Mayoral Election, Planned Parenthood Spark Boycott of Houston by Amarillo Pastor

“Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established.  The authorities that exist have been established by God.  Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgement on themselves.”  Romans 13:1-2 NIV

http://www.boycotthouston.com/

I would guess this particular passage is probably invoked a lot, and misinterpreted a lot.  I find it somewhat remarkable that it appears in the writings of the apostle Paul, and in a book addressed to the Christians who lived closest to the feared and despised Caesar Nero.  There is no doubt this is definitely one of those tough sayings which require much thought and careful analysis.  Those Paul was addressing undoubtably thought immediately of Nero, and the succession of Roman Caesars who, around this particular time, had taken to making the lives of Christians sheer misery.  Seeing this passage once caused me to mention the name of Hitler, who was probably not a whole lot worse than the Caesars in terms of his contempt for humanity and of the evil in which he seemed to delight. 

An explanation, one which didn’t satisfy me at the time, but which I now can certainly give some due consideration, is that this is an example of the sovereign will of God, something that he does for his own reasons.  He does not have to be accountable for his reasoning to humans (For who has known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? I Corinthians 2:16a).  Paul does, however, offer some reasoning for this particular position.  One is to be free from the fear of the one in authority.  Rulers, he says, hold no terror for those who do right.  Another reason, and perhaps the one that helps most with the understanding of this principle when it seems the authority has gone awry, as it had in the days of Nero, or of Hitler, is the need for this to be a matter of conscience.  Respecting the authority of the civil government is not equated to agreeing with it in principle.  It is a matter of a testimony of faith.  It is the principle on which the martyrdom of literally thousands of Christians throughout history rests.  There may have been no more powerful voice in all of history down through the ages with regard to preaching the gospel than the one shouted out by the saints who gave up their lives for what they believed without resisting the authority of the civil government, in fact, in being executed by it unjustly.  What a powerful confirmation of the truth!

Though a municipal government is far from being compared to the powerful Roman Empire, or even the federal government, the fact of the matter is that the scripture’s teachings still apply to its authority.  Again, the idea is that respecting the authority of the civil government is not the same thing as agreeing with it in principle or by conviction.  For that reason, I question the effectiveness of the boycott of Houston advocated by the Amarillo pastor as a result of the recent election of Annise Parker as Mayor, and the anticipated opening of the new Planned Parenthood center.  This will simply result in something which makes all Christians look bad without having any effect on either the business community in Houston, or the results of future elections.  And I wonder who, among the field of candidates running for mayor this time around, would have been the “chosen one” for Christians to support.  Sinless perfection wasn’t a characteristic exhibited by or claimed by anyone running for mayor of Houston this time around.  I guess I should be grateful that I live in the suburbs…

The presence of the new Planned Parenthood center on Houston’s southeast side is not something for which the citizens of Houston alone should bear political or social responsibility.  For years, Texas has been governed by conservative politicians who have given lip service, and not much else, to the pro-life advocates who, time and time again have elected them without demanding any accountability from them with regard to living up to their campaign promises.  Many of those same conservative politicians sit on the boards of directors, hold stock, and earn profits from businesses which were major contributors to the renovation of the old Sterling Bank building, enabling Planned Parenthood to turn it into a headquarters facility and abortion clinic.  As long as protecting the ability to turn a buck is the highest priority of Texas politicians, social issues important to Christians, such as this one, will take a back seat.  Planned Parenthood’s renovation of the old bank put money in the pockets of contractors, material distributors, transportation companies, banks, and health insurance companies.  Houston isn’t the only city in the state where Planned Parenthood operates, and questions about its apparently free hand to operate in Texas should be addressed to the Republican dominated, conservative state legislature, the present governor and his predecessor.  Planned Parenthood would have found existing in Texas to be difficult, much less constructing a multi-million dollar facility on the Gulf Freeway, if the politicians had been held accountable. 

I didn’t pay a whole lot of attention to the mayoral race in Houston last year, mainly because I wasn’t voting in it because I don’t live in the city limits.  I can’t really speak to the issues that were involved or the voting patterns, or even the political affiliation of the candidates.  Technically, a city election is non-partisan, though most people seem to know which candidates are Republicans and which are Democrats.  Most of the conservative Christians support those known to be Republicans, out of habit or out of the belief that there is a connection between the two, though I could point to a number of examples where that is simply not the case.  The only identified Republican in the mayor’s race was beaten to the ground in the primary election, which may explain why the Christians, which the Amarillo pastor seems to think exist in relatively large numbers in the city of Houston, didn’t turn out to vote.  Then again I am not sure that’s the case.

But I am sure there is no Biblical teaching regarding God’s judgement being held over the Christians who live in a particular city because of who was elected mayor.  The Bible teaches that every human being is subject to God’s judgement for their own sin, and the penalty for it is death, from which there is no escape.  That is neither enhanced or diminished by the righteousness, or lack thereof, of the elected politicians in government.  The power of forgiveness,  and the mercy and grace which brings restoration and freedom from the judgement and penalty of sin comes from the cross, not the ballot box, and it isn’t distributed collectively as a reward for voting the right way, but individually when someone repents and accepts it through the atonement. 

The scripture clearly instructs Christians to treat those who hold office with the respect and dignity that the authority which comes with the office they hold demands.  That’s what God expects of us, and in so doing, we set the kind of example that he desires us to show.  That does not mean we approve of the politician’s lifestyle, or that we must agree with any position they hold.  It simply means that our behavior toward them must reflect the inward transformation that we have experienced through our faith in Christ, and from the saving grace that we were given when we were a sinner lost and on the road to eternal death.

Look closely at the Boycott Houston website.  See the logo you can click to “donate”?  Wanna bet that’s at least one of the major driving forces behind the website?

Where is this found in Scripture?

http://www.wfaa.com/news/investigates/Prominent-Pastor-Linked-to-Luxury-83600192.html

The New Testament writers, in outlining the responsibilities, authority and duties of a “pastor,” which they more commonly referred to as the “overseer” or the “Bishop,” probably never envisioned the kind of wealth that individuals could accumulate when they advocated for his being “worthy of his hire,” or even “worthy of double honor.”  And even in the most commercial, consumer society in the world, there are probably no more than a small number of people in general, and church members in particular, who would not be shocked by the exhorbatant and lavish expense account, along with salary and benefits, provided by the Grapevine church pastored by Ed Young, Jr. 

Apparently, there are those among Young’s congregation who have gotten wind of what is happening to their contributions, and they are making an exit.  Fair enough under the circumstances.  Accountability to the congregation is not a popular concept among megachurch leadership in America, and it really never has been.  But even so, there is certainly a question to be raised here regarding why someone would join a church and hand over their tithe check in a situation where there is no open accountability with regard to the way it is used. 

I have sat through plenty of arguments in church business meetings in recent years, in which disclosure of staff salaries and benefits in the monthly or quarterly budget reports was demanded, and I’ve heard all of the reasons why pastors and church staff should object to them.  After all, how many church members would tolerate having to disclose their salary to other members of the same church?  The only problem with that line of reasoning is that it is a direct product of thinking which essentially ignores the basic principles of scripture.  The church is a community of faith, supported by that same faith, and built on trust.  Authority is invested in the entire body functioning together as a unit. 

In light of that perspective, there are several inherent problems related to this particular incident in Grapevine, Texas.  At what point does extravangant spending of church funds become an expression of the love of money?  I’m not quite sure how to measure that, but for me, I think the bottom line would be the willingness of this particular pastor to serve in a small church that might struggle to pay him the equivalent of a local high school history teacher.  Would he be willing to do that if God called him to it?  Only he can answer that question.

A second problem relates to the efficient and effective stewardship of the money.  While it may be true that people from a jet-set lifestyle, with jet-set money to give, expect their pastor to have the same priviliges and opportunities as they have, is merely allowing them to do so good discipleship?  The Christian experience is supposed to be a life transforming one.  It seems that your wallet, your view of money, your spending habits and everything else associated with it would be “baptized” so to speak.  And this doesn’t look like it has been immersed in much of anything related to what the Bible has to say on the subject.

A third issue related to this scenario has to do with the shroud of secrecy that must be drawn over the activities to keep public relations problems from happening.  Why does a faith community built on mutual trust have to be kept in the dark?  There is a fear, especially among those who lead such large groups of people, that the connections to the congregation by many members are somewhat shallow, and that unpopular policy and moves of the leadership might cause enough fringe members to leave to affect the bottom line, which is the budget.  Success is measured by continuous growth, and if that is not occurring, then there must be some problem keeping it from happening.  So, to stop public relations problems from happening, you simply do not disclose anything you are doing. 

A fourth issue is the one which determines who owns the church’s “intellectual property,” which would include the pastor’s sermons and writings.  If a church is a faith community of which the pastor is the designated “elder” or overseer, then anything that is produced by him for the exclusive use of the congregation would, in my way of interpreting the scripture on this subject, belong to the whole congregation.  Outside of that, I would think that any personal writing or intellectual property would be his own, provided that its production did not interfere with his normal duties as pastor of the church, or that it was not produced on the time that was scheduled to be devoted to them. 

Perhaps the largest issue related to incidents such as this is the impression which is left by many people who are not part of the Christian community.  Stuff like this simply serves to give credibility to the claim that the church is after your money, will always be involved in asking you for more, and this is why. 

When you have massive financial resources at your disposal, it is pretty obvious that there is little need for the presence of the Holy Spirit, and you are a long way from the humiliation and suffering of the Cross.

The Politics of Calling a Pastor

This is more or less part two of an article I wrote on this blog more than a year ago entitled Inside a Pastor Search.  Though I didn’t actually serve on the team, I did serve as their advisor, and I’ve observed the process on more than one occasion.  What I’ve learned, and observed, is that for many Baptist churches who pursue calling a pastor in this way, it is a miracle that they arrive at a conclusion and are successful in finding someone who meets their qualifications.  The average length of tenure of a pastor in a Baptist church may very well be an indication of the level at which this process is flawed and ineffective. 

There is a lot of talk at the beginning about prayer, seeking the Lord’s will and sense of direction, and following Biblical qualifications and directives.  At some point, in some cases, those elements may eventually make their way into the search, but only when they apply to a specific candidate that two or three of the search team members favor.  What usually happens is an acknowledgment at the beginning of the search that the team is “sticking to the Bible” with regard to the qualifications and set of spiritual gifts it desires to pursue in its next pastor, and then a departure from those qualifications in favor of more worldly standards that have crept in from the business and corporate world, blended with personal preferences. 

Generally, when the resumes begin coming in, and the team begins looking at them, there are several factors which become almost completely dominating in the search process, and none of them are really related to the Biblical role, calling or qualifications of the man called to be the elder, the overseer, the shepherd of the body of Christ.  The blending of generations on a pastor search team causes all of these factors to come to the surface, and also creates an atmosphere in which individuals from very different backgrounds, with different experience and different sets of spiritual gifts come to the top of the pile of hundreds of resumes. 

First, some members of the team are working under the conviction that the new pastor should be a younger man, with a nice family, in order to attract younger families to the church.  The very premise that it is the pastor who attracts members to the church is not derived from scripture, and laying this expectation on the shoulders of any pastor leads to an immediate deterioration of the “capital” he needs in a church in order to develop his ministry, but it sounds logical.  Of course, among the pile of several hundred resumes which eventually come to a pastor search team in a reasonably sized church with a full time pastor, there are going to be fewer than a dozen who fall into the “under 40″ category, and fewer who fit the experience demands of the rest of the team members, but there will inevitably be a few candidates who will surface.  They will be the ones who have their seminary graduation face shot attached, showing a full head of hair and a broad smile with straight, white teeth.  If he’s photogenic enough, his lack of experience will be overlooked.

Second, in Southern Baptist circles, a deep voice and a southern accent are critical.  In evaluating preaching styles, content is, unfortunately, not nearly as critical a factor as presentation.  There is a very theatrical style that includes hand motions, voice inflections, specific pronounciations of specific words, a sprinkling of southern colloquial sayings, and for lack of a better way to describe them, pregnant pauses, that causes the super spiritual to say “Amen,” and provokes a reaction from even the most shy member.  The new thinline Bibles that Broadman and Holman produce come in handy, because the pastor can hold the scripture open to his text with one hand, fold back the cover and the preceding pages with the other, and wave it in the air without losing his spot or dropping it. 

Third, candidates which exhibit a relatively high level of what might be called panache, will inevitably come to the top of the pile.  I’ve seen this happen with virtually every search team I’ve ever observed, including the one that my father served on back in the late 1970’s.  It explains how a candidate who has pastored four or five churches in two decades, leaving each one of them smaller and with fewer financial resources than when he arrived, can still be one of the top contenders for the current opening.  A few conference phone calls, a personal interview, and the information on the resume and in the denominational record book is quickly forgotten. 

In recent years, there’s a new approach to the Baptist pastor search that has become very prominent and influential in the process.  There is now a lot of open campaigning for the job by the candidate himself, and far more “lobbying” on his behalf by his friends and associates than I have ever observed.  That has always been part of a pastor search.  In fact, in the past many churches got names of potential candidates by asking a denominational leader or an influential pastor for a recommendation, and of course, they were provided with a list of their closest friends and associates.  In fact, for a candidate to send a resume directly to a church with an open position was considered improper and self-promoting.  Now, I would guess that 95% of the resumes come to a church that way. 

It takes a while for a good search team to work through personal agendas and preferences, superficial appeal and self promotion to get down to the business of actually calling the pastor that is being spiritually directed and prepared to serve a particular congregation.  Some search teams never do.  As Baptists, we always resort to our use of terms like “God’s will” and “spirit led” to describe the end results, but I’ve been in vocational ministry for 30 years, and I know the code words that are used to convince people that the choice being made is the one God wants us to make.  It’s that short average tenure of a pastor in our denomination that leads me to believe the language at the end of the process is not always describing the conclusion that is reached. 

Friends who serve in ministry in other denominations have a difficult time understanding why we do things this way.  Frankly, so do I.  The fact that the process varies from church to church makes it even more baffling.  It doesn’t seem to be a very efficient process, and it is often not effective or satisfactory for either the church, or the pastor.  Most of my Baptist colleagues have multiple experiences with churches that they would call a mismatch, and most church members would agree that, over time, most of the ministers who have pastored or served their churches were not well suited for their particular position. 

There are churches, however, which are able to get beyond the superficial and the personal preferences, and come up with the individual they feel has been directed to their presence by God’s Holy Spirit.  Ultimately, I’m not sure whether I believe that there is just one person for the job, or that, in the church, most of those who are gifted and equipped for the ministry of equipping the saints and called to be the overseer could serve anywhere they happened to be planted at the time.  I don’t believe a church ever has to use language like “settling for their second choice,” if the first person they selected happened not to be available or turned down the opportunity.  That’s almost like limiting God’s sovereignty to circumstances.  The fact that individuals who do not have “penache,” who do not fit the image associated with a flashy smile, a dimple in the cheek, or a slick business suit, who are not well connected self promoters, and who are not “young” by the world’s standards not only make their way into church vocational service, but who more often than not are successful in it by the way God measures success would be an indicator that there is indeed something else at work here.  Maybe it happens when a team becomes so tired of looking at resumes and so weary of meeting together, watching videos, listening to DVD’s and visiting churches that they are ready for the process to end, and that’s when God can get past the worldly influences and go to work.  Maybe God’s sovereign will is always at work, even through the personal preferences and personal agendas that get brought to the table. 

It is pretty clear that, once on the job, if the search team bought the superficial image of the pastor candidate and that influenced their decision making process, it will not be long before the very real demands of the job cause him to either become completely dependent on the Holy Spirit, or to move on to the next place.

Politics Stymies Pro-Life Movement

The old Sterling Bank building on the  Gulf Freeway in Houston has been given a facelift.  The white stucco exterior on the unusually designed building has been covered with a more twenty-first century style pattern of blues, greens and black.  The interior is being readied for service as an operations center for Planned Parenthood, and billed by them as a state of the art facility providing “health care options” to the unfortunate and less affluent.  Opponents have called it the nation’s largest abortion clinic.  It is still a few months from opening for business.

The location of the facility is a propaganda coup for Planned Parenthood.  It is highly visible from the Gulf Freeway, just a few blocks off the campus of the University of Houston, easily accessible via the Elgin-Cullen exit, and yet, situated in such a way that entrances and access are limited and private, providing a high level of security and protection from prying eyes, and potential protesters.  It lies along the social “boundary” between a historic, predominantly African American district and the Barrio, in the heart of the two largest, most prominent minority communities in the city of Houston.  Abortion, says its supporters, is just a small part of the health care services that will be offered there to the less fortunate, the poor, those who cannot affort health insurance or basic health care. 

Yesterday, deliberately chosen because of the values represented by the late Dr. Martin Luther King, a large number of pro-life supporters joined in a peaceful, almost silent “stand and pray” event which surrounded the new center with people praying, reading their Bibles, and showing their support for the unborn.  At a nearby church, there was a rally.  I joined in with those standing at the building, spent some time in prayer, and some time just standing, listening and observing.  Those who gathered there to do the same are obviously quite passionate about their conviction that the lives of the conceived but not yet born have the same civil rights as any other human being.  There was quite a crowd, not only gathered in a circle that wound completely around the building, but also outside at the church nearby. 

There is probably not any other issue of life that has gathered the consistent, continual support, and channeled the resources and energy into changing the law than the movement to end abortion on demand in America.  There is no doubt that it is a defining issue with regard to people’s religious beliefs.  Obviously, most of those present yesterday were from various Christian traditions, from observation many of them were Catholic, but I also noticed Muslims and Jews present as well.  It has also become a clearly defining political issue as well.  And that may be the Achilles heel of the movement. 

The fact that Planned Parenthood has, with relative ease, been able to plan and construct the country’s largest abortion clinic in the heart of the largest city in Texas may be a testimony to the fact that success for the pro-life movement in achieving its goal is probably not going to come through politics, and certainly not through partisan politics.  Texas is one of the most conservative, and most Republican states in the nation.  The state legislature, executive office, and state supreme court have been firmly in the hands of the GOP for more than a decade, going back to at least 1996.  In spite of that, Texas remains one of the easiest places in the country for a pregnant woman to enter a clinic and come out just a few hours later no longer pregnant.  The relatively few obstacles Planned Parenthood faced in securing funding, purchasing and renovating its new Houston facility indicates that there was at least some enabling, and little if any opposition, from the state’s political establishment, either legislative or judicial. 

Part of the problem is that those who have supported the politicians who claim allegiance to the pro-life cause have done little, if anything, to hold them accountable.  The political agenda has focused largely on economic issues, very little on social issues, and almost completely ignored the pro-life cause, dismissing it as a federal judiciary issue that can’t be solved until the Supreme Court has a pro-life majority on it, and overturns the Roe decision.  Ironically, the Supreme Court’s current pro-choice majority is a direct result of appointments made by a former Texas congressman, and a former governor, both named Bush, who kept the pro-choice majority alive by their appointments. 

The mentality that holding those who give lip service to the pro-life cause accountable might mean electing politicians who are worse doesn’t hold water.  Supporting hands-off economic policies that have led to exhorbatant credit card interest rates, the bank failures due to corruption and excesses, the over taxation of the middle class and small business to cut corporate taxes, and the erosion of employer provided benefits, all of which are marks of Republican leadership in Washington, isn’t any better than the government involvement in the economy advocated by the Democrats.  One of the taunts from Planned Parenthood supporters directed at the pro-life supporters yesterday was the quoting of a scripture verse from James 3:11, “Does a spring pour forth from the same opening both fresh and salt water?” a reference to the perceived support of pro-lifers for the “preemtive” war in Iraq, and the death penalty.  Another taunt pointed out that the opposition to Planned Parenthood was opposition to health care that bypassed insurance providers and expensive, private health care corporations. 

Accountability begins with the demand for delivery on promises made by politicians to get the pro-life vote.  Assuming that those who showed up yesterday are the most passionate advocates of the pro-life cause, they represented an awful lot of votes.  In these days of narrow elections and political polarization, they represent the votes that may make a difference between a candidate being elected or not.  Electing and expecting results in the first term is not unreasonable.  If there are no results on this particular issue, then the candidates need to know they will not get the votes next time around.  I was handed a list yesterday of the names of politicians which were found on boards of directors of companies and businesses which contributed to the Planned Parenthood renovation.  If it was accurate, then there are a lot of Republicans who either don’t know what their company is up to, or feel that they can do something like that and not get caught at it. 

“For as it is written, the name of God is blasphemed among the gentiles because of you.”  Romans 2:24, ESV

I was particularly pleased to notice yesterday that those who came to support the pro-life cause, and express their faith as well, were respectful, courteous and orderly for the most part.  There were those there who showed up to taunt them, to holler obscenities, and I observed at one point a man in a pickup truck roll down his window and curse at some of the marchers crossing the street at the Gulf Freeway and Cullen Blvd.  No one hollered back. 

I believe that the effectiveness of attempting to get this done through the political system is limited.  It is time to put resources and effort into ministering directly to the people involved.  The church has the means to make a major dent in the abortion numbers in several ways.  One, offering young women considering abortion a “way of escape” by providing pre-natal care, medical treatment and perhaps even housing and food during the pregnancy is a ministry that is long overdue and far too rare in the Christian community.  Two, advocacy to take the “profit motivation” out of the adoption process, so that a middle class family can afford to adopt, lowering legal fees, and removing some of the more draconian, onerous regulations like age limitations, to make adoption much easier to accomplish.  Three, extend ministry into the very communities where Planned Parenthood plans to work, which might involve setting up alternative counseling and ministry centers in the vicinity of their facilities, including their new Houston headquarters, to compete with the other health care services they provide so that people looking for something else will not have to walk into an abortion facility to get it. 

Four, and most important, keep praying.

The Legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King

“I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”  Dr. Martin Luther King, “I Have A Dream”

We are not there yet.

When I was a faculty member of an overwhelmingly caucasian, conservative, evangelical Christian school in the suburbs of Houston, the school administration had to make a decision about how to handle the MLK holiday.  The problem centered on the school’s need to meet the required number of session days for the second semester without going into June, and getting some consistency back after the Christmas break.  With two presidential birthday holidays in January, and the loss of two or three days at the beginning of the month because of the way Christmas vacation fell, adding yet another Monday holiday created a bit of a dilemna for the school.  The school decided to go ahead with classes on the holiday itself, but grant permission to African American students who wished to attend the parade or other events excused absences if requested in advance.

That sounded reasonable.  However, it missed the whole point of the commemorative holiday and left the impression that the celebration of Dr. King’s birthday was an exclusively African American event.  It is not.  Dr. King’s accomplishments in the arena of civil rights have been of major benefit to Americans of all races and walks of life without exception.  He blazed a trail, in the struggle for equality for African Americans, which has been followed by all Americans, and the advances, not only in civil rights, but in race relations and toward an ideal system of unity in diversity, has carried the entire country forward in giant leaps from where it was before he appeared on the scene. 

If the civil rights of any individual American are limited by prejudice, repression, or even tyranny, the civil rights of every other American are in danger.  As long as African Americans suffered discrimination, the possibility existed that other Americans could suffer the same kind of discrimination for different reasons, not just their racial or cultural background, but for just about anything else that set them apart from the status quo, including their religious beliefs.  Dr. King’s work was motivated by a sense of justice that he acquired mainly from the scriptures.  He understood, and articulated as well as anyone in American History has ever done, the Biblical principles from which most of our founding fathers drew their beliefs in life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.  He could point out the hypocrisy in those who claimed to be both patriotic Americans and Bible-believing Christians when they tried to defend the “separate but equal” stance that characterized the treatment of most African Americans in this country, particularly in the Deep South, since reconstruction. 

The idea that the MLK holiday is a celebration primarily for African Americans is still residual evidence of the fact that our culture still separates people on racial lines, and holds a very clear “us vs. them” mentality when it comes to race and culture.  African Americans, along with other people of color or non-European racial backgrounds, have been part of America since the very beginning, not to mention Native Americans whose ancestors were already here when the Europeans arrived.  Yet, even in the twenty first century, our mentality is to separate people by race, culture, religion, social status, and to set ourselves apart from those that we might consider inferior because of their differences. 

Dr. King was also an ordained Baptist minister, and if the same logic is applied to that fact that is used to determine that his designated holiday is an “African American” holiday, it should also be a holiday recognized and celebrated by Baptists as well.  Somehow, that fact seems to escape a lot of people, or they deliberately downplay or ignore it.  My own personal experience is that Baptists are often racially and culturally more divided than American society as a whole, and it is hard to base that separation on finely tuned doctrinal positions. 

In fairness to the school in the example I used, they have recently come to accept the fact that the MLK holiday is a celebration of everyone’s civil rights, and they now give their faculty and students the holiday.  That’s progress.  The entire country has, because of Dr. King’s legacy, also moved forward.  The day will come when Dr. King’s dream about his children will come to pass, I am sure.  It will probably not be in their lifetime, but it will come.

Can’t We All Just Get Along With Each Other?

Therefore, let us not pass judgment on one another any longer, but rather decide never to put a stumbling block or hindrance in the way of a brother.”  Romans 14:13

The divisions and separations which exist within Christianity in general, and within the form that the Christian church has taken in this country are fascinating in their history and development.  Looking at the various doctrinal positions which developed as a result of the Protestant Reformation, and the way that people gathered into the various churches and groupings of churches is a fascinating study in both human behavior and history, as well as theology.  It seems that there is nothing more complicated and tangled as the relationships between people in Christ’s church, and the finely tuned differences and nuances of belief and doctrine that serve not only to separate people into groups, but also to set them against each other to the point that most of them have a list of beliefs which they use to determine whether another church outside their own is genuinely part of the Kingdom of God or not. 

The verse I quoted above comes from an entire passage in Romans 14 in which Paul deals with the subject of acceptance and judgment on the part of those in the church.  There is a general recognition that some are weaker in the faith than others.  The bottom line is faith in Christ’s saving grace, which is linked to having his atoning death on the cross applied to the sinful nature of our own lives in order to be reconciled to God.  Once that boundary is crossed, there is an expectation that the influence of the church’s discipleship and nurture will lead to a maturity in the faith and a transformation of the soul that manifests itself in the outward behavior and lifestyle of the believer.  But that is a process which happens over time.  Those who are more mature in the faith, who have more experience, and who have spent more time studying and praying, are to help pave a path for those who come along afterward, not judging their behavior or doing things which cause them to stumble in their faith, but giving them every opportunity to grow in their faith.

“For the Kingdom of God is not a metter of eating and drinking but of righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit.  Whoever thus serves Christ is acceptable to God and approved by men.  So then let us pursue what makes for peace and mutual upbuilding.”  Romans 14:17-19, ESV

It is hard to see that Christians pursue this when they argue with each other over what Paul calls “disputable matters,” and separate themselves into groups that, in effect, excommunicate each other from the Kingdom in their own minds.  Even within denominations, the doctrinal police are always on the prowl, waiting to condemn someone who doesn’t land on exactly the same interpretation of scripture that they do.  And the bottom line is, what’s the point?  Is salvation, reconciliation with God and a relationship with Jesus dependent on getting the doctrine right?

Several years ago, while working in Christian education, a friend of mine was pursuing an administrative position as principal of a medium sized Christian high school in the upper midwest.  He had made it to a list of just three finalists for the position and was in the middle of a conference call phone interview with the board of trustees when the question came up regarding the school’s doctrinal statement.  It was pretty standard for a fairly conservative, evangelical related educational institution, with the basic affirmations of the scriptures, the deity and humanity of Christ, his virgin birth, sinless life, atoning death and resurrection from the dead, the nature of God and the Holy Spirit, the church, and the other things most evangelicals hold in common.  My friend stated that he could wholeheartedly affirm the statement.  The next question probed deeper into his Baptist background.  One of the trustees wanted to know what kind of Baptist he was, to which he replied that he was a member of a church in friendly cooperation with the SBC.  He was then asked whether he was familiar with the doctrines of Reformed Christianity, and he replied that he was, though he did not consider himself a Calvinist, he thought he could work very well within the Calvinist-Reformed tradition.  He was invited to an in-person interview.

He didn’t get the job.  The board chairman told him that while he was almost point for point the best candidate they had, top down, the sticking point had been the fact that he wasn’t a member of a church that accepted Reformed theology.  Everything else lined up exactly with the qualifications and parameters the board had set, but they couldn’t get past the fact that, though he had clearly expressed his feeling that working in the environment of a school operated by Reformed churches would not create any problems for him, and would be essentially a non-issue, they didn’t see it that way at all. 

While I can see that there are problems when disagreements over belief and faith are related to points which may completely change the nature of the debate with regard to the essentials of the Christian faith, those things which are centered around Jesus as the Christ, it is very difficult for me to understand why those who clearly fall within the boundaries of what we would call Biblical orthodoxy, and for whom disagreement on doctrine is a matter of interpretation of points where there is not unanimous agreement on the interpretation of finer points of scripture, cannot work together and simply agree to disagree.  Such disagreement and separation goes against the very principles of scripture set down by the apostles, especially Paul, which most of those involved in heated arguments claim to believe implicitly. 

There’s a Starbucks on my way to work where I occasionally stop and enjoy a latte and a conversation with a group of “coffeehouse” friends.  Generally, since they have discovered that I am an ordained Southern Baptist minister, the conversation always goes toward the religious side, and generally moves in the direction of some event in the world of conservative evangelicalism that has made news headlines for some reason.  Though there is vast disagreement among us regarding the way we see scripture, and our beliefs, these conversations are far more amiable than many similar conversations I’ve had with fellow Christians on the same side of the evangelical spectrum.  It seems far more likely that, in the course of disagreeing over a finite interpretation of a point about eschatology, a fellow believer will go off in an angry huff, or stop speaking to me altogether, than for anyone in my coffee club to do so.  And I can point to numerous examples where a church staff member or even a pastor has put their job in jeopardy for their position on a particular interpretation of scripture which might not square up exactly with what an influential church member has decided is the only correct interpretation of the matter. 

If what I read on some blogs and hear from some Christians is representative of the attitude and the face that we are turning to the world when it comes to disagreeing on disputable matters of doctrine, stuff that the scripture tells us we are only going to see through a glass darkly anyway, until we come into eternity, then it is no wonder we lack the kind of credibility we must now feel compelled to seek through the political system.

For One of the Least of These…

“When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?”  Matthew 25:39

The past few months have brought a relatively new experience into my life and ministry.  In almost 30 years of serving in vocational ministry, 17 of that as a member of a church staff, I have rarely set foot inside a jail or a prison.  Prior to this past year, I can think of only a few cases where I have ever been asked to visit someone in jail, either by a family member or an inmate, and that has been in either a small county facility or a small town municipal holding facility.  Once, when serving as a youth pastor, I visited a young man in juvenile detention, and had the more common experience of visiting youth in group home settings.  But during the past two years, that number has increased exponentially.  I have come into contact with at least five individuals who have either spent time in jail or prison, or are currently incarcerated.  Along with that contact has come an awareness, and a concern, that I have not previously experienced.

Obviously, a jail is not supposed to be a luxury resort.  Aside from being somewhat self-defeating in terms of being a consequence for criminal behavior, or an aid to rehabilitation, there is the fact that prisoners are housed at taxpayer expense, and the more “luxury” built in to the system, the higher the cost.  But I have learned that there are some humanitarian concerns that are either overlooked, or deliberately refused.  Many of those held in the county system are simply awaiting trial, and have not been sentenced, but they are serving in the same place, and under the same conditions, as those who are.  I’ve always operated under the assumption that in addition to basic needs, provision is made for medical conditions, such as access to a doctor and provision of prescription medication, since a prisoner can’t just go down to the corner drug store.  But I have been told that’s not always the case. 

Sanitation and cleanliness is an issue in the visitation room, so I can’t imagine what things are like on the other side of the wall.  And while I understand the stress of working in such an environment, and the risks that are present (several law enforcement officers have been shot in the lobby of the jail facility), and I know that looking after inmates requires a level of detachment and hardness of character to be effective, the sense of relief that I feel when I turn in my badge, retrieve my belongings and walk out the front door is different than anything I have ever experienced before.  The procedures, questions, suspicious looks and barked orders are disconcerting, as are the moments after presenting my ministerial credentials, when the guard, through a plexiglass window, looks hard at me to determine if what he is seeing is for real, or if I am an imposter.  Having to be hand searched, rather than going through the metal detector (I have a defibrillator) is treated like it is a major disruption of routine.  Obviously, there is no customer service value attached to jail visitation time.  And that kind of treatment to someone visiting only lends credibility to the stories that the inmates tell about what happens inside.

In spite of all of that, it is just the county jail.  Compared to the state prison system, it may seem to be luxurious.  That’s probably why many inmates, when offered as part of a plea bargain, opt for time in the county jail rather than in the prison system.  Prison is, according to those who have experienced it, a system for debasing and dehumanizing living beings.  I understand that you are not supposed to want to go there.  It is not a hotel.  On the other hand, my conscience is bothered by the fact that I’ve looked past the unpleasantness of correctional institutions so as to subconsciously avoid feeling guilty about what might be happening there, because as a Christian who believes in the complete sanctity of human life, and the total redemptive ability of Jesus, I believe there is a boundary between humane treatment of convicted criminals, and cruel and unusual punishment.  The denial of basic human needs falls into the latter category.  Vengeance is the Lord’s, according to the scripture, and hell is not something that we should have to face until it is too late to do anything about it. 

Jesus didn’t tell the criminals of his day that they deserved what they were getting.  He pulled up a chair, had dinner with them, affirmed their humanity, and then he put his efforts into showing them that there is a much better way to life the one life God gave them.

“I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.”  Matthew 25:40

Thou Shalt Offend Pharisees

This is so good, from Mark Batterson, pastor of National Community Church in Washington, D.C.  I thought it was worth a link.

http://evotional.com/2010/01/thou-shalt-offend-pharisees.html

Not a Thing to be Grasped…

“Do nothing from rivalry or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves.  Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others.  Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men.”  Philippians 2:3-7

Have the attitude of Christ Jesus…

The perception of the church, and consequently the effect of its ministry, would be remarkably different if we were only able to do that somehow.  We’ve become wrapped up in many other things, most of them related to money and the things of prosperity, and because those things become essential to our identity, or at least, to the identity we seem to want to build, it becomes very easy to ignore specific instructions from the scripture with regard to how the church is to conduct itself in the public arena. 

Among my Southern Baptist brethren, airing the dirty laundry in public, an analogy for bringing church conflicts out into the open and writing about them on blogs, has become a means for people to express their frustration with what they perceive as the squelching of their free speech and the conduct of their pastors and church staff that they have deemed to be inappropriate and self-benefitting. 

As we approach the late autumn of what has been the first season of the megachurch in Baptist life, the wisdom of following the scriptures closely with regard to the way the church, as a local body of believers, was organized in its infancy is obvious.  Small units which met in homes and started new units when the house in which they were meeting was too small to accomodate the group prevented groups from becoming unmanageable in terms of logistics and resources, and also helped the leadership remain humble and Christlike.  It also helped them with other things, like discipleship and remaining faithful to the word and the Spirit, since those charged with the responsibility of teaching were able to discern the progress the membership was making. 

The lines of authority and responsibility were clear and visible, and members were called to account when they did not follow them.  The fact that conflicts would be inevitable was planned for by the Apostles, and by Jesus himself, who outlined the proper, Christian way of dealing with issues that came up between members of the church.  Because in its early years, the church was in a precarious position in society, and its reputation among outsiders was essential to its ability to preach the gospel, conflicts were to be resolved within the body, and not in front of civil authorities.  The latter could also not make proper rulings with regard to resolutions of conflict without a genuine understanding of the beliefs and principles at work within the body. 

In the past few years, conflicts within some of our denomination’s megachurches has not only erupted into the secular press, but it has found its way into the blogosphere via the keyboards of computers belonging to members of the church who use it to call leaders to account for what they believe are improper actions with regard to financial decisions and other areas of church leadership in which it seems they have, as the CEO-in-residence, accorded themselves privileges without consulting the brethren. 

The twelve men who spent most of the three years of Jesus’ earthly ministry with him were equipped with a lot of wisdom and knowledge to enable them to handle the growth and development of the early church in the days following Pentecost.  Even at that, with the Holy Spirit guiding them every step of the way, they were careful and prudent in their actions.  The enemy would have loved an opportunity to squelch the church before it really got going, or capitalized on the mis-steps of its leadership.  These were men who had seen miracles, who, at the Spirit’s direction, laid their hands on people who were healed through them.  At one point, in Lystra, after healing a cripple, the people thought Paul and Barnabas were gods.  How tempting it must have been, under such circumstances, to use this miraculous power for their own benefit and perhaps even for their own protection.  Rather than living lives of prosperity and privilege, however, they were more than willing to put up with poverty and deprivation, most of them winding up in prison or executed by a hostile government, for putting the gospel message first, and treating everyone with Christlike humility. 

The Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB), a product of Southern Baptist scholarship, uses the phrase “did not consider equality with God as something to be used for His own advantage,” in place of “as something to be grasped.”  Think about it.  The words to an old gospel song come to mind, “he could have called ten thousand angels” if he had decided that the humility and pain of the cross was too much to bear, or that he, as the Son of God, was too important and prominent to endure something so cruel, and so common.

It seems that most conflict in the church comes about when someone’s agenda is crossed up, or when something interferes with our preferences or our comfort.  Most of our arguments relate to how fortunes are spent, or regarding who got the biggest golden parachute, or whether the capital campaign or multiple millions of dollars raised was spent in accordance with the intention of those who gave the money.  It is not unreasonable to think that the world sees how little we really regard the scripture when it comes to our own advantages.

The Birth of Grace

“For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.”  John 3:17, ESV

“Glory to God in the highest!,” was the proclamation made by the angels announcing the birth of Jesus, “And on earth, peace among those with whom he is pleased!”

No matter who sings it, or what version of it I hear, the old Christmas carol, “I Heard the Bells on Christmas Day” is one of my favorites.  Jesus came into the world as one of us, and everything changed.  The son of God, and the son of man, fully divine, fully human, is the subject of a beautiful story.  But it is far more than just a story to be read at the appropriate time.  “There is no peace on earth, I said,” is one of the lyrics from the previously mentioned Christmas carol.  When Jesus came into the world, it was the birth of grace, the covenant long planned by God for the redemption of his creation.  Among men, it certainly appears that there is no peace, but the hope for peace, along with love, comes through this new covenant of grace that was introduced by Jesus. 

Humankind has made a shambles of God’s creation ever since the very beginning.  And I think it is accurate to say that, even after the appearance of Jesus, and the introduction of the covenant of grace, humans have still made a shambles of what God wanted to bring about, even the church.  Of course, if you read the book, you understand that a second appearance by Jesus is necessary to clean up the mess.  We can even argue over that.  Nonetheless, the message of grace that Jesus brought with him is still there, and people can still find their way to the peace that passes all understanding through Jesus Christ. 

The birth of Grace.  One day, perhaps we will be able to see that all the bickering, infighting, warring, conflict, and the troubles of both mankind, and on a smaller scale, the church, is nothing more than the result of human selfishness.  It is in contrast with God’s selflessness in making a sacrifice out of himself, in the person of Jesus, to open a door to reconciliation.  It is hard to imagine us reconciled with God, when the people who claim his name cannot find a way to reconcile with each other.  No wonder the world doesn’t act like it is paying attention. 

It’s Christmas once again.  Celebrate the birth of grace by making a real effort to gain some grace in your life.