From my background in the Wesleyan Holiness and Pentecostal traditions of the Body of Christ, following are some thoughts on understanding revival I hope you will find helpful.

How do we define revival? My initial answer was social media short, and maybe a little academic and formal:

Revival is usually considered to involve personal awakening or personal renewal in relationship with God. When assessed in a group setting, it may or may not be evangelistic in nature. Reports from Asbury note what might be termed confessions, re-dedications, and new decisions as others have joined the original student weekly prayer gathering.

Revival literally means giving life again, restoring life from death. Paul writes that we were dead in our sins, revived―given new life―by God’s love and grace expressed in Jesus Christ (Ephesians 2:1-5). Similarly, in the parable Jesus told about the lost son and loving father the son who had claimed his inheritance and left home was declared by his dad to have been dead but alive again when the young man returned home (Luke 15:24).

Historically, when revival, with resultant changed lives, has taken place in a group setting it has been referred to as revival, awakening, or renewal. New life through shared experience by a community of people. Asleep to God and awakened by and to His love. The old made new.

Revival isn’t in the music, although revival may be inspired by and inspire music. Revival isn’t in the gathering, although revival may come from and generate gathering. Revival isn’t about the location, although revival may be geographically defined. Revival isn’t in the duration of the event, although revival may last for an extended period of time.

Revival is about new life; submission to God that influences the course of one’s living, life altar-ing that is life altering.

The first great communal revival took place in Jerusalem on Pentecost. In obedience to Jesus (Acts 1:4-8), His followers were gathered in prayer and waiting when they had an encounter with Holy Spirit that changed their lives. The fruit of that life altering experience was observable in the response of others to their testimony of what had taken place (Acts 2:1-41).

If there is any formula to revival it might be: obedience to Jesus plus prayer and waiting. How long must we wait? “It is not for you to know the times and seasons that the Father has fixed by his own authority.” (Acts 1:7)

What is the evidence of revival? The presence of Holy Spirit convicting of sin, righteousness, and judgment. Concerning sin, because people do not believe in Christ. Concerning righteousness, because there are areas of life in which we are not following Jesus, placing other things in life ahead of giving him all of ourselves (Mark 12:30), as we do not consider Him present in the situation. Concerning judgment, because the ruler of this world, Satan in rebellion to God, and those who opt to pursue the things of this world rather than the things of Christ’s kingdom stand condemned by their own choices (John 16:7-11).

The evidence of revival is also in the formation of new life. As Paul wrote, “I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.” (Galatians 2:20) There is something in the revived that is inexorably altered by having been placed on the altar.

All of us who follow Christ have experienced revival of the personal nature. We are being conformed through life’s circumstances to be more like Jesus in our nature (Romans 8:28-29). The fruit of our new life is known in the growth of: love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control―the fruit of Holy Spirit’s effecting presence within us (Galatians 5:22-23).

Some have had the group experience described as revival, renewal, awakening. Many thousands made their way to savour the Toronto Blessing or Brownsville Revival in the 1990s and early 2000s. Some were revival junkies, relishing only the experience of the moment. More were revived, renewed, refreshed in relationship with God and affirmed or redirected in life plans.

Some of us have felt we missed revival in the group sense. As a family we had reason to delay attending a conference in Kingston by one day. When we arrived, the reports we heard were of a meeting that started in music and prayer before all were overwhelmed by God’s presence, falling on the floor. Several hours passed before any could move, or wanted to. I spent the rest of the weekend feeling I had missed it.

But had I missed revival? I missed a group experience, but not revival.

As Paul notes, revival happens in the individual who accepts Holy Spirit’s conviction and follows Christ.

Revival might look like Pentecost, or Hughes Auditorium, wind of the Spirit blowing and thousands being drawn to hear God’s message. Or revival might look like Sunday morning at your church when a prayer shared, song sung, or pastor’s word is caught by the wind of the Spirit into your heart and something in your life is surrendered to Christ’s Lordship.

If you think you’ve missed it, and you’re longing for Christ to do more, please know you haven’t. You’re in personal revival, even if you’re not in Wilmore, Kentucky.

The Spirit blows where it wishes, and you hear its sound, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. (John 3:8)

A Prayer for lawyers and judges

by

Our Father, You are wise, and just, and merciful. You are gracious toward all human beings in Your relationship with us. May those of us who have been trained and equipped to practice law be wise, just, and merciful in our interactions with others. Whether we are advisors, advocates, or adjudicators, may we be helpers. Encourage and enable us also to be gracious toward all.

Father, for those of us who are Christians, may our service for others and for the culture in which we live also provide a harvest taste of the fruit of Your presence in us―love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness,  gentleness, and self-control―that You would be known through us, and glorified.

Father, we are mindful of the considerable number of lawyers positioned to serve their neighbours as politicians. We pray that each, along with advisors, advocates, and adjudicators, would contribute to all of us being able to live quiet and peaceful lives.

Father, may each lawyer and each judge share in the knowledge of Your truth, experience the joy of Your salvation, and daily live and serve with sensitivity to Holy Spirit’s counsel and direction.

In Jesus’ name. Amen.

Biblically informed thoughts on Christian use of social media

by

“Preach the gospel at all times. Use words if necessary.” This quote, or words to this effect, are often attributed to St. Francis of Assisi. However, there is no record of Francis having said or written any such thing. The closest to this thought is found in his twelfth of the rules for friars (frères or brothers) from 1221 in which Francis required that those who preach “must first draw from secret prayers what he will later pour out in holy sermons” and “all the friars… should preach by their deeds.” These latter words align with the admonition found in James’ letter that faith without corresponding works is dead, a lifeless and meaningless claim to faith (James 2:17).

With the advent of social media many Christians seem to have adopted an inverse variation on the theme, “Use words. If necessary preach the gospel.” The absence of biblical influence on the behaviour of too many users of social media, including Christians, is evident by the tone in its use which is often self-focused or unrestrainedly negative. Taking into account an individual’s posting trend it can be jarring when someone quotes Scripture or identifies as a Christ-follower. What are we doing unto others?

Three months ago, I felt a prompting to address this inconsistency through ninety days of questions about our social media behaviour, framed in light of Scripture used in context so that those interested might either know the context or open the Bible to read the context. Ninety days of biblical quotes and relevant questions would daily be constrained by the 280-character limit of Twitter.

I don’t chase or follow every prompting, but experience has taught that when a prompting aligns with Scripture and the challenge to live with Christlike character it’s one to pursue. As Francis might have advised his friars, first draw from private prayer what will be poured out in 280 characters or less. This was my ninety day challenge as much as in sharing it became ours.

For those who might want to take up your own ninety days of biblical reflection about social media use, here they are. [Link below]

Blessings, Don.

Biblically informed thoughts on Christian use of social media

The Charter, Indigenous Relations, and The Queen

by

Two noteworthy historic events coincide this week, in addition to the millennia-old celebrations of Passover and Easter.

A central constitutional component in the less ancient history of the Dominion of Canada is our monarchy. Two significant events in the life of the Queen of Canada take place within days of each other. Seventy years into her reign, April 21 is Queen Elizabeth II’s 96th birthday and April 17 marks four decades since she signed the final paperwork authorizing Canada’s constitution to be administered at home instead of from the Palace at Westminster (the Parliament building of the United Kingdom).

I will address the constitutional landmark first, with a brief telling of how my own story intersects. As shared in Under Siege: Religious Freedom and the Church in Canada at 150 (1867–2017):

The day after writing the final exam of my first year of law school was April 17, 1982. That morning, I got on my bicycle and rode a fair distance to my friend Mitch’s house. He was one of the few people I knew who owned a colour television—a twenty-six-inch screen at that! It was a beautiful, sunny day in Vancouver— and pouring rain in Ottawa. Mitch had invited a bunch of fellow law students to his place for an unusual kind of party, one that has not been repeated in my lifetime. We watched the live broadcast as Prime Minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau and Queen Elizabeth II, on the front steps of Parliament Hill, signed the official documentation to transition Canada’s constitution from an act of the British Parliament (the British North America Act, now referred to as the Constitution Act, 1867) to the Canadian-held and Canadian-amendable Constitution Act, 1982. While often referred to as the repatriation of our constitution, it was actually the patriation of our constitution, as this was the occasion when it became the property of Canada and Canadians for the first time.

Canada, established July 1, 1867, did not actually become a sovereign nation until April 17, 1982. Also on that day, Canadian law was forever changed by the inclusion of thirty-four sections in Part I of the Constitution Act, 1982. These sections are known as the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

A few days later, I left Vancouver to prepare for and then enter Christian ministry as a pastor. None of us in that living room on a sunny west coast morning had any idea how dramatically the amendment to our constitution would change the practice of law, the practices of Canadians, or the very nature of our nation.

Precisely three years later, as provided in the Constitution Act, 1982, on April 17, 1985, the equality rights provision of the Charter came into effect. As a result of the time required for legal cases to make their way through the court system, exactly seven days later the Supreme Court of Canada issued its first decision on the Charter’s guarantee of freedom of religion in R v Big M Drug Mart. But already the seeds planted in 1982 were producing fresh growth that would in short order revise Canada’s legal landscape.

Not long afterward, I was asked by the Canadian leader of my church denomination, The Salvation Army, to return to law school to prepare myself to establish a national legal department.

At the time, my wife Gloria and I were co-pastoring a church in the Lax Kw’alaams (“place of the wild roses”) village, commonly called Port Simpson, part of the Port Simpson No. 1 Reserve of the Tsimshian First Nation in northern British Columbia.

I carried the above story forward to Lax Kw’alaams because lessons learned there inform an important portion of both this week’s constitutional celebration and the monarchy.

As Her Majesty’s birthday approaches amidst Platinum Jubilee celebrations of her accession to the throne in 1952, republicans are openly advocating an end to the monarchy in Canada. The heir to her throne, our throne, plans to visit in May. The announcement alone gave amplified profile to the republican agenda because Prince Charles is thought less popular with Canadians than his mother.

Like the organizers of the 1864 Charlottetown conference on confederation, and subsequent gatherings leading up to the British North America Act of 1867, Canadian republicans forget that our founding nations are not just two―the United Kingdom and France―but hundreds. Turtle Island’s first citizens had their own long histories before welcoming the relative newcomers from Europe half a millennium ago. The Constitution Act, 1982 reminded of and reinvigorated that truth.

While many Canadians will this week celebrate the 40th anniversary of sections 1 to 34 of the Constitution Act, 1982, better know as the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, we need remember the constitutional amendment of 1982 also included sections 35 to 52.

Section 35 recognizes and affirms “the existing aboriginal and treaty rights of the aboriginal peoples” who are described as including “the Indian, Inuit and Métis peoples of Canada.” The “existing aboriginal rights” mentioned are distinct from and pre-date written treaty rights. Those rights are pertinent to every square metre of Canadian soil, including those covered by treaty. While government and the courts are sorting out application of old treaties and aboriginal rights, as well as redress for violations, the section also recognizes new treaties that are still being negotiated concerning unceded lands.

It cannot go unnoticed that treaties with Indigenous residents were made with the Crown―the monarch―not the government.

When we lived in Lax Kw’alaams, the elders were clear, as have been elders I have since encountered from sea to sea, that formalized Indigenous relationship with Canada is understood to be with the Queen not her prime minister. The Queen is the head of state. The prime minister is the head of her government.

To become a republic, in addition to constitutional negotiations (see Part V of the Constitution Act, 1982 for the procedure), renegotiation would be required for treaties made between Indigenous peoples and the Crown. There are 70 recognized treaties made between 1701 and 1923, describing the basis for relationship between the Crown and 364 First Nations, representing over 600,000 people. As part of Canada’s comprehensive land claims policy to address previously unceded lands, an additional 25 treaties have been negotiated since 1973. These describe the relationship between 97 Indigenous communities and nearly 90,000 people. Treaty negotiation is complex, historic, and ongoing in Canada.

Perhaps we Canadians might focus a bit less this week on the Charter and more on opportunities to advance reconciliation with Canada’s Indigenous peoples; much less on outspoken republicans and more on our esteemed monarch’s 96th birthday. Long live our noble Queen.

 

 

Be Kind to Each Other

by

In Ontario, covid-19 related masking requirements became optional on Monday, March 21. Most private businesses and institutions have decided to go mask optional. Some have decided to maintain mask mandates and passport requirements for now. Public facilities are compelled to discontinue mandates, recognizing masking and vaccination as a personal choice (except for public transit and a few others). Federal mask and vaccine passports remain in place.

Starting the day mandates were imposed and through this week, one thing I’ve noticed is too often absent has been kindness―patience, gentleness, self-control―between people who disagree.

Reading what some are free to say on social media and listening to passionate voices on video or in the news, I can’t help but think there seems to be a missing element of humanity in our humanity. It crossed my mind that if Rabbi Bulka was still alive he would remind us to be kind to each other.

Kindness is a strong motivator. So is fear.

Do you fear what you might lose if you put on a mask? Pride in your research? Ridicule from friends or strangers? Your sense of identity?

Do you fear what you might lose if you had decided to be vaccinated once, twice or thrice, exposing your shoulder to the needle and downloading a QR code?

Perhaps you fear what you might lose if you don’t put on a mask? Pride in your research? Ridicule from friends or strangers?

Do you fear what you might lose if you had not been vaccinated once, twice or thrice?

For too many, the answers have fostered flashpoints for anger rather than acceptance of a personal choice and motivation to demonstrate human kindness toward one another. Both sides rebuke the other with the same words. “You’re being deceived!”

There are other fears, some that received little attention over the last two years and are especially deserving of our thoughts in the coming days and weeks.

Perhaps, the shots and that mask are not for the mask-wearer. Maybe grandmother, grandfather, mom, dad, sibling or child faces risks we know not of.

Be kind.

You may think of a mask as a face diaper or muzzle but perhaps best to hold those words for private conversation with friends. The mask could signify fear. Bully words won’t alleviate it. The mask might be an expression of kindness, legitimate concern for life and love of self or another.

The unvaccinated are not a threat to Canada’s government or society. The unmasked are not a horde of selfish virus-spreaders.

Love your neighbour, he said. Treat others the way you would like to be treated, are his words. Love even your enemies, he added.

Church, we especially ought to grasp the importance of being kind―to ourselves and to others.

March 27 will mark the first Sunday the option to mask or not to mask extends to those gathered in places of worship. May I encourage that we smile at one another? Smile with your eyes if your mouth is covered.

It will be a different Sunday than has been experienced over the last two years. There will have been only a week to prepare to be kind to one another. Or, maybe, in the moment we’ll apply the lessons of a lifetime.

Sunday, some will have masks on. Others will not. Some will keep their distance. Others will hug. Let’s be respectful of one another. Watch and listen to our brothers and sisters.

I like the decision the leadership team of our congregation has taken. They’ll have masks with them. If you approach maskless you may be greeted maskless. If you approach masked, they’ll try to remember to mask, being sensitive to your level of comfort and personal need. That’s kindness in action.

When you show up, some of the people you’re looking for won’t be there. Things have changed over the last two years. They’ve moved, or moved to another congregation. A few have moved on to their eternal home. Others to a care home.

Some will simply be at home. They’re not ready to come back just yet. Now is not the time to tell them the Bible has 365 fear nots, one for each day of the year. (So I’ve heard, but never counted.) They or loved ones have needs. Some have needs the congregation may not be in a position to meet until it’s clear who’ll be back and which areas of ministry will have, or lack, volunteers. The online attendance option is the best fit for now.

Miss them. Pray for them. Call them. Encourage them. Be kind.

There will be new opportunities presented by this fresh start. Look for those opportunities. Pray about whether one or more might be an opportunity for you to show love in action.

Jesus doesn’t separate his disciples into the masked and the unmasked. He did say, “By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another (John 13:35)”.

Let’s be kind to each other.