Saturday, April 24, 2010

Is It About the Kingdom, or the Institution?


Bishop Will Willimon posted Ten Theses About The Future of Ministry on his blogsite this morning. They are a gutsy and rare prophetic voice from one of our bishops (Bishop Tim Whitaker also comes to mind as one of those voices). I'll comment on a few of these as a 45 year old pastor in between the generations that the Bishop speaks about.
  • The pastoral ministry in mainline Protestantism will continue to experience numerical decline as well as be pushed to the margins of this culture. The mainline is old-line that is becoming sidelined.
Hard to argue with. The numbers and diminishing resources back this up.
  • The pastoral ministry in mainline Protestantism will need to lead the church in redefining itself in the light of the spiritual needs and aspirations of people under 35 or else will continue to decline because it has limited itself to the spiritual affairs of one generation.
Yes again. We pastors have failed to culture leadership and legacy among the "one generation" to leave the church better than they found it. We haven't passed the mantle - it's been held on to for far too long.
  • The pastoral ministry in mainline Protestantism will need to find a theological way through the intellectual death of theological liberalism (“Progressive Christianity”) and the cultural compromises of traditional evangelicalism (the IRD and evangelical Protestantism’s alliance with the political right).
The gutsiest statement yet. Theological liberalism was a theology found wanting - and sometimes, seemed to delight in the shock value of turning Christian doctrines at the heart of Christianity into a cafeteria Christianity. The IRD and ilk like them would have us be in bed with the correct politics... which resembles spiritual prostitution in being "of" the world rather than "in" the world. I would say that progressive Christianity has done the same thing where American politics are concerned.
  • The pastoral ministry must be supple, adaptable, and willing to experiment on the basis of biblically supported leadership styles.
Another true and hard statement. Cut-and-paste ministry doesn't work. Leadership is blessed but hard work. It isn't all about preaching good sermons anymore (although it's not a bad start). How are we making disciples? What is our plan to do so? How do we BOTH (1) grow disciples in maturity, and (2) increase the flock?
  • The mission of the church will take precedence over internal maintenance, real estate, fellowship, therapy, pastoral care and other factors that have driven the church in recent decades and have contributed to our decline.
The Great Commission was this: "Go, make disciples, baptizing and teaching them in my name." The Book of Discipline gets bigger and bigger (and more largely ignored and irrelevent), the number of Judicial Council decisions increases as does the docket, and yet the church membership continues to decline. As much of a baseball fan that I am, it simply isn't true that "if you build it, they will come." We must be willing to make disciples, and to do that, we must be willing to build relationships. We have done what the medical community has done - become specialists while forgetting our general health and wholeness.
  • Methodists will either become engaged in the mysterious, relentless growth of the Kingdom of God or they will continue to decline. Growth is our most needed focus.
One does not have to be an actuarial expert to know that the denomination will financially and administratively collapse within 12 years. God isn't dead, but it is possible that we are realizing Wesley's worst fear (and I know, we all know the quote... but are we listening?):
I am not afraid that the people called Methodists should ever cease to exist either in Europe or America. But I am afraid lest they should only exist as a dead sect, having the form of religion without the power. And this undoubtedly will be the case unless they hold fast both the doctrine, spirit, and discipline with which they first set out. - J. Wesley
As a Lutheran friend once told me, "Methodists have lost their method."
  • The pastoral ministry will recover the oddness and the excitement of salvation in Jesus Christ.
Seems like I remember being taught that Christians are to be counter-cultural. "Oddness" is probably a good word. Why would anyone in society who is cynical and distrustful of secular institutions want to be part of a Church that simply resembles another institution with a cross slapped up on the side of the building?
  • The pastoral ministry will either find a way to attract and empower a new generation of pastor’s critique and reconstruct pastoral ministry or we will pass away with this generation.
Again, numbers don't lie.

This OUGHT to be a ripe opportunity for the UMC: We are connected. We have a framework for the deployment of ministry and a catechetical process for making Christians and disciples. In theory, we have a framework and discipline to deploy pastors and match gifts to churches. But in practice, we are failing. Miserably. Our connection is serving little purpose and laity have finally woken up and asked, "Is our apportionment money being used to increase the Kingdom or support a dying structure? Are we getting our money's worth?"

The itinerancy and appointment process has become a pastoral tenure system that is self-serving to clergy but not really helping the Church much. As far as catechesis... a lot of folks don't even know what that word means. Or words like catechism. Discipleship. Or disciple. I mean, have you asked anyone lately to define what a disciple is? It took a group in my church several weeks to arrive at a definition - not because they aren't good or faithful people, but they simply inherited a faith tradition that didn't hand that understanding down to them! We failed to teach and equip - hence, the present problem.

Nothing is beyond redemption, and if we are indeed a faithful people, then we are a hope-filled people. I am one with such hope. After a lot of prayer (more listening, less talking), I am convinced that some very faithful, hopeful, and risk-taking folks are going to have to rise to the challenge and call to extreme leadership. We need bishops not elected out of entitlement or pedigree, but out of spiritual and prophetic depth. We need risk takers. We need superintendents who lead pastors spiritually and boldly, not folks who got there because of a salary sheet or gender, or because it was "their turn." We need folks who can with muster and gumption do some hard work: some churches need to close. Some pastors need to be encouraged to leave pastoral ministry because they are ineffective at it. We need folks to take thou authority. We have to quit playing slot machine with pastoral appointments. And in the case of bishops and superintendents, we need some folks who are willing to do these things with the knowledge they might not get a guaranteed paycheck... since our system is presently collapsing to the point where conferences and episcopal funds won't be financed in a few years. That will call for creativeness and a willingness to think beyond present institutional practices.

I know I paint a bleak scene - but it is hard not to be concerned given the present realities. Lyle Schaller wrote a few years ago that to avoid financial and institutional collapse, we should have taken action at the 2008 General Conference on many of these things. Perhaps he is right.

God can redeem anything - but just like grace, we must be willing to receive it instead of push it away. Is God giving us the signs that we need to change? I don't see how we could interpret them any other way.

Instead of a dead sect, I sure would like the UMC to take the lead. We certainly have all the ingredients.

Pax,
Sky+

Thursday, April 08, 2010

Putting On Christ - And Wearing Him Always


As Christians, we are always to wear the face of Christ wherever we go. It sounds good on Sunday mornings and whenever we gather as the Church. I know myself that it is very easy to be the example of Christ when I am wearing a clerical collar and suit.

But from Sunday at noon until the following Sunday at 8 AM - are we still wearing Christ? In this day and age, we are more and more transparent than ever. Our political stances and our Facebook comments are certainly public for all to see. While everyone is entitled to a political opinion and opinions in general, we have to very careful that our political stances and opinions don’t turn others off from the Gospel or our church.

When it comes to politics, I am at best a cynic. That doesn’t mean I can’t tolerate the opinions of others, though. At the end of the day, or at the end of any conversation, I think when there are disagreements among Christians, they have to end it with the words, “We will agree to disagree.” No moral judgments, no denigration. Just a difference of opinion.

Ronald Reagan once said, “Politics is the second oldest profession, but I have learned that it bears a striking resemblance to the first.” It is a humorous quote, but with an element of truth. If we sell out ourselves to political opinions first and the Gospel second, we have told the world where our treasure lies. And the world, especially those who are nominally Christian or new to the faith, is watching us like a child. Do we really want them to think we are a Republican or Democrat first, and a Christian second? That Kentucky basketball is more important than living the Christian faith? That we spend more time playing Farmville or Mafia Wars than we do reading scripture or articles about theology, discipleship, or mission (the Web is full of these things, by the way)? Or that we place more stock in Glenn Beck or Keith Olbermann than we do Jesus Christ?

Don’t get me wrong: politics are important. And no one loves basketball more than I do. I have a Facebook page too. But none of those things are ever important enough to take the place of who Christ is… or to turn others away from Him.

Let’s be careful.
Sky+

Sunday, March 28, 2010

In Hac Lacrimarum Valle


It is a very sad day. With Kentucky and Tennessee's losses this weekend, there is no SEC team in the Final Four. Worse, a Big East team and an ACC team are in it. It is almost more than I can bear.

So I will do something that I have never done, (or, for that matter, something that no one else has ever done, either), and root for a Horizon League team to win it all.

Go Butler.

Tuesday, March 23, 2010

Why Have the Church? Just Be a Democrat. Or a Republican.


Brothers and Sisters:

The Lord be with you.

One of the liabilities of being so involved in government, as one of our General Boards so often is, is that we actually get “credit” for what we do (in this case, a resolution made at an earlier General Conference). I speak as a political cynic, having found both of our American political parties wanting.

I want to draw attention to a quote Stan Hauerwas gave several years ago:
"...[A] theological politics understands the church as an alternative polis or civitas, which is constituted by the new reality of the kingdom of God as seen in the life and destiny of Jesus. In contrast to political theology, which makes the political struggle for emancipation the horizon in which the church's theology and practice is interpreted, a theological politics makes the church's story the 'counter story' that interprets the world's politics.... [m]aking the church the primary locus of politics [which] not only changes the political horizon, but also requires a different understanding of the nature of politics."-- Stanley Hauerwas
In my opinion, anyone who thinks Democrats are the only ones who are interested in big government doesn’t read very much – Republicans are just as interested in gaining/regaining power and running things. Today’s politics are reduced to issues, and using power and coercion to enforce the convictions of the Left or the Right. And while I am certainly cynical about politics, I am not advocating we withdraw from the world – indeed, we Christians are supposed to be IN the world, just not OF it. The politics we advocate are the politics of Christ, which will set us apart from the world.

We have only ourselves to blame for the press attention we have gotten from Speaker Pelosi. At least for this week, the United Methodist Church is not known as a Church that makes disciples, but rather known for helping pass a Health Reform Care bill through the House that is split down party lines. I’d say the same thing about abortion: I would like to see abortion become a thing of the past – not because Republicans passed a bill to make abortion illegal, but because the Church influenced society so much that (a) no one would feel so shamed by an out-of-wedlock pregnancy to have an abortion, and (b) no mother would feel alone since the church would step up and minister to her and her child’s needs.

A friend of mine reminded me that during the Bush Administration, Left wing critics made the following observation of Republican Christians: "If the Republican plank has become your Gospel, why do you still need the church?" He noted that this observation fits just as well with this possible observation given this week's happenings: "If the Democratic plank has become your Gospel, why do you still need the church?"

We have been used as a denomination this week by politicians, and it has given in to more of the American preoccupation of being on the correct side instead of being on the Lord’s side. As one of my blogging buddies Allen Bevere said today, to embrace the status quo politics of either party is to become ecclesial sectarians.

I think neither Jesus nor John Wesley would approve. Regardless of what the Book of Resolutions or the Council of Bishops tells us.

Pax,
Sky+

Tuesday, February 23, 2010

Are We Thinking Ahead? Who's Job Is It?


In the past few weeks, our bishop and cabinet sent out a letter: "Making the System Work." You can find a copy of the letter here.

The letter has rubbed some clergy the wrong way. Some see it as a threat. Others see it as void of anything pastoral. I see it as a retelling of what is already in the Book of Discipline. The problem is, we really haven't followed the spirit or the letter of the Discipline when it comes to the itinerancy. We are "selectively itinerant" these days, in my opinion, because we have been allowed to be. From the letter:
  1. The mission of the local church comes first. As ministers, we are called to serve, not to be served. Our primary effort will be to place the best qualified minister, according to the needs of the church. Churches involved in mission and ministry for Jesus Christ and supportive of the connection will be given first consideration.
  2. The appointment process deserves our honesty, a view for the good of the whole connection. Ministers are members of the Annual Conference and open to appointment in any part of the Conference.

We all know that while this is the theory, it has not been the practice. Some clergy have been truly itinerant, serving in varying appointments (and often across state lines, as our conference includes Western Tennessee and the Purchase Area of Kentucky). Some have requested that they not be appointed outside of a metropolitan area or across a state line. Some have citied educational needs for children, vocational needs for spouses, and consideration for those with aging parents - the list of variables is long and convoluted, and not without merit or concern.

But to complicate matters, we started selling off parsonages a few years ago. When this issue was raised a few years ago, someone found a realtor who spoke on the floor of the annual conference and said that one could "break even" on buying a house and selling it within 6 years (the length of a district superintendent tenure). I suppose that would be possible in a FEW places in the U.S... but nowhere close to where I live! As a result, we have added another variable to the itinerancy: the buying and selling of a house. Of course this is not a new phenomenon to most professions, but in our annual conference, clergy often move at the drop of a hat, and even in a "good" conference year pastoral appointments are rarely close to "done" until a month before a move happens. Four weeks is a very short window to (1) list a house for sale, (2) pack to move, (3) say farewell to a congregation, (4) move into a house that (5) hopefully you've bought (and been able to sell the other one), and (6) begin work at your new church/parish.

I think all of these more recent "convolutions" for the itinerancy makes it very difficult for our bishop and cabinet to try and "Make the System Work," because our ideas and practices about the itinerancy have strayed so far away from the ideal. When bishops and cabinets send us such statements, they sound harsh because we've been casual about being truly itinerant. But all of us who were ordained elders agreed to be appointed "without reservation." If we weren't comfortable with that, we had the option of being a local pastor, appointed year to year, but without a guaranteed appointment.

If we look at all of this from the standpoint of our laity, however, we begin to see another side. They can very easily and accurately say, "We have been faithful to what we've been asked to do." They have provided parsonages (or housing allowances), paid salaries, pensions, and insurance. They want the best pastor for their church, because that is what the church promises to provide for them. It is very hard to defend against the claim of some of our laity that our leadership has failed them. We have. And that's a corporate "we" - that's the nature of the covenant and the Connection.


Problem? The same institution that says: "The mission of the local church comes first. As ministers, we are called to serve, not to be served," also allowed parsonages to be sold off and allowed clergy to be selectively itinerant. Can we blame this bishop and cabinet? Not fully. But we clergy ultimately do have to take responsibility for our failure of leadership. That's the nature of the Order of Elder - we are in COVENANT with each other to serve the church.

Are we thinking ahead? One thing I learned from my mentor Don Saliers many years ago was this: The Holy Spirit rarely rejects good planning. In these difficult times, I think the Spirit demands it. It's our job to lead our congregations - and to serve, not to be served. That requires a lot of prayer, planning, and sacrifice, all with a Gospel bent.

Pax,
Sky+

Wednesday, February 17, 2010

Lenten Humor

In looking for a do-it-yourself bulletin cover for Ash Wednesday, this one did NOT get staff or worship-team approval. Oh well.

Wednesday, February 10, 2010

A One-Sided Conversation


I have rarely been this frustrated in my life. My email doesn’t work: I can receive email, but I can’t send it from my Comcast account. I can’t send it from my computer, I can’t send it from my administrative assistant's computer, or my iPhone. I don’t get an error message, it doesn’t say “Server Error” or “Undeliverable.” It says that it’s been sent… but no one gets it. I can’t even send an email to myself. Comcast can’t send email out from my account either. No one seems to know what the problem is.

I really didn’t know how dependent I had become on email as a way of communication. Here I am trying to communicate – but no one can hear.

If we define prayer as communication with God (and I think it is an accurate definition), I wonder how God feels when we do not respond to him? Do we put up a barrier - or, in computer terms, erect a “firewall?” Maybe we’re afraid of what God might move us to do!

My colleague Mike Ripski said this about prayer: “Because prayer centers us in God, it moves us away from other centers. It moves us against the grain. Prayer moves us to be hopeful, patient, and persevering because it enables us to see things from God’s vantage point. It permits our lives to be led in directions we’ve never gone before. Then we are willing to risk unpopularity and even our lives… Be attentive to God for very long, and the eyes and hands and feet will be as involved as the ears and mouth. Prayer will take you someplace.” (from Conversing with God, © 1992, pp. 91-92)

God certainly wants a conversation with us. Let’s be sure we’re allowing Him to get through.

Pax,

Sky+

Monday, January 04, 2010

Citizenship, Politics, and Christianity


My fellow blogger and U.M. pastor Allen Bevere writes some great blogs. I want to highlight one he wrote at the end of 2009. Here is an excerpt:
Small town journalism is among the best reporting in the country, unlike the national media which continues to be a disgrace. Most journalists in the mainstream media think the square root of pi is coconut cream.

Local politicians are usually better behaved than national ones, probably because they are more accountable to their constituencies (there are, of course, exceptions to this).

Nowhere is the lack of serious and deep thinking more present than in Washington DC.

I do not understand why liberals say they are progressive. There is nothing progressive about wanting more government control over individual lives. There is nothing progressive about believing that government is the answer to most things. FDR believed that and enacted the era of big government. Today's liberals are not forward-looking, but rather nostalgic for earlier times. If 1935 ever returns the Democratic Party is ready.

By the same token, what is so conservative about Republicans? They are big spenders and have become foreign policy activists. There is nothing conservative in that philosophy. And it also appears that they have run out of ideas with no one standing out to lead the party. So much of late that comes out of Republican mouths is embarrassing. When 2012 arrives, the Republican Party will not be ready.

There were those in 2009 talking about the coming evangelical collapse. I disagree. Evangelicalism will not collapse, but it is in the process of being reformed. That is a good thing.

Theological liberalism is in large part repetitive and uninteresting.

Theological fundamentalism is in large part repetitive and uninteresting.

Fundamentalism and liberalism are simply two sides of the same coin.

-from Allen Bevere's, "Brief and Random Thoughts at the End of 2009," 30-Dec-09

Ever since I read Allen's above post, it has provoked a myriad of thoughts. One is that I fear our country will embrace rugged individualism to the point where, "I can do whatever I want," and everyone else be damned. Before you think that's far fetched, consider American Christianity, where you can pretty much believe whatever you damned darned well please.

I really have to do some soul searching occasionally and remember where my allegiances are, and to know that being a good citizen does not negate being a good Christian... and vice versa. I was officiating at a basketball game a few weeks ago at a private high school, and we began with a prayer followed by the singing of the national anthem. Those are really not incompatible things - prayer is our communication with God, and the national anthem is our respect and love for the country in which we live. The test comes in what we do with what God communicates to us, and how we live out our love for our country.

If Christianity is experiencing loss of its spiritual depth in America, I fear that patriotism is equally experiencing loss. Our continued fervor for partisan politics above a politic/policy for the common good is killing America (at least, the America that was founded many years ago). And no - I am not talking about health care. I am talking about politic. Πολιτικά. The affairs of the state. To be honest, I'm tired of what is passing for politics today. My language is atrocious enough without saying what I think today's politics resembles, so I'll stick to a safer and more polite term: self-gratification. We're all about ourselves.

Ultimately, if we are a country that (at least claims to be) Christian, we believe this: God has the last word in all things. We ARE our brother's and sister's keeper. Jesus redeems all things, and that includes justice, peace, and eternal life. It doesn't mean we have to be pacifists, but it certainly means we should at least have the goal of beating swords into plowshares. It doesn't mean we have to adopt Marxist socialistic ways about health care (which don't work anyway), but it doesn't mean we can avoid dealing with those less fortunate than ourselves, either. It doesn't mean that it's wrong to make money - as long as we remember the Source from whom all things come, and that to those who have much given, much is expected. The bottom line: do we trust God? If we don't, we will have a hard time living out the politics of being Christian.

"I Vow to Thee My Country" is a British hymn - and some critics say that it shouldn't even qualify as a hymn - but I think the words are poignant and can fit America as well as Britain. The words are below:



I vow to thee, my country, all earthly things above,
Entire and whole and perfect, the service of my love;
The love that asks no question, the love that stands the test,
That lays upon the altar the dearest and the best;
The love that never falters, the love that pays the price,
The love that makes undaunted the final sacrifice.

And there's another country, I've heard of long ago,
Most dear to them that love her, most great to them that know;
We may not count her armies, we may not see her King;
Her fortress is a faithful heart, her pride is suffering;
And soul by soul and silently her shining bounds increase,
And her ways are ways of gentleness, and all her paths are peace.

- Words: Sir Cecil Spring-Rice, 1908

Music: Gustav Holst, 1921

If we're American, and we're Christian, we should have no trouble singing either verse. The politics of Jesus and the costs of discipleship require our vow and and our sacrifice. But we do so as a community of faith, not individuals. Love doesn't insist on it's way, but insists on the truth.

Pax,
Sky+

Saturday, December 26, 2009

Our Love, Our Hope, Ourselves


I dearly love what I do as an ordained minister, and believe I am called and convicted to it. Indeed, I don't really know what else I would do on this earth.

At the same time, on Christmas Eve and Christmas Day, there is a part of me that yearns to be a worshiper instead of a presider. On this one day, I would rather sing hymns than lead them, I would rather hear the Word proclaimed than be the one proclaiming it, I would rather be receiving Christ at the Eucharist as a communicant rather than as presider. My love of Christ and my love of music overwhelms me on this day. I just want to sit in the pew and worship.

I know that's not reality, because my love of the Church outweighs my own selfishness. So for many years I have listened to the international broadcast of Lessons and Carols from King's College, Cambridge - my opportunity to "sit in the pew" and simply worship. This year, schedule and work didn't allow me to listen to it. So, arriving home after our 11 PM Christmas Eve service, I watched several clips from previous years' worship services at King's College. Hearing the scripture readings and the carols sung remind me of the joy of Christmas, why I am Christian, and why I love Christ so.

This carol, "The Shepherd's Carol," is new... and brings tears to my eyes and joy to my heart every time I hear it. Sung from the standpoint of the shepherds to Mary, it captures serenity, humility, wonderment, and the implications of Christ's birth to the world. It is a anonymous poem that gifted British composer Bob Chilcott set to choral setting in 2000. No organ, no piano, no instruments whatsoever - and none needed. (Turn up the volume or get headphones to catch the richness of the voices and harmony)

May we offer to Jesus our love, our hope, and ourselves.

Sky+



We stood on the hills, Lady,
Our day’s work done,
Watching the frosted meadows
That winter had won.

The evening was calm, Lady,
The air so still,
Silence more lovely than music
Folded the hill.

There was a star, Lady,
Shone in the night,
Larger than Venus it was
And bright, so bright.

Oh, a voice from the sky, Lady,
It seemed to us then
Telling of God being born
In the world of men.

And so we have come, Lady,
Our day’s work done,
Our love, our hopes, ourselves
We give to your son.

Tuesday, December 22, 2009

Christmas and Never Being Alone


Christmas can admittedly be a lonely time for many. While it is a time for families and friends to get together and celebrate, it can also be a painful reminder of the loss of loved ones. My parents’ anniversary was on December 24th, the same day that my grandmother died. I love Christmas, but I miss my mother and grandmother.

I have “inflicted” the writings of Henri Nouwen on you many times. Allow me once again to inflict you, this time with some of his words about Christmas:
God came to us because he wanted to join us on the road, to listen to our story, and to help us realize that we are not walking in circles but moving towards the house of peace and joy. This is the great mystery of Christmas that continues to give us comfort and consolation: we are not alone on our journey. The God of love who gave us life sent his only Son to be with us at all times and in all places, so that we never have to feel lost in our struggles but always can trust that he walks with us.

The challenge is to let God be who he wants to be. A part of us clings to our aloneness and does not allow God to touch us where we are most in pain. Often we hide from him precisely those places in ourselves where we feel guilty, ashamed, confused, and lost. Thus we do not give him a chance to be with us where we feel most alone.

Christmas is the renewed invitation not to be afraid and to let him - whose love is greater than our own hearts and minds can comprehend - be our companion.

- Henri Nouwen, Gracias
Merry Christmas, and God bless us – everyone.

Sky+


Saturday, October 31, 2009

Friday, September 18, 2009

Mark Tooley: See 4(b)

JERK
Pronunciation: \ˈjərk\
Function: noun
Etymology: probably alteration of yerk
Date: 1575
1 : a single quick motion of short duration
2 a : jolting, bouncing, or thrusting motions b : a tendency to produce spasmodic motions
3 a : an involuntary spasmodic muscular movement due to reflex action b plural : involuntary twitchings due to nervous excitement
4 a : an annoyingly stupid or foolish person b : an unlikable person; especially : one who is cruel, rude, or small-minded
5 : the pushing of a weight from shoulder height to a position overhead in weight lifting

Sometimes, people can give church renewal a bad name.

Since Mark wrote me a letter and addressed it "Dear Sky," I don't have any problems being a bit casual with my remarks. And since I cannot abide "liberals" or "conservatives" who take things out of context, here is his letter in its entirety:

September 18, 2009

Church Officials Start to Acknowledge
Persecution of Christians by Radical Islam

Dear Sky,

Would you believe that liberal church officials are actually starting to speak out about radical Islam and persecution of Christians?

Yes, it’s quite amazing, and good news certainly. The recent ravaging of two Pakistani Christian communities, resulting in scores of burned homes and 7 dead Christians, has sparked distress. A bishop from The Church of Pakistan also recently visited offices in New York for the National Council of Churches, the United Methodist General Board of Global Ministries, and the Episcopal Church, igniting statements of concern from all.

The
statement by United Methodist West Ohio Bishop Bruce Ough, as president of Global Ministries, was especially good. Encourage him with a supportive email, thanking him.

And here’s
my article, quoting Bishop Ough and others.

This Pakistani bishop especially expressed alarm about his country’s Blasphemy Law, which makes illegal any criticism of Muhammad or the Koran. Angry Islamist mobs exploit the law to create rumors about Christians and then to attack them. Theocratic laws forbidding criticism of Islam are common throughout Muslim majority countries and are often aimed like a knife against vulnerable Christians and other religious minorities.

But typically, left-leaning church officials say nothing about persecution of Christians by Islamists. They prefer to think of Christianity, and the West, especially the U.S., as the persecutor, and Muslims everywhere as only victims. Liberal church officials often prefer apologizing for the Crusades of 1,000 years ago rather than recognizing today’s injustices. The outrages in Pakistan seem to have aroused some new concern. Let’s pray the Holy Spirit will water and grow this concern for persecuted Christians!

Of course, most of the Religious Left will remain silent about persecution of Christians, whether by Islamist or Marxist regimes. The Religious Left prefers its usual political themes, such as attacking capitalism as a cosmic threat to Planet Earth. A group of Presbyterian and Congregationalist theologians from around the world recently convened to issue their denunciation of free markets as the supposed tormentor of the poor.
Here’s my article.

Which has sustained more poverty in the world? Free markets and protection of private property, or state control and corruption of markets? Tens of millions of previously poor people in the Global South, especially in India and China, have escaped centuries of poverty and experienced relief thanks to the former. But the Religious Left prefers its own ideology, to reality and traditional Christian thought. Unfortunately, at least if you are a Mainline Protestant, the Religious is often funded by your donations to your local church!

Please continue to pray for our churches, for the persecuted church globally, for our country, and for IRD’s ministry of church reform. Your contribution allows IRD to report and to speak about what is happening in our churches. Your gift of $25 will help us continue. Please easily donate here.

With appreciation,


Mark Tooley
IRD President

It is a weird letter that at best congratulates leadership in a backhanded way while still labeling them and getting in the Talking Head-Like-Jab that seems to be so obligatory these days.

Rude: "Would you believe that liberal church officials are actually starting to speak out about radical Islam and persecution of Christians? Yes, it’s quite amazing, and good news certainly."

Small minded (and broad generalization): "But typically, left-leaning church officials say nothing about persecution of Christians by Islamists. They prefer to think of Christianity, and the West, especially the U.S., as the persecutor, and Muslims everywhere as only victims. Liberal church officials often prefer apologizing for the Crusades of 1,000 years ago rather than recognizing today’s injustices." What a liberal use of generalization, and right out of the Liberal's handbook at that!! Take Stephen King's advice about words like "typically": use adverbs sparingly. (A sense of humor helps too).

Sarcastic: "Of course, most of the Religious Left will remain silent about persecution of Christians, whether by Islamist or Marxist regimes. The Religious Left prefers its usual political themes, such as attacking capitalism as a cosmic threat to Planet Earth." Good grief, give that tired old jab of hyberbole a rest.

Pretty close to a lie: "But the Religious Left prefers its own ideology, to reality and traditional Christian thought. Unfortunately, at least if you are a Mainline Protestant, the Religious is often funded by your donations to your local church!" Just about anyone could refute several parts of that. Better learn some qualifiers, Mark, like "some" or even "most." The problem with generalizations is the same problem when you assume; it definitely makes an "ass" of "u" and "me," Plus, there's a comma splice in there too.

I tried being a liberal - and found it weak on doctrine and continuity of faith. I tried being a conservative - and found the same thing. This power struggle between Left and Right is becoming a game the United Methodist Church cannot afford to play anymore. More to the point: the people in the pews are getting tired of it, and are no longer impressed. We need less liberals and conservatives and more radicals, in the radicalness of Jesus.

Here's a generalization I'll make after attending four General Conferences, one of them as a delegate:

The Left: Lacks a lot on tradition and theological consistency. Bad technology geeks. Great meals and hospitality.
The Right: Holds (selectively) to tradition and theology. Great technology geeks. Bad food, and lacking in hospitality.

If you want to do the cause justice, Mark - encourage good behavior and validate it, rather than mock it. Your tactics have their place and work well for politics and rhetoric and CIA-type deception and propaganda... but I suspect they are suspect when it comes to the Kingdom of God. The ends never justify the means.

In short, Mark, if you want to make a difference, be kind. Be charitable. Don't be a clanging cymbal. Love is never rude or boastful. That goes for all you liberal lefties out there, too... as well as my own self; I know that I can be a jerk too.

God forgive me. And God forgive all of us for making His Kingdom an ideological playground.

Pax,
Sky+