As we celebrate God's pouring of grace upon this great country, we are reminded by this Day of Thanksgiving of the great potential for the United States to be the great "city on a hill" that has been cited by so many since the colonial days. That first Thanksgiving with the Plymouth pilgrims and native Americans was an incredible and prophetic example of what America is called to be. Just think of what could have been if the humble thankfulness of the pilgrims and the generous hearts of the native Americans had become the normal pattern for the social development of this new experiment in human experience! What a shining light there would have been for all to see!
Of course, America has at different times dared to approach God's call to be a land of hope and promise like no other in the history of the world. So, at times and in places it has shone forth as a lighthouse for freedom and opportunity. But, oh, what could have been! Think about the opportunity this great nation had after it had enjoyed God's providence in throwing off the yoke of English tyranny, as the founders wrestled with writing a guiding constitution for a new and different kind of republic. They as much as any up until their time knew the value and worth of every human individual in the sight of an Almighty and merciful God, yet they blinked when facing the issue of slavery. What if they had applied the full force of all the "self-evident" truths, "that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." What could have been!
Again, God has given our great country opportunity after opportunity to be the great "city on a hill." In the rise of the evangelical Awakenings, in the great economic power of capitalism, in the challenges of expansion and world wars, America has always had a call from God to be different and shining in how we handle things. In many ways we have been that shining light, and in many ways we have missed it. However, it is clear that America is at its best and most likely to fulfill its God-ordained potential when it clearly and humbly submits itself as a people to God through its governance, institutions, families, and individuals. We miss the mark the most when we stray from attributing our blessings and giftedness to God.
This Thanksgiving Day 2009 we are again poised as a nation to choose to fulfill God's great call for our country by humbly pointing to God as the One who gives us what we have, makes us who we are, and guides us to what we can be. Again, there are those voices that point us away from our Creator and claim that we are on our own as a nation, that we must fight each other for our rights, and that our destiny is no more special or unique than any other people or nation. But think of what can be! Think of the opportunity we have again to follow God's call and become a shining beacon of hope and promise for all through this world.
If we will acknowledge God as the source for our freedom and the Giver of our rights, we can be a model for all the world as a nation that is blessed and guided by God. We can still be that shining "city on a hill" for all to see.
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
Thursday, November 19, 2009
The New Samaritans
As I was sitting in a meeting of evangelical church leaders last week, it occurred to me that the group most antagonistic toward evangelicals may not be liberals, secularists, or even denominational leaders. Rather, it may be those who see themselves as "emerging" or "recovering evangelicals," and as such seek to warn the unsuspecting world about the embarrassingly simplistic tenets of evangelical Christianity. As we were being lectured by a well-known (and I believe sincere) speaker on the great failures of the evangelical segment of the church (which are real and many), it dawned on me that those who are former or "progressive" evangelicals would likely be the first ones to turn me over to the authorities should my evangelical faith ever be deemed too intolerant to be tolerated in a tolerant society.
The person speaking during my epiphanous occasion is a well known author who was very careful to tout his own "evangelical credentials." The problem was that his only pejorative words were reserved for describing evangelicals and no one else. He identified himself with Brian McLaren, whose books I enjoy reading and who provokes a lot of good thought. However, Mr. McLaren's writings are marked with a ferocious antipathy toward his "fellow" evangelicals, who he sees as shallow Christians who seek convenience in their faith commitments and who do not wrestle with difficult social/political issues. Mr. McLaren, like Sojourner's Jim Wallis and Solomon Porch's Doug Pagitt, all claim to have been once shackled by the burdensome chains of simplistic views of God, Bible, faith, and grace that kept them from seeing the activity of the Spirit in others beyond their faith circle. Now that they have jettisoned dogmatic belief for a more open and relative view of truth, they can now see the dangers of their former evangelical worldview (or any such faith, Christian or otherwise, that claims to have real objective content and real objective articles of belief). Of course, it goes hand in hand that if the evangelical worldview is dangerous, so are those who carry this infection, that is, evangelical Christians.
With the recent scuttlebutt regarding Presbyterian professor Mark Achtemeier's embracing a liberal position regarding gay, lesbian, etc. orientations, it became clear that Professor Achtemeier has also adopted the idea that evangelicals are not just misled buffoons, but are actually dangerous in their beliefs. As he states, "...I can no longer close my eyes to the spiritual and psychological damage that flow from this well-intended but tragically misguided teaching." No finer gauntlet has ever been tossed, and it is this divisive impasse that is helping to lay the foundation for going beyond critical words to active deeds of opposition and prevention.
These actions presently may be expressed in the simple subjugating of evangelicals in so-called tasks forces, the ostracizing of evangelicals in denominational hierarchies, and even outright ridicule in societal venues like politics. However, as laws are on the verge of being enacted in federal legislation that may actually prohibit the expression of some evangelical views, such as support for the traditional family or the call to pray public prayers in Christ's name, punishments could become as severe as court pronounced fines and, in worst case scenarios, imprisonment. I think now I realize that it will be my "fellow" evangelicals who have gone on to more enlightened views who will be willingly and enthusiastically pointing me out to the those appointed by whatever authority there may be to curb and contain unsanctioned thinking and belief.
In the United States and Europe, evangelicals are becoming the present day "Samaritans." Like the Samaritans of old whose culture and beliefs were disdained by the Jewish people as bastardized forms of true belief and proper religious practice, so are the evangelicals viewed by liberals and "progressive evangelicals" as backward and unenlightened in their "less than generous" expressions of Christian faith and life. Yet, like the Samaritan in Jesus' parable about who is my neighbor, it is the evangelicals who are engaged in actively seeking to live out Christ's life in the world. Organizations like Samaritan's Purse, World Vision, Compassion International, Every Home For Christ, and many more are filled with people who are primarily populated by evangelicals. Much of the outreach in local missions throughout our cities are supported and staffed by evangelicals, and the majority of missionaries in the PCUSA and other protestant denominations are motivated by their evangelical zeal to see people come into a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. Ecumenically, it is the evangelicals who enjoy many points of mutual faith and mission with the Roman Catholic and Orthodox expressions of Christianity.
Actually, when one thinks about it for awhile, it is really an honor to be part of the "new Samaritans." Jesus told us in his ironic words (Matthew 5:11), "Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me." It's not the part of following Jesus that we (or should I just say "I") enthusiastically embrace, but it is crucial in molding us into Christ-like persons who live out God's truth in humility. We know the certainty of this divine reality when our hearts impell us to stop and become neighbor to all who have fallen along the road.
The person speaking during my epiphanous occasion is a well known author who was very careful to tout his own "evangelical credentials." The problem was that his only pejorative words were reserved for describing evangelicals and no one else. He identified himself with Brian McLaren, whose books I enjoy reading and who provokes a lot of good thought. However, Mr. McLaren's writings are marked with a ferocious antipathy toward his "fellow" evangelicals, who he sees as shallow Christians who seek convenience in their faith commitments and who do not wrestle with difficult social/political issues. Mr. McLaren, like Sojourner's Jim Wallis and Solomon Porch's Doug Pagitt, all claim to have been once shackled by the burdensome chains of simplistic views of God, Bible, faith, and grace that kept them from seeing the activity of the Spirit in others beyond their faith circle. Now that they have jettisoned dogmatic belief for a more open and relative view of truth, they can now see the dangers of their former evangelical worldview (or any such faith, Christian or otherwise, that claims to have real objective content and real objective articles of belief). Of course, it goes hand in hand that if the evangelical worldview is dangerous, so are those who carry this infection, that is, evangelical Christians.
With the recent scuttlebutt regarding Presbyterian professor Mark Achtemeier's embracing a liberal position regarding gay, lesbian, etc. orientations, it became clear that Professor Achtemeier has also adopted the idea that evangelicals are not just misled buffoons, but are actually dangerous in their beliefs. As he states, "...I can no longer close my eyes to the spiritual and psychological damage that flow from this well-intended but tragically misguided teaching." No finer gauntlet has ever been tossed, and it is this divisive impasse that is helping to lay the foundation for going beyond critical words to active deeds of opposition and prevention.
These actions presently may be expressed in the simple subjugating of evangelicals in so-called tasks forces, the ostracizing of evangelicals in denominational hierarchies, and even outright ridicule in societal venues like politics. However, as laws are on the verge of being enacted in federal legislation that may actually prohibit the expression of some evangelical views, such as support for the traditional family or the call to pray public prayers in Christ's name, punishments could become as severe as court pronounced fines and, in worst case scenarios, imprisonment. I think now I realize that it will be my "fellow" evangelicals who have gone on to more enlightened views who will be willingly and enthusiastically pointing me out to the those appointed by whatever authority there may be to curb and contain unsanctioned thinking and belief.
In the United States and Europe, evangelicals are becoming the present day "Samaritans." Like the Samaritans of old whose culture and beliefs were disdained by the Jewish people as bastardized forms of true belief and proper religious practice, so are the evangelicals viewed by liberals and "progressive evangelicals" as backward and unenlightened in their "less than generous" expressions of Christian faith and life. Yet, like the Samaritan in Jesus' parable about who is my neighbor, it is the evangelicals who are engaged in actively seeking to live out Christ's life in the world. Organizations like Samaritan's Purse, World Vision, Compassion International, Every Home For Christ, and many more are filled with people who are primarily populated by evangelicals. Much of the outreach in local missions throughout our cities are supported and staffed by evangelicals, and the majority of missionaries in the PCUSA and other protestant denominations are motivated by their evangelical zeal to see people come into a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. Ecumenically, it is the evangelicals who enjoy many points of mutual faith and mission with the Roman Catholic and Orthodox expressions of Christianity.
Actually, when one thinks about it for awhile, it is really an honor to be part of the "new Samaritans." Jesus told us in his ironic words (Matthew 5:11), "Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me." It's not the part of following Jesus that we (or should I just say "I") enthusiastically embrace, but it is crucial in molding us into Christ-like persons who live out God's truth in humility. We know the certainty of this divine reality when our hearts impell us to stop and become neighbor to all who have fallen along the road.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Mark's Off The Mark (abbreviated)
Like many, I was very saddened to read about Mark Achtemeier's talk at the current Covenant Network conference. Clearly, he is quite "off the mark." It is sad to see one who was apparently so well grounded theologically and scripturally capitulate to those who claim the supreme authority duet of subjective experience and relativistic post-modern truth. I trust that he is sincere, and that this position he has taken with those who eschew Bible, Christ, and Tao (see Abolition of Man by C.S. Lewis) is one of heartfelt and heartrending reflection. Nevertheless, it is important to note two major points that should give anyone serious pause before following Professor Achtemeier into the bright land of amoral enlightenment.
The first is to look at who is rejoicing when a prominent figure embraces the "anything goes as long as we really love each other" approach to human sexual relationships. It should cause us to reexamine our thinking when those who have rebelled against nature and the God of nature find us amenable to their lifestyles. Many in these circles are now openly promoting multiple partner "unions," and the acceptance of incest among consenting persons. One may say there are no views such as these among the Covenant Network folk, but so far they have shown little resolve in resisting societal pressures to step in line with whatever is deemed "progressive," which currently includes advocates for these sexual practices. Society and science hold more authority for this circle of ecclesiastics than Bible or even church tradition, and for them Christianity is merely a religion to make more relevant according to their own personal understandings than the faithful community of a risen Lord whose eternal Word transforms us and the world.
Of course it is understood that there is no valid rationale for condemning and avoiding such people with their perspectives. Christ calls us to stand and walk in their midst as fellow sinners who have been reclaimed through the blood of Jesus Christ from our sin. We are compelled by the Lord of all servants to seek both the welfare and the redemption of all people, not just the ones we are compatible with personally in culture, religion, race, orientation, politics, or philosophy (although there may be an exception regarding Iowa State University supporters). But when those who disagree and denigrate God's revealed viewpoints find our viewpoints to their liking, then that should be enough of a signal to us that we have moved away from God's truth and have accommodated ourselves in some way to serious and potentially damning error (and believe me, I am no stranger to this predicament).
The second observation is to note the incredible arrogance in the language of those who have opted out of the "traditional view" of marriage and have embraced the gay, lesbian, transgendered, bisexual, and endless other qualifications approach to marriage and sexual relationships. In his talk to the Covenant Network, Professor Achtemeier indicates several times that his former position against gay partnerships and marriage was due to his lack of personal experience with good, committed Christian gays, and that his understanding of scripture was due to sheltering himself from the insights and opinions of others who disagreed with his "traditionalist" position (one can only wonder how he managed to remain this "sheltered" in both experience and education while attending Harvard and Duke). However, he then projects his personal journey as being the experience of the typical evangelical. This again is incredulously arrogant and self-serving..
I am an evangelical Presbyterian minister (albeit a very low profile, relatively irrelevant one) who has read a pretty good share of the books both pro and con on sexual orientation issues. I've even studied much of the secular research. Plus, throughout my life, even from high school days, I have known gays in committed relationships and gays in ongoing multiple relationships. (As Professor Achtemeier should know, there are a number of diverse and even opposing viewpoints among gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered persons on what forms their relationships should take.) During my years (long, long ago and in a galaxy far, far away) at Princeton Seminary, I so frequently sat at the "gay table" in the commons that many people assumed that I was gay, too. Plus, at Princeton and Duke (and even my pedestrian undergrad school, Wichita State), I had excellent liberal and evangelical professors who pushed me hard to wrestle with the foundations of my beliefs. Yet, I am confident in my approach to the scriptures and the moral positions I believe the Spirit and the scriptures instruct me to take. I've just always believed that these same scriptures and Spirit also called me into personal and loving involvement with those who I may be at odds with in both faith and life.
What then to make of this speech and Mark Achtemeier's new perspective? Yes, it gives ammunition to the liberal camps in the ongoing ecclesiastical wars in the mainline denominations. Of course, this doesn't really matter since the victory of some liberal church people will have no bearing on the catholic witness of Christ's church in all its authentic forms. It certainly will not cause the biblical interpretations of the orthodox, catholic, and evangelical to crumble into ashes because Professor Achtemeier's apology for his new view is so overwhelmingly persuasive. And, of course, God is not going to "repent" of God's clear intention (according to Jesus) in creating humans, sex, and marriage (although God may "repent" of having created the PCUSA, which raises a whole host of other issues to ponder).
The clear and obvious answer is to pray for Mark Achtemeier. As a fellow disciple of Jesus, I am confident that he would appreciate this, even if he thinks the motivation for the prayers is misinformed. I know I appreciate the prayers of my liberal friends who think I am out to lunch on my positions. In a more serious vein, however, I believe if Professor Achtemeier is truly seeking to be faithful to his God (and I believe he is), and is not simply rationalizing to deal with personal pressures to conform to this world, then he will be willing to open himself to his trusted evangelical friends and colleagues who take issue with his new position. If he is sincere, let him test his view in the fires of personal discourse with his friends, such as Robert Gagnon and others. This, along with the sweet incense of the prayers of the saints, will help him hear and follow the voice of his Shepherd who is certainly calling out to him. Again, Mark Achtemeier can be "on the mark!"
The first is to look at who is rejoicing when a prominent figure embraces the "anything goes as long as we really love each other" approach to human sexual relationships. It should cause us to reexamine our thinking when those who have rebelled against nature and the God of nature find us amenable to their lifestyles. Many in these circles are now openly promoting multiple partner "unions," and the acceptance of incest among consenting persons. One may say there are no views such as these among the Covenant Network folk, but so far they have shown little resolve in resisting societal pressures to step in line with whatever is deemed "progressive," which currently includes advocates for these sexual practices. Society and science hold more authority for this circle of ecclesiastics than Bible or even church tradition, and for them Christianity is merely a religion to make more relevant according to their own personal understandings than the faithful community of a risen Lord whose eternal Word transforms us and the world.
Of course it is understood that there is no valid rationale for condemning and avoiding such people with their perspectives. Christ calls us to stand and walk in their midst as fellow sinners who have been reclaimed through the blood of Jesus Christ from our sin. We are compelled by the Lord of all servants to seek both the welfare and the redemption of all people, not just the ones we are compatible with personally in culture, religion, race, orientation, politics, or philosophy (although there may be an exception regarding Iowa State University supporters). But when those who disagree and denigrate God's revealed viewpoints find our viewpoints to their liking, then that should be enough of a signal to us that we have moved away from God's truth and have accommodated ourselves in some way to serious and potentially damning error (and believe me, I am no stranger to this predicament).
The second observation is to note the incredible arrogance in the language of those who have opted out of the "traditional view" of marriage and have embraced the gay, lesbian, transgendered, bisexual, and endless other qualifications approach to marriage and sexual relationships. In his talk to the Covenant Network, Professor Achtemeier indicates several times that his former position against gay partnerships and marriage was due to his lack of personal experience with good, committed Christian gays, and that his understanding of scripture was due to sheltering himself from the insights and opinions of others who disagreed with his "traditionalist" position (one can only wonder how he managed to remain this "sheltered" in both experience and education while attending Harvard and Duke). However, he then projects his personal journey as being the experience of the typical evangelical. This again is incredulously arrogant and self-serving..
I am an evangelical Presbyterian minister (albeit a very low profile, relatively irrelevant one) who has read a pretty good share of the books both pro and con on sexual orientation issues. I've even studied much of the secular research. Plus, throughout my life, even from high school days, I have known gays in committed relationships and gays in ongoing multiple relationships. (As Professor Achtemeier should know, there are a number of diverse and even opposing viewpoints among gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered persons on what forms their relationships should take.) During my years (long, long ago and in a galaxy far, far away) at Princeton Seminary, I so frequently sat at the "gay table" in the commons that many people assumed that I was gay, too. Plus, at Princeton and Duke (and even my pedestrian undergrad school, Wichita State), I had excellent liberal and evangelical professors who pushed me hard to wrestle with the foundations of my beliefs. Yet, I am confident in my approach to the scriptures and the moral positions I believe the Spirit and the scriptures instruct me to take. I've just always believed that these same scriptures and Spirit also called me into personal and loving involvement with those who I may be at odds with in both faith and life.
What then to make of this speech and Mark Achtemeier's new perspective? Yes, it gives ammunition to the liberal camps in the ongoing ecclesiastical wars in the mainline denominations. Of course, this doesn't really matter since the victory of some liberal church people will have no bearing on the catholic witness of Christ's church in all its authentic forms. It certainly will not cause the biblical interpretations of the orthodox, catholic, and evangelical to crumble into ashes because Professor Achtemeier's apology for his new view is so overwhelmingly persuasive. And, of course, God is not going to "repent" of God's clear intention (according to Jesus) in creating humans, sex, and marriage (although God may "repent" of having created the PCUSA, which raises a whole host of other issues to ponder).
The clear and obvious answer is to pray for Mark Achtemeier. As a fellow disciple of Jesus, I am confident that he would appreciate this, even if he thinks the motivation for the prayers is misinformed. I know I appreciate the prayers of my liberal friends who think I am out to lunch on my positions. In a more serious vein, however, I believe if Professor Achtemeier is truly seeking to be faithful to his God (and I believe he is), and is not simply rationalizing to deal with personal pressures to conform to this world, then he will be willing to open himself to his trusted evangelical friends and colleagues who take issue with his new position. If he is sincere, let him test his view in the fires of personal discourse with his friends, such as Robert Gagnon and others. This, along with the sweet incense of the prayers of the saints, will help him hear and follow the voice of his Shepherd who is certainly calling out to him. Again, Mark Achtemeier can be "on the mark!"
Saturday, November 7, 2009
Mark's Off The Mark (expanded)
Like many, I was very saddened to read about Mark Achtemeier's talk at the current Covenant Network conference. Clearly, he is quite "off the mark." I am not surprised, since there have been many indications over the past few years that he was drifting away from a trust in the revelatory authority of the scriptures. Still, it is sad to see one who was apparently so well grounded theologically and scripturally capitulate to those who claim the supreme authority duet of subjective experience and relativistic post-modern truth. (I know this crowd usually says they utilize the guidance of tradition and scripture, but this is almost always lip service for the sake of the unwashed evangelicals, catholics, and orthodox.)
I am not wanting to examine Professor Achtemeier's motives or intentions, since obviously these are both properly and personally beyond my rightful concerns. I trust him enough to believe that he is sincere, and that this position he has taken with those who eschew Bible, Christ, and Tao (see Abolition of Man by C.S. Lewis) is one of heartfelt and heartrending reflection. Rather, I am only commenting on two macro observations that should give anyone serious pause before following Professor Achtemeier into the bright land of amoral enlightenment (which by implication is also "a-divine," since if there are no ethical nuances to how and with whom we have sex, then there is no divine authority or source whose viewpoint matters).
The first is to look at who is rejoicing when a prominent figure embraces the "anything goes as long as we really love each other" approach to human sexual relationships. It should give us pause when those who have rebelled against nature and the God of nature find us amenable to their lifestyles. Many in these circles are now openly promoting multiple partner "unions," the acceptance of incest among consenting persons, and there is even a growing voice for the "sexual rights" of children. One may say there are no views such as these among the Covenant Network folk, but so far they have shown little resolve in resisting societal pressures to step in line with whatever is deemed "progressive," which currently includes advocates for these sexual practices.
I am not saying that those who are part of the Covenant Network and similar groups are evil, malicious people. I know several of the leaders, and have worked with many more in various ministry situations. This only means I am quite certain when I state that this is not a group of people who are overly concerned with this historic witness of the church or the faith once given to the saints. They reject the revelatory authority of the scriptures, and consider it to be provincial arrogance on the part of anyone who asserts that Jesus is the unique Son of God through whom alone we must be reconciled to God the Father through the regenerative power of the Holy Spirit. Society and science hold more authority for this circle of ecclesiastics than Bible or even church tradition, and for them Christianity is merely a religion to make more relevant according to their own personal understandings than the faithful community of a risen Lord whose eternal Word transforms us and the world.
Now obviously, evangelical, catholic, and orthodox Christians have no place to condemn and should not stay away from such people or avoid engaging their perspectives. Christ calls us to stand and walk in their midst as fellow sinners who have been reclaimed through the blood of Jesus Christ from our sin. We are compelled by the Lord of all servants to seek both the welfare and the redemption of all people, not just the ones we are compatible with personally in culture, religion, race, orientation, politics, or philosophy (although there may be an exception regarding Iowa State University supporters). But when those who disagree and denigrate God's revealed viewpoints find our viewpoints to their liking, that should be enough of a signal to us that we have moved away from God's truth and have accommodated ourselves in some way to serious and potentially damning error (and believe me, I am no stranger to this predicament).
The second observation is to note the incredible arrogance in the language of those who have opted out of the "traditional view" of marriage and have embraced gay, lesbian, transgendered, bisexual, and endless other qualifications approach to marriage and sexual relationships. An earlier convert from the evangelical to the progressive, Professor Jack Rogers, was particularly vicious in his personal skewering of the philistine evangelicals who had held him captive for years with their hermeneutical spells. While Professor Achtemeier isn't showing such vitriol yet, he is still showing this same arrogance. This is also seen in some leaders of the so-called "emergent church," who view evangelicals as spiritual troglodytes holding unsuspecting Christians from true freedom by insisting that there is some actual content to faith.
In his talk to the Covenant Network, Professor Achtemeier indicates many times that his former position against gay partnerships and marriage was due to his lack of personal experience with good, committed Christian gays, and that his understanding of scripture was due to sheltering himself from the insights and opinions of others who disagreed with his "traditionalist" position (one can only wonder how he managed to remain this "sheltered" in both experience and education while attending Harvard and Duke). He even says that now that he has changed his view, there are many evangelicals who secretly agree with him but who are yet too fearful to express this openly. So, we evangelicals who hold to the "traditionalist" position on sexuality and marriage are sheltered, scholarly self-indulgent, trapped in our views by fear, and wrestle with an innate sense of being hypocritical regarding our actual experience with gays. Well, I guess that sets the table for open, respectful dialogue, doesn't it! Whatever I or another similar advocate says, our point and positions have already been dismissed as borne out of ignorance and fear.
Of course, Professor Achtemeier can declare his new viewpoint to be buttressed and capped by his high regard for the authority of scripture and the Lordship of Jesus Christ. But wait a minute, doesn't he say that this was a weakness he had in his old view because it was just a way to cover up his gnawing insecurities. Doesn't he indicate that evangelicals claim the high biblical ground as a way of avoiding the issues he has now so bravely faced? We evangelicals are in the conundrum where the professor can dismiss us for using the very same point he now uses to reinforce his own view. Seriously, I think his claim to hold his new position and a high view of biblical authority together simply makes him less honest and forthright than other advocates of alternative sexual lifestyles. Give me a good, honest liberal progressive who believes the scriptures are just plain wrong regarding the modern issues of sexual orientation, and then we can have a far more respectful and honest dialogue. Agreement is highly unlikely, but respect and regard for one another in both position and person are very likely.
Mark Achtemeier's straw man portrait of the fearful and sheltered evangelical is typical of progressive comments on this subject (one wonders how a person who was so recently an evangelical leader can now display such a shallow understanding of evangelicals and their beliefs). However, he indicates in his Covenant Network speech that this fits his own personal journey, which he then projects as the experience of the typical evangelical. This again is arrogant and errant. I am an evangelical Presbyterian minister (albeit a very low profile, relatively irrelevant one) who has read a pretty good share of the books both pro and con these issues. I've even studied much of the secular research into sexual orientation. Plus, throughout my life, even from high school days, I have had good and respectful personal friendships with gays and gay lifestyle supporters (and I also include other orientations such as transgendered and bisexual). I know and have known gays in committed relationships and gays in ongoing multiple relationships. (As Professor Achtemeier should know, there are a number of diverse and even opposing viewpoints among gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered persons on what forms their relationships should take.)
My children have been around my wife's and my gay (and heterosexually errant) friends (though we have never thought it necessary to discuss with our children the sexual practices of any of our friends regardless of their persuasions). During my years (long, long ago and in a galaxy far, far away) at Princeton Seminary, I so frequently sat at the "gay table" in the commons that many people assumed that I was gay, too. Plus, at Princeton and Duke (and even my pedestrian undergrad school, Wichita State), I had excellent liberal and evangelical professors who pushed me hard to wrestle with the foundations of my beliefs. Yet, I am confident in my approach to the scriptures and the moral positions I believe the Spirit and the scriptures instruct me to take. I've just always believed that these same scriptures and Spirit also called me into personal and loving involvement with those who I may be at odds with in both faith and life. To paraphrase the words of an old evangelist I heard once, I want to be stationed at the last outpost before hell so I can reach those who most desperately need the Gospel.
What then to make of this speech and Mark Achtemeier's new perspective? Yes, it gives ammunition to the liberal camps in the ongoing ecclesiastical wars in the mainline denominations. Of course, this doesn't really matter since the victory of some liberal church people will have no bearing on the catholic witness of Christ's church in all its authentic forms. It certainly will not cause the biblical interpretations of the orthodox, catholic, and evangelical to crumble into ashes because Professor Achtemeier's apology for his new view is so overwhelmingly persuasive. And, of course, God is not going to "repent" of God's clear intention (according to Jesus) in creating humans, sex, and marriage (although God may "repent" of having created the PCUSA, which raises a whole host of other issues to ponder).
The clear and obvious answer is to pray for Mark Achtemeier. As a fellow disciple of Jesus, I am confident that he would appreciate this, even if he thinks the motivation for the prayers is misinformed. I know I appreciate the prayers of my liberal friends who think I am out to lunch on my positions. In a more serious vein, however, I believe if Professor Achtemeier is truly seeking to be faithful to his God (and I believe he is), and is not simply rationalizing to deal with personal pressures to conform to this world, then he will be willing to open himself to his trusted evangelical friends and colleagues who take issue with his new position. If he is sincere, let him test his view in the fires of personal discourse with his friends, such as Robert Gagnon and others. This, along with the sweet incense of the prayers of the saints, will help him hear and follow the voice of his Shepherd who is certainly calling out to him. Again, Mark Achtemeier can be "on the mark!"
I am not wanting to examine Professor Achtemeier's motives or intentions, since obviously these are both properly and personally beyond my rightful concerns. I trust him enough to believe that he is sincere, and that this position he has taken with those who eschew Bible, Christ, and Tao (see Abolition of Man by C.S. Lewis) is one of heartfelt and heartrending reflection. Rather, I am only commenting on two macro observations that should give anyone serious pause before following Professor Achtemeier into the bright land of amoral enlightenment (which by implication is also "a-divine," since if there are no ethical nuances to how and with whom we have sex, then there is no divine authority or source whose viewpoint matters).
The first is to look at who is rejoicing when a prominent figure embraces the "anything goes as long as we really love each other" approach to human sexual relationships. It should give us pause when those who have rebelled against nature and the God of nature find us amenable to their lifestyles. Many in these circles are now openly promoting multiple partner "unions," the acceptance of incest among consenting persons, and there is even a growing voice for the "sexual rights" of children. One may say there are no views such as these among the Covenant Network folk, but so far they have shown little resolve in resisting societal pressures to step in line with whatever is deemed "progressive," which currently includes advocates for these sexual practices.
I am not saying that those who are part of the Covenant Network and similar groups are evil, malicious people. I know several of the leaders, and have worked with many more in various ministry situations. This only means I am quite certain when I state that this is not a group of people who are overly concerned with this historic witness of the church or the faith once given to the saints. They reject the revelatory authority of the scriptures, and consider it to be provincial arrogance on the part of anyone who asserts that Jesus is the unique Son of God through whom alone we must be reconciled to God the Father through the regenerative power of the Holy Spirit. Society and science hold more authority for this circle of ecclesiastics than Bible or even church tradition, and for them Christianity is merely a religion to make more relevant according to their own personal understandings than the faithful community of a risen Lord whose eternal Word transforms us and the world.
Now obviously, evangelical, catholic, and orthodox Christians have no place to condemn and should not stay away from such people or avoid engaging their perspectives. Christ calls us to stand and walk in their midst as fellow sinners who have been reclaimed through the blood of Jesus Christ from our sin. We are compelled by the Lord of all servants to seek both the welfare and the redemption of all people, not just the ones we are compatible with personally in culture, religion, race, orientation, politics, or philosophy (although there may be an exception regarding Iowa State University supporters). But when those who disagree and denigrate God's revealed viewpoints find our viewpoints to their liking, that should be enough of a signal to us that we have moved away from God's truth and have accommodated ourselves in some way to serious and potentially damning error (and believe me, I am no stranger to this predicament).
The second observation is to note the incredible arrogance in the language of those who have opted out of the "traditional view" of marriage and have embraced gay, lesbian, transgendered, bisexual, and endless other qualifications approach to marriage and sexual relationships. An earlier convert from the evangelical to the progressive, Professor Jack Rogers, was particularly vicious in his personal skewering of the philistine evangelicals who had held him captive for years with their hermeneutical spells. While Professor Achtemeier isn't showing such vitriol yet, he is still showing this same arrogance. This is also seen in some leaders of the so-called "emergent church," who view evangelicals as spiritual troglodytes holding unsuspecting Christians from true freedom by insisting that there is some actual content to faith.
In his talk to the Covenant Network, Professor Achtemeier indicates many times that his former position against gay partnerships and marriage was due to his lack of personal experience with good, committed Christian gays, and that his understanding of scripture was due to sheltering himself from the insights and opinions of others who disagreed with his "traditionalist" position (one can only wonder how he managed to remain this "sheltered" in both experience and education while attending Harvard and Duke). He even says that now that he has changed his view, there are many evangelicals who secretly agree with him but who are yet too fearful to express this openly. So, we evangelicals who hold to the "traditionalist" position on sexuality and marriage are sheltered, scholarly self-indulgent, trapped in our views by fear, and wrestle with an innate sense of being hypocritical regarding our actual experience with gays. Well, I guess that sets the table for open, respectful dialogue, doesn't it! Whatever I or another similar advocate says, our point and positions have already been dismissed as borne out of ignorance and fear.
Of course, Professor Achtemeier can declare his new viewpoint to be buttressed and capped by his high regard for the authority of scripture and the Lordship of Jesus Christ. But wait a minute, doesn't he say that this was a weakness he had in his old view because it was just a way to cover up his gnawing insecurities. Doesn't he indicate that evangelicals claim the high biblical ground as a way of avoiding the issues he has now so bravely faced? We evangelicals are in the conundrum where the professor can dismiss us for using the very same point he now uses to reinforce his own view. Seriously, I think his claim to hold his new position and a high view of biblical authority together simply makes him less honest and forthright than other advocates of alternative sexual lifestyles. Give me a good, honest liberal progressive who believes the scriptures are just plain wrong regarding the modern issues of sexual orientation, and then we can have a far more respectful and honest dialogue. Agreement is highly unlikely, but respect and regard for one another in both position and person are very likely.
Mark Achtemeier's straw man portrait of the fearful and sheltered evangelical is typical of progressive comments on this subject (one wonders how a person who was so recently an evangelical leader can now display such a shallow understanding of evangelicals and their beliefs). However, he indicates in his Covenant Network speech that this fits his own personal journey, which he then projects as the experience of the typical evangelical. This again is arrogant and errant. I am an evangelical Presbyterian minister (albeit a very low profile, relatively irrelevant one) who has read a pretty good share of the books both pro and con these issues. I've even studied much of the secular research into sexual orientation. Plus, throughout my life, even from high school days, I have had good and respectful personal friendships with gays and gay lifestyle supporters (and I also include other orientations such as transgendered and bisexual). I know and have known gays in committed relationships and gays in ongoing multiple relationships. (As Professor Achtemeier should know, there are a number of diverse and even opposing viewpoints among gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered persons on what forms their relationships should take.)
My children have been around my wife's and my gay (and heterosexually errant) friends (though we have never thought it necessary to discuss with our children the sexual practices of any of our friends regardless of their persuasions). During my years (long, long ago and in a galaxy far, far away) at Princeton Seminary, I so frequently sat at the "gay table" in the commons that many people assumed that I was gay, too. Plus, at Princeton and Duke (and even my pedestrian undergrad school, Wichita State), I had excellent liberal and evangelical professors who pushed me hard to wrestle with the foundations of my beliefs. Yet, I am confident in my approach to the scriptures and the moral positions I believe the Spirit and the scriptures instruct me to take. I've just always believed that these same scriptures and Spirit also called me into personal and loving involvement with those who I may be at odds with in both faith and life. To paraphrase the words of an old evangelist I heard once, I want to be stationed at the last outpost before hell so I can reach those who most desperately need the Gospel.
What then to make of this speech and Mark Achtemeier's new perspective? Yes, it gives ammunition to the liberal camps in the ongoing ecclesiastical wars in the mainline denominations. Of course, this doesn't really matter since the victory of some liberal church people will have no bearing on the catholic witness of Christ's church in all its authentic forms. It certainly will not cause the biblical interpretations of the orthodox, catholic, and evangelical to crumble into ashes because Professor Achtemeier's apology for his new view is so overwhelmingly persuasive. And, of course, God is not going to "repent" of God's clear intention (according to Jesus) in creating humans, sex, and marriage (although God may "repent" of having created the PCUSA, which raises a whole host of other issues to ponder).
The clear and obvious answer is to pray for Mark Achtemeier. As a fellow disciple of Jesus, I am confident that he would appreciate this, even if he thinks the motivation for the prayers is misinformed. I know I appreciate the prayers of my liberal friends who think I am out to lunch on my positions. In a more serious vein, however, I believe if Professor Achtemeier is truly seeking to be faithful to his God (and I believe he is), and is not simply rationalizing to deal with personal pressures to conform to this world, then he will be willing to open himself to his trusted evangelical friends and colleagues who take issue with his new position. If he is sincere, let him test his view in the fires of personal discourse with his friends, such as Robert Gagnon and others. This, along with the sweet incense of the prayers of the saints, will help him hear and follow the voice of his Shepherd who is certainly calling out to him. Again, Mark Achtemeier can be "on the mark!"
Thursday, November 5, 2009
The Way To Walking
Seth is doing GREAT in his first week at the Project Walk Spinal Cord Injury Center near San Diego. I was with him through Wednesday, and now Jackie is there through November 14. Our 19 year old son, Chris, will be there November 4-11.
The very first day his trainer found that Seth has "deep touch" sensation in his thighs, and that when Seth tries to make his legs move his muscles in his hips try to initiate movement. Of course, no one knew this before because Seth can't feel it and doctors don't check for it since they don't believe there is any reason to.
The trainers at Project Walk are all very dedicated and encouraging people, and there is a very positive atmosphere since they typically see improvement in their clients. They are especially hopeful for Seth, since they usually have very good success with children in regaining the ability to walk.
This is just the beginning, of course, but it looks very, very good at this point. God has brought Seth to the right place for his physical situation, and for this we are very thankful to all of you who have prayed, worked, hoped, and contributed financially to help this come about.
Seth picked verses 14 and 15 in Psalm 50 for his time at Project Walk. They are sort of a theme for him to use for encouragement.
Sacrifice thank offerings to God,
fulfill your vows to the Most High,
and call upon me in the day of trouble;
I will deliver you, and you will honor me.
Seth considers his vows to be what God is asking him to do, which consists of "Ask Me, trust Me, and work with Me!" I can hardly imagine what it must be like for an eleven year old boy to be called to such a difficult challenge. Seth has always been an exceptional person, but the incredible character he is demonstrating in all this is breathtaking.
Keep on praying!
Blessings!
Will Jackson
The very first day his trainer found that Seth has "deep touch" sensation in his thighs, and that when Seth tries to make his legs move his muscles in his hips try to initiate movement. Of course, no one knew this before because Seth can't feel it and doctors don't check for it since they don't believe there is any reason to.
The trainers at Project Walk are all very dedicated and encouraging people, and there is a very positive atmosphere since they typically see improvement in their clients. They are especially hopeful for Seth, since they usually have very good success with children in regaining the ability to walk.
This is just the beginning, of course, but it looks very, very good at this point. God has brought Seth to the right place for his physical situation, and for this we are very thankful to all of you who have prayed, worked, hoped, and contributed financially to help this come about.
Seth picked verses 14 and 15 in Psalm 50 for his time at Project Walk. They are sort of a theme for him to use for encouragement.
Sacrifice thank offerings to God,
fulfill your vows to the Most High,
and call upon me in the day of trouble;
I will deliver you, and you will honor me.
Seth considers his vows to be what God is asking him to do, which consists of "Ask Me, trust Me, and work with Me!" I can hardly imagine what it must be like for an eleven year old boy to be called to such a difficult challenge. Seth has always been an exceptional person, but the incredible character he is demonstrating in all this is breathtaking.
Keep on praying!
Blessings!
Will Jackson
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
