Voting on the Will of God

This is a section of the sermon I preached today titled "His" on Matthew 6:24-34. This section deals with Matthew 6:33 and its role in the Presbyterian Church (USA) during this round of voting on amendments from the General Assembly.  I guess in a way when we vote on the amendments, in essence, we will vote on the will of God.  As true as this is, let us come together in discernment. 

This leads us to one more matter that we must examine on account of this passage, discerning his kingdom and his righteousness. The best example for me to bring up today is the biennial root canal that is the General Assembly of the PC(USA). This is a place where good Christian men and women come together to discern God’s will for the denomination and for the whole Body of Christ. As is the norm when good Christian men and women come together to discern God’s will, people will often reach opposite conclusions regarding the best way to strive for the kingdom of God and his righteousness. 

What I find distressing is not that we disagree. I’m distressed when we insult and revile another in God’s name. I have seen fear and shame and anger do their level best to overwhelm love. Often people are so blind to their own words that not only is grace lacking, but so is confession that no one person has had all the answers since the guy on the cross. 

Yet as we strive for the kingdom of God and his righteousness together, we are able to discern God’s way and wisdom for our lives. In Committees, in Session and in Presbytery and in General Assembly, we are more apt to discern God’s wisdom than when we work alone. When we hear the opinions of others, especially when we disagree, we are more likely to learn from one another. 

Next weekend, this feast of discernment makes its way to Dallas where Grace Presbytery will vote on the amendments sent by the General Assembly to the presbyteries. So now, let us pray not for a side to win the day, but that as a Presbytery we strive for his kingdom and his righteousness.

Well, I said it, so it's time for me to own it.  Recently on this very blog, I posted a pretty snarky group of remarks to a letter sent by a group of Presbyterian Men who are mostly (43 our of 45) "big steeple" pastors.  Frankly, I regret the way I said what I said.  I don't regret my intent, but I do regret my execution.  There were other posts that made the points I wanted to make so much more eloquently.  I wish I could find them so I could share them.  Alas...

Still, let us pray for discernment for the whole denomination and for the whole church as we approach the mercy seat of God to do the work of the denomination.  Let us be holy.  Let us be holy together.

It Works for Pro Wrestling...

I have heard commentators say that great players who want to play with other great players is good for the NBA.  They say that having several superstars concentrated on teams like Miami, New York, Chicago, Boston, LA (the Lakers of course, not the Clippers) is good for the game.  As for the little sisters, Charlotte, Toronto, Cleveland, Sacramento, Milwaukee--well, somebody's gotta lose every night so it might as well be these guys, right?

It seems like a business model right out of World Wrestling Entertainment.  Their business model talks about popular wrestlers who get a "push" to increase their popularity and ultimately popularity.  The guys they beat up all week long, they're called "jobbers" because they're just there to do a job, to make the stars look good.  They also call them "ham and eggers" because they'll never be able to afford steak and eggs.

Miami has been getting a push all season long.  Toronto, they're just doin' a job.

So tonight, as Chicago takes on Toronto, just remember those ham and eggs are supposed to taste good.  That's all the NBA thinks your team is worth.

The End of Civilization as We Know It, East Texas Version

I was driving from Tyler to Marshall, Texas earlier today and was looking for postcards. Where can you find a postcard? How about a touristy place like a gas fill-up/restaurant/C-Store? Well, no not anymore. That's one lament, digital photography and e-mail have killed the postcard industry. Sad day, but that's not the sign of the end of days.

No, the sign of the end of days was that the strip-mall/gas station had a Kolache shop... which also sold sushi.

Kolache and crab roll, I don't know what to say.

For anyone thinking it's just the way trends go, ask yourself- Would you have ever considered buying sushi at a truck stop? What would you say to a trucker who asked for extra wasabi with his California roll?

My Super Bowl XLV Halftime Show Review

Well, I reviewed the halftime show for Super Bowl XLIV, so why not XLV?

Like I started last year, congratulations to the Green Bay Packers and their fans. They have certainly showed the world that the team building strategy begun three years ago was the right way to go.  Congrats again.

As for The Black Eyed Peas, can a set list be more derivative than this one?  People have complained that since the "Justin Timberlake creates a wardrobe malfunction" incident that the Super Bowl halftime show went safe, calling on classic rock stars who have a following, but won't create an incident.  (How Prince made that list is beyond me, but maybe he was the exception to prove the rule.)  So how about that Peas song that is lyric thrown onto a classic surf song.  I know it's a surf song because the tune is on the Pulp Fiction soundtrack.

Slash doing "Sweet Child of Mine"?  Love Slash!  This was just misplaced.  Fergie is no Axl Rose.  On a side note, Axl must have had a heart attack.  He hates it when Slash uses their music, but at least Axl got paid.  Axl doesn't know whether to hate it or cash the check, thus the coronary.

Usher?  Why?

The dancers, I saw a blog that said it was Tron inspired.  Derivative?  Dancers based on a 2011 movie remake from the 80's.

What was that thing on will.i.am's head and did it protect him from ice falling off the Jerry Dome?

Autotune?  STOP IT!  Singing that doesn't have to be scrubbed is so much better.

Did Daltry sound like his voice was blown out last year?  I think so.  Tom Petty in a beard looking like a mountain man?  Leave that for the cameo in "The Postman."  Springsteen singing "Tenth Avenue Freeze Out" for six hours?  How many times can you chant "Tenth" before it sounds like you're trying to clear your sinuses?

Still, these performers gave us original music without contrived vocals or dancers.

My final critique: The show just had the originality of a Domino's Pepperoni.  Sure, you like it all right, but what do you have when it's done?

On a side note, for anyone who wonders if I am just some old guy who doesn't like "new music" and everything was better "when I was your age," you may be right.  But then again, the songs the Peas sampled were from my time, so look out where you're pointing.

Let me just say my dad is laughing his butt off at me from beyond the grave.  We had this same chat more than once.

The Sky Is Falling!

WARNING! PRESBY SPEAK BEYOND THIS POINT!

Yesterday, this letter was sent from an "unnamed group" of Presbyterian Pastors (the pastors are named, the group isn't) to the church. I have included the entire unedited text of the letter in a normal font, my comments in italics. Please note that the offset italicized comments, as always, are mine alone. Especially the snarky ones. The links to the mentioned documents are the ones from the email and active as of this posting. I have included all of the names as they had included all of their names.

A Letter to the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)

February 2, 2011

Brothers and Sisters in Christ,

To say the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) is deathly ill is not editorializing but acknowledging reality. Over the past year, a group of PC(USA) pastors has become convinced that to remain locked in unending controversy will only continue a slow demise, dishonor our calling, and offer a poor legacy to those we hope will follow us. We recently met in Phoenix, and have grown in number and commitment. We humbly share responsibility for the failure of our common life, and are no better as pastors nor more righteous than anyone on other sides of tough issues.

So, you're telling me that you are no better than me, my Session, and my people but because you went to Phoenix I should follow you? Because you represent a large church I should follow you? Because you feel a poor legacy coming that you have been a significant part of creating I should follow you? Still? Again?

Our denomination has been in steady decline for 45 years, now literally half the size of a generation ago. Most congregations see far more funerals than infant baptisms because we are an aging denomination. Only 1,500 of our 5,439 smallest churches have an installed pastor, putting their future viability as congregations in doubt. Even many larger congregations, which grew well for decades, have hit a season of plateau or decline. Our governing bodies reflect these trends, losing financial strength, staffing, and viability as presbyteries, synods, and national offices.

By the way, for the sake of knowing facts over emotional declaration, according to The Mainline Evangelism Project, this trend of declining membership and attendance applies to all of the "Seven Sister" "Mainline" denominations. This phenomena, while horrible, is not purely Presbyterian.

How we got to this place is less important than how to move forward. We are determined to get past rancorous, draining internal disputes that paralyze our common life and ministry. We believe the PC(USA) will not survive without drastic intervention, and stand ready to DO something different, to thrive as the Body of Christ. We call others of like mind to envision a new future for congregations that share our Presbyterian, Reformed, Evangelical heritage. If the denomination has the ability and will to move in this new direction, we will rejoice. Regardless, a group of us will change course, forming a new way for our congregations to relate. We hate the appearance of schism - but the PC(USA) is divided already. Our proposal only acknowledges the fractured denomination we have become.

Yep, 45 years of decline are horrid. But you know, these guys and their mentors have been in the church and in charge of the church for most of that time. These guys and others like them have been in charge for these 45 years, so now they are calling us all to share with them and put them back in charge again 'cause they're changing regardless? We know that this is going to happen because they say so-- "A group of us will change course, forming a new way for our congregations to relate." They hate the "appearance of schism so much" they'll leave. That's not ironic, that's contradictory.

Homosexual ordination has been the flashpoint of controversy for the last 35 years. Yet, that issue - with endless, contentious "yes" and "no" votes - masks deeper, more important divisions within the PC(USA). Our divisions revolve around differing understandings of Scripture, authority, Christology, the extent of salvation amidst creeping universalism, and a broader set of moral issues. Outside of presbytery meetings, we mostly exist in separate worlds, with opposing sides reading different books and journals, attending different conferences, and supporting different causes. There is no longer common understanding of what is meant by being "Reformed." Indeed, many sense that the only unity we have left is contained in the property clause and the pension plan; some feel like withholding per capita is a club used against them, while others feel locked into institutional captivity by property. While everyone wearies of battles over ordination, these battles divert us from a host of issues that affect the way our congregations fail to attract either young believers or those outside the faith. Thus, we age, shrink, and become increasingly irrelevant. Is it time to acknowledge that traditional denominations like the PC(USA) have served in their day but now must be radically transformed?

When people say it's not about the money, it's about the money. So it's not about the gays do we believe it's not about the gays? They say because the church is not a homogeneous unit that walks in lockstep we should stop coming together as Christians of the Presbyterian Church (USA) variety Christians so now we should become a "non-traditional" denomination? Since being a traditional denomination didn't work under their watch we should now become a non-traditional denomination under their watch.

We need something new, characterized by:

1. A clear, concise theological core to which we subscribe, within classic biblical, Reformed/Evangelical traditions, and a pledge to live according to those beliefs, regardless of cultural pressures to conform;

2. A commitment to nurture leadership in local congregations, which we believe is a primary expression of the Kingdom of God. We will identify, develop, and train a new generation of leaders - clergy and laity;

3. A passion to share in the larger mission of the people of God around the world, especially among the least, the lost, and the left behind.

4. A dream of multiplying healthy, missional communities throughout North America;

5. A pattern of fellowship reflecting the realities of our scattered life and joint mission, with regular gatherings locally, regionally, and nationally to excite our ability to dream together.

You know, if we all had the clear, concise, theological core we wouldn't have needed to change since Moses, but we didn't. Shoot, humanity couldn't handle one simple rule "Don't eat that!" We still don't and we never will. This is why we need the reconciling work of Christ and the power of the Holy Spirit.

By the way, that commitment to local congregations is fine, especially if you are in one of the 4,000 smallest churches.  That way these guys don't have to even think about you much less pay attention to what you have to say.

Our values include:

1. A minimalist structure, replacing bureaucracy and most rules with relational networks of common purpose;

2. Property and assets under stewardship of the local Session. Dues/Gifts for common administration should only allow and enable continued affiliation among these congregations;

3. Rather than large institutions, joint ventures with specialized ministries as congregations deem helpful [PC(USA) World Mission may be a source of joint support, aspects of the Board of Pensions, Presbyterian Foundation, Presbyterian Global Fellowship, Presbyterians for Renewal conferences, Outreach Foundation, etc.];

4. An atmosphere of support for congregations both within and outside of the PC(USA).

Our congregations are flush, so you can look to us like you did the Prom King and Queen, love us as we bully you, but don't ask to borrow the Corvette.

We invite like-minded pastors and elders to a gathering on August 25-27 in Minneapolis to explore joining this movement and help shape its character. Our purpose is to LIVE INTO new patterns as they are created, modeling a way of faith: the worship, supportive fellowship, sharing of best practices, and accessible theology that brings unity and the Spirit's vitality.

This gathering of the like-minded reminds me of that old song by the Five-Man Electrical Band called "Signs"--Long haired freaky people need not apply.

OUR PROPOSAL:

1. A Fellowship: The most immediate change we intend is creating a new way of relating in common faith, a Fellowship (name to be determined). The primary purpose of this Fellowship will be the encouragement of local congregations to live out the Good News proclaimed by our Savior, increasing the impact of the Kingdom of Heaven. This Fellowship will exist within current presbyteries for the time being, but energies and resources will flow in new directions. It is an intermediate tool to bring together like-minded congregations and pastors, to enable us to build a future different than our fractured present.

2. New Synod/Presbyteries: In the near future we will need "middle bodies" that offer freedom to express historical, biblical values amid ordination changes in the PC(USA). More importantly, we long for presbytery-like bodies with theological and missional consensus rather than fundamental disagreement over so many core issues. We need new processes that identify and support the next generation of leadership differently than the current model, which unintentionally weeds out the entrepreneurial persons we so desperately need in our congregations. Many current functions should be removed; some, like curriculum and mission relationships, have become less centralized already. We will work with the Middle Governing Bodies Commission since changes to The Book of Order will be needed to step fully into this reality.

3. Possible New Reformed Body: Congregations and presbyteries that remain in a denomination that fundamentally changes will become an insurmountable problem for many. Some members of the Fellowship will need an entity apart from the current PC(USA). It is likely that a new body will need to be created, beyond the boundary of the current PC(USA), while remaining in correspondence with its congregations. The wall between these partner Reformed bodies will be permeable, allowing congregations and pastors to be members in the Fellowship regardless of denominational affiliation. All kinds of possibilities exist, and much will depend on how supportive the PC(USA) can be in allowing something new to flourish.

4. Possible Reconfiguration of the PC(USA): We intend to continue conversations within the PC(USA), and have met with both Louisville's leadership and that of the Covenant Network in the past few months. We believe the denomination no longer provides a viable future and perceive that the Covenant Network also sees a broken system. We hope to work together to see if some new alignment might serve the whole Church.

We have had conversations with the denomination which we see as broken and no longer viable. That just doesn't seem to be a place to start a discussion. By the way, this "Fellowship" doesn't have to include you. As for agreeing with the Covenant Network about "seeing a broken system" it seems that this answer includes the thought "we agree with them that we would rather be a part of a church that doesn't include them or people who think like them."

Any model that includes an entity outside the PC(USA) does mean fewer remaining congregations, pastors, and elders to fight the challenges of the current PC(USA). Votes will swing in directions that had not been desirable before. For many this outcome simply acknowledges that fighting is not the way we choose to proceed; our goal is not institutional survival but effective faithfulness as full participants in the worldwide Church. We hope to discover and model what a new "Reformed body" looks like in the coming years, and we invite you to join us, stepping faithfully, boldly, and joyfully into the work for which God has called us.

Oh gosh, now they're using math as a fighting point. A schism from the PC(USA) will mean a smaller PC(USA). Can't disagree with something so obvious, but using it like a sharp stick is not glorious. "Fighting is not the way we choose to proceed" means "we're loosing now so we're not gonna play any more."

We invite you to:
download and share a PDF of this letter,
download and share a PDF of the white paper "Time for Something New",

visit our temporary webpage for more information,
and email us at fellowshippcusa@gmail.com  if you have questions and/or would like to be a signatory on this letter.

Steering Committee:
Vic Pentz, Peachtree Presbyterian, Atlanta, GA
John Crosby, Christ Presbyterian, Edina, MN
David Peterson, Memorial Drive Presbyterian, Houston, TX
Jim Singleton, First Presbyterian, Colorado Springs, CO
David Swanson, First Presbyterian, Orlando, FL
Rich Kannwischer, St. Andrews, Newport Beach, CA
Mark Toone, Chapel Hill Presbyterian, Gig Harbor, WA

Concurring Pastors:*

G. Christopher Scruggs, Advent Presbyterian, Cordova, TN
Mark Brewer, Bel Air Presbyterian, Los Angeles, CA
Allan Poole, Blacknall Memorial Presbyterian, Durham, NC
Rick Murray, Covenant Presbyterian, Austin, TX
Tim Harrison, Crossroads Presbyterian, Mequon, WI
Bob Burkins, Elmwood United Presbyterian, East Orange, NJ
Doug Pratt, First Presbyterian, Bonita Springs, FL
Mateen Elass, First Presbyterian, Edmond, OK
Rich McDermott, First Presbyterian, Fort Collins, CO
Richard Gibbons, First Presbyterian, Greenville, SC
Dan Baumgartner, First Presbyterian, Hollywood, CA
Jim Birchfield, First Presbyterian, Houston, TX
Jim Davis, First Presbyterian, Kingwood, TX
Jerry Andrews, First Presbyterian, San Diego, CA
John Sowers, First Presbyterian, Spokane, WA
Jim Miller, First Presbyterian, Tulsa, OK
Jack Peebles, First Presbyterian, Yakima, WA
Don Baird, Fremont Presbyterian, Sacramento, CA
Doug Ferguson, Grace Presbyterian, Houston, TX
Bill Teng, Heritage Presbyterian, Alexandria, VA
Ronald W. Scates, Highland Park Presbyterian, Dallas, TX
David Lenz, Hope Presbyterian, Richfield, MN
Paul A. Cunningham, La Jolla Presbyterian, La Jolla, CA
Bob Sanders, Lake Grove Presbyterian, Lake Oswego, OR
Kevin Pound, Mandarin Presbyterian Church, Jacksonville, FL
John Ortberg, Menlo Park Presbyterian, Menlo Park, CA
Jeff Ebert, Presbyterian Church at New Providence, New Providence, NJ
Douglas Garrard, Palm Desert Community Presbyterian, Palm Desert, CA
Paul Detterman, Presbyterians for Renewal, Louisville, KY
Mike McClenahan, Solana Beach Presbyterian, Solana Beach, CA
Steve Hartman, Third Presbyterian, Richmond, VA
David Joynt, Presbyterian Church of Toms River, Toms River, NJ
Douglas J. Rumford, Trinity United Presbyterian, Santa Ana, CA
Patrick H. Wrisley, University Place Presbyterian, University Place, WA
George Hinman (Senior Pastor) and Tim Snow (Executive Pastor), University Presbyterian, Seattle, WA
Peter Barnes, Westlake Hills Presbyterian, Austin, TX
Baron Eliason, Westminster Presbyterian, Lubbock, TX

*Signatories represent themselves, not necessarily the Session or congregation of their respective churches.

This ends the letter, back to my comments:  It has been noted by some that all of these churches are "Big Steeple" churches, large churches with storied histories. They also have significant amounts of property and status in their communities and in the denomination. It has also been noted that all of these pastors are men, and supposed that they are white men. I can say that the former is true and the latter is likely true, especially given the demographics of the denomination.

Again, as I said, these links are active and these signatories were on the letter I received yesterday. One more note, I will label this post under "church" but I will not use the "faith" label. This letter and my responses have little to do with faith.

These men tell us "the sky is falling." If that's true, I'm glad I have faith that it is the Lord God who will catch us, and not these guys.