I am a Minister of the Gospel: called, ordained, and entrusted to shepherd the sheep

I may not look the part yet, but perhaps someday

In recent conversations, primarily online, a number of people have 'warned' me against speaking out about the reality of systemic racism and/or the deadly nature of COVID-19 and the efficacy of the vaccine.  Some of these conversations have included predictions that doing so will damage my ministry, my Gospel witness, and call into question my integrity.  Some have suggested that wanting to be right (i.e. know and share facts and truth) is a character flaw, or at least a waste of time when such issues are only matters of opinion.  I would be sugarcoating it if I said these responses didn't bother me; some of them, given my relationship with the source, have been deeply disappointing and emotionally painful.

What then is my response, how do I evaluate this advice in light of my own call to ministry?  The following is an attempt to respond, if you are one of the people referred to in the paragraph above, please read this in the spirit and heart in which I write it, as much as I value our relationship, these issue demand more of me.  If what you wrote/said was coming from a place of genuine concern, I value that.

Therefore, as a minister of the Gospel:

1. I will NOT disregard, dismiss, or 'other' those in need

When we first began working on getting a homeless shelter operating in Venango County {now called: Emmaus Haven of Venango County a wonderful organization my church and I are committing to supporting} there were a number of local people who shared a variation of this idea: "There are no homeless in Venango County, what are you going to do, bus them up here from Pittsburgh?"  This was factually inaccurate, those who work to help solve housing issues in our area were well aware that there are in fact a significant number of homeless individuals (and families) on any given day in our county.  Many of them are temporarily homeless, as opposed to chronically, but they certainly needed shelter.  Additionally, are we as Christians supposed to care less about those who are homeless in the Pittsburgh area?  Are they not our neighbors too?

Thankfully, the local churches of our county, together with our partners in the county government, were able to continue to move forward and eventually open Emmaus Haven.  Whether we see them or not, whether we know them or not, those in need in our community are human being created in the image of God, they are not an 'other', not a 'them' to be ignored.

I will not consider less worthy of compassion, help, and prayer:

A. Immigrants, refugees, and other non-citizens

B. Those who are homeless, downtrodden, and desperate

C. The who suffering with physical or mental handicaps

D. Those living in poverty

E. Those battling addictions

F. The unvaccinated or those otherwise lacking healthcare

G. Those who don't look, act, or think like me.

The list could be longer, or more specific, but you get the point.  As a minister of the Gospel, called to live by the Law of Love, setting up barriers to that obligation is a direct violation of my oath before God.  I cannot allow them in my own heart or mind, and am called to confront them when the people of God wrongly exhibit them.

Psalm 82:3     New International Version

Defend the weak and the fatherless; uphold the cause of the poor and the oppressed.

2. I will NOT excuse, utilize, or encourage lies and falsehoods in the name of the 'greater good', in a misguided attempt to bolster my ministry, or protect my country.

This is the part that frightens me about the health of much of the Church in America today.  I see 'Christian' websites willingly spreading falsehoods because they bolster the Culture War narrative of the moment, 'Christian' leaders embracing easily disprovable ideas for financial or political gain, and much of it without significant pushback.  We seem to care more about 'winning' than the Truth, and that guarantees that the last thing we will be doing with respect to the Kingdom is winning.

A. Truth matters, honesty and integrity do too.

B. We all have opinions, we don't all have facts to back them up.  Opinions are not created equally, authority, experience, and expertise have weight.

C. A disregard for the Truth is a cancer within the Church, WE must always want to be, strive to be, and pray to God that we will be, walking in the light of truth and not the darkness of error/lies.

Titus 1:2  New International Version

in the hope of eternal life, which God, who does not lie, promised before the beginning of time,

Hebrews 6:18  New International Version

God did this so that, by two unchangeable things in which it is impossible for God to lie, we who have fled to take hold of the hope set before us may be greatly encouraged.

The cause of the Gospel of Jesus Christ is NOT advanced through lies, end of story. 

3. While matters pertaining to God, the Church, the Bible, and Christianity are my area of special concern, training, experience, and relative expertise, that does not mean I will MYOB or 'stay in my lane' regarding the issues that confront me, my family, community, country, or the world.

A. A prophetic voice is a calling from God.  My particular calling, as evidenced by my passion, the testimony of other Christians who know me, and my ability is to be a Teacher.  I will not ignore it or muzzle it.

B. When a minister of the Gospel grounds his/her opinion in a biblical, orthodox, and historic understanding of the Church, the burden shifts to the people of God to evaluate, weigh, and respond to it.

C. If you disagree with my conclusions without offering a biblically, orthodox, and historically Christian alternative, you haven't responded to the prophetic voice God has laid upon me {and tens of thousands of others, I am but one of God's servants}.

Putting B and C together, this is what frustrates me about much of the online, in particular, 'debate'    between Christians.  I see little evidence of attempts to ground opinions in biblical interpretation or the teaching of the Church.  I see ample political argumentation, far too much actually, and plenty of economic or philosophical viewpoints, but very little of it grounded in a Christian worldview, expressing a desire to evidence the Fruit of the Spirit.  It is not the secularists on the outside who are a significant threat to the Church in America, but those who have abandoned a Christian Mind within.

D. There is ample room to disagree within a Christian framework, even strongly disagree.  A healthy Church has diverse opinions within a Christian worldview.

Feel free to disagree with me, if you do so within a Christian framework at least we're having a healthy discussion, an 'iron sharpens iron' type thing, even if we cannot agree.

E. Opinions which are contrary to biblical, orthodox, and historic Christianity are NOT healthy for individual Christian or the Church and should be challenged by every minister of the Gospel.

Such opinions included, but are not limited to, those based in

    (1) Individualism

    (2) Consumerism/Materialism

    (3) Nationalism

    (4) Racism

    (5) Sexism

Philippians 2:1-5  New International Version

2 Therefore if you have any encouragement from being united with Christ, if any comfort from his love, if any common sharing in the Spirit, if any tenderness and compassion, 2 then make my joy complete by being like-minded, having the same love, being one in spirit and of one mind. 3 Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit. Rather, in humility value others above yourselves, 4 not looking to your own interests but each of you to the interests of the others.

5 In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus:

I will continue striving to fulfill my calling, hopefully speaking the Truth, and hopefully doing so in love.  As Luther was purported to have said, "here I stand, I can do no other."  May God enlighten us all through his Spirit at work within us.

Impeachment aside, the President mocking the prayers of the Speaker should be disconcerting to all Christians.

Americans are evenly divided on the question of whether or not the President of the United States ought to be impeached and removed from office, multiple polls over the past few months have confirmed it.  This is, of course, no surprise given the increasingly antagonistic partisan nature of the political 'discourse' (an ironic term in the current climate) that takes place each day on television and social media, not to mention the vitriol coming from the politicians themselves.  America has had bitter divisions like this before, and survived them, but at great cost.  One of the things that, in theory, helps hold our nation together is the willingness of Christians to pray for God's blessing upon our nation, for peace and justice, even when their own party is not currently in power.  From the Christians I've known, and from being honest with my own heart, I've at times wondered how consistent and sincere our prayers are when 'they' are in power and not 'us'.  I know that some Christians are deeply committed to their prayer for the nation, and elections don't change their attitudes or habits.  But other Christians, who knows how many, treat their prayers to the Almighty as an extension of their own political preferences, beseeching God to give our 'holy and righteous' side victory and smite the 'vile and wicked' ways of the opposition.  Perhaps an equal number of Red and Blue Christians in America are committed to praying no matter what, and an equal number pray only in partisan terms.  {And here is where I'll lose some of you, upon reading that last sentence you'll either say to yourself, 'What Blue (or Red) Christians, they can't possibly be Christians if they support...Yes, that's a further symptom of how dangerously our politics has infected our theology.  I'm saved by the Blood of the Lamb, that and that alone, as is every Christian (and Old Covenant saint before Christ) who has every lived, my politics (or lack thereof) are NOT a factor, how could they be?}

Which brings me to the current example of our polarization.  I have no intention of offering an opinion regarding the President, the Speaker of the House, or Impeachment (If you expected that, you've not read my blog before).  What I am willing to speak about, however, is prayer.  I have doubts about the sincerity of the faith of a number of politicians, on both sides, who seem to utilize that faith when it will get them votes and ignore it when it gets in the way of tactics or their own moral choices.  Then again, I have doubts about the sincerity of the faith of a number of famous 'Christian' leaders, who seem more interested in power, wealth, and fame than in being a servant of the Gospel.  I also wonder about the sincerity of the faith of some of the people I know personally, for whom faith seems to be a matter of convenience more than conviction.  I have these doubts, and I believe them to be a healthy amount of skepticism, as Jesus reminded us, "16 By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thorn bushes, or figs from thistles? 17 Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them." (Matthew 7:16-20)
In response to the impending Articles of Impeachment, the President of the United States, Donald Trump, issued a public letter written to the Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi.  Among many a political invective in the letter is the section below:

Even worse than offending the Founding Fathers, you are offending Americans of faith by
continually saying "I pray for the President", when you know this statement is not true, unless it
is meant in a negative sense. It is a terrible thing you are doing, but you will have to live with it,
not I!  {READ: President Trump Sends Pelosi Letter Protesting 'Partisan Impeachment Crusade'}

I don't know if Speaker Pelosi prays for the President or not, but I know that she says that she does.  I don't know what the content, attitude, and tone of the Speaker's prayers might be, perhaps they are infected with partisan attitudes, or maybe she rises above that and prays for the good of the country even if it means the success of her political enemy.  The point is, I don't know these things, and neither does the President.  The sad thing here is that an assumption is being made, one with a cynical heart: that a Democrat cannot possibly pray with sincerity for a Republican (and vice versa).  If we have descended this far into tribalism, if we are being asked to accept that the Universal Church can only contain people who think just like we do, then we're also being asked to write-off millions of Church going, self-professed Christians who claim that their faith is in Jesus Christ, as not simply still Lost, but our enemies. {My favorite example of this attitude is from an episode of Cheers - Woody Boyd : I love you, Kelly - that's why I'm now a member of the Lutheran Evangelical Church of America. Just like you.
Kelly Boyd : Oh, Woody! You saved our marriage... What a wonderful sacrifice! Now when we die and go to heaven, we won't be separated by barbed wire and barking dogs (for context, Woody was already a Lutheran, just a different branch of the tree)}.

Perhaps it is hopelessly optimistic of me to believe that as Christians our faith ought to transcend our politics and even our citizenship as the defining characteristic of our lives.  Jesus, of course, told us he would accept no less, "Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me. 25 For whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me will find it. 26 What good will it be for someone to gain the whole world, yet forfeit their soul? Or what can anyone give in exchange for their soul?" (Matthew 16:24-26).  As I read about Church history, I find plenty of examples of people for whom faith was seemingly the third or fourth most important thing (often behind their pursuit of wealth/power/fame or their own prejudices and hatreds), their stories could confirm that we shouldn't expect any better.  But I also read powerful stories of self-sacrifice, principled stands in the face of danger, and service to others, even to those who were considered to be "them" and not "us".    Men like William Wilberforce, and women like Sojourner Truth, hold the cynicism of reading history at bay, as do redemption stories like that of Saint Augustine, and the principled martyrdom of Jan Hus or Dietrich Bonhoeffer.  If men and women of extraordinary faith like that existed then, they are here among us now too.

To my fellow self-proclaimed Christians for whom politics is the primary lens through which you see the world: Do you pray for the opposition?  With sincerity, hoping that they will be transformed by the power of God's Word (if need be), not to see things as you or I see them, but as God would have them be seen?  If you are willing to pray for them, and they are willing to pray for you, perhaps I'm not as hopelessly optimistic as it seems.

"By What Standard?" - A shameful trailer made by Founders Ministries utilizing the worst political ad tactics

In the original version of the "By What Standard?" documentary trailer released by Florida based Founders Ministries , among other highly objectionable tactics (which I will get to in a minute), the trailer chose to portray Rachael Denhollander as a wolf in sheep's clothing, an enemy of the Church using the sexual abuse of women and children as a Trojan horse for "godless ideologies".  If you don't know who Rachael Denhollander is, and why it is despicable to choose to highlight her involvement in helping the Southern Baptist Convention comes to grip with the widespread sexual abuse in its midst, read this amazing article about Rachael that highlights her faith (paying particular attention to the role she played at the last SBC gathering, making her a target of Founders Ministries):

She surrendered her secrets to put away a sexual predator. But her sacrifice isn't over - by Matt Mencarini, Louisville Courier Journal

Did you read the whole article?  If not, go back and read it, otherwise you might not understand why I'm upset, actually really upset, when a self-proclaimed defender of evangelical Christianity behaves in this way.  Following the release of the trailer for "By What Standard?" (watch it here, I have been unable to find the previous version containing Rachael online) uproar ensued on behalf of those targeted in the trailer and from those who had been interviewed for the documentary who strenuously objected to being a part of this finished product.  In the end, three of the board members of Founders Ministries resigned when the board as a whole refused to admit that it had erred and needed to repent publicly.  And while the portion of the trailer containing Rachael Denhollander has been edited out, the trailer was then re-released after Founders Ministries president, SBC pastor Tom Ascol, defended the original trailer and rejected the stand taken by the three board members who resigned in a letter about their departure: Resignation Letter

"Our conversations led to an impasse regarding the nature of sin, unintentional sin, unwise acts and what faithfulness to Christ requires in the wake of each. Though each of these three men formulated his own arguments, their views led them all to conclude they could not conscientiously continue to serve Founders without agreement on these points as it relates to elements in the trailer. As the statements of Fred Malone and Tom Hicks below indicate, they believe we have sinned in how the trailer portrayed certain people and issues. Tom Nettles, Jared Longshore and I do not believe that. This is the fundamental point of the impasse that we reached." - Pastor Tom Ascol
Following significant push-back about the trailer, Founders Ministries issued the following clarification: About That Trailer , for the three board members who resigned, this defense was not sufficient.
"Some expressed concerns about a 1-2 second clip of Rachael Denhollander, accusing us of presenting her as demonic. Certainly, no one at Founders Ministries believes that and we did not foresee people taking it that way. That was not our intention and, admittedly, not our wisest editing moment. We regret the pain and confusion we caused by this unwise alignment of image and idea. We have removed the clip and have reached out to her and to her husband, Jacob. We are grateful for so many of Mrs. Denhollander’s efforts to serve victims of abuse." - Pastor Tom Ascol
If you appreciate the work of Rachael Denhollander, why did you group her with the "godless ideologies" bent upon the destruction of the church?  Why include her at all?  This defense, "we didn't think people would react that way" is shallow, at best.  The entire trailer features an us vs. them mentality, those opposed to, so we are being told, sound Biblical teaching (Are they really?  That's a serious charge requiring a serious discussion, not a slick hit piece), must be confronted in this manner.
If the portrayal of Rachael Denhollander was the entirety of the issue with the trailer, it would be enough.  But there is more.  The trailer utilizes slick video production techniques to portray the "good guys" in color and the "bad guys" in black and white.  In addition to claims made by several of those interviewed that their words were taken out of context, the screen flashes with images of protests, a figure being burned in effigy, a female clergy member, and United States Senator Bernie Sanders, all clearly being shown as the "enemy" {in brief flashes, like the psycho killer in the next horror movie, complete with sound effects}.  Perhaps the inclusion of Bernie Sanders, an openly Jewish politician, is a random choice, but in a trailer highlighting a conspiracy theory, a subtle takeover of a cherished institution by nefarious outside forces, how could it not occur to the creators of the trailer that they would be invoking the anti-Semitic trope that the Jews are the ones trying to destroy Western civilization?  Of all the liberal politicians that could be shown (if you must portray a politician and thus bring politics into this as well, another questionable choice), why the only well known Jewish politician the one?  If this is an oversight and the creators did not make this connection, it is a significant one, because it seems highly unlikely that those who swim in cesspool of anti-Semitism won't see it as a "nod, nod, wink, wink".
If Christians treat each other this way, no holds barred, take no prisoners, is it any wonder that we're treating fellow Americans as an infection to be eradicated when we disagree with them but don't have the spiritual bond that is supposed to make such behavior unacceptable?
Founders Ministries has been called to task by many in the leadership of the SBC, but that rebuke is insufficient, this behavior needs to be rejected far and wide, and those who watch the film need to be aware of the unethical way in which it was promoted.  No matter what the virtues or faults of the final documentary end up being, it was promoted in a way that has more in common with a political PAC hatchet job than anything connected to Christian brotherhood.
If Founders Ministries believes that they are fighting for the soul of the SBC, and maybe for all of evangelical Christianity, and if they believe that soul is in mortal danger, they still must adhere to Paul's words, "Why not say--as some slanderously claim that we say--'Let us do evil that good may result'? Their condemnation is just!"  We, as Christians, are not allowed to "fight fire with fire".  We cannot justify slander, hit pieces, and treating fellow Christians as an "other".  I know that Pastor Tom Ascol has stated that such is not the intent of the documentary or its trailer, but such is certainly the reality.  Watch the trailer.  Does this look like an invitation to a debate on a serious topic, or a political ad meant to portray the other side in a negative light through slick editing?  Calling those one disagrees with "well intentioned"(as Pastor Ascol, to his credit, has done) is not good enough, when the tactics one uses to respond drown out that statement.  Pastor Ascol has made his position clear, "they believe we have sinned in how the trailer portrayed certain people and issues. Tom Nettles, Jared Longshore and I do not believe that."  Intentions do matter, but not all sin is intentional.  The resignation letters from two of the three board members who resigned admit this, that among other things, showing Rachael Denhollander's picture with the audio "forces of darkness" was wrong, even without intentionally conflating abuse victims with those labeled as dangerous to the church.
Read the article about Rachael, watch the edited trailer, consider the resignation letters and the defense of the trailer by Pastor Ascol.  When you are done, ask yourself this question, is this what Jesus had in mind when he said, 'By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.' (John 13:35).  I cannot see how it could be.

For an additional perspective on the tactics used in the trailer see: Video links Beth Moore, Russell Moore, James Merritt to ‘Trojan horse of social...Religion News Service  Notice in particular the greater detail on the now deleted Rachael Denhollander scene and her husband's response.

For a previous blog post I wrote about how Christians ought to engage with their adversaries (both within the Church and without): How a Christian must respond to adversaries

How a Christian must respond to adversaries

It has become readily apparent that a significant number of Christians have decided that those who oppose them, in a variety of settings that include church controversies, business, and politics, ought to be treated as an "other" and defeated by nearly any means necessary.  For too many of us, the ends justify the means because we have pridefully defined our chosen end as God's will.  And while history has shown how dangerous this attitude can be even when a nation is facing an existential threat {see for example: the firebombing of Dresden, and the internment of Americans of Japanese descent during WWII}, it can in no way be argued, according to the Scriptures {which is what ought to matter to a Christian}, that this is the morally appropriate choice for an individual, or group, of Christians. 

Romans 3:8 New International Version (NIV)
8 Why not say—as some slanderously claim that we say—“Let us do evil that good may result”? Their condemnation is just!

Romans 12:21 New International Version (NIV)
21 Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.

Matthew 5:43-48 New International Version (NIV)
43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

We, as Christians, have been called to a higher standard.  We have been charged with living as disciples of Jesus Christ and thus imitating our Savior in this world.  To "win" a battle utilizing immoral means is to lose the war. 

Hear this, and hear it well: God is the judge of the world.  It is better for us to lose morally than to try to win immorally.  We have not been given a command to be winners, we have been given a command to be righteous.  In this world, they're not typically the same thing.  Each time Christians choose to try to be winners rather than righteous, they demonstrate that they don't have sufficient faith in God's final victory and they taint the message of the Gospel {as hypocrites}.

Zechariah 4:6 New International Version (NIV)
6 So he said to me, “This is the word of the Lord to Zerubbabel: ‘Not by might nor by power, but by my Spirit,’ says the Lord Almighty.

In Flanders field the poppies blow...Nationalism and the lessons of WWI

One hundred years ago the United States of America reluctantly ended its isolationism and joined WWI against the Central Powers.  At that point, WWI had raged into its fourth year, with the dead and maimed growing each day, millions upon millions.  Nobody knew it at the time, but WWI only had a year and a half until German exhaustion brought it to an end.
WWI was not an example of Just War Theory in action, at least not for its principle protagonists, the Great Powers of Europe who went to war for nationalistic reasons, each hoping for a quick victory that would increase their relative power and prestige at the expense of the enemy.  Nationalism had helped turn the kingdoms of Europe into modern nation-states, but it also stoked hatred of the "other" (Germans of Russians and the French, the French of the Germans, etc.) and enabled leaders to whip up war enthusiasm by painting the enemy as evil.
I've written this before, but it bears repeating, nationalism is not compatible with Christianity.  Patriotism certainly is, if your city, state, or country is lovable, then by all means love it and be proud of it.  Nationalism is different.  Nationalism is the belief that your people are superior, and thus other peoples are inferior.  When it puts down roots and matures, nationalism views the people who are not like us as a sub-human or inhuman "other".  This false pride and denigration of other peoples is contrary to the clear teaching of the Gospel that all men are created by God and that in Christ there is no slave or free, no Jew or gentile, all are one in Christ.  The British, French, German, Austrian, and Russian soldiers who went to war in 1914 were largely Christians, and yet they fought against their fellow Christians, replacing brotherly love with gruesome killing, because they had been taught that their enemy was not their brother in Christ, but instead a fearsome "other".
WWII saw a reprisal of nationalism, brought to its ugly natural culmination in Nazi Germany, before it was discredited by the deaths of tens of millions in that war.  After WWII, nationalism lay dormant during the Cold War, as the battle between Communism and Capitalism took center stage, but following the collapse of the Soviet system, it began to grow once more.
Nationalism is on the rise, in America and Europe, moving us back toward an era of "us not them", of dangerous competition instead of cooperation.  Will the world forget the horrors of WWI and WWII?  Will the lessons paid for in so much blood and destruction be ignored?  A pessimist would see the return of nationalism as a natural counter-balance to the free-market and open-border policies of the recent past, and would resign himself to a return of the dark days of national rivalries.  An optimist might see that same return as an opportunity for the nations of the world to show that they are capable of learning from the past, only time will tell if optimism or pessimism is warranted here.
The Church and Christians in general were fooled by nationalism before, allowing the us vs. them mentality to replace what the Word of God declares about Christian brotherhood and the dangers of pride in oneself and hatred of one's enemies.  Let us pray that the Church and the Christians within her will be wise enough this time around to say "no" to the siren's call of nationalism, for all the world's people have but one Father, one Creator, nobody is an "other".