Hypocrisy

Senator Larry Craig from Idaho was arrested in June 2007 in a men’s restroom at the Minneapolis Airport. He plead guilty to disorderly conduct. Apparently, it was a place frequented by men seeking gay sex. Of course, the press is having a field day, and Craig isn’t helping matters by denying that a guilty plea suggests his guilt.

Interestingly, the big word of the day is “hypocrisy.” Several commentators are expressing their moral outrage that Craig is a conservative Republican who speaks strongly in favor of “family values.” That he would say one thing and do another has caused the pundits to be shocked and dismayed.

I am bothered by the tidal wave of “hypocrite” charges. Is Craig a hypocrite? The evidence suggests yes. Nonetheless, there are bigger problems here than hypocrisy. As one pundit noted, “Adultery, for starters, is worse then hypocrisy.”

Oscar Wilde, no paragon of a prim and proper puritan, once quipped, “that hypocrisy is the tribute that vice pays to virtue.” Back in those days, vice and virtue were considered objective. The hypocrite, despite his moral failing, at least knew the right thing to do. These days, our current culture teaches that morality is based entirely on personal preferences. The highest good is “to be true to self.” Where virtue is defined by the individual, hypocrisy becomes the only vice.

Paul’s confession of sin rings a little different in the modern ear:

“We know that the law is spiritual; but I am unspiritual, sold as a slave to sin. I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do.” (Romans 7:14-15)

Paul is a self-acknowledged hypocrite. He doesn’t particularly need redemption. He needs merely to change his convictions to fit his morality. In our world, the libertine will never be a hypocrite.

“Hypocrisy”, at least in its current manifestation, has become a useless word.

Newsletter: Spiritual Self-Contradiction

“I am told God loves me--and yet the reality of darkness and coldness and emptiness is so great that nothing touches my soul.”

These are the words of Mother Teresa in a prayer to Jesus as reported recently by Time magazine. The excerpt comes from a larger collection of letters and papers entitled, Mother Teresa: Come Be My Light. The press coverage of the new book has suggested a scandal.

The talking heads on the cable news shows cluck that Mother Teresa was a hypocrite. Here is a woman who dedicated her life to God. Nonetheless, she often wandered in a spiritual desert. She had days, rather years, in which God seemed silent. The author of the Time article suggests that Teresa’s life presents “a startling portrait in self-contradiction.”

I only know Mother Teresa through her public persona. She was born in Macedonia and began her ministry in India at the age of 19. There she ministered to the poor and dying of Calcutta in the name of Christ. I cannot speak to her inner spiritual life. I am in no position to judge. However, is it possible to follow God and not feel God’s presence?

“My God, my God, why have you forsaken me? Why are you so far from saving me, so far from the words of my groaning?” (Psalm 22:1)

The psalmist believes that the answer is yes. In fact, Jesus himself speaks the psalmist’s words from the cross. Faithfulness does not mean happiness all the time. Discipleship can be accompanied by sorrow, silence, and suffering.

Human beings are emotional creatures. Our emotions can bring a passion and intensity to all of life. We should not neglect our feelings. Nonetheless, the love of God does not change when we cannot perceive it. We are saved by God’s grace in Jesus Christ, not our feelings. We must rely on the promises of the Scriptures and the collective faith of the church to sustain us when our own individual faith seems insufficient.

If you have never experienced the “self-contradiction” of spiritual dryness count yourself blessed. If you are like the rest of us, do not despair. Bring your fear, anger and doubt to God. Raise your concerns, and ask your questions. Wrestle with God, and even ask for a blessing. In the end, know that we belong to our faithful Savior, Jesus Christ, even if we cannot feel it.

Newsletter: Beyond the Answers

The answer is 42. You know, the answer to life, the universe, and everything. It’s 42. At least that is the claim of Douglas Adams in his science fiction farce, The Hitchhikers’ Guide to the Galaxy. The problem, according to the book, is not the answer. Instead, we don’t know the right question. Here, Adams pokes a little irreverent fun at the elusive nature of existential questions. Who are we? Why are we here? Knowing the answer and understanding its meaning are two separate things.

We stand with Christians throughout history proclaiming that Jesus is Lord. God has a claim on our life, and as a result, we live differently. The question remains, how shall we then live? Faithful living means asking that question. More importantly, it means having the courage to live with the answers. Guided by the Holy Spirit, we worship God, study the Bible, and pray. In humility, we then step out in faith.

In the past two years, our congregation has been in a season of discernment. After much worship, study and prayer, we acknowledge that God is calling us to equip the Church for the life of faith. Paul writes in the letter to the Ephesians…

It was [Christ] who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers, to prepare God's people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ. (Ephesians 4:11-13)

We want for our congregation what God wants for us--that we become mature in the faith. We would like our church to be a vibrant, dynamic community, alive in Christ.

Knowing our calling and living it out are two separate things. On August 24-26, the First Presbyterian Church will be hosting a conference on “Equipping the Church: Responding to our Call.” I encourage you join us for a weekend of teaching, fellowship, music and reflection.

The Love of God Displayed

While in Houston last week, our family stopped for gas. Some graffiti evangelist had scrawled onto the gas pump, "HE IS very REAL! JESUS Heals the Broken Hearted."

I can think of no better witness to the love of God in Jesus Christ than to deface someone else's property.

Newsletter: Praise the Lord With Music

Praise ye the LORD.
Praise God in his sanctuary:
praise him in the firmament of his power.
Praise him for his mighty acts:
praise him according to his excellent greatness.
Praise him with the sound of the trumpet:
praise him with the psaltery and harp.
Praise him with the timbrel and dance:
praise him with stringed instruments and organs.
Praise him upon the loud cymbals:
praise him upon the high sounding cymbals.
Let every thing that hath breath praise the LORD.
Praise ye the LORD.
Psalm 150 (KJV)

During our recent vacation to Washington D.C., our family attended a worship service at National Cathedral. Although we arrived a little late and sat in the back of the sanctuary, we could not avoid the music of the pipe organ. We really didn’t listen to the organ. Thanks to the acoustics, we were surrounded, enveloped by the music. Our praises to God flowed with the sound of the pipes. It was a magnificent experience.

The organ has been playing church music for a long time. Around the late fourth century, St. Jerome describes an organ in Jerusalem that could be heard more than a mile away at the Mount of Olives. Still, not everyone in the Church has been a fan. As the Puritans stripped away ornamentation from worship, they dubbed the instrument, “the devil’s bagpipe.” Despite the criticism, the organ remained the preferred instrument for church music until the late twentieth century.

First Presbyterian Church has had its organ since our building was built in the late 1960s. For the time, it was one of the best electronic organs around. Over the years, we have been blessed with some wonderful organists whose music encouraged our own praise to God. Unfortunately, the electronic components of the organ have deteriorated over those same years. Soon, we will be forced to decide whether organ music will remain part of our music ministry.

Currently, the movement in church music is away from the organ. Many churches have replaced their pipes with keyboards and guitars. Over the next several years, more and more good church music will be available for these instruments. Our own congregation must learn how to better utilize guitar, keyboard and other instruments in worship. God deserves praise using the broadest musical palette.

Although organ music pushes against the trend, should it retain a prominent place in our worship? Certainly, the organ's voice is very different from other instruments. Without it, we do limit our options. Moreover, the historical repertoire of the organ has incredible depth and range. When we use these great pieces of music in worship, we touch the living faith of generations past. We acknowledge that the church is more than about us. The timeless and eternal often trump the “new and improved.”

The challenge we really face is not about the organ. It is about our music ministry. How do we develop the musical talents of our community to the glory of God? How do we encourage an appreciation of the musical heritage of the whole Church? How best do we minister with music in the name of Jesus Christ?

Darfur and Climate Change

According to the headlines, the current United Nations General Secretary, Ban Ki-Moon, has suggested that the killing in Darfur was caused by global warming. Apparently, sub-Saharan Africa has been drying for the past two decades, and Ban attributes the drying to “man-made global warming.”

Is there something to global warming? Probably. Pouring tons of carbon into the atmosphere very likely has caused some unintended consequences. Nonetheless, even the celebrated Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has made predictions and pronouncements more modest than Al Gore’s hyperbolic hysteria.

Even if drought conditions in sub-Saharan African could be directly attributed to carbon emissions (which is impossibly complex), the problem in Darfur is not drought. It is genocide. The Sudanese government and allies who are racially Arab have been systematically slaughtering black Africans. Unlike the conflict in other parts of the Sudan, both sides are Muslim. The killing in Darfur is based almost solely on ethnicity. Over 300,000 are dead, and the number is climbing. The United States Holocaust Museum has a helpful summary.

The problem in Darfur is sin. Evil had darkened the human heart. Rape, murder, genocide are not caused by climate change. Although droughts can make life horribly difficult, they do not force people to exterminate their neighbors.

Why then would an intelligent man like the U.N. General Secretary blame global warming? I honestly don’t know. Perhaps, it is easier. Perhaps, it is easier to sign treaties to cut carbon emissions than to change hearts and minds. We all want to do something, but who wants to do the hard work of changing hatred to love?

Beautiful Television

I watched Special Report with Brit Hume on Fox News this evening. At the end of each program, Brit usually offers a short comedy bit via David Letterman or Jimmy Kimmel. Tonight was a little different. Brit offered video via YouTube from Got Talent, the British program that inspired American Idol.

In the clip, Paul Potts, a mobile phone salesman from South Wales, sings opera. On first glace, Potts does not strike an inspiring pose. He looks just like everyone else. Then, he sings. He brings you to tears. Shows like American Idol usually bring people down to bring ratings up. What a beautiful moment on television.

It reminded me of that scene in Shawshank Redemption where Tim Robbin’s character, Andy, plays an record of opera over the loudspeaker of the prison. Morgan Freeman’s character, Red, another prisoner, comments…

"I have no idea to this day what those two Italian ladies were singing about. Truth is, I don't want to know. Some things are best left unsaid. I'd like to think they were singing about something so beautiful, it can't be expressed in words, and makes your heart ache because of it. I tell you, those voices soared higher and farther than anybody in a gray place dares to dream. It was like some beautiful bird flapped into our drab little cage and made those walls dissolve away, and for the briefest of moments, every last man in Shawshank felt free."

For just a brief moment, the ironic, sarcastic, and crass world in which we live dissolved away.

UPDATE: Paul Potts sings "Con te partirò" in the Semi-Final.

FINAL UPDATE: Paul Potts wins!

Socially Redeeming

I had the opportunity last week to hear an interesting exchange between Dennis Prager and Christopher Hitchens. Dennis Prager is a conservative radio commentator who has taught and written on Judaism, Russia and law. Christopher Hitchens is an author, journalist and literary critic. He is also an avowed atheist having recently published, God is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything.

During this exchange, Prager is trying to get Hitchens to avoid a blanket condemnation of everything religious.

PRAGER: If you were in an American city that you were not familiar with, alone, late at night, and you couldn’t find your car in a bad neighborhood. You saw ten men walking toward you would or would you not be relieved to know that they just attended a Bible class?

HITCHENS: Not relieved. Not alarmed either necessarily, but not relieved. It’s irrelevant to me in other words. If they had just come from studying Thomas Paine’s Rights of Man, then I would feel positively cheered up. Or if they were members of the local Thomas Jefferson Society.

I have heard Prager’s question before, and until now, I thought that it was clever. Hitchens impresses me here. He handles the question deftly. Although I, unlike Hitchens, would be relieved to find out the men had attended a Bible study, I also would be relieved if they were members of the Thomas Jefferson Society. Frankly, I would even be relieved to find out that they had just attended a concert of Bach concertos, or a class on oil painting, or a lecture on thermodynamics.

Prager’s point is a modest one. Let’s allow for the tolerance of religion because it has socially redeeming value. He succeeds in making his point. However, this defense of religion on the basis of social value is ultimately a weak one. Hitchens and I can provide a multitude of other socially redeeming activities. Moreover, we can find religious activity that is not socially redeeming. What if the Bible study in question was sponsored by the Aryan Nation?

I have listened to many of the church gurus who preach that the church must meet the needs of people. We want well-adjusted, self-actualized folks who stay in school and don’t do drugs. That’s okay. The church should strive to be socially redeeming. However, we exist for deeper reasons. We confess that Jesus Christ is “the way, the truth, and the life.” If we forget that, we may have a hard time justifying our existence.

A Few Thoughts At Arlington National Cemetery

This last week, our family was on vacation in Washington D.C. On our last day, we visited Arlington National Cemetery. I’ve been to the nation’s capitol twice. Surprisingly, this was my first extended visit of the cemetery. The place was beautiful, somber and serious. My family watched the changing of the guard at the Tomb of the Unknown. The ceremony was rehearsed. Every motion was planned. There was nothing spontaneous here. Nonetheless, every moment suggested respect and honor. Echoing Abraham Lincoln‘s words about another military cemetery, the dead laid here have consecrated this ground, “far above our poor power to add or detract.”

In the recent issue of First Things, Joseph Bottum has a fascinating article entitled, “Death & Politics.” It deserves reading and rereading. The topics range widely and subtly. Bottum is trying to grasp at something deep and mysterious. He concludes…

These are dangerous waters to stir to life, but without them we lack thickness, seriousness, and purpose in our political endeavors. We create true communities only when we have shared dead. Everything else is artificial, and adventitious, and temporary, and incomplete. This is a frightening truth, for the dead we share may be those we kill instead of those for whom we grieve. But dangerous or not, it remains the human condition.

Death may hold clues to our search for meaning. Unfortunately, we don’t see it. Our modern world tries to avoid death by cheating it or hiding it away. We idolize youth and youth culture, and we are unsure how to deal with the elderly. There is even now a movement in Europe called “anonymous death” where the dead are buried in unmarked graves without ceremony. In a world where madmen try to create meaning by spilling blood, we ignore the metaphysical role of death at our peril.

It’s interesting. I accept the notion of “substitutionary atonement.” Jesus Christ died on the cross for my sins, taking my punishment. Our congregation will even sing, “There is a Fountain Filled with Blood.” Still, I can understand those who are uncomfortable with the imagery. The whole thing sounds a bit gory. Nonetheless, if death and fear of death lie at the root of the human condition, the spilled blood of Christ makes even more sense. Jesus Christ experiences what is quintessentially human (at least in its fallen state), death. His sacrifice consecrates his life. By dying on the cross and rising again, Jesus destroys death’s grip on who we are.

Newsletter: Calling and Commitment

CALLING AND COMMITMENT
OF
FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH

Our Calling:
We are equipping the Church for the life of faith.

Our Commitment:
Relying on the grace found in Jesus Christ,
we glorify and enjoy God in all things.

Holding closely to the truth of God’s Word,
we ask with courage difficult questions of our faith and life.

Loved by God,
we show compassion respecting each other as brothers and sisters in Christ.

Guided by Christ’s commands,
we strive to love God, to love our neighbor, and to make disciples.

Approved by the session, March 2007.

Star Wars and Pretension

Yes, the thirtieth anniversary of Star Wars is a big deal. Before I knew Aristotle, Nietzsche, or Wittgenstein, I knew Yoda. Before I knew Athanasius, John Calvin, or David Bosch, I knew Obi Wan Kenobi. For better or worse, the movies helped define me. I understand the heroic partly thanks to Luke Skywalker, Princess Leia and Han Solo. Yes, I am a geek.

As pretentious as that last paragraph, I was overwhelmed tonight by the History Channel’s special, Star Wars Revealed. They trudged out religious scholars, classicists, film critics, journalists, and the rest. Everyone spoke such grandiose and intellectual cheese that I needed a good reality check.

The story of Luke Skywalker and the redemption of Darth Vader is more based on westerns, war movies, and pulp science fiction than heroic myths and biblical motifs. If the movies connect on larger themes found in classical literature, that only acknowledges that our culture is saturated with those themes. George Lucas, when he is at his best, is simply a good story-teller. When he is at his worst, Howard the Duck.

He also grabs and borrows from everywhere. Tatooine, The desert homeworld of Anakin and Luke Skywalker, bares a striking resemblance to the planet Dune in the books by Frank Herbert. Coruscant, the political center of the Star Wars universe, is cribbed from Trantor, a planet in Isaac Asimov’s Foundation trilogy.

Unfortunately, Joseph Campbell came along and claimed that Star Wars fit his broad generalizations of the world’s mythologies. Although interesting, many of the connections seemed forced. Steven Hart does a pretty good job deflating much of the myth of Campbell’s analysis. At one point, Hart writes,

If this is the level of analysis at work, then why should this myth-mongering stop with Lucas? The original "Rocky," released the year before "Star Wars," follows Campbell's mythic template much more closely than "Star Wars": just imagine Burgess Meredith as the wise old sage, Burt Young as the guardian of the threshold and Carl Weathers as Darth Vader. (Pop quiz: Where do the pet turtles fit in?) Campbell's approach can give any adventure story, from "Bulldog Drummond" to "The Perils of Pauline," a place in the pantheon. In fact, his acolytes are hard at work doing just that with such movies as “The Matrix” and “The Wizard of Oz.” It adds up to little more than a party game for drunken grad students, or a smoke screen for filmmakers covering their tracks.

Star Wars helped define my generation, but it isn’t profound. It’s a Rorschach test on celluloid. For many, Darth Vader and his Storm Troopers stand in for Hitler and his Storm Troopers. One black film critic from the History Channel special noted that Darth Vader reminded him of pimps from inner-city Detroit. As viewers in Prague saw Star Wars for the first time in 1991, there was no doubt that the evil Empire was the Soviet Union. The Emperor Palpatine is George W. Bush, Clifton Kirkpatrick or Dean Wormer depending on your perspective.

Unfortunately, as George Lucas added the prequels and modified the originals, he has actually muddied the waters. The Force which was never very coherent, now makes little sense. “Trust your feelings,” we are told, yet a Jedi must set aside his emotions. The midi-chlorians turns the Jedi from a order of space Jesuit/Ninjas, who have received the proper training and discipline, to a group of supermen with the right blood.

Still, I love the movies. I enjoy sharing them with my son. Perhaps, the best advice is Han Solo’s to Luke Skywalker as the Millenium Falcon makes its escape from the Death Star, “Don’t get cocky, kid.”

Albert Einstein: God and Ethics

Albert Einstein has been making a splash in the popular culture lately. I am aware of about a dozen recent references to Einstein in articles and on television and radio. I realize that Walter Isaacson has recently published a biography of the scientist, Einstein: His Life and Universe. I also understand that this biography was partly based on recently released letters. Still, I don’t know if the excitement has been generated by the book or if the book was generated by the excitement.

Recently, NPR aired an essay of Albert Einstein for “This I Believe”. Although NPR science correspondent, Robert Krulwich, read the essay, it was originally aired in Einstein’s voice in 1954.

The most beautiful thing we can experience is the Mysterious — the knowledge of the existence of something unfathomable to us, the manifestation of the most profound reason coupled with the most brilliant beauty.

The words are poetic. The words also summarize the faith of the man who famously said, “God does not play dice with the universe.” However, the god of Einstein is not the God of Abraham or Jesus.

I cannot imagine a God who rewards and punishes the objects of his creation, or who has a will of the kind we experience in ourselves.

Einstein’s faith is rooted in natural theology. He rejects a god who is personal or who has a will of his own. Einstein sounds much like a Deist from the 18th Century. Please don’t get me wrong, I realize its inadequacy, but frankly, I prefer the Einstein’s Deism to Richard Dawkins’ atheism any day. The question remains, however, can Deism resist the devolution into atheism.

Einstein then turns from the cosmic to the human.

Man's ethical behavior should be effectively grounded on compassion, nurture and social bonds. What is moral is not the divine, but rather a purely human matter, albeit the most important of all human matters.

Ethical human behavior, according to Einstein, has nothing to do with God. It is rooted in historical circumstances. Unfortunately, there remains a problem, a “crisis“ in Einstein‘s words.

His position in society, then, is such that that which drives his ego is encouraged and developed, and that which would drive him toward other men (a weak impulse to begin with) is left to atrophy.

In other words, our society does not provide proper motivation for the love of justice or the love of our neighbor. Einstein suggests a possible solution.

It is my belief that there is only one way to eliminate these evils, namely, the establishment of a planned economy coupled with an education geared towards social goals.

When I first heard this essay, I was perplexed. The mystery of the cosmos and a “planned economy” seemed a strange mix. However, Einstein is a smart guy. He didn’t just make this up. I realize now that he was completely consistent in his argument.

Human ethics demands a foundation. If the God of the universe is unwilling to take the job, then we must do it ourselves. The state must use force to compel its citizens to do the right thing. Granted, the state uses force all the time. The state uses violence or threatens to use violence to curb people from killing, stealing, etc.

However, in the past, we also would remind people of their duty to God or the natural law. As Christians, we even believe that the Holy Spirit can generate compassion and love in a person‘s life. These softer appeals, although not universally applicable, have a greater ability to influence society.

In contrast, Einstein inadvertently rejects those quieter influences by rejecting a God who cares about human behavior. Einstein’s hope for a compassionate society can only be achieved through force. Einstein praises the morality rooted in the Judeo-Christian tradition, yet he wants the ethics without the God.

This I Believe

Since I received an Ipod in March of 2007, I’ve been a regular listener to “This I Believe.” National Public Radio recently revived a radio series started by Edward R. Murrow in 1951. Back then, Murrow described the series in this way:

This I Believe. By that name, we present the personal philosophies of thoughtful men and women in all walks of life. In this brief space, a banker or a butcher, a painter or a social worker, people of all kinds who need have nothing more in common than integrity, a real honesty, will write about the rules they live by, the things they have found to be the basic values in their lives.

In it’s current manifestation, NPR airs essays weekly from ordinary and extraordinary people about what matters to them. Some of the essays, I find touching. Others, I find disheartening. I’m still waiting for someone to quote the Nicene Creed a la Stephen Colbert, but you can’t have everything. It’s a good window on American culture.

Tomorrow: A look at Albert Einstein's essay.

New Churches, Renewed Churches

Last week, Presbyweb provided a link to a news article out of the United Methodist Church. Apparently, the Methodists want to start 650 new churches by 2012. I applaud the effort. New church development is essential to the life and vitality of a denomination. I have often been frustrated that the PCUSA doesn’t seem similarly interested. In Palo Duro Presbytery, for example, no one remembers the last time a new church was started. Granted, the overall population of the Texas plains peaked at the beginning of the Twentieth Century. Still, there is potential in some of the urban areas of the presbytery.

Although I was inclined to be sympathetic, I became quickly saddened. Rev. Thomas Butcher, the chair of congregational development in the United Methodist Church tried to explain his rationale for focusing on new churches.

…the common outcry among United Methodists, Mr. Butcher said, is for renewal, not new churches. His response? "It's easier to give birth than to raise Lazarus from the dead," he said in a report to the Council of Bishops.

New churches, he said, need to have a younger and more diverse membership to reach the changing demographics in the U.S. About 35 percent of the nation's population don't attend church.

I’m disappointed that Rev. Butcher seems so dismissive of existing congregations. Why do we have to choose between new church development and congregational renewal? Do only folks in growing suburban areas need churches that are vital and faithful?

Established congregations are less desirable because they are set in their ways. They are filled with curmudgeons who are unable to draw church members of an attractive demographic. Rather than call people to repentance and a deepening faith, it is easier to start with a self-selecting group who feel comfortable with the culture of the new church. Renewal is hard work. It requires leadership, sacrifice and love. It is not for the timid.

Thankfully, the majority of established churches have signs of life. There are men and women in those congregations earnestly seeking to be followers of Jesus Christ. Nevertheless, some established churches can be stubborn, mean, and even faithless. Some have been dead for more than three days and “stinketh” (John 11:39, KJV). Jesus, however, is the resurrection. Even Lazarus can be raised from the dead.

Thus Spake Jeffy

Here's a new way to enjoy your favorite Bill Keane comics and express your existential angst at the same time. The Nietzsche Family Circus combines random Family Circus comics with random quotes from Friedrich Nietzsche.

https://www.nietzschefamilycircus.com/

Newsletter: Our Calling: Equipping the Church

Over the past year and a half, our congregation has been engaged in a process of discernment. Instead of focusing on our wants and desires, we have actively sought out God’s will for the First Presbyterian Church. We have turned to prayer and Bible study. We have examined our heritage, our ministries and our community. Through all the efforts, we realized that God is calling us to a particular ministry here in this place and time: We are equipping the Church for the life of faith.

As Christians, we affirm that Jesus Christ is Lord. We accept the historic teachings of the church. We acknowledge our faith must be lived out in word and action. Moreover, we believe that God wants our congregation to take seriously Jesus’ command “to make disciples.” We are called to walk with others--to equip the Church for the hard work of worship, study, service and witness. Beyond simply imparting the facts of faith, we must equip the church on how to be Christ‘s ambassadors, how to develop the disciplines of prayer and Bible study, how to make the tough choices. Nonetheless, it would be the height of hubris to think we do this alone. In fact, we are merely instruments of God’s grace.

Now is the time for leadership. In the coming weeks and months, we will be practically applying our calling to our life together. What does worship look like in an equipping church? What is the best way that Christian Education can equip others for the life of faith? How do we do mission? What is stewardship? How can our facilities serve our calling? This won’t be an easy task. It will require energy, intelligence, imagination and love. Still, these are exciting times for the First Presbyterian Church as we respond to God’s call.

"Louisville Papers" Revealed

Today in the Presbyterian Outlook, the Constitutional Services Department and the Office of Legal Services at the General Assembly respond to the infamous "Louisville Papers." Back in August of 2006, the Layman reported that the denominational lawyers circulated secret documents to presbytery executives about legal procedures relating to churches and their property. The Layman drawing upon the Watergate era nomenclature of the "Pentagon Papers" dubbed the legal advice, the "Louisville Papers."

I know that some have been hyperventilating over the documents. They suggest that the "Louisville Papers" recommend strong arm tactics to presbyteries to prevent property from leaving the denomination. Personally, I find the statements rather standard legal fair. They clearly have a vested interest in protecting the property of the denomination. Since unification of the United Presbyterian Church USA and the Presbyterian Church US in 1983 if not before, the property of the local congregation has been held in trust by the presbyteries. These documents suggest nothing new.

What I find troublesome is the handling of the situation by our denominational leadership. Clifton Kirkpatrick only contacted the powers-that-be to respond to the controversy a few weeks ago. You don't have to like what's written in the Layman, but please read the thing. After you read it, then make your defense (if there is one). The folks in Louisville need a few lessons in public relations.

More importantly, why did the denominational officials keep the papers "confidential"?

While some have focused only recently on these materials, they are not new. They were first prepared in 2001, in response to requests from presbyteries and their legal advisers. Moreover, they have never been "secret," as some have claimed. The OGA paper has never born any label indicating confidentiality. The Legal Services memo is a confidential attorney document. Like many attorney-written documents, it was handled in this way in order to avoid its misuse by others who might wish to start or pursue civil litigation. These documents were intended to provide background information and pastoral aid to presbyteries, not to be used as legal briefs.

I've made this observation before, but perhaps it needs repeating. If a document is provided to the presbyteries, why shouldn't the presbyteries know about it? A presbytery is made of elders and pastors. These legal documents were provided to presbytery executives and staff. They are not the same thing. Although executives play an important role in the ministry of the presbytery, they are essentially the "hired help." Granted, there are times in the life of the church where confidentiality is important. Some pastoral issues are delicate and require discretion, but general advice about legal process is not one of them.

Transparency is always the best policy. I have no problem with denominational lawyers offering advice. Such advice could have led to a general process relating to departing congregations and their property. If such a process existed, there can be no complaint of discrimination. It applies evenly, fairly to everyone who wishes to leave the denomination. If people don't like the process, presbytery-wide debate can lead to the adoption of an improved process. The "Louisville Papers" kerfuffle could have easily been avoided by the Office of the Stated Clerk and Legal Services.

UPDATE: I erroneously suggested that the Layman was origin of the name, "Louisville Papers." In fact, it was given by Classical Presbyterian.

Newsletter: Bunnies and Butterflies are not Enough

The Apostle Paul says it in the clearest language possible, “And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith” (1 Cor 15:14). During Easter, the Church celebrates explicitly what we celebrate implicitly every Lord’s Day--Jesus Christ is risen. Trying to articulate our faith, we often resort to metaphor and analogy. The spring reminds us of new life after the death of winter. Bunnies and eggs, associated with renewal and fecundity, dominate our Easter decorations. Even butterflies who no longer lie dormant in their cocoons now grace our bulletin covers, vestments and banners.

Although helpful, metaphors also limit us. The resurrection of Jesus Christ is not about the “Circle of Life” from some Disney movie. Death is real and terrible. Jesus Christ’s death was particularly horrific. Nailed to a cross, Jesus bled, suffered, and died. For all practical purposes, death was the final solution. All of the hopes inspired by Jesus should have been crucified with him. By definition, nothing should survive death.

Then Jesus rose from the grave. God shattered the power of death. The way the world had always worked was no more. In case we missed it the first time, Paul reiterates, “And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins” (1 Cor 15:17). With Jesus Christ alive today, God proclaims that hope is more than wishful thinking. We are freed from the bondage of ever day leading to an inevitable death. Breaking away, God offers forgiveness and grace unto life everlasting.

Newsletter: Lent With a Side of Sausage

I have a love-hate relationship with Lent.

For the unaware, the season of Lent begins forty days before Easter. Like the holy days of Christmas and Easter, Lent was a later invention of the Church. The season recalls Jesus being led by the Spirit into the wilderness for forty days after his baptism. There he fasted and was tempted by the devil. The Lenten season even suggests the forty years that the Israelites wandered in the desert. There God prepared and shaped them for life in his promised land. Lent is a time for repentance, prayer and fasting as we anticipate the glory of Jesus' resurrection.

As Christians, we rely only on the grace found in Jesus Christ. Despite the fact that we are undeserving, God continues to love us. Only through God's actions in Jesus, am I reconciled to God. That belief makes me cast a suspicious eye on Lent. Are we trying through our own piety to manipulate God to love us more? If so, it is a foolhardy attempt.

In 1522, a group of Christians in Zurich heady with the profound knowledge of God's grace ate sausages during Lent. The simple defiant act of eating meat during the prescribed fast threw the city into an uproar. The Reformation came to Zurich, and the disciplines of Lent demanded by the Church were rejected.

Christians like grace. As a small child, I asked my parents, "How do I know that I've done enough to get into heaven?" The answer is that God's love and mercy is sufficient for you and me. However, many Christians who embrace God's grace have forgotten about its high cost. Grace doesn't cost us anything, but God paid a heavy price. Jesus, our Emmanuel, suffered and died on a cross bearing the sins of the world. This costly grace calls us to faithfulness. We live lives of prayer, worship, and sacrifice. We delve into the Scriptures to understand better our Lord. We forgive, love and show mercy because of the grace that we have received.

No season is better than another. Still if we decide to spend Lent reflecting on the incredible cost of God's grace and our response, it will be time well-spent. If the disciplines of Lent are less about us and more about God, the time can be redeemed. As we enjoy our sausages, let us also be shaped for the life God intends.

Super Bowl Win

Sports and Christianity have had a long tradition together probably dating before the formation of the YMCA in 1844. Prayers before games and players who attribute their wins to Jesus have become part of the pop culture. In fact, the latter has been parodied again and again. I must admit that some declarations of faith on the field appear to suggest that God favors one team over another. The statements are usually innocent, but I still cringe at the mixture of religion and athletic rivalries. Perhaps, that is why I was so impressed by the words of Tony Dungy, the coach of the 2007 Super Bowl Champions, the Indianapolis Colts.

During the post game show on CBS, Dungy was asked about the “social significance” of the win.

Jim Nantz of CBS Sports: This is one of those moments, Tony, where there is also social significance in this victory, and to have your hands on the Vince Lombardi Trophy. Tell me what this means to you right now.

Tony Dungy: I'll tell you what. I'm proud to be representing African-American coaches, to be the first African-American to win this. It means an awful lot to our country. But again, more than anything, I've said it before, Lovie Smith and I, not only the first two African-Americans, but Christian coaches showing that you can win doing it the Lord's way. And we're more proud of that.

You can win doing it the Lord’s way. He is not saying that God chose the Indianapolis Colts. More importantly, he is saying, in the world of professional sports, you don’t have to give into temptation. You can play by God’s rules and still win.

Both Tony Dungy and Lovie Smith, the Chicago Bears’ coach, act differently than other coaches. One commentator speaking about Tony Dungy says…

He has always done what good men do, eschewing the tyrannical approach of some of his colleagues, proving you can succeed while treating people with decency and respect rather than terrorizing them.

A Boston Globe column talking about Lovie Smith says…

Lovie doesn't yell and Lovie doesn't swear. (The same is true of Lovie's friend, Tony Dungy.) Take both of those options away and at least half of America's professional and college coaches would not be able to function. So how does he make his points?

"We have a coach who isn't a yeller or a screamer," acknowledges cornerback Nathan Vasher. "What he always talks about is being a real man, and we have real men on this team. What he wants us to know is that it is not about you. It's about the team."

Character matters. For Tony Dungy and Lovie Smith, character has it’s source in their Christian faith.