Links that Caught My Eye

This Momentary Marriage

With all of the talk about same-sex marriage in the news, I thought it would be good to post this link to John Piper’s book, “This Momentary Marriage.” Despite the legal wranglings, marriage for Christians means so much more than cohabitation with government endorsement. Let’s not forgot that God created marriage even if man is trying to remake it in his own image.

The Gospel Coalition’s Series on Ministry to Muslims

This is a series that will be dealing with recent debates on contextualization. This is the first in a series, so you can poke around and find a couple of other articles on the same topic.

Sexual Orientation versus the Church

Proponents of gay rights often make the arguement that churches are not being harmed in any way by their efforts. Here is an example where pro-gay legislation which, while seeking to end discrimination, is limiting church rights. On a similar topic, see The Intolerance of Tolerance.

Interesting Article on God’s Bad Behavior

Frank Viola interviews the author of “God Behaving Badly.” What do you think about Old Testament passages in which God smites and destroys?

Returning to Church

Andrea Palpant Dilley talks about her personal journey away from faith and then back to it. This is probably a common path for many and I really liked when she wrote, “My doubt belonged in church.”

Free Book on Romney’s Faith

A few months back I reviewed a book that was edited by a friend. Today (and tomorrow) that book is being offered free on Amazon for all Kindle readers.

Here is where you can get the free book: The Mormon Faith of Mitt Romney.

Now that Romney is the presumptive Republican nominee you might want to learn a little bit about his faith. This book is written from an evangelical perspective and is not a smear job, but I think you will find some surprises in it (I sure did).

Enjoy!

Nuclear Church Polity

I have been watching from a distance the discussion among churches affiliated with Sovereign Grace Ministries. This past month, they announced a process to re-examine their structure. You can google it if you want more information. There are strong views (both pro and con) about the process, the reasons for the process, the fairness of the process, and so forth.

Church polity, a distant relative of “church politics,” (a much more violent sport) has to do with the ways and means that churches make decisions and enforce them. Like any organized human activity, from families to corporations, churches have rules that govern the interactions between members. Implicit rules (that may never be formally acknowledged) are often as important as written rules.

Evangelical churches desire to be “biblical” in their approach to polity. This is a tricky business because the scriptures provide for a wide road on how a church should make decisions. When somebody asks me why there are so many denominations and divisions within Christianity, I like to remind them of the relatively open position that the New Testament takes on polity.

At this point, some readers are thinking, “But what about elders? The Bible is clear about that…” Yes, that’s true, but be careful when applying the “doctrine of beards” (in Hebrew, not Greek, the word “elder” usually translates the word zaqen from a root that means “beard” or “chin”). I think we have traveled some distance from its early-era application.

For example, one of Paul’s commands to Timothy was to appoint elders in every town (Titus 1:5). Today, we have created a huge amount of concern for the “local church” (a phrase not found in the scriptures). There is a tendency today to over emphasize the “local” nature of the church (leftover angst from the Reformation perhaps?). When combined with how we view pastors in contemporary Christianity  (the word “pastor” in the New Testament refers to a gift, not a role) our models of church are more “localized” than they might have been in the New Testament era. This is a contrast to the idea of a “town church.”

It’s more reasonable to conclude that churches in the first century were city or town-based networks of house churches, loosely connected; yet unified. Their polity was different than what most of us know today. This is not to suggest that our modern structures are “un-biblical.” But let’s not assume that when the Apostles Creed states, “one holy and catholic church” it does not mean 1^st Baptist or Cross(road/way/point/etc.).

On the other end of the spectrum from “local” is the organization of congregations into denominations. Denominationalism has fallen more or less out of favor in the decentralized world of evangelicalism except perhaps among the Presbyterians. We have a fear of institutionalization (born of some pretty difficult history) and this leads us to concerns about associations with other churches.

Once again, I would advocate for caution in how we label denominationalism. “Local autonomy” for the church is not something that Paul preached on extensively – if at all. While I tend toward being a bit more decentralized in my view of church, I can’t agree that denominations are explicitly or implicitly forbidden. There is, in fact, much to be said about unity among believers. Cooperation seems to be a part of unity.

Why is this all so important? Because of the potential for “spiritual abuse;” the whitewashing of leadership decisions with the brush of God’s approval. This is dangerous business and the source for much disunity in the church.

Polity can be a little like nuclear power. It has the potential for great harm or great good. The shear potential for danger has ended in many government avoiding nuclear energy altogether. The consequences from a bad accident are so long-lasting that they are discussed in terms of their “half-life.” Similarly, a bad church experience, when coupled with issues of polity, has long-lasting consequences.

Many in our culture  have walked away from the church because of issues surrounding polity. Rather than wresting the good from church, it has become too dangerous to handle. Leaders, with all humility, should take note and avoid making their polity the Gospel truth.

Missionaries on Welfare

Two converging events have created in me a need to write this post – a post that will no doubt offend (or embarrass) a few of my fellow Christian workers. Please forgive me for what I am about to write.

This past week the Obama campaign rolled out a fictitious story about Julia. Julia’s story unfolds on the computer screen telling us about all the ways that Uncle Barack has come to the rescue in the form of government assistance just when Julia was at her time of greatest need. It contrasts these benefits with all the heinous cuts the evil Republicans are planning to make. The Republicans responded fiercely, painting Julia as a ward of the state, sucking from the teat of government rather than making her own way in life (that’s the first time I have ever used the word “teat” in a blog post!). One rather cute  tweet noted that, most likely, Julia will be moving in with mom and dad after college since she cannot find a job.

This got me thinking about the “support-raised Christian workers” who are taking advantage of government welfare programs. They are, in effect, missionaries on welfare.

The phrase, “support-raised Christian workers” refers to people working in organizations that require their staff members to find donations to pay for their ministry cost. I am aware of a number of them that are now sucking at that same teat (2^nd time!!) as Julia. The issue to which I am referring is almost exclusively found among US-based staff (none of the aforementioned “welfare missionaries” are with Pioneers, mind you, although there may be some).

My bias against welfare is about to come out and I apologize in advance for being such a troglodyte about government assistance. I have this old-fashioned idea that welfare is not supposed to be a part of a household’s economy unless there are (negative) extenuating circumstances. In other words, if you are on welfare, you have problems and need help.

I have learned, however, that many consider government welfare (whether it concerns food stamps, school lunch assistance, or any other range of assistance programs) to be “rights.” In other words, if you qualify, than it is your “right” to have it.

There is something that seems wrong about deciding to work a bit less at fundraising because, with a lower income level, one can top off the budget with free school lunches. Worse yet? Qualifying for food stamps or assistance payments that allows a person to continue in ministry despite budget shortfalls. If one works for a non-profit I assume the idea is to provide a service to society, not to ask society to give you welfare benefits. After all, non-profits already get a government break through reduced taxation.

As I pondered this, I realized that I myself have sucked at a government teat (wow – three times in post!) but perhaps not the same one. Just this past month my wife and I refinanced our house. We qualified for a lower interest rate through an FHA-sponsored program that covered most of our closing costs, courtesy of the Obama administration, based on when we purchased our home. I didn’t ask for it – in fact, we were bombarded by offers and simply couldn’t pass it up (that’s my justification for doing it). If one extrapolates this to include other benefits of government for which I qualify (roads, bridges, protection from the US armed forces, etc.) I suppose we all get government assistance of some sort.

Still, am I wrong to suggest that missionaries who raise their support should think twice before getting welfare benefits?

What do you think?

Holy Stink!

Yes, there is a holy stink going on regarding the megachurch. Since that is a topic I have blogged about occasionally here, I thought I would highlight it for you.

Christianity Today highlights a controversy brewing over Andy Stanley’s recent sermon on a gay couple that attend his church, North Point. You can hear Stanley’s original sermon by clicking here (the relevant part starts somewhere around minute 24). You can read CT’s version of events by clicking here. The bottom line is that some are upset with Stanley for not pointing out that homosexuality is sin while using an illustration about a gay couple.

Albert Mohler (who himself teaches in a megachurch) used the situation to express his concern about the megachurch in a posting entitled, “Is the Megachurch the New Liberalism?” In broad strokes, he paints a very unflattering account of the megachurch’s influence on American spirituality. He charges, for example, that the megachurch is leading evangelicalism in the wrong direction by minimizing sin.

The California Cardinal, Rick Warren, could not let this go unanswered. He tweets that Al must apologize for his comments:

“@albertmohler A TITLE questioning1000s of churches’ orthodoxy due to size is unChristlike.U need to apologize to pastors Al.”

The tweet is, in my view, a bit illogical. Al makes the case that the practice of “megachurching” is harmful and Rick  requests an apology because it is the practice of 1’000′s of churches. Hmmm…. why didn’t he address the charges Mohler makes about the megachurch? Maybe it is the 140 character limit on twitter… which is exactly the argument that Mohler is making!

For better or for worse, it’s a missiological truth that how we do church gets infused with the message that is being delivered. “Big box” churches have consequences for American spirituality. I don’t believe there is a prescription for a particular church model suggested in the New Testament. However, all prescriptions have side effects. In this case, Mohler is simply highlighting them for us.

Could it be that we are witnessing the beginning of a movement that questions “big box” spirituality?

Links that Caught My Eye

The Contextualization Issue in the Orlando Sentinel

Granted, Orlando is home to a number of larger ministries, but I still was surprised to see this issue get coverage in the local newspaper.

The Devastating Plaque of Porn

Pornography is another one of those “victimless crimes” that libertarians seek to protect. Put yourself in the shoes of this parent and ask yourself if it is, in fact, victimless.

Driscoll on a Mission

It looks like Driscoll is taking his efforts to a wider audience. I wish him all the best.

Bullying Christians

The “anti-bullying” campaign shows its true colors. Nobody is in favor of gay bashing but through the portrayal of gay rights as a civil rights issue, Christian views will be outlawed. Religious freedom will be taking a back seat to gay rights and this story highlights our future.

Pregnancy Q & A

A humorous look at pregnancy. I particularly like the last FAQ: Question: Our baby was born lst week. When will my wife begin to feel and act normal again? Answer: When the kids are in college. I would personally amend that to be “After they are married and making their own money.”

Can you Trust the Theology of a Slave Owner?

Excellent article about Anyabwile’s address on slave-owner and uber-theologian Jonathan Edwards. Too bad Anyabwile hasn’t read Bill Webb’s book, Slaves, Women, and Homosexuals.

Technopaganism

I have written before on this blog about technopaganism. This is another expose on the topic and is a social critique of the new religious being birthed from secular scientism.

Multisite Musings

I am back from an overseas trip – I don’t post when I travel in areas which suppress the church or when I am with international staff that live in countries that do.

Upon my return, my colleagues have filled my inbox with a series of witty emails (at least they think they are witty!) about Thabiti Anyabwile’s recent article denouncing the multisite church model. You can read the original article by clicking here. If you read the comments you will find a spirited and lively debate. To sum it up, he makes the charge that multisite churches feed the idolatry of the “megapastor,” give way to competition and pride, remove the emphasis on local ministry, are pragmatist, and are nothing more than a cultural phenomenon.

Pretty hard to argue with that, I would say, though some are trying. One example is Four Oaks Community Church’s Erik Braun (you can read his reply by clicking here). He has written a point-by-point counter to Anyabwile but the real meat is in the argument that scripture doesn’t forbid it. Technically, he is correct.

I don’t think the real issue is multisite, per se. If by “multisite” we mean that the church meets at multiple sites, then our house church network is a multisite church. The real issue is the distribution of a single preacher’s message to multiple congregations and the implications behind it.

It seems to me that two things are happening simultaneously when churches pursue a multisite video preaching approach. The first is that the priesthood of the believer takes it on the chin because one priest’s gifts are so emphasized that others in the body are not able to fully participate with their gifting. This really isn’t a multisite issue. It’s a problem with our view of preaching and our view of preachers. This problem has been around a long time – consider Spurgeon’s 5,000 seat auditorium. Spurgeon was, essentially, the Joel Olsteen of his day, sans smile, as it pertains to drawing crowds. We have exalted the megapastor and multisite is just one symptom of our love for celebrity pastors.

The other issue has to do with the corporate influence of our culture on churches. The pastor-as-CEO model has overtaken the church. In the New Testament, one of the most (if not THE most) common metaphor for church is family. In our times, the corporation metaphor, with all its marketing programs, metrics, and growth-driven strategies has, in my view, displaced the family metaphor. I am not down on growth; quite the opposite – I love it. However, growth as a byproduct of slick sermon “packages” and carefully crafted “worship events” does not, in my humble opinion, produce discipleship and life transformation.

Neither of these two things are explicitly proof-texted (is that a word?) as forbidden in the Bible, so I guess pastor Braun is correct. Our models of church have consequences, of course, so while it may not be forbidden we can assume it is not without its effects.

Just as the Wizard of Oz created a persona and then failed to live up to it, my concern is that the multisite pastors of today are creating something that they can’t really live up to. Ministries that project the preaching and teaching of a small cadre of influential but fallen sinners are bound to eventually go wrong. I am not talking about scandal (though that’s a real issue). Rather, I am referring to the rewiring of our brains and hearts that happens when we adopt a set of assumptions about church that, while not forbidden, exchanges the living room for the board room.

Book Review: The End of Sexual Identity

Book:The End of Sexual Identity: Why Sex Is Too Important to Define Who We Are by Janell Williams Paris

This is a rather frank and engaging book about human sexuality with a focus on issues surrounding gay and lesbian identity issues. The author argues (quite effectively) that the categories we have given to sexual preferences (for example, “homosexual”) is harmful to a full understanding of human sexuality. By forcing the categories onto people, we inadvertantly create a crisis of identity that doesn’t need to exist.

A few months ago I read Masuzawa’s “The Invention of World Religions.” She makes the case that prior to the 1900s we didn’t identify Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, or Hinduism as monolithic religious blocs. By creating the category of “world religion” we erase the diversity and differences within these religions and understanding them less. This is similar to Paris’ argument regarding sexual identity categories. The invented social construct, in this case the meaning we infuse into the concept of homosexuality, is not something embraced by scripture (or by historical Christianity). Because of this, it is futile to attempt to discuss homosexuality from a biblical perspective using this construct. Instead, Paris suggests, we need to address issues of sexuality in a different way than to just say, “homosexuality is sin.” Paris holds to a historic Christian view regarding the morality of homosexuality. However, she doesn’t believe we should accept the identity-based version that we must contend with in contemporary culture.

In my experience working in a Christian organization, same-sex issues are difficult to discuss in a frank and open way. Paris, speaking from the perspective of an anthropologist, is able to very directly address the issues at hand without reducing the conversation to simple platitudes. This is a much more thoughtful and nuanced discussion of sexuality than one typically finds from a Christian author (there are a few sections which are startlingly frank so consider yourself warned). She argues instead for sexual holiness – a more positive approach than the condemnation of sinful acts.

It’s easy for us to thoughtlessly discuss issues of homosexuality using the “identity categories” of sexual orientation. Paris challenges this way of thinking which she calls a worldly system. After reading this it did strike me as odd that we encourage people to identify themselves on the basis of their sexuality.

Links that Caught My Eye

When Should Christians Engage in Civil Disobedience?

With the Obama administration telling the Catholic Church to just deal with it, the question on the horizon is simple. Will Christians be called upon to stand against this coercive policy on birth control and abortificients (I write “Christians” and not just “Catholic Christians” because whether one is with them on the issue of contraception matters not – the issue is: do we want to see religious freedom eroded in this way)? Mark Coppenger makes an argument which doesn’t extend to the “religiously unreasonable” which is a hard case to make.

Hey! You Can’t Say That!

Great Britain goes further down the politically correct trail with a ban on language that refers to couples with the terms “husband” and “wife.” One argument against gay marriage is that it denigrates heterosexual marriage. This appears to support that argument.

Asians are the fastest growing race group in the United States

With all the talk about illegal immigration from Mexico, you might be surprised to learn that Asians are outgrowing other ethnic groups.

The Other Side of Global Missions

Jason Johnson gives a call to global missions and makes the case that when we seek to change the nations, the nations change us.

Modern Day Slaves

Mustafa grew up in the deserts surrounding Dakar, Senegal. At six years old, his illiterate father, struggling to survive with his family of six, gave Mustafa to a marabout (pronounced mare-uh-boo). The promise of education and life in the city seemed so much better for Mustafa than eking out a living in the harsh terrain in which they lived.

As Mustafa traveled toward Dakar, he had no idea what awaited him there. The Quranic teachings cost a little less than 50 cents a day, but that was more money than Mustafa had ever held in his hand. He would be responsible to beg for this tuition. Some days this might take ten hours and he was soon schooled on the realities of life on the rough and tumble streets.

On good days he would return to the marabout’s street compound to surrender his money. On the days where he was empty-handed he was rewarded with a severe beating. Dirty, hungry, and constantly in fear of being cast aside, little Mustafa did his best to comply. He, and thousands of other little boys in the marabout system of Western Africa, are modern-day slaves.

Marabouts are Islamic teachers, mostly from the Sufi branch of Islam. To be fair, not all of them enslave boys. They are not considered to be a part of “orthodox Islam,” but inject a greater degree of mysticism into their religious practice. They are the shamans and voodoo doctors of Islam. Nobody knows how many marabouts there are, but in Dakar there are at least 6,000 boys in the the marabout system. When one comes across a boy begging in the streets with a small pendant around his neck, picturing an older man (their marabout leader), one can be sure to have seen a marabout boy.

As the boys grow older the more aggressive among them become the marabouts’ cheif lieutenants. They collect the fees, organize the feeding of the boys, and make sure that nobody steps out of line. Anybody who attempts to escape and flee to home is punished severely. Few marabous provide housing for the boys and most of their time is spent living on the streets. It is a tough existence.

The Kony video and its strange aftermath have been much in the news lately. It’s a tragic story of exploitation. As I watched it, I couldn’t help but remember seeing the marabout boys last year when I was in Senegal. Who is their advovate? To the government’s credit, I am aware of some atttempts to relieve the suffering of these boys. However, I know of no ministires seeking to assist these boys – I am sure somebody is, though, and I invite you to post about it in the comments.

In the meantime, please remember to pray for the marabout boys, that somebody would take up their plight and invest their lives in sharing Christ with them and helping them to escape the terrible system in which they are trapped.