In case we needed another reminder of the danger of trying to serve two masters (in this case, God and power/politics), the Southern Baptist Convention's annual meeting once again reinforced the applicability of the warning of Jesus in Matthew 6:24 against split loyalties. The delegates to the Southern Baptist Convention's annual meeting were presented with a speech from the current Vice-President of the United States, Mike Pence. Had the speech focused exclusively upon Gospel-centered issues, it would still raise the question: Why was a politician given this opportunity, here at a gathering of the leaders of the church, above a minister of the church? A powerful politician is not being asked to address a gathering of the church because of his/her theological expertise or relevant experience as a church leader, but because of his/her possession of political power. In the case of the speech by Vice-President Pence, the primary topic was not Gospel-centered, nor even centered upon moral issues of relevance to the Church, but rather a touting of the political accomplishments of the administration to which he belongs. It was, in essence, a campaign speech. Choosing to allow a campaign speech at a gathering of the leaders of a church, who have been designated to conduct the business of the church, whether from a Republican or a Democrat, or any other party, raises a host of issues all of which are potentially damaging to the Church's given mission to make disciples and share the Gospel: (1) It identifies the Church with a particular political party, thus discouraging anyone who does not support that party from attending/visiting churches affiliated with the denomination (and frankly other churches too, those on the outside looking in don't typically grasp our denominational divisions). (2) It creates an atmosphere within the church/denomination where dissent/disagreement regarding political issues and how to solve them (which is normal and to be expected) is treated as a spiritual matter. In other words, if two people disagree on immigration policy or tax policy, one is viewed as more spiritual than the other because that person agrees with the church/party/politician and the other does not. The line between politics and theology becomes hopelessly blurred, to the detriment of theology. (3) It opens up the church to legitimate questions of hypocrisy when the inevitable moral failings of political leaders are ignored in the pursuit of an ongoing relationship to those in power, failings that would be absolutely disqualifying for any leader within the church. (4) It opens up church leaders to temptation regarding the pursuit of wealth, fame, and power, an unholy trio of temptations that the Church has fallen victim too far too often throughout its history. (5) It treats the teachings of the Word of God, and by extension the ministers of the Gospel, as secondary to those of politicians, thus elevating earthly power and its pursuit above spiritual power and discipleship. Within the Church, the Word of God ought to be the ultimate authority, and those called and ordained as ministers ought to be the guardians of God's Word. Of what value to the Church is the opinion, influenced by political realities, of a politician? The Church's role is to share the Word of God with the world, not receive the word of man from those who wield earthly power.
Below are links to one news article, and one opinion piece regarding this topic.
ABC News: Pence Gives Campaign-Style Speech to Southern Baptists
The Gospel Coalition: Truth, Power, and Pence at the SBC
I've written extensively about the danger of mixing religion and politics, from the perspective of history and current events. Over the past two generations, the Church in the United States has moved closer to power and wealth, not further away. It has been more willing to make moral compromises, and less willing to confront the influence of affluence. This trend is not universal, some Christians, churches, and denominations, have rejected it, but overall the trend is clear. The Church has become less spiritual, more material, less interested in service, more interested in power. This flirtation with power/wealth/fame is dangerous, it is foolish, and it has already harmed, and will continue to harm, both the Church and its mission.
As I have stated previously, this is not a political statement or endorsement on my part, that would obviously defeat the purpose. The same warning applies two both liberals and conservatives, Republicans and Democrats, to Baptist, Catholics, Lutherans, Methodists, and all the rest; the siren's call of power is threatening to shipwreck us all; "What good will it be for a man if he gains the whole world, yet forfeits his soul?" (Matthew 16:26)
Thursday, June 14, 2018
Tuesday, June 12, 2018
To not "look Catholic" is a terrible rationale for a Baptist Church to base decisions upon.
The Red Bank Baptist Church of Lexington, South Carolina, recently voted (in Baptist Churches all members have a vote, and can vote at regular congregational business meetings regarding matters both great and small, i.e. the church budget, the calling/dismissing of a pastor, program and building issues, etc.) to remove a 7 ft. statue of Jesus which had been displayed outside the entrance to the church for the past decade. According to Pastor Jeff Wright, "This is not a denomination issue, its a church decision. We are removing it to end some confusion. Some people have seen it, guests that have been here and have asked, 'Why is this on the front of a Baptist Church?" In a letter the church sent to the artist, Delbert Baker Jr., Pastor Wright explained that the statue brings into question, "the theology and core values" of the church.
AP story: Baptist church's 'Catholic' Jesus statue to find new home
We live in interesting times. On the one hand we have an ongoing debate that roils people's emotions and has led to protests and bloodshed concerning the removal of statues on public land which were erected to honor those who fought to retain slavery in America, and at the same time, we have a congregation choosing to remove a statue of Jesus from their property because it makes the building appear "too Catholic".
Whether or not a Baptist Church has a statue or painting of Jesus prominently displayed is not the most pressing theological question facing most churches, but the line of reasoning that led to the decision made by the people of Red Bank Baptist Church is of import to all churches, regardless of denomination. We, as local churches and/or as part of a denomination, ought not to be deciding how we carry out our Biblical mandate to share the Gospel and make disciples on the basis of not doing so "like them". The "them" in this case is the Catholic Church, but it could just have easily been the Methodists, Lutherans, Pentecostals, or a host of others. Why we do what we do, and how we do it, are questions far too important to be decided based upon a desire to have a unique "brand" as a church.
What is the proper standard for a church to base its decisions upon? The bedrock standard is the Word of God itself. Does the Bible encourage, prohibit, or is it silent on the issue at hand? If the Bible encourages/commands the behavior/attitude in question, the discussion is over. Our task is simply to obey. If the Bible prohibits/condemns the behavior/attitude in question, again, the discussion is over, our task is to obey. If the Bible is silent on the particular issue, we then look to see if principles contained in God's Word apply, we consider the wisdom of the collective Church's viewpoint on the issue over the ages, and we examine our own God-given reason and consciences as well. These are the proper channels for discussion and debate among a local church or denomination regarding the choices we face and decisions we must make. However, being "not Catholic", "not Pentecostal", or "not Presbyterian" is an invalid viewpoint, one that heightens divisions, encourages emotional instead of reasoned decisions, and in the end, leads to faulty theology. In case you're wondering, making a decision based upon trying to mimic another church is an equally faulty methodology, albeit one that at least has a positive connotation.
Baptists are not alone in falling to this temptation. Historically speaking many of the Counter-Reformation decisions of the Catholic Church were made on this same basis, to be "not Protestant", with less than helpful results. Time and time again, churches have made decisions that were not based upon a careful and obedient understanding of God's Word, or upon wisdom received from our ancestors in the faith combined with our own reasons/consciences, but rather upon lesser criteria. When we make decisions based upon reasoning and motivations that are less than ideal, or even downright foolish, how can we expect the decisions themselves to be God honoring and wise?
Not being privy to the internal discussions that took place at Red Bank Baptist prior to the decision, I don't know why they believe that the "theology and core values" of their church are threatened by an artist's depiction of Jesus, but if the answer contains any of this sentiment, "because it makes us look too Catholic", whether in the end they came to the right decision or not, the reasoning was dangerously faulty.
For some perspective, I write this as the pastor of an American Baptist Church with a rather unique architectural and artistic style among baptist churches that reflects the oil boom heritage of the Franklin area when the church sanctuary as it looks now was completed in 1904. We have more art than most churches on the walls, including two giant murals of Jesus flanking the pulpit. It would be a tragedy if a future generation decided to whitewash those murals to avoid looking like other Christians.
AP story: Baptist church's 'Catholic' Jesus statue to find new home
The Jesus statue at Red Bank Baptist Church that is being removed. |
Whether or not a Baptist Church has a statue or painting of Jesus prominently displayed is not the most pressing theological question facing most churches, but the line of reasoning that led to the decision made by the people of Red Bank Baptist Church is of import to all churches, regardless of denomination. We, as local churches and/or as part of a denomination, ought not to be deciding how we carry out our Biblical mandate to share the Gospel and make disciples on the basis of not doing so "like them". The "them" in this case is the Catholic Church, but it could just have easily been the Methodists, Lutherans, Pentecostals, or a host of others. Why we do what we do, and how we do it, are questions far too important to be decided based upon a desire to have a unique "brand" as a church.
What is the proper standard for a church to base its decisions upon? The bedrock standard is the Word of God itself. Does the Bible encourage, prohibit, or is it silent on the issue at hand? If the Bible encourages/commands the behavior/attitude in question, the discussion is over. Our task is simply to obey. If the Bible prohibits/condemns the behavior/attitude in question, again, the discussion is over, our task is to obey. If the Bible is silent on the particular issue, we then look to see if principles contained in God's Word apply, we consider the wisdom of the collective Church's viewpoint on the issue over the ages, and we examine our own God-given reason and consciences as well. These are the proper channels for discussion and debate among a local church or denomination regarding the choices we face and decisions we must make. However, being "not Catholic", "not Pentecostal", or "not Presbyterian" is an invalid viewpoint, one that heightens divisions, encourages emotional instead of reasoned decisions, and in the end, leads to faulty theology. In case you're wondering, making a decision based upon trying to mimic another church is an equally faulty methodology, albeit one that at least has a positive connotation.
Baptists are not alone in falling to this temptation. Historically speaking many of the Counter-Reformation decisions of the Catholic Church were made on this same basis, to be "not Protestant", with less than helpful results. Time and time again, churches have made decisions that were not based upon a careful and obedient understanding of God's Word, or upon wisdom received from our ancestors in the faith combined with our own reasons/consciences, but rather upon lesser criteria. When we make decisions based upon reasoning and motivations that are less than ideal, or even downright foolish, how can we expect the decisions themselves to be God honoring and wise?
Not being privy to the internal discussions that took place at Red Bank Baptist prior to the decision, I don't know why they believe that the "theology and core values" of their church are threatened by an artist's depiction of Jesus, but if the answer contains any of this sentiment, "because it makes us look too Catholic", whether in the end they came to the right decision or not, the reasoning was dangerously faulty.
For some perspective, I write this as the pastor of an American Baptist Church with a rather unique architectural and artistic style among baptist churches that reflects the oil boom heritage of the Franklin area when the church sanctuary as it looks now was completed in 1904. We have more art than most churches on the walls, including two giant murals of Jesus flanking the pulpit. It would be a tragedy if a future generation decided to whitewash those murals to avoid looking like other Christians.
The sanctuary of First Baptist Church of Franklin |
Sermon Video: In Him we have redemption - Colossians 1:12-14
The 4th of Paul's examples of what it means to "live a life worthy of the Lord" (The first three were: bearing fruit through good works, growing in the knowledge of God, and being strengthened by his power) is the one that he chooses to expound upon: giving joyful thanks to the Father. We have, as followers of Jesus Christ, ample reasons for ongoing gratitude toward God, here Paul chooses to focus upon how we became disciples of Jesus in the first place: God rescued us from darkness and brought us into the light. All of the verbs that Paul uses to describe our redemption are passive and past tense. In other words, it is something which God, and he alone, accomplished, and it is something that has already happened. In addition, Paul reminds us that the mechanism by which God rescued us was the payment of our sins (redemption) by the Son, which made the forgiveness of our sins possible. In the end, we have every reason to continue in joyful thanks to the Father.
To watch the video, click on the link below:
To watch the video, click on the link below:
Tuesday, June 5, 2018
Sermon Video: Our Prayer - Live a Life worthy of the Lord, Colossians 1:9-11
Having already expressed his thanks to God for the good report of the faith, hope, and love evident at the church of Colossae, Paul goes on to share that because he has already heard of God's work among them, he has not stopped praying for them. As they are people already saved from spiritual death by Christ, for what does Paul pray on their behalf? That they might live lives worthy of the Lord. I don't know about you, but that sounds like a monumental task. And yet, it is within the ability of every disciple of Jesus Christ, empowered by the Spirit, and as a matter of fact, expected of us. What characterizes a Christian who pleases the Lord? Paul lists four things: (1) Bearing fruit through every kind of good work, (2) growing in the knowledge of God, (3) being strengthened by God's power, and (4) having an attitude of gratitude {explained in vs. 12-14}. We, as God's people, called to repentance by the Holy Spirit, CAN accomplish this by God's power; we can, and we must.
To watch the video, click on the link below:
To watch the video, click on the link below:
Tuesday, May 29, 2018
Sermon Video: Thanking God for the faith and love of his people - Colossians 1:1-8
In the introduction to Paul's letter to the church at Colossae, we see the concern of Paul, the apostle, for a church that he himself did not found, manifested in prayers of thanksgiving from Paul (and Timothy) to God on behalf of fellow faithful brothers and sisters in Christ. Having heard about their faith, Paul describes it as a faith combined with love that springs forth from their hope in heaven, a powerful combination of growth in the Spirit made possible by their acceptance of the "true message of the gospel". Paul ends the introduction by crediting the founder of the church at Colossae, Epaphras, whom Paul calls "our dear fellow servant" and a "faithful minister of Christ", a reminder that Paul considers those who worked with him in the harvest field of the Lord by witnessing to the Gospel to be teammates not rivals.
To watch the video, click on the link below:
To watch the video, click on the link below:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)