Interview with Jeff Sharlet, author of The Family: Part 1

This is part 1 of my exclusive interview with Jeff Sharlet, author of The Family.  Parts 2 and 3 will be posted Wednesday and Thursday of this week.

Interview with Jeff Sharlet, author of The Family: Part 1
by Chuck Warnock

Jeff Sharlet is author of The Family: The Secret Fundamentalism At The Heart of American Power, number five on Amazon’s bestseller list this week. The Family tells the story of a secretive quasi-evangelical organization, founded in the late 1930s, which has insinuated itself into the halls of power in Washington and other countries around the world.

The Family operates several residences, one of them “the house at C Street,” where several United States senators and congressmen live when in Washington, D. C..  Two Family members have recently been in the news for marital infidelity — Senator John Ensign of Arizona, and Governor Mark Sanford of South Carolina.

In 2002, Sharlet lived at one of the Family’s many centers, Ivanwald, giving him an insider’s perspective to an organization that remains an enigma in evangelical life.  But the story of the Family is also one of intrigue, international power politics, and a self-styled religion described by its practitioners as “Jesus plus nothing.” In short, The Family is one of the most fascinating and disturbing books I have ever read.

After reading The Family, I contacted Jeff Sharlet who agreed to a blog interview.  I submitted the following questions.  Both my questions and his answers are unedited.  For my review of The Family, visit my blog AmicusDei.com.

About the Author: “Jeff Sharlet is a contributing editor for Harper’s and Rolling Stone, and a visiting research scholar at New York University’s Center for Religion and Media, where he has taught journalism and religious studies.  He is co-author, with Peter Manseau, of Killing the Buddha, and the editor of TheRevealer.org.  He lives in Brooklyn, New York.” — from About the Author, The Family.

Here is Part 1 of my interview with the author of The Family, Jeff Sharlet:

CW:  At 454 pages, including notes and index, The Family covers evangelical fundamentalism from the period of Jonathan Edwards in the 1700s to the Office of Faith-Based Initiatives in the George W. Bush White House, all centered around a group called the Family, which is best known for leading the National Prayer Breakfast in Washington, D.C. each February.  How long did it take you to research and write The Family?

JS:  Five years of direct work, but I’ve been writing about religion, history, and politics for much longer than that. I stumbled into the Family in 2002, with no particular intentions and completely unaware of its political identity. When I left, I thought there might be more of a story, so I traveled to their archives at the Billy Graham Center in Wheaton, Illinois. What I found there both shocked and intrigued. I ended up writing an article for Harper’s, and then a book proposal, largely so that I could afford to go back to the archives and keep digging.

CW:  You state on several occasions that you used primary sources, particularly archives left by the Family organization in the Billy Graham Center archives at Wheaton College.  Did you have difficulty in persuading the Wheaton librarians to give you access to the Family archives, and are those archives still open to researchers today?

JS:  No. It’s a first-rate professional, scholarly archive, and absolutely essential to any serious research on American evangelicalism. But it was a strange experience living, basically, on the campus of Wheaton, the “evangelical Harvard,” for six months. One day I was taking a break and a student came up to me and asked me if I’d heard the Good News about Jesus. I thought the kid deserved a gold star, so to speak — he’d id’d the only Jew on campus. Turned out he was majoring in missiology.

As for the archives, the historical papers are still open, but the more contemporary stuff is closed, restricted following my Harper’s story, a major investigative piece for the LA Times, and research by some foreign journalists.

CW:  Some accuse you of having a particular “axe to grind” with this book.  How would you respond to that accusation?

JS:  Absolutely. I’m for open, transparent democracy. I’m for an accountable church. I’m for Christians who really try to preach Christ’s message of mercy and love, not a theology of more power for the already powerful. I try to make these positions clear in the book. A good book isn’t a data dump, it’s an argument and a story. I hope my book is both.

CW:  In The Family, you name just about every major evangelical organization and leader: the late Dawson Trotman of the Navigators, the late Bill Bright of Campus Crusade for Christ, Chaplain of the U. S. Senate the late Richard Halverson, Billy Graham, Chuck Colson of Prison Fellowship, the late Jerry Falwell, James Dobson of Focus on the Family, Young Life, and of course, Doug Coe and the National Prayer Breakfast, plus many others.  Are all these groups and leaders tied to the Family, or is this guilt by association because all are leaders of evangelical organizations?

JS:  No, they’re not all tied to the Family, and I don’t say that they are, so this is hardly guilt by association. Trotman was the mentor of Coe — that’s why he’s in the story. Bright did have a lot of dealings with the Family, and his papers are intermingled with the Family’s — that makes him part of the story. Halverson was a longtime formal leader of the Family — there are literally thousands of Halverson’s personal documents in the archive. Billy Graham writes of his modest connection in his memoir. Chuck Colson boasts, in his memoir, of joining the Family’s “veritable underground of Christ’s men” in Washington. Falwell has no connection that I know of, and I don’t claim one. Nor does Dobson. Young Life’s finances were for a long time all tangled up with the Family’s. I’m pretty tired of the “guilt by association” charge. The people who make it rarely present any evidence. I do.

(Tomorrow in Part 2, Sharlet comments on the Family’s use of Adolf Hitler as a role model for leadership, and answers critics’ charges that he sees a religious-right conspiracy where none exists.)

Filed under: Church news, Global issues, Resources, christian history, culture, ethics, leadership

How I spent my summer (so far)

In addition to pastoring a small church, we garden. Actually, Debbie does the real gardening, I just dig holes where she tells me to. Here’s a walk from our backdoor to the vegetable garden and beyond. Note the 1-day old bluebirds at the very end of the video. I’m not posting a sermon today because we have a gospel quartet singing tomorrow for the entire service. Enjoy the garden tour!

Filed under: Community, Journey , backyard garden, garden, homegrown, locavore, organic, organic gardening, simple life, vegetable garden

Sunday Beer Sales and Bad Public Policy

In their infinite wisdom, our board of supervisors has decided the way out of our county’s financial squeeze (we’re the 2nd poorest county in Virginia) is to allow beer and wine sales on Sundays.  One supervisor commented tonight, “This isn’t about religion, it’s about economics.”

I would agree.  I don’t think Christians can make a credible case any longer for Sunday blue laws.  Blue laws restrict goods that may be bought and sold on Sundays here in Virginia, as they do in many states, although fewer now than in past years.

Baptists say we believe in the separation of church and state, and if we do, we should not look to the state — or county — to protect Sundays.   Our blue laws don’t protect the Jewish sabbath, or the Seventh-Day Adventist day of worship, so why should Christians get special treatment from the government, local or otherwise?  No, I don’t think we can make a civil case for keeping blue laws.

But we can make an economic case.  The assumption our supervisors are making is that Sunday sales of beer and wine will generate more tax revenue for our struggling county.  However, let’s take a closer look at this assumption:

1.  The supervisors don’t really know how much revenue this will generate.  No economic impact study has been done, probably because the county can’t afford it.

2.  No one has considered the economic cost of allowing beer and wine sales on Sunday.  Adding one more day per week increases the opportunity to buy beer and wine by more than 15%.  Will our county supervisors also increase the sheriff’s department budget by 15% to put more deputies in patrol cars on Sundays?  Will the supervisors increase the budgets of local rescue squads and fire departments who respond to car wrecks?  Do we know what percentage of car accidents, domestic abuse cases, and child abuse cases involve alcohol?  And, are we going to increase the budgets of all those agencies by 15% to handle the potential increase?

3.  The state of Virginia does not allow alcohol sales on election day, presumably so that our citizens can make clear-headed voting decisions.  Why not establish one day a week, Sunday or not, to stop alcohol sales just to give us all a breather from the problems associated with alcohol?  We regulate who can purchase alcohol, where it can be sold, in what types of containers and quantities, and the tax on alcohol sales.  Why not regulate the days on which it is sold on a regular basis?

4.  Finally, our county is not a destination for tourists or those seeking recreation.  The only people needing to buy alcohol on Sundays are most likely the ones who have problems with it in the first place.  Just like state lotteries, alcohol sales are geared to those who can least afford it.  Our county already has a higher than average rate of substance abuse, and a long culture of alcohol-related crime, including bootlegging.

I agree with our esteemed county supervisor — this isn’t about religion.  It is about economics.  I just wish our supervisors would do their homework before trying to buffalo us with their new-found concern for “keeping our shopping dollars in Pittsylvania county.”

Lifting the ban on Sunday beer and wine sales without assessing the impact is bad public policy, economic or otherwise.  I for one plan to oppose their efforts.  What do you think?

Filed under: Community, culture, ethics, leadership , alcohol abuse, common good, economics of alcohol sales, pittsylvania county, public policy, separation of church and state, sunday beer and wine sales, sunday blue laws, virginia

Sermon: Post-Modernism: Why is Truth no longer true?

Here is the sermon I preaching tomorrow.  It’s the 5th in a series of 8 sermons around the theme, Seven Cultural Challenges Every Church Faces.  The first four were Secularism, Pluralism, Nominalism, and Materialism. I hope your Sunday is great!

Seven Cultural Challenges Every Church Faces
Post-Modernism: Why is Truth No Longer True?

John 18:28-40
²⁸Then the Jews led Jesus from Caiaphas to the palace of the Roman governor. By now it was early morning, and to avoid ceremonial uncleanness the Jews did not enter the palace; they wanted to be able to eat the Passover. ²⁹So Pilate came out to them and asked, “What charges are you bringing against this man?”

³⁰“If he were not a criminal,” they replied, “we would not have handed him over to you.”

³¹Pilate said, “Take him yourselves and judge him by your own law.”

“But we have no right to execute anyone,” the Jews objected. ³²This happened so that the words Jesus had spoken indicating the kind of death he was going to die would be fulfilled.

³³Pilate then went back inside the palace, summoned Jesus and asked him, “Are you the king of the Jews?”

³⁴“Is that your own idea,” Jesus asked, “or did others talk to you about me?”

³⁵“Am I a Jew?” Pilate replied. “It was your people and your chief priests who handed you over to me. What is it you have done?”

³⁶Jesus said, “My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jews. But now my kingdom is from another place.”

³⁷“You are a king, then!” said Pilate.
Jesus answered, “You are right in saying I am a king. In fact, for this reason I was born, and for this I came into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone on the side of truth listens to me.”

³⁸“What is truth?” Pilate asked. With this he went out again to the Jews and said, “I find no basis for a charge against him. ³⁹But it is your custom for me to release to you one prisoner at the time of the Passover. Do you want me to release ‘the king of the Jews’?”

⁴⁰They shouted back, “No, not him! Give us Barabbas!” Now Barabbas had taken part in a rebellion.

Pilate Asks An Age-old Question?

In this story of the last hours of Jesus’ life, John tells us the Jewish religious leaders led by Caiaphas have brought Jesus to Pilate, the governor appointed by Rome to govern the occupied land of Judea.  If you remember Paul Bremmer, appointed by President Bush to be the governor of Iraq during the American invasion and occupation of Iraq, then you get the picture of the position that Pilate is in.

Pilate, as he states, is not a Jew.  Actually, Pilate doesn’t state it so much as he cynically asks the question of Jesus, “Am I a Jew?”  In other words, Pilate was saying, “I really don’t care at all about the internal squabbles of you people.”  But he has to care because the religious leaders have no authority to kill Jesus, which is what they want to do.  They want to kill him for blasphemy which, of course, is not against Roman law.

Pilate examines Jesus, and in this back-and-forth with Jesus finds himself dealing not just with a minor political drama, but with something much deeper.  Jesus claims to be a king, but not a king like any Pilate has ever seen.  Of course, Pilate’s king is Caesar and Caesar’s kingdom is definitely of this world.

But then Jesus goes on to say,

“You are right in saying I am a king. In fact, for this reason I was born, and for this I came into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone on the side of truth listens to me.”

Then Pilate asks, “What is truth?”  Of course, my guess is that Pilate isn’t asking that question to find an answer.  He’s asking in a world-weary sort of way, as if saying “Who knows what’s true and what’s not true anymore?”

And, that is the question we’re dealing with today — what is truth?  Or to state it in terms of this series of sermons, “Why is truth no longer true?”

A Quick Trip Through the Age of Enlightenment

Of course, we know that Jesus was telling Pilate the truth.  But I could show you a dozen websites and blogs on the internet written by people who do not believe any or all of the following:

1. that Jesus was an actual person and lived in the first century;
2. that Jesus was the Son of God;
3. that Jesus is the Savior of the world;
4. that Jesus was crucified, buried, and rose again after three days in the grave.

Of course, the list could go on to include internet sites that do not believe in God at all, much less Jesus.  All of these writers claim they have the truth, too.  So, whose truth do we believe now — the truth of the Christians or the truth of the non-Christians?

Obviously, there can only be one truth.  The late senator from New York, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, is reported to have told another senator with whom he was having a healthy debate –

“You are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts”.

How, then, can two reasonable people believe that two contradictory statements are each true?  One word: post-modernism.

If you have never heard the term post-modernism, you’re not alone.  Post-modernism is a label that philosophers and social scientists have given to the age in which we live.  Let me explain.

The age of modernity, or the modern age, is generally thought to have begun with the Enlightenment.  The Age of Enlightenment usually dates from the 1700s.  Here’s a quick rundown: Prior to the Enlightenment, the medieval period was a time when kings ruled the world, or at least their own kingdoms; and the church had an explanation for everything.  The Church took great exception to anything that contradicted their dogma.

When Galileo, who lived about 100 years before the advent of the Enlightenment, suggested that the sun was the center of the universe, and that the earth revolved around the sun, the church became highly indignant.

According to Wikipedia, the church cited Psalm 104:5 which says,  “the Lord set the earth on its foundations; it can never be moved.” Ecclesiastes 1:5 states “And the sun rises and sets and returns to its place.” Proving, of course, that the earth certainly did not move, and the sun rose and set.

Galileo was a churchman as well, but he took a less literal, and more literary, reading of those Biblical passages than others.  He insisted that his scientific discovery concluded that the sun was the center of the universe, and that the earth did indeed move.  To make a long story really short, the controversy dragged on for decades, and it wasn’t until 1835 that the Roman Catholic Church finally removed Galileo’s books from the official index of prohibited books.  Of course, Copernicus had proposed the same theory about 100 years before Galileo, but he died just as the Church was about to ban his book.

During the Enlightenment, Galileo’s findings were confirmed, and reason ruled the day.  Religion and its superstitious explanations were dismissed as not “enlightened” or reasonable thinking.

The Church, which had since the third century, been the official keeper of Truth, now was relegated to only being the keeper of faith.  Of course, faith could not be proven, and so was considered “unenlightened” thinking.

The Enlightenment embraced the emerging disciplines in the sciences, and sought to explain the world in terms of reasonable, provable theorems, not wildly speculative and absurd religious arguments.

The Age of Enlightenment, with its scientific research and empirical evidence, promised to unlock the secrets of the universe under the careful and reasonable study of men like Rene Descartes, who said, “I think, therefore I am.”  Thinking, not believing, became the most desired of all qualities in this brave new world of exploration and discovery.

The Enlightenment produced the scientific method.  I remember studying the basic steps in the scientific method in elementary school –

1. Define the question.
2. Suggest a hypothesis.
3. Perform an experiment.
4. Observe the results.
5. Confirm or refine your hypothesis.
6. Repeat steps 3-5 again.

The scientific method is something we take for granted now.  We assume that when doctors prescribe a treatment for a disease or illness, that the drug or therapy has been thoroughly tested.  Prior to the scientific method, doctors just guessed about what would work.  Leeches were thought to draw out the “bad blood” from a person’s body.  The familiar barber pole with its red and white stripes was an sign that the barber could “bleed” you — cut you and drain off the “bad humour” from your body.

Fortunately, we now know better, but prior to the scientific method, hunches or superstition played the lead role in just about every decision of life.

So, the Enlightenment has been a good thing, but it also has its unintended consequences.

The Enlightenment Doesn’t Live Up to Its Potential

I remember when I was in about the third or fourth grade, I brought home my report card at the end of one six week period.  I had a couple of A’s, some B’s, and maybe a C or two.  But, the back of the report card was the really scary part.  Because on the back your teacher could make comments and your were given a Satisfactory or Unsatisfactory mark for how you acted.

This was generally called “citizenship” and included things like “Talks to his neighbor” and “Applies himself.”  I remember on this particular report card, the teacher commented, “Chuck isn’t working up to his potential.”  That was about the worst thing a teacher could say, especially to my mother who had been a teacher.  I remember being encouraged to “do my best” and to “work up to my potential” from then on.

I tell that story to say that the Enlightenment did not live up to its potential.  The Enlightenment promised, not literally but implicitly, to solve all the problems of humankind, to reveal the secrets of life, and to improve the quality of all our lives.  But somewhere along the way, the Enlightenment failed to deliver.

Instead of being lifted up by the all the new discoveries of science, humankind seemed to turn even the most extraordinary discoveries into less than noble uses.

As the Industrial Revolution dawned, and the demand for manufactured goods increased, mill owners figured out that children could be employed cheaply.  So, child labor became an issue.  In England, children were employed in mills for a pittance, and made to work 12-18 hours a day.  Working conditions were deplorable, and worker safety and welfare was of no concern.  So the Enlightenment brought mass-produced goods, but at the cost of social disruption, the explotation of children, and the creation of an underclass of millworkers.

Slavery was another example of the use of new technologies, turned to evil purposes.  A 20th century example was the development of atomic energy.  Even the scientists who worked for the US government to harness the power of the atom, creating the atom bomb, immediately realized the potential abuses of that discovery and petitioned the government not to use it for sinister purposes.  The result was Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the only two cities to be hit by an atomic bomb, and leaving the United States the only country ever to use it.

The Post-Modern Age Emerges

All of that brings us to what some social scientists are calling the Post-Modern Era.  Post-modernism is a reaction against the Enlightenment and the modernity it created.  In other words, Post-modernism questions whether the Enlightenment was really so enlightening after all.

As you might guess, post-modernism questions the achievements and stories of the modern world.  Post-modern thought especially questions claims of absolute truth.  And so any religion or any belief system that claims to have the “truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth” is immediately called into question.

Let me give you an example:  Suppose you’re having a conversation with someone who thinks in a post-modern way.  In the course of the conversation, you might casually mention that you’re a Christian — that you believe that God created the world, that mankind has failed to live up to God’s intention, and that God sent Jesus to live, die, and rise again, so that all humankind might know God, love God, and serve God.

If you are talking to a post-modernist, their reply might be something like, “Well, I’m glad that’s true for you, but for me it’s just not true.”  In other words, you can have a belief that you are convinced is true, but your true claims aren’t universal.  They don’t apply to me.

That is the age of post-modernism.  Pilate, the governor of Judea, was ahead of his time — he was a post-modernist before it even existed.

You can imagine the problems this causes.  Let me give you a story that illustrates my point on this 4th of July weekend –

NPR reported that last year on July 1, 2008, Rene Marie, a well-known jazz singer, was asked to sing the National Anthem at Denver’s State of the City address.  The tune she sang was the tune to “The Star-Spangled Banner” but the words were written by James Weldon Johnson in 1899, and titled, “Lift Every Voice and Sing,” also known as The Black National Anthem.

Of course, her performance created quite a stir.  Politcians denounced her.  Barack Obama said, “If she was asked to sing the national anthem, she should have sung that,” Obama said. “‘Lift Every Voice and Sing’ is a beautiful song, but we only have one national anthem.”

But, Rene Marie responded to those who criticized her singing lyrics that were not The Star-Spangled Banner.  Marie received over 1600 emails protesting her choice, some saying that the National Anthem was “sacred.”  Her response was,

“I’ve had so many e-mails,” Marie says, “some of the e-mails saying that ‘The Star Spangled Banner’ is sacred. Oh, really. Maybe it’s sacred to you. That’s fine, that’s cool. But it’s not sacred to me. The guy, the dude who wrote it, he’s a slave owner.”

So, here’s an example of two sets of facts — there is only one National Anthem, but apparently Rene Marie believed she was free to choose her own version of The National Anthem that meant something to her.

What Is Truth?

But if two people can’t agree on facts, how will we ever know what is true?  After all, Senator Moynihan was right — you are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts.

Jesus gives us an interesting answer in another passage, also from John’s Gospel.  In John 14:6,

⁶Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”

Truth isn’t contained in dogma or doctrine, as important as those statements of faith and belief might be to us.  Truth is found in a person, the only person whose life was the embodiment of truth — Jesus.

Jesus did not say, “I’ll teach you the truth.”  Or, “This doctrine is true.” Or, “My theology is true.”

Jesus said, “I am the truth.”

Truth is found in a person, a relationship, not in doctrines or systems.  Doctrines are opinions — they are important opinions, but opinions nevertheless.  Doctrines are the attempts of theologians to make sense of the Bible and apply it to real life.  But, in the end doctrines are opinions.  We’re all entitled to our own, which is why there are so many denominations.

But truth is found in the person of Jesus Christ.  It is found in relationship with Christ.  That’s what Jesus was trying to tell Pilate.  That’s what Jesus did tell the Jewish leaders of his day.  But they held to their version of the truth, because it kept them in power, it kept them in control.

Truth is found in the person of Christ, lived out before humanity, as God’s expression of all that is true and faithful in this world which he created.

Scholars today encourage Christians simply to tell the story of Jesus, and how we have found ourselves in that story.  We do not need to engage in endless debates, trying to prove our faith.  We do not need to call others names, act with hostility, or react with anger when they challenge our beliefs.  We simply have to tell the story, and live out the Truth that we learn in Christ each day.

This table set before us today is a symbol of the Truth of God’s love.  It is real, genuine, redemptive, powerful.  Love that is so true and pure that Jesus gave his life to demonstrate it, to express it for us, and to guarantee it for all creation.

We may disagree on whether or not the bread and wine becomes the body and blood of Christ literally or symbolically, because that is a dogma, a doctrine, an opinion.  But, we cannot disagree on the truth of love, for here is its expression presented before us.

Filed under: John, Sermon Illustrations, Sermons, Worship, culture, lifestyle, sermon

Summer break

I’m on vacation this week.  You can keep up with the latest church news at my news sites, NewChurchReport.com and SmallChurchProf.com.  I’ll post my sermon at the end of the week.  Otherwise, I’m in the garden this week!

Filed under: Church news , new church report, small church prof, summer break

Sermon: Materialism–Why Do We Have So Much Stuff?

Here is the sermon I’m preaching tomorrow.  This is the 4th in a series of 8 sermons under the theme — Seven Cultural Challenges Each Church Faces.  I hope your Sunday is wonderful!

Seven Cultural Challenges Each Church Faces
Materialism: Why Do We Have So Much Stuff?

Luke 18:18-30
¹⁸A certain ruler asked him, “Good teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?”

¹⁹“Why do you call me good?” Jesus answered. “No one is good—except God alone. ²⁰You know the commandments: ‘Do not commit adultery, do not murder, do not steal, do not give false testimony, honor your father and mother.’”

²¹“All these I have kept since I was a boy,” he said.

²²When Jesus heard this, he said to him, “You still lack one thing. Sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”

²³When he heard this, he became very sad, because he was a man of great wealth. ²⁴Jesus looked at him and said, “How hard it is for the rich to enter the kingdom of God! ²⁵Indeed, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.”

²⁶Those who heard this asked, “Who then can be saved?”

²⁷Jesus replied, “What is impossible with men is possible with God.”

²⁸Peter said to him, “We have left all we had to follow you!”

²⁹“I tell you the truth,” Jesus said to them, “no one who has left home or wife or brothers or parents or children for the sake of the kingdom of God ³⁰will fail to receive many times as much in this age and, in the age to come, eternal life.”

Has Jesus Lost His Mind?

Okay, imagine you live in the first century and you pastor a new church in Jerusalem.  So far the only members you have attracted to your congregation are 12 guys who, to say the least, are not the cream of the crop.  Several of them are fishermen, which is a smelly, messy business.  One is a tax collector, or rather former tax collector, because he left a fine source of income to follow you.  One is a domestic terrorist, Simon the Zealot, and he’s on the “no fly” list at the Judean Department of Homeland Security.  One of them, Judas, is a self-taught accountant — at least that’s the story he told every one.  Actually, all of these men, all 12 of them, are technically unemployed.  They all left their jobs — fishing nets, tax collection booth, accounting, what have you — to follow you.  Which is great, except the offerings have been down for some time now.

So, one day a really nice looking, extremely well-dressed young man comes up to you.  He addresses you in polite and polished Aramaic, not the slanguage of the fishing village that most of your guys speak.  And, he graciously calls you “good master.”

But, it’s his sincerity in asking his question that really gets to you.  “What must I do to obtain eternal life?”  So, this is a serious young man, too.

Here is a prime candidate for discipleship.  He’s rich, young, and he’s a leader.  Luke calls him a “certain ruler,” which probably meant he led a synagogue or was a leading member of a religious party with authority over others.  In any event, he’s the best looking, wealthiest, and most articulate person who has questioned you.

That’s the situation that Jesus found himself in.  Mark’s Gospel says everything that Luke’s does, plus it adds that this man “ran up to Jesus and fell on his knees before him.”  So, the young man was not only rich, and powerful, but urgently seeking some answers to his spiritual questions.

Jesus replies by saying, “You know the commandments,” and Jesus begins to recite them:

• Do not commit adultery,
• do not murder,
• do not steal,
• do not give false testimony,
• honor your father and mother.

Now, what do you notice about this list of commandments that Jesus quotes?  Well, first, these aren’t all the commandments.  Jesus only quotes 5 here.  There are 5 more, which is why the original list is called the Ten Commandments.  But, why these five?

You might remember the Ten Commandments, but if not, let me give you a quick run-down from Exodus 20.  Here they all are:

1. You shall have no other gods before me.

2.  You shall not make for yourself an idol…

3.  You shall not misuse the name of the LORD your God..

4.  Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy.

5.  Honor your father and your mother…

6.  You shall not murder.

7.  You shall not commit adultery.

8.  You shall not steal.

9.  You shall not give false testimony against your neighbor.

10. You shall not covet…

The first 4 commandments have to do with our relationship with God, and the next 6 have to do with how we treat others.  Jesus totally skips over the first 4, and goes right to numbers 5-9, not in the exact order, but he gets them all in there.

Isn’t that interesting?  Wouldn’t you, if someone asked you how to obtain eternal life, wouldn’t you start with stuff about God, especially the first 4 commandments — no other Gods, no idols, no taking God’s name in vain, and keep God’s day holy.  I would, but Jesus doesn’t.

Jesus, instead, focuses the young man’s attention on 5 of the 6 commandments that are pretty straight-forward, and that deal with how you relate to other people.

The young ruler’s answer is — I’ve done all that since I was a kid.  He had honored his father and mother, hadn’t killed anybody, hadn’t committed adultery (obviously he was not the governor of South Carolina), hadn’t stolen anything (after all he was rich), and hadn’t lied in court.

Now, Jesus probably knew that he was a good guy, and that this was going to be his answer.

Because then Jesus says, “But you’re missing one thing.”

At this point, all eyes and ears are on Jesus.  The rich young ruler especially is completely captivated.  And I am sure the look on his face is a mixture of both relief and expectancy.

He’s probably thinking at this point — “Okay, only one thing, that’s good.  Just one more thing, and I’ve got this in the bag.”

Then, Jesus says, “Sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”

Silence.  Dead still.  Nobody moves.  They’re all in shock, not the least of which is the rich young ruler.

The Bible says “When he heard this, he became very sad, because he was a man of great wealth.”

The young man turns his back on Jesus and walks away.  End of story.  But not quite.

Because the disciples are stunned.  “If this guy can’t make it, who can?” they ask Jesus?  Why did they ask that?  Because first, he was a righteous man.  He took the law seriously and thought he kept it.  Jews in the first century did not have our false humility about “nobody can live up to God’s law.”  They fully expected to keep the law, and to do so developed thousands of rules to explain exactly what the law meant, and how far you could go and still be “keeping the law.”

Of course, Jesus blew all that nonsense away in the Sermon on the Mount, when he said over and over, “You have heard it has been said…but I say unto you.”  And he reimagined what it meant to keep and break the law of God.  But, that’s a sermon for another day.

But, even more than the young man’s righteousness, was his wealth.  If a person was wealthy, others assumed God’s favor on him.  God blessed him with wealth, therefore God smiled on him.  He was one of God’s favorites, and his wealth was the sign of God’s blessing.

Now we know that wealth is not necessarily a sign of God’s favor, but there are still thousands of folks who today think so.  The so-called “Prosperity Gospel” movement is built on the idea that God will bless you materially, if you do certain things.  Most of those things involve sending money to your local television evangelist, who promises you that your “seed faith” sown in trust will reap you a great material harvest.  So, the idea that lots of money is a sign of God’s blessing is still with us.

The disciples are stunned.  How can anybody be saved if those whom God has blessed can’t be?  Jesus reply, “What is impossible with men is possible with God.”

Then, Peter sees an opportunity to score some points, and he blurts out, “We have left everything to follow you!”  In other words, “Hey, Jesus, look at us — we’ve left everything just like you told the rich guy to do.  Pretty good, huh?”  Jesus is not impressed, and doesn’t commend Peter, but he does say that “no one who has left home or wife or brothers or parents or children for the sake of the kingdom of God will fail to receive many times as much in this age and, in the age to come, eternal life.”  So, you are going to be rewarded in this life and in the life to come no matter what you give up.

But, back to our story.

If We Were Jesus

If we were Jesus, here’s how this conversation would have gone:

Rich young ruler:  What must I do to obtain eternal life?

Us:  Keep the commandments.

RYR:  I’ve done that since I was a kid.

Us:  Great!  Sounds like you’re our kind of people.  By the way, that’s a stunning tie you have on? Did you get that at Brooks Brothers?

RYR:  Why yes I did.  If you like it, I could get you one.  They’re only a $100 each, so not really expensive.  As a matter of fact, take this one, and I’ll get another one later.

Us:  Well, thanks.  Say, let me tell you about our plans to build the largest synagogue in the world.  God has given me a great vision for reaching people, and you can play a big part in that.  Here’s a donor card.  Could I put you down for a lifetime membership for only $10,000.  Of course, for just $5,000 more you could be in the Pastor’s Circle, a very special group of those who support the ministry.

RYR:  And that will get me eternal life?

Us:  Actually, no, but we can talk about that later.  Of course, God will be very pleased with you if you’re a good steward of the things he’s blessed you with.  Could I put you down for a gift today?  Our books close on June 30, so you’ve only got a couple of days left.  Oh, of course, it’s all tax-deductible.

RYR: Well, I was really looking for eternal life today, but sure, why not.  Maybe this is a first step in the right direction.

Us: I’m sure it is.

Okay, you get the point.  If we were Jesus, we would not have told this guy to sell all he had.  Or if we had, we certainly would not have told him to give it to the poor.

Have you ever thought about how he would give it to the poor?  Would he had out 100-drachma coins on the street?  Would he build a new homeless shelter in downtown Jerusalem?  Would he have people sign up, and make sure they qualified by filling out a lot of paperwork?  How would he actually give this money away to the poor?

And if he gave all his money away, he would still be young, but would he be a ruler?  Probably not.  Why, because money is power.  Always has been, always will be.  The rich young ruler knows that money is power, and asks “how can I obtain (get, purchase, acquire) eternal life.”  He’s been able to parlay his wealth into position and prestige, now perhaps it will help him get a guaranteed ticket on the Heaven Express.

The Way We Handle Money Matters

I’ve heard preachers say, “Did Jesus really mean for him to sell everything he had and give it to the poor?  Absolutely not, Jesus already knew he wouldn’t and so this was the young man’s ultimate test.”

And here’s where I’m going to disagree with those preachers.  Jesus usually meant what he said.  I think he meant for the rich young ruler to sell everything he had to follow Jesus.  After all, why would he need it.

• Jesus had already told his disciples that the birds have nests and the foxes have holes, but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head.
• He had taught the disciples to pray “Give us this day our daily bread” reminding them of God’s feeding the nation of Israel with manna while they were on their 40-year journey to the Promised Land.
• Jesus had shown them the power of God to provide by feeding 5,000 people with a boy’s lunch.
• Jesus had sent them out 2-by-2 and commanded them to take nothing with them, and the disciples returned amazed at how God had provided.
• Jesus had already told them to give to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.
• Jesus had healed people for free, fed people for free, cast out demons for free, and preached to the crowd for free.  In God’s economy, God is the source of all supply whatever the need.

Suppose Jesus were to ask us, “Sell this church and give the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven.”

Our insurance company tells us the buildings and furnishings are worth about $3-million.   Not a small sum, even in today’s economy.  We could do that.

I read recently of a church in California that abandoned plans to build a multi-million dollar building and instead began to meet in homes.  All the money they were going to spend on building and maintenance they decided to give to feed people, clothe people, and help people.

The decisions we make about money cannot be hidden under the “we’re doing this for God” excuse.  God doesn’t need our money or our buildings or our wealth to accomplish his purposes.  God needs our obedience.

The Current State of Our Economy

According to the American Almanac, even though the United States has only 5% of the world’s population, we consume 26% of the world’s energy.  Well, of course, we do.  We have to in order to run our air conditioners, our washers and dryers, our TVs, our DVD players, our computers, our hot water heaters, our microwaves, our refrigerators and freezers, our electric lights, our stereos, our cell phone chargers, our answering machines, our electric razors, hairdryers, curling irons, treadmills, and soon our electric cars.

So, our economic status separates us from the rest of the world.  Because we use 26% of the world’s energy, we are leaving only 74% of the world’s energy to the remaining 95% of the world’s population.

And, do you know what the developing world tells us when we say to them, “Wow, we’ve made a mess of this planet, let’s all cut back and conserve energy.”

They say to us, “We want the same thing you have.  No fair cutting off the power before we get to have our own cars, microwaves, TVs, computers and so on.”  In other words, they want to be just like us.

I was in Shanghai, China very close to Christmas one year, and I was amazed.  The Chinese malls and shopping districts were decorated for Xmas.  Santa Claus was pictured, presents were wrapped, Christmas songs like “Rudolph the Rednose Reindeer” played over the PA systems.  It was just like being in the US during the Christmas shopping spree.  Of course, no Jesus, but hey, they had everything else!

The United Nations last week announced that now over 1-billion people are officially listed as being hungry, not having enough to eat.  1-billion, while we battle obesity here in the United States.  Forgive another China story, but Americans eat such large servings, Dan Ryan’s restaurant in Hong Kong has a disclaimer that says, “We serve American portions.”  Translation: you’re going to get a lot of food!

The Church World is No Different

But, you might say, those are all stories and statistics of the non-Christian world.  Unfortunately, the church world is no different.  Michael Spencer quotes the Charlotte World as saying,

Examples of the Christian-Industrial Complex are easy to see. The Women of Faith conferences, for example, rake in more than $50-million per year and are part of a for-profit, publicly traded company. The Christian retail industry topped $4.5-billion last year. (A bit of context: $30 per month can support many pastors in developing countries. That means that Americans spend enough annually on “Jesus Junk” to support 250-thousand Third World pastors — for 50 years.)

As they say in the ginsu knife commercial, “But, wait, there’s more!”  Beliefnet, which claims to be the world’s largest spirituality site, is owned by Rupert Murdoch’s NewsCorp.  Zondervan, one of the oldest and largest evangelical publishers, is owned by Harper/Collins, which is owned by Rupert Murdoch’s NewsCorp.  Beginning to see a pattern here?  Obviously, Rupert Murdoch, an Australian billionaire and media mogul, believes there is big money to be made from the Christian market.

But suppose we quit buying “Jesus Junk” as Michael Spencer calls it.  That would free up $4.5-billion annually for hunger relief, education, medical missions, and anything else you could think of.

Suppose our call to “sell all you have” just means quit buying useless stuff, even if it’s Christian useless stuff?

Economics divides the world into haves and have-nots, and the have-nots are usually not courted by our churches because they can’t contribute financially to the church budget.  Years ago, I heard Rick Warren talk about the type of church member that Saddleback Church went after.  Warren called him, “Saddleback Sam” and his complete demographic included the following profile:

“Saddleback Sam” is a well educated young urban professional. He is self-satisfied, and comfortable with his life. He likes his job and where he lives. He is affluent, recreation conscious, and prefers the casual and informal over the formal. He is interested in health and fitness, and he thinks he is enjoying life more than 5 years ago, but he is overextended in time and money, and is stressed out. He has some religious background from childhood, but he hasn’t been to church for 15 or 20 years, and he is skeptical of “organized religion.” He doesn’t want to be recognized when he comes to church.

I am happy to tell you that since Rick Warren’s runaway bestseller, The Purpose Driven Life, Warren has turned his attention to the world’s poor, particularly those with HIV/Aids.  But “Saddleback Sam” is the kind of person almost every church wants — young, rich, professional.  A modern day rich young ruler.

But are we telling these rich young rulers that Jesus says to sell everything, give it to the poor, and follow him?  Nope, we’re asking them to give to our budgets, our mission programs, and to buy our Christian products.  In short, we who follow Jesus have forgotten that God’s economy is not the world’s, and that Jesus came to make all things new, including how we handle possessions and money.

We who follow Jesus must model a different economic reality for the world to see.  An economy that is based on trust in God, care for God’s children and creation, and a new sense of what is enough in light of the need of the world.  An economy where there is an abundance of resources, and those resources are shared with others so that no one is lacking.

Our new economy must reach out to those who struggle and bring them along with us.  Our new economy must build lives, not monuments to our own pride.  Our new model must put possessions in proper perspective, and we must see the “stuff of our lives” not as material to be hoarded, but as a blessing to be shared.

Our new model must reflect our belief that whoever gives up “home or wife or brothers or parents or children for the sake of the kingdom of God will not fail to receive many times as much in this age and, in the age to come, eternal life.”

Filed under: Sermon Illustrations, Sermons, Worship, culture, economics, luke, sermon , Aids, christian industrial complex, church marketing, economic justice, economy, HIV, hunger, luke 18:18-30, poor, poverty, rich young ruler, saddleback sam, stewardship

We’re in the middle of VBS

We do a community VBS with 4 other small churches in our community — 2 Baptist, 2 United Methodist, and 1 Presbyterian.  This year we’re using Group Publishing’s Crocodile Dock.  Here are some photos of the week so far:

Filed under: Community, Creativity, Resources, outreach , chatham baptist church, children's ministry, children's programs, community vbs, crocodile dock, small church vbs, vbs

Sermon: Nominalism – Why Don’t We Walk Like We Talk?

This is the third sermon in an eight part series titled, “Seven Cultural Challenges Every Church Faces.” I’m preaching this one tomorrow, and I hope your Sunday is a great one.  Happy Fathers Day to all the dads out there, too!

Seven Cultural Challenges Every Church Faces:
Nominalism — Why Don’t We Walk Like We Talk?

In his startling book, The Scandal of the Evangelical Conscience, Ron Sider said out loud what had become all too apparent — America’s most conservative Christians, evangelicals, live no differently than other Americans who claim no relationship to Jesus Christ.

George Barna, Christian pollster and trend watcher, said, “American Christianity has largely failed since the middle of the twentieth century because Jesus’ modern disciples do not act like Jesus.”

Sider points out in his book, subtitled Why Are Christians Living Just Like The Rest of the World?, that Christians are no different than the general population when it comes to failed marriages, domestic abuse, sexual conduct, materialism, and racism.  And if you find that hard to believe, let’s do the numbers:

• Marriage and Family. In 1999, Barna reported that divorce rates for evangelicals and the total population were exactly the same — 25%.  Brad Wilcox, a Christian sociologist pointed out that “Compared with the rest of the population, conservative Protestants are more likely to divorce.”  Sadly, in many families that stay together, domestic abuse occurs within evangelical families at approximately the same frequency as in the general population.
• Materialism and Stewardship. By 2001, evangelical Christians were giving 4.27% to their church, down from 6.15% in 1968.  And, from 2000 to 2002, evangelicals who tithed (gave 10% of their income) dropped from 12% to 9%, and the trend continues downward.  One study pointed out that if all evangelicals tithed, we would have over $143-billion dollars to send to world missions, hunger relief, poverty eradication, and other ministries.  The UN has estimated that it would take $70-80-billion per year to provide the world’s 1.2 billion poor with essential services like basic health care and education.  In other words, if only half of evangelical Christians tithed, we could raise the standard of living for the world’s poorest to a more humane level.
• Morality and Sexual Conduct. In 1993, the Southern Baptist Convention started a sexual abstinence program for young people called True Love Waits.  About 2.4-million kids signed the promise to keep themselves sexually pure until marriage.  But researchers from Columbia and Yale Universities tracked 12,000 teens who had signed the “I’ll Wait” pledge.  The results were disheartening — 88% of those who had signed the True Love Waits pledge had engaged in sexual intercourse before they were married.  Only 12% maintained their promise.
• Racism. In a 1989 survey, George Barna asked different groups whether they would object to having an African-American neighbor.  Only 11% of Catholics and non-evangelicals objected.  16% of mainline Protestants objected, but 20% of Southern Baptists objected to having a black family on their block.  Hopefully, since 1989, some attitudes have changed.  Southern Baptists have gone on record as apologizing for the enslavement of black Africans, and for the role slavery played in the founding of the Southern Baptist Convention.  But, some have viewed that apology with cynicism, citing SBC studies which show that for Southern Baptists to continue to grow, we must reach out to minorities and establish minority churches, and train minorities for leadership positions within the SBC.  Still our denomination remains one of the most segregated of denominations in our nation.  11 o’clock Sunday morning is still the most segregated hour in America.

The act of failing to live up to the teachings of Christ is called nominalism, from the Latin word nomen, which means name.  Nominalism, then, distinguishes that which is real from that which is in name only, or nominal.  In other words, evangelical Christians are for the most part, Christians in name only.  Our walk does not match out talk.

Mahatma Gandhi is reported to have said, “I would become a Christian, if I could see one.”

How Did We Lose our Way?

Why did I include nominalism under these 7 cultural challenges that churches face?  Because culture plays a tremendous role in influencing all of our society, including those of us who claim to be followers of Christ.

Paul writing to Christians in the first century who were in the midst of the culture of Rome, had this to say about the Christians and popular culture –

¹Therefore, I urge you, brothers, in view of God’s mercy, to offer your bodies as living sacrifices, holy and pleasing to God—this is your spiritual act of worship. ²Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is—his good, pleasing and perfect will.  — Romans 12:1-2

Christians in the 21st century, it seems, have become so enmeshed in the culture in which we live that we have been conformed to the culture — the world — rather than being transformed by Christ.  But how did this happen?  Well, there are several answers.

The Marriage of Church and State

The first answer to that question is found in the 4th century.  For its first 250 years or so, Christianity was a minority and persecuted faith.  All of the apostles were martyred, with the possible exception of John.  The story goes that authorities attempted to kill John, but he survived and instead was banished to the Isle of Patmos where he received the great apocalyptic vision we call the Book of Revelation.

That book, The Revelation of Jesus Christ, is about the persecution of the people of God, the church.  Written during the reign of the emperor Domitian, John’s vision gives hope to the Christians of the first century that their deaths were not in vain, that God saw their suffering, and that they had a special place in God’s kingdom.  And, most importantly, one day Jesus himself was coming with the whole host of heaven to vindicate the martyrs, and take them to their eternal glory as all things were made new by Christ.  In other words, God was giving hope to his persecuted people.

The early church was persecuted because the followers of Jesus were not like those around them.  In an age of dishonesty and everyman for himself, Christians were honest.  In an empire where sexual promiscuity was celebrated, Christians maintained the bond of marriage.  In a culture where the weak were viewed as a drag on society and were outcast or overlooked, Christians were generous and cared for the poor and the widows.  In a culture where rich masters owned slaves, Christians put aside positions of class in the ekklesia and slaves often served as leaders of the congregation.

Gerhard Lohfink has called the early church a “contrast society.”  And it was.  The values and lifestyle of the Christians of the first and second centuries contrasted dramatically with that of the culture around them.  Barry Harvey says the early church saw themselves as “another city” — in contrast to the great city of Rome, the Christian community became “another city” in governance, values, lifestyle, relationships, and conduct.

Because of their contrasting lives, Christians were easy targets for the failing Roman empire.  Nero was the first to blame Christians wholesale for the failures of his regime.  Subsequent emperors seized upon Nero’s idea, and expanded the blame placed on Christians until it reached fever pitch during the reign of Domitian.

But, as Christianity spread and grew, and Christians became more numerous, the empire began having second thoughts.  When Constantine ascends to the emperor’s throne, he needed to do something to bring a decaying empire together.  Christians were now as sizeable part of the population, and so Constantine decided to embrace Christianity as the unifying factor in his empire.

The famous legend of Constantine’s vision of the cross in the sky, and Christ’s words to him, “By this sign, conquer” makes for a great legend, but Constantine was no committed Christian, only accepting Christian baptism as he neared the end of his life.

For centuries, the church celebrated their new found status in the empire, sharing some power with the emperor himself.  As is always the case when the religious community seeks favor with politicians, the church woke up one day several hundred years later to its own corruption and loss of witness.  The church had become nothing more than the extension of the state.

That’s the historical setting, but it doesn’t fully explain how we in the 21st century, almost 500 years after the Protestant Reformation, are still being conformed to culture, rather than to Christ.  And, how culture shapes us, rather than Christians shaping culture.

A Missed Chance at the Reformation

It seems that even the Reformers — Luther, Calvin, Knox, and others — also fell for the same fatal idea: church and state should be one.  Which meant that church and culture would become one, and we live with that bad bargain made 500 years ago still today.

Of course, Baptists and American evangelicalism contributed the idea that religious freedom should prevail in America.  That we should be free from government establishment or prohibition of religious expression.  Baptists were highly influential in persuading Thomas Jefferson, and other colonial leaders, to write the Bill of Rights, which first took hold in Virginia where the Episcopal Church has already been established as the official state church.   The Episcopal Church was disenfranchised, and freedom of religion became the law of the land.

But, escape from government control did not mean escape from cultural influence.

The stories of faith and freedom were so closely tied in the newly-born United States that we as a people assumed they were one and the same.  And, the slide into Americanized Christianity took place over that past 250 years or so.  Now, American Christianity contributed some great things to the cause of faith — we focused on the individual, not the class or family, so that individuals were free to trust Christ without the constraints of social status or family heritage.  As a matter of fact, John Wesley’s Methodism sought out the disenfranchised first in England, and then in America, and presented the Gospel to them as well.

But, God and country are not the same, and when pressed to pledge allegiance to one or the other, Christians should have chosen God, as they did in the first century.  Instead, too often we chose American culture.

An example of the choosing of culture over Biblical faith is the founding of our own denomination — Southern Baptists.  Prior to 1845, with slavery becoming more widespread in the South where labor intensive crops like tobacco and cotton dominated the economy, Baptists in the North began to object to Baptists in the South holding slaves.  That objection extended to the rejection of mission offerings from Baptists in the South, until such time as these southern Baptists divested themselves of their slave holdings.

Baptists in the South were outraged and offended.  So, in 1845, the Southern Baptist Convention was born, allowing Baptists in the South to send their own missionaries to China and India and Africa, without the judgmental interference of their Northern counterparts.  Clearly, our Southern Baptist forefathers gave in to the culture and the economy, rather than to the Gospel of Christ.  Of course, numerous passages of scripture were quoted and re-quoted justifying slavery, and bolstering the status of Southern Baptists.

With 150 years of hindsight, slavery is a sin of which we should still repent.  One wonders if a denomination born in strife, and on the backs of enslaved human beings, can or should survive.  That is a debate for future Baptists, but I wonder if the fractious history of our denomination, which continues to this day, is a part of our denominational DNA.

The State Cannot Impose Our Values On Others

History is full of failed moral experiments, Prohibition being one of them.  During Prohibition, our country learned that you can’t legislate one morality for all people.  While the Temperance Movement was thrilled when Prohibition passed, legions of Americans (including many in our own community) broke the law to either get a drink or make liquor out of economic necessity.

So, before I go any further, let me state that I do not believe that the Bible teaches that we as followers of Christ should impose our moral system, whatever it is, on others.  We cannot make people act like Christians, who do not follow Christ.  Of course, some laws that accomplish our purposes are laws passed for the common good.  Laws that protect children from being exploited either by unscrupulous factory owners, or pornographers, are good laws.  They serve Christian purposes, but also the higher good.  So, we are not opposed to laws that protect and define conduct that makes the world a better place for all.

Back to my illustration of Prohibition.  Even though it is now legal in many places, including Chatham to sell and purchase alcohol, it is not legal to drive while intoxicated, sell alcohol to minors, or sell non-tax paid liquor, known as moonshine.  All of those laws serve our Christian idea of good, but are not specifically Christian laws.

No, the answer to why we don’t walk like we talk is not found in the local town ordinance, the state legal code, or federal law.

We Lost Our Way, Because We Have Left The Way

I believe that Christians have lost influence with our society because we have lost our way, The Way of Jesus.  You and I could debate endlessly what a Christian could do, should do, and ought to do.  That, in part, is why we have so many denominations.  Some find great latitude in how to live the Christian life, others like our Amish brothers and sisters, follow a much more narrow path.

But being a follower of Christ is about being a follower of Christ.  When we began to look for the loopholes, the exceptions, when we begin to ask ourselves “where’s the line?” in our conduct, we have missed the point completely.  The Pharisees were far better a walking that fine line between religious legality and illegality.  Jesus completely dismantled their thinking every time he said, “You have heard….but I say unto you.”

For it is not in the letter of the law that we find Christ, it is in the Spirit of the law.  It is not a matter of how little do we have to do, or how much can we get away with in living and still be called Christian.  Rather, we should live our lives with Jesus, as though he were here, present with us.  For he is.

Jesus said, “If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first. ¹⁹If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you. ²⁰Remember the words I spoke to you: ‘No servant is greater than his master.’ If they persecuted me, they will persecute you also. If they obeyed my teaching, they will obey yours also. ²¹They will treat you this way because of my name, for they do not know the One who sent me. ²²If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not be guilty of sin. Now, however, they have no excuse for their sin. ²³He who hates me hates my Father as well. ²⁴If I had not done among them what no one else did, they would not be guilty of sin. But now they have seen these miracles, and yet they have hated both me and my Father. ²⁵But this is to fulfill what is written in their Law: ‘They hated me without reason.’

²⁶“When the Counselor comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who goes out from the Father, he will testify about me. ²⁷And you also must testify, for you have been with me from the beginning.” — John 15:18-27

Why don’t we walk like we talk?  Partly because we don’t want the world to hate us.  We want to fit in, we don’t want to stand out.  We want to be like everybody else, and that is our problem.  We want to be like everybody else, when we ought to want to be like Jesus.

Jesus said, “I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life, no one comes to the Father except by me.”

Jesus did not say, “I know the way” or “I’ll teach you the way” or “This idea is the way.”  He said, “I am the Way.”  Period.  In the first century Christians were called followers of The Way.  It was Jesus’ Way because the Way was Jesus himself.

We do not walk like we talk because we are not following Jesus.

More than 25 years ago, Graham Cyster, a South African Christian struggled against the wickedness of apartheid — the institutionalized racism and genocide of the South African government.  Other groups were also working to move South Africa away from the apartheid, and Communists were among those working in South Africa to bring equality to all South Africans — black and white.

Graham Cyster was smuggled into an underground Communist cell of young people one night, in hopes of presenting the message of Christ.  Amazingly, the young Communists gathered that evening said, “Tell us about the gospel of Jesus Christ,” half-hoping for an alternative to the armed, violent struggle they knew they faced.

According to Ron Sider, Graham gave a clear and powerful explanation of the Gospel, telling how faith in Christ can transform individual lives.  He talked about how Christian love could break down the barriers that separated people, and quoted from the Apostle Paul that there was no longer male nor female, Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, but that faith in Christ builds a new community where all God’s people live together in love.

One 17-year old exclaimed, “That’s wonderful!  Show me where I can see that happening!”  Graham’s face fell as he had to report that sadly, he knew of no place in South Africa where that was true, even though there were many churches in South Africa.

With that the young man cursed, and left the meeting.  Less than a month later, he had joined an armed band of Communist guerrillas who were committed to the violent overthrow of the South African government.

The world around us is not interested in what we believe.  Nor are most of them interested in where they will spend eternity.  The world around us wants to see that the message of Jesus, the message of God’s love is possible.  For if it is possible, then there is hope.  If it is possible, then there is a heaven.  If it is possible, then there is a God who loves even me.

Filed under: John, Journey, Romans, Sermon Illustrations, Sermons, Worship, culture, lifestyle, sermon, theology , belief, chuck warnock, culture, faith and culture, following jesus, lifestyle, nominalism, sermon, the way, why don't we walk like we talk, Worship

Churches adapt ancient models for the 21st century

For many of us who care about church, it is becoming increasingly apparent that church as we know it must change in order to maintain its mission in the 21st century.  This change will not be cosmetic.  This change will not be a debate about traditional worship versus contemporary worship, or small groups versus Sunday School.  The kind of change the church must adopt is transformational change — change that fundamentally reshapes how we think about church, and what church actually does.

Three ancient church models are gaining traction in the first decade of this new century:  the marketplace church, the monastic church, and the mission center church.  Each one of these church models existed in previous centuries, but now each has been reimagined for this new millennium.

The marketplace church. This is the church that is a coffee shop or an art gallery or a clothing consignment store during business hours, engaging its community through the medium of the marketplace.  A good example of this is Knox Life Church in Knoxville, Tennessee which operates Remedy Coffee, and then gathers for worship on the weekend. The old Celtic Christian abbeys maintained farms which engaged the local population, generated income for the abbey, and provided employment for their neighbors.

The monastic church. This is the church where community, a committed community, is the core value.  The monastic church might do good in their neighborhood, or they might share table fellowship with each other on a regular basis, or both.   Participants in the monastic church community do not necessarily live together, but they share a rule of life that mimics that of the ancient monastic orders.  Gordon Cosby’s Church of the Savior is probably the oldest and best-known example of this type, but Shane Claiborne’s group might be a more recent example.

The mission center church. The all-time winner of this category, and the sole occupant of this slot for decades, is the Salvation Army.  Their mission work overshadows the other things they do like worship.  A good example of a local church that is a mission center is Solid Rock United Methodist Church in Olivia, North Carolina.  Solid Rock UMC died as a struggling storefront church, and was reborn as a mission with a mission.  The Celtic abbeys also were mission centers in the midst of great need.  One abbey fed over 1,000 people a day.  Most abbeys gave refuge, cared for the sick, welcomed the stranger, and provided food, shelter and clothing to those who needed it.

These ancient models are with us again because all three — marketplace, monastic, and mission center — express the vision of their participants to be a new expression of church built on a specific approach to being the people of God.  Some churches combine all three, and more, of these models to become “the church as abbey” that I have written about previously.  I think this is the wave of the future for church, and that any or all of these expressions are legitimate and effective ways of engaging the world with the gospel.  Notice that none of these models emphasizes worship as the connection with the surrounding community.  More on that later.

Filed under: Missional Church, church as abbey , community development, evangelism, marketplace, mission center, Missional Church, monastic, outreach, Worship

Strip down the church and start over

John Temple, former editor and publisher of the Rocky Mountain News, blogs about what newspapers must do to survive.  Temple should know because the 150-year old Rocky Mountain News folded this past February, the victim of a sagging economy, the digital revolution, and journalism’s failure to adapt.  What does this have to do with churches? Listen to Temple’s advice to newspapers:

Strip down the newsroom and start over with this mission (serving as public watchdog) in mind. Reconstruct the entire news operation on all platforms to make sure the newsroom has this mission at its heart. This will be difficult. Many internally will ask, ‘Well, how can we stop doing this?’ Or, ‘How can we stop doing that?’ The answer is if newspapers don’t perform their central function well, nothing else will matter. If it’s not clear by now that things have to change, the battle may be lost anyway.

Sound familiar?  Substitute the word “church” for “newsroom” and Temple could be offering good advice to churches.  And, of course, he’s right — it will be difficult to stop doing some things we’ve always done.  But we have to.  Just like newspapers, churches that fail to adapt will be as obsolete as newsprint in the age of the Kindle.

Of course, the problem we have in church is deciding what our mission is.  For some it’s evangelism, for others worship, for others service.  But whatever you think your church’s mission is, ask yourself the same question Temple asked of newspapers — “What are you spending your money on?”

If the most of your church budget goes to something other than your mission, then you’re not serious about your mission, whatever it is.   Agree or disagree?

Filed under: Congregation, Missional Church , church, john temple, ministry, mission, newspapers, rocky mountain news