Speakers Warn Against “Entrenched” Positions of “Conservative White Men” at Evangelical Conference

Tags

David Gushee, Evangelicals, Evangelicals for Social Action, IRD Blog, Kristin Rudolph, Lisa Sharon Harper, Paul Alexander, Ron Sider, Shane Claiborne, Soong-Chan Rah

(Dr. Ron Sider, founder and president of ESA retired this year. Photo Credit: Surrender.org.au)

Kristin Rudolph (@Kristin_Rudolph)

Evangelicals for Social Action (ESA) gathered July 12 – 14 to celebrate the retirement of their founder and president, Dr. Ron Sider, the installation of two new co-presidents, and the organization’s 40 year anniversary at Eastern University near Philadelphia, PA. The conference, called “Follow. Jesus.” drew a few hundred attendees. Through plenary sessions and small group “conversations,” the conference explored Christian participation in social and political activist causes like economic inequality, immigration, climate change, abortion and racial division, among others. The focus of the main sessions was the history of evangelical activism and what the future may hold for American evangelicalism.

Dr. Michael Lindsay, president of Gordon College, reviewed the 40 year history of ESA, pointing to the 1973 Chicago Declaration of Evangelical Social Concern as a turning point for evangelicalism, and remarking the organization made Micah chapter 6 verse 8 “become embraced by a much wider constituency” of evangelicals. The verse, “And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God,” is indeed an oft cited one among Christian social activists.

ESA, Lindsay said, became a voice for what evangelicals were for, rather than what they were against after the social upheaval of the 1960s. Although evangelical organizations have long been involved in mercy ministries, justice work “really started 40 years ago. Sure justice has been around for a lot longer than that but … there hasn’t been organizational focus,” he claimed. But, Lindsay continued: “If you really want to make a difference you’ve got to think about institutions because those are the things that last.”

In a panel discussion on the future challenges for evangelicals, Dr. David Gushee, professor of Christian Ethics at Mercer University complained “the culture wars will remain with us, but in a sense they should be over.” He observed “40 years of arguing over mainly sex related moral issues in public … continues long past when one might have hoped that those arguments would be so central … and the polarization doesn’t seem to me to be changing.” Gushee predicted “as conservative white men … feel increasingly threatened by pluralistic post-white America, the heels are gonna get dug in and the positions are going to remain entrenched.”

He continued: “America’s religion and politics in the next generation will be defined as a contest between those who fully integrate the emerging racial ethnic and national background diversity of our country and those who seek to resist it.” Gushee asserted “the future of Evangelical Christianity hinges on getting past the ‘White Male Club’ as the people in charge of everything.”

Similarly, Lisa Sharon Harper, Director of Mobilizing for Sojourners said evangelicals have become “divorced from people who are not like ourselves.” She also pointed out a “deep [scriptural] illiteracy in the church,” which renders believers vulnerable to “politicking people … [who] twist the Scripture and make it mean something it doesn’t mean.”

This illiteracy “bears itself out in everything,” most recently the immigration reform debate, Harper said. “If we don’t know the Scripture, then we don’t know that 92 times in the Old Testament the word ger [the Hebrew word for immigrant] is mentioned … We don’t know or understand the fact that Jesus himself was an immigrant,” she lamented. Harper concluded the “lack of Scripture and a lack of compassion, lack of relationship” with those different from ourselves, makes evangelicals “ripe to be used, to be wielded like a sword in the public square in the hands of people who are politicking in the name of evangelicalism.”

In the same panel, Rev. Dr. Soong-Chan Rah, professor of church growth and evangelism at North Park Theological Seminary pointed out the “multi-cultural, multi-ethnic reality of society and Christianity,” and that “declining American Christianity is not rooted in these minority communities it’s actually rooted in the decline of White Evangelicalism.” With this shift, he warned of “the danger of framing [justice and social action] in an American exceptionalism and triumphalism that doesn’t make sense anymore.”

Yet evangelicals should not abandon that label and claim a new name, because evangelicalism has “a history that needs to be confessed” over things like slavery and racism, and evangelicals should not “[excuse themselves] from that history,” Rah said. Instead, he suggested God may be “calling us to engage in a lament rather than in the triumphalistic, exceptionalistic approach to justice,” instead of the long standing “absence of lament in the liturgical traditions in America.”

In an evening plenary session, Dr. Mimi Haddad, president of Christians for Biblical Equality called for a “renewed commitment to gender justice in the Church and around the world.” She described how “ideas have consequences,” and theologies and philosophies that teach the inferiority of women result in tragedies like sex slavery, sex-selective abortion, and other abuses.

Later, explaining his work toward renewal in impoverished Philadelphia neighborhoods, activist Shane Claiborne said “It’s hard to believe you have a beautiful creator if everything you look at is ugly.” Pointing out the bad reputation Christians in America have, he joked “You can believe in the bodily resurrection and still be really mean to people.” Being a Christian is not just about “right believing” but “right living,” Claiborne said.

He continued: “Poverty is every person’s responsibility … things like good health care and good education are not just privileges for the few that can afford it but they should be available to everybody. That’s what it means to love our neighbor as ourselves.” He urged attendees to follow the advice Ron Sider had given to him years before during the founding of the Simple Way, and keep Jesus at the center of their justice work.

In a concluding worship service Sunday morning, Dr. Al Tizon and Dr. Paul Alexander were installed as the new co-presidents of ESA.
[Note: A report on Tizon’s and Alexander’s remarks is forthcoming]

Update on the Sovereign Grace Ministries Lawsuit

Tags

Church, Evangelicals, IRD Blog, Kristin Rudolph, Lawsuit, sex abuse, Sovereign Grace Ministries

(Credit: pastormattblog.com)

Kristin Rudolph (@Kristin_Rudolph)

Since my last report on the Sovereign Grace Ministries lawsuit in May, more developments have unfolded in this horrific ordeal. For an in-depth overview of the situation, see my last article on the topic. To sum up the events though, back in October 2012 three women represented by attorney Susan Burke filed a civil lawsuit in Montgomery County, MD accusing SGM and various of its leaders and churches of covering up and failing to report child sex abuse crimes through the 1980s and 90s.

In May 2013 eleven plaintiffs signed onto the second amendment of the lawsuit and Burke stated there were even more. The civil suit was largely dismissed for the expired statute of limitations, but criminal investigations are in the works and the plaintiffs have filed an appeal.

SGM is a network of about 80 “evangelical, Reformed, and charismatic” churches led, until a few months, ago by C.J. Mahaney. SGM was headquartered in Gaithersburg, MD until their recent relocation to Louisville, KY.

A major concern in this situation was the silence of well-known pastors and leaders close to Mahaney and SGM. Very little was said concerning the lawsuit outside the rumblings of lesser known bloggers. Shortly after the lawsuit was dismissed, two major evangelical organizations with close ties to SGM and its leader C.J. Mahaney (who is among the defendants in the lawsuit) commented. Within hours of each other, Together for the Gospel (T4G) and members of The Gospel Coalition (TGC) issued statements explaining their silence resulted from hesitation due to the complex nature of the lawsuit and their close friendship with Mahaney.

TGC’s letter was signed by Don Carson, Kevin DeYoung, and Justin Taylor. It specifies that the letter does not represent the views of all associated with TGC. Neither statement calls for Mahaney to step back from public ministry until the allegations and lawsuit are resolved. The three members who make up T4G with Mahaney – Al Mohler, Mark Dever, and Ligon Duncan – received criticism for stating that Mahaney was merely accused of “founding a ministry and for teaching doctrines and principles that are held to be true by vast millions of American evangelicals. For this reason, we, along with many others, refused to step away from C. J. in any way.”

The statement was recently removed from T4G’s website and replaced with a letter from Mahaney explaining why he will not be speaking at the group’s 2014 conference. In the letter dated July 1 Mahaney writes: “Unfortunately, the civil lawsuit filed against Sovereign Grace Ministries, two former SGM churches and pastors (including myself), continues to generate the type of attention that could subject my friends to unfair and unwarranted criticism. Though dismissed in May (and now on appeal), the lawsuit could prove a distraction from the purpose of this important conference. My withdrawal is not intended to communicate anything about the merits of the suit.”

Others in the evangelical community have used this circumstance as an opportunity to address how churches should prevent, and if necessary, deal with child sexual abuse. The Southern Baptist Convention, at its recent annual meeting in Houston passed a resolution titled “On Sexual Abuse of Children” urging churches to vigilantly screen prospective staff members – particularly those working with children – and comply with legal obligations by reporting abuse to the authorities, among other things.

In addition, the resolution encourages “all denominational leaders and employees of the Southern Baptist Convention to utilize the highest sense of discernment in affiliating with groups and or individuals that possess questionable policies and practices in protecting our children from criminal abuse.”

Further, Boz Tchividjian founder and Executive director of GRACE (Godly Response to Abuse in the Christian Environment) has been critical of how evangelical leaders have publicly handled this tragic situation. Tchividjian, grandson of Billy Graham and brother of TGC member Tullian Tchividjian, stated in a post on the GRACE website that “the heart of this lawsuit is about a systematic church effort to discourage and eventually prevent the families of children who were allegedly (and repeatedly) sexually victimized by church officials from speaking out and reporting to law enforcement.”

He continues: “A Gospel-centered response to child sexual abuse begins with our understanding that silence is not an option. We must be willing to openly confront abuse and its surrounding silence and give of ourselves so that those impacted can experience the healing and transformative power of Jesus.”

As the appeal goes to trial and the criminal investigations proceed, we can only pray justice prevails and that moving forward, churches and ministries will do all in their power to protect children from violation.

The Ethics of Surrogacy

Tags

dignity of life, family, Institute on Religion and Democracy, IRD Blog, Kristin Rudolph, marriage, same sex marriage, surrogacy

(Photo Credit: Bioedge)

Kristin Rudolph (@Kristin_Rudolph)

Surrogacy is not an issue that comes to the average Christian’s mind when discussing the dignity and sanctity of human life. But Russell Moore, the new president of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention believes Christians must be educated on the ethical implications of surrogacy as artificial reproductive technologies become an increasingly common answer to infertility.

In a podcast on June 5th, Moore interviewed Jennifer Lahl, founder and president of the Center for Bioethics and Culture about a bill (SB 162) in Louisiana that would legalize surrogacy contracts that now awaits governor Bobby Jindal’s signature. Lahl explained: “It has passed with such overwhelming support from the House and the Senate … I would ask [the governor] to think long and hard about the children.” We often hear about “the plight of the couple who desperately wants a child,” but not the children involved. This is no small matter, Lahl said, and we need to “think deeply about changing such a dramatic way in which families are made and children are conceived and this isn’t something we just do lightly.”

Lahl, who previously worked as a pediatric nurse recalled how “hard we worked to bond mothers and babies together in the womb and to keep babies in their mothers womb for so long because they have been fearfully and wonderfully made … and these technologies intentionally tell a woman ‘do not bond with this child.’” Gestational surrogacy (as opposed to traditional surrogacy in which the surrogate is the biological mother) is presented and perceived by many women as as an opportunity to help an infertile couple have a family. Moore described how “at first glance that seems to be a very compassionate thing who could not be for this? … You have children who are being born, children welcomed into families.”

But “we haven’t done our homework … in really helping people think Christianly” about infertility,” Lahl lamented. One problem, she explained, is the commodification of life inherent in gestational surrogacy. On this aspect, Lahl has found unlikely allies in pro-abortion feminists who also oppose the commercial aspect of treating women as mere incubators. Surrogacy is targeted at lower income, often vulnerable women with compensation ranging around twenty to thirty thousand dollars, Lahl said. But the health risks are high, as “it takes a lot of maneuvering and a lot of drugs and a lot of procedures to prepare a gestational surrogate mother’s womb in order to [artificially] conceive an embryo.”

Further, “there’s not been a lot of study done or tracking on the long term effects of these drugs on the children that are produced from them and also the surrogates,” Lahl said. There are, of course, significant issues with creating multiple embryos and discarding or freezing the “surplus,” in addition to the mistreatment of women. Rather than helping a couple in need, gestational surrogacy commodifies the life of both mother and child. “If you read these contracts, it’s a transaction. The surrogate is not paid if she does not produce a baby at the end,” Lahl explained.

The United States is second only to India in the surrogacy market. India is a popular destination for Western couples to find a relatively inexpensive gestational surrogate, but it can be a hazardous, even deathly transaction for desperately poor Indian women. Lahl described how “women in India are literally housed in dormitories [and] they have to leave their communities they leave their villages, they leave their families it’s taboo, it’s considered selling your motherhood.”

Although the current bill in Louisiana limits gestational surrogacy contracts to married heterosexual couples, the surrogacy and broader artificial reproductive technology market is a key element of creating “alternative” family structures. Homosexual male couples, and even some single men use surrogates to have children.

Moore explained that “our churches, although we are pro-life and we speak about the life issue as it relates to abortion … aren’t ready sometimes to deal with where the life issue is happening at the technological level.” He shared how when he and his wife were facing infertility, they had no one to talk with about the ethical implications of the “fixes” doctors prescribed. “When you’re vulnerable and when you’re in a desperate situation, you’re sometimes willing to negotiate away your ethics,” he said, encouraging pastors and other church leaders to address reproductive technology in a way that emphasizes the dignity of human life.

Breadwinner Moms: It’s Complicated

Tags

children, Institute on Religion and Democracy, IRD Blog, Kristin Rudolph, marriage, Motherhood

(Photo Credit: Aiminglow.com)

Kristin Rudolph (@Kristin_Rudolph)

The Pew Research Center released a study last week on “Breadwinner Moms,” which found 40% of American households with children under 18 “include mothers who are either the sole or primary source of income.” Some of the responses to this study have been a bit simplistic in their assumption that American women are usurping the “dominant” place of men, trampling over their husbands and children as they clamber up the corporate ladder.

At the same time, others present this news as a monumental gain for women’s equality and downplay the fact that 63% of “breadwinning” mothers are single and have a median annual income of $23,000. Most people (65%) still agree the rising number of single mothers presents a challenge for society, and it is a tragedy for children to grow up without their fathers.

But these reactions miss complexities about the real lives that make up the statistics. I wonder how many married mothers want to be working away from their children. For how many is it just what makes sense for their families? It’s not always a straightforward matter of choice which spouse can make more money, and for many families, one income simply is not enough.

Education and work experience dramatically limit our options, especially in an economy where a college degree earns significantly more than a high school diploma. For example, a woman who is a pharmacist will earn significantly more than her husband who is a family counselor. Such an example may sound atypical, but it happens, and there is little room to change careers in such situations.

Further, the study does not present a breakdown of mothers who work according to the age or number of children, but simply reports the findings for “households with children under 18.” The average American family has two children, these two children are likely to be close in age, and they are overwhelmingly likely to enter school full time around age six. What is a mother to do at this point? (As an aside, there are many good arguments to be made for having larger families and homeschooling, but these are not the reality for most American families right now).

All mothers inevitably come to a point when their children don’t require constant nurturing and care and there is a big difference between a two year old and a twelve year old. The Pew study simply reports that 37% of married mothers with children under 18 earn more than their husbands. In reality, we simply don’t know the stories behind the statistics.

I am not saying these findings do not indicate legitimate problems in American families. They certainly do and there is room to critique the rise of single motherhood, mothers of young children working away from home, or even the matter of wives earning more than their husbands.

But to make sweeping statements about the demise of American men and the obliteration of gender norms is unhelpful and misses the complexities of the situation. According to the study, most Americans agree mothers working outside the home makes it more difficult to raise children, despite making it easier for families to live comfortably.

It seems the practical realities and assumptions of modern middle class American life, such as sending children to college, maintaining multiple cars, taking annual family vacations, etc. are quite expensive. And often even without luxuries, for many families, one income simply doesn’t cut it. Perhaps the Christian response, instead of chastising the world for blurring distinctions between men and women, should be to examine and critique more holistically the cultural and economic shifts that have led to this new family structure.

One contributing factor is that our our culture redefined marriage long ago regardless of the Supreme Court’s ruling this month. Many (if not most) Americans would readily agree that marriage is not primarily about raising children, but is rather an intimate emotional bond between two adults. In this view, marriage is two individuals seeking happiness and companionship through their relationship.

We don’t think of the family as the basic unit of society. We are individualists living in a culture that values careers, busyness, and measures our self-worth by those things. So when two people marry and have children, it is little wonder the question is “how can I have it all?”

Second, the modern home is a place of consumption; a pit stop along the journey through the outside working world where significance is found. We have enough money and technology to significantly lighten the burden of homemaking, which is good in many ways, but renders the domestic sphere a different place than it once was. “Homemaking” no longer demands sewing clothes, kneading bread, churning butter, and scouring floors. The carpets only need to be vacuumed so many times a week. To be sure, keeping a home today requires significant time and effort, but it’s not the back-breaking, productive, and purposeful work it was throughout most of history.

There are innumerable factors contributing to this trend, and ultimately, Christian mothers and fathers must place their family at the center of their lives. And at the end of the day, self-sacrificial love for one’s family does not leave room for an all-consuming competition up the career ladder for either mothers or fathers.

Assemblies of God General Superintendent Defends Biblical Teaching on Sexuality

Tags

Assemblies of God, evangelical, George Wood, homosexuality, Institute on Religion and Democracy, IRD Blog, Kristin Rudolph, marriage, same sex marriage

(Dr. George Wood – Photo Credit: Charisma)

Kristin Rudolph (@Kristin_Rudolph)

In recent weeks, Dr. George Wood, the General Superintendent of the Assemblies of God (AG) has  publicly and articulately defended the traditional biblical teaching on marriage and homosexual practice against distortions by liberal ministers. On his website, Dr. Wood writes of his interaction with pastors in his local area of Springfield, MO concerning the biblical teaching on sexuality. The issue arose after the Springfield City Council formed a “Sexual Orientation & Gender Identity Task Force” to consider extending protected-class status in city ordinances to persons based on those two categories.”

A public debate between Springfield clergy started after AG Pastor John Lindell gave testimony to the city council’s task force on April 22 presenting “the theologically conservative viewpoint on the issue of the sexual orientation and gender identity ordinance.” He shared Scripture that lays out “God’s original design for human sexuality and relationship,” and argued that “homosexuality is not God’s original design for sexuality. Quite simply, “Whether a person accepts the Bible’s authority on the subject is another matter, but the Bible itself is quite clear,” he told the task force.

In response, a group of 23 ministers in Springfield wrote an Op-Ed in the News-Leader criticizing Rev. Lindell’s statement and apologizing for “the ways Christianity is frequently used to hurt rather than heal, and we want you to know there are many of us in support of you.”

They discount the passages from Scripture that Rev. Lindell pointed to, asserting that in the New Testament, “things are far more complicated than we often think.” The letter states: “While we also support the wisdom of Scripture, we believe that the Bible is honored most when it is read in context … We believe a more thematic view of the Bible can reveal the divine intent where justice, love and compassion are honored over violence, hatred and insensitivity.”

Dr. Wood wrote a response in the News-Leader, pointing out that “by failing to cite any Scripture that affirms homosexual behavior, by ignoring the standard Christian interpretation of Old Testament law, and by appealing to a thematic view of the Bible that ignores what the Bible actually says, Snider and his colleagues have shown that they, not John Lindell, are reading Scripture with ‘preconceived biases.’”

Rev. Phil Snider, who grew up and was baptized in the AG, and is now the pastor of Brentwood Christian Church (a Disciples of Christ church) wrote an eleven page open letter responding to Dr. Wood. He concludes his letter stating: “I believe the Bible to be the Word of God insofar as it conforms to the image of God as revealed in Jesus Christ. Anytime it falls short of love, which is the heart of the Torah, or anytime it falls short of the image of God as revealed in Jesus Christ, then I choose to go with the spirit of the law over the letter of the law.”

On May 23, Dr. Wood responded with a fifteen page letter answering Rev. Snider’s arguments, concluding:

The traditional Christian standard of sexual conduct is founded on the teachings of Jesus, Moses, and Paul. It is grounded in creation and law. It is expressed through an affirmation of marriage and a prohibition of non-marital sexual conduct, including homosexual conduct. That is what the Christian church across history, cultures, and ecclesial boundaries has proclaimed. Revising this standard in order to accommodate homosexual conduct doesn’t work … And by introducing the harm principle into Christian ethics—but detaching it from creation narratives, levitical prohibitions, and Pauline vice lists—it introduces an alien logic into Christian ethics that threatens to revise all biblical standards of sexual conduct, not merely the one you want to revise.

On his website, Dr. Wood explained he got involved in this discussion because being salt and light in the world “requires us to understand and promote what the Bible teaches. It also requires us to respond clearly and charitably to misinterpretations of the Bible, lest the Bible’s moral witness be presented in a confusing way to the broader public.”

Indeed, there is great confusion about biblical teaching on sexuality even within the Church today. Distortion of Scripture and acquiescence to our culture is common regarding this matter. In addition, we rarely see a level-headed, thoughtful engagement with an issue so heated as homosexuality. Dr. Wood has presented a positive example by thoroughly and graciously defending traditional Christian teaching.