Not Enthused Part 1

As I have started writing this I have found I have enough material for several weeks.  I recognize that I might lose some of my more casual readers over the next few weeks but those who are interested in theology and in the Church will probably find this of interest.  

Last week I concluded by saying that I am not as enthused as some Christians are for a return to the ways of the Reformers.  This week I’m going to get into what I meant when I said that.  Before I begin, let me remind you that I greatly admire the Reformers, especially Martin Luther and John Calvin.  I give thanks to God for the sacrifices that were made by Protestants during those many years of strife.  Many Protestants gave their lives for the cause of reforming a terribly corrupt Church.  However, just because I am indebted to them, am often guided by their writings, and because I greatly admire what they did in the 16^th Century, does not mean that I think it is a good idea to impose the faith as they taught it and lived it onto the 21^st Century Church without some major amendments being made.  Here is reason number one for me:

There are not enough people being invited to the table:

The Reformers were geniuses.  However, they were all 16^th century highly-educated, white, male geniuses from Northern Europe.  To claim that the Reformers got it right for all times, or that their theological descendents that authored the Westminster Confession and Catechisms completely “nailed it,” is to claim that a 16^th or 17^th century Northern European highly educated white male perspective is the right perspective.  If we are going to claim that, then we also need to remember that this particular 16^th or 17^th Century Northern European highly educated white male perspective was, in fact, only one of many 16^th or 17^th century Northern European highly educated white male perspectives in Europe at the time.  Those who are calling for a return to the Reformers are okay with claiming that their particular favorite Northern European highly educated white male perspective is the right perspective for obvious reasons.  If you were to go to one of the national conferences held by those who are calling for a return to the ways of the Reformers you would find that nearly all the speakers and writers represent one group: white men of Northern European descent (like me).  At the two largest and most popular conferences in this genre for 2013-2014 there either was or will be a combined twenty-one speakers.  21 out of 21 of the speakers are men.  20 of the 21 are white men.  This doesn't mean they are wrong; it simply means that not enough people are being invited to the table.  

What about that 50% of the population that includes my wife and daughter?  I am continually surprised by the very different insights that never would have come to my mind that come from my sisters in faith and ministry.  The Reformers and their current disciples do not allow for women to serve in roles of leadership within the Church.  What about people of color?  What about people from other parts of the world?  What about other kinds of Christians such as Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Pentecostals, etc.? What about the contributions of those who lived before the 16^th Century and those who lived after it?  What about the work of those who disagreed with Luther and Calvin (who disagreed with each other on some pretty major issues)?  If we return to the ways of the Reformers the way that many conservative Presbyterians, Lutherans, and Baptists are calling for, the table shrinks and we end up with a Northern European Jesus flanked by Luther and Calvin with a bunch of modern white men in suits sitting at their feet. 

I truly believe that we need the voices of unique indigenous forms of Christianity, even when (or especially when) they have not been heavily influenced by those like Luther and Calvin.  I even think we need the input of those from other religious traditions and I am even open to hearing from (instead of arguing with) those who call themselves agnostics or atheists.  For me, with both the Reformers and with those who idolize them now, the table is too small.  If what you want is for conservative white men of Northern European descent to be the dominant voice, then returning to the Reformers is for you.  It is not, however, for me.  It seems to me that this has more to do with white guys like me gripping more and more tightly to the privilege that we are slowly losing than it does with working toward the Kingdom of God that Jesus preached, enacted, and inaugurated.  I recognize that this is a stereotypical "liberal" response, but it is the response that makes the most sense to me. 

We are at a point in history during which the Christian faith can take on new diversity, complexity, color, and texture.  The faith can hold onto the core of Christian discipleship while looking very different at the same time.  The faith is not diminished by hearing the voices of different perspectives; it is enriched.  For instance, I know the work of the Reformers, but I also appreciate the work of many Roman Catholic theologians.  The Reformers (because of their context) and their modern devotees (because they want to be like the Reformers even though they live in a different context) are not big fans of the Catholics and resist or outright refuse to listen to the input of Catholics.  A prime example of this is R.C. Sproul, who is a theologian and author who has helped me to understand the historical Reformed Tradition but who has not convinced me to continue to adhere to the historical Reformed Tradition in the way he would like.  Here is what he says about Catholics and those of us who are in the “liberal” churches as he calls them such as the PC(USA), Episcopal Church (USA), Evangelical Lutheran Church of America, and United Church of Christ: 

“Yes there are believers, true believers here and there in the Roman Catholic Church, in liberal churches and so on. They're mavericks to their community and I personally believe that those people who truly accept Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior in the biblical sense who live in the Roman Catholic Church have a moral and spiritual duty to leave that communion immediately, that they are living in sin by continuing to be a visible member of an institution that anathematizes the gospel of Jesus Christ.”  

I respect Dr. Sproul for stating what he believes and I recognize that he would wipe the floor with me in a theological debate (because that is his specialty) but although I have read a great deal of what he believes (and I think it should be a part of Reformed theology courses in our PC(USA) seminaries) after a great deal of reflection I simply do not share his beliefs, and the first major reason for that is that his system of beliefs is formulated at a very small, very homogeneous table of discussion.  That is why I refuse to follow his advice to leave the Presbyterian Church (USA) as he did several decades ago when the PC(USA) started to ordain women to the offices of deacon, ruling elder, and teaching elder.  I value the diversity of voices that we invite to the table in the PC(USA).

This will be continued next week...

May the Christ in others stir up the Christ in you so that in all your interactions with others this week there will be peace.

In Christ,

Everett

Reformation Day

This past Sunday we had a wonderful celebration in worship marking Reformation Sunday.  As I explained in worship, Reformation Day is actually on October 31, because it was on that day in 1517 that a Catholic priest/monk/professor in the city of Wittenberg in what we now call Germany finally got so ticked off at the way the Church was being run in Europe that he nailed his 95 Theses (or complaints) to the door of the church in town.  Now, it should be noted, that Luther isn’t the only one who would have nailed papers to the front door of the church.  It was used as a kind of bulletin board for the town.  But regardless, posting his 95 theses on the town bulletin board was a gutsy move.  

As so often happens in history, Martin Luther was the right person living at the right time.  It also helped a great deal that he found a powerful ally in a local ruler by the name of Frederick the Wise (a lot can be said for having friends with money and influence as long as that money and influence is used for God’s purposes).  Perhaps the most important factor, however, was that the printing press was available to Luther in a way that it had not been available to those who came before him.  Because they could be copied rather quickly (by the standards of the times) Luther’s writings spread like wildfire.  It wasn’t long before all kinds of reform movements, some very different from Luther’s, began to take root in cities in France, England, and Switzerland.  Our tradition, Presbyterianism, is the descendent of Scottish Presbyterianism, which is in turn the descendent of the work of John Calvin, a major reformer who was originally from France but did his work in the Swiss city of Geneva.  A fiery Scottish preacher named John Knox (who spent a good deal of time as a galley slave on a ship because of his Protestant beliefs) studied under John Calvin and then returned to Scotland.  The main thrust of the Protestant Reformation (in its many various forms) as a whole was generally to get the Church to return to the Bible as the only authority of the Church, as opposed to Church tradition.  Many of the Reformers saw themselves as working to return to the ways of the early apostolic church.  

I love Reformation history and I have read hundreds and hundreds of pages written by John Calvin as well as many written by Martin Luther and Ulrich Zwingli.  I’ve read some of John Knox’s work (including the Scots Confession) as well as other documents from other reformers of the era such as the Second Helvetic Confession and the Heidelberg Catechism.  Also, I have read many current authors who write a great deal about the Reformation such as Michael Horton, R.C. Sproul, and Kevin DeYoung.  These brilliantly intelligent authors look back to the Reformation in a very similar way that the reformers looked back to the early church—as a kind of pure era to which we must return.  Although I owe an immeasurable gratitude to the Reformers and I have learned a great deal from the contemporary writers who call for a return to the ways of the Reformers, I am not as enthused about the idea of returning to the ways of the Reformers as some Christians are, many of them my good friends.  

But time for both this writer and probably you as the reader is running short so I’ll have to tell you why I’m not as enthused about the call to return to the Reformation next week.

In the meantime, may you all have a blessed Reformation Day on October 31 as well as a day of remembrance and God’s comfort on All Saints Day on November 1.  We will mark All Saints Sunday on November 3.

Grace and Peace,

Everett 

The Bishop of Bling

Over the past few days, Pope Francis has made the news once again for something very positive.  He has suspended the Bishop of Limburg in Germany for using church money to live an obscenely lavish lifestyle. The opulent spending of Bishop Franz-Peter Tebartz-van Elst (what a name!) is so notorious that the media has dubbed him the "Bishop of Bling."  Among other charges against him, it is alleged that he spent $42,000,000 renovating his personal residence.  His extravagant lifestyle has been financed by the offerings that are put into the plate each Sunday by faithful German Catholic worshipers.  It seems as though the Bishop must never have read Jesus' words in Matthew 6, "No one can serve two masters; for a slave will either hate the one and love the other, or be devoted to the one and despise the other.  You cannot serve God and wealth."

It is interesting that this has made the news this week as we approach Reformation Day on October 31, which we will mark as a congregation as Reformation Sunday on October 27.  It was on October 31, 1517 that a German Catholic priest/monk/professor by the name of Martin Luther finally grew so ticked off with the excesses and greed of the Church in Europe that he nailed his "95 Theses," which were basically 95 complaints against the Church leadership, to the door of the church in the town of Wittenberg. Although this date is said to have begun the Reformation, really the Reformation had been building strength for more than a century. Metaphorically speaking, the dam had been cracking for more than a hundred years, but Martin Luther's actions burst the already heavily compromised dam letting loose the waters of reform. It must also be noted, because we Protestants are often ignorant of it, that the Catholic Church did actually reform itself through the Councils of Trent that took place between 1545-1563.  Pope Francis is trying to do the same thing right now in regard to the greed of Church leaders, what he calls the "closed-mindedness" of some Catholic doctrines, and the horrible tragedy of priestly molestation and the resulting church cover-ups.  

But let's concentrate on the opulence of religious leaders for a moment. The so-called "Bishop of Bling" is merely the most recent example of greed among church leaders.  Popular American preachers like Joel Osteen, Joyce Meyer, and TD Jakes teach what is called "the prosperity gospel."  They tell their hearers that if they will give money to God, conveniently through their particular ministry, that the giver will receive more money and blessings from God in return.  Meyer, Osteen, and Jakes have mansions and private jets, yet continue to ask the faithful for more money.  A friend of mine who is an elder in the Presbyterian Church of Nigeria told me that there are many Pentecostal prosperity preachers in Nigeria (and throughout Africa) who have become multi-millionaires from the money given by poor, even destitute, African people.  On a much smaller scale, I've known a Presbyterian pastor who always drove a brand-new Cadillac and wore a Rolex watch.  Also, I've sat in a presbytery meeting and watched as a pastor fought tooth-and-nail to keep the presbytery from setting a minimum salary that congregations must pay a pastor, a minimum of only $40,000. Come to find out, that pastor who was fighting against the $40,000 minimum (I was making $37,000 at the time) had a yearly salary close to $100,000 along with six weeks of vacation and four weeks of study leave per year.  This is most certainly not merely a Roman Catholic problem; this is a Christian problem.

This morning I opened up my email and read my daily devotion from Franciscan Priest Richard Rohr.  Here is part of that devotion:

The biblical bias toward the bottom has been called by some the "preferential option for the poor."  But it is an option, an invitation: it is a grace, and it emerges from inner freedom--or else it would not be from God.  In the last analysis, the Bible is biased; it takes the side of the rejected ones, the abandoned ones, the barren women, and the ones who have been excluded, tortured, and kept outside. This is all summed up in Jesus' own ministry: He clearly prefers, heals, and includes the foreigner, the non-Jew, the handicapped, and the sinner--without rejecting the people of power, but very clearly critiquing them.

I believe what Father Rohr is writing about is true; that is why I struggle with it.  I try to live a simple lifestyle. It may not seem that way to a lot of folks, but I do.  It is true that I live in a huge, almost 3,000 square feet, stately, freshly renovated house.  This could be interpreted as opulence. But it needs to be known that this is simply the house the church owns, the house the church provides for my family and me. We enjoy the house, but we were just as happy in our little 1,100 square feet house in Oklahoma.  "But what about your giant TV?" you might ask.  We didn't pay for that either; it was a housewarming gift from someone in our family. We didn't ask for it; they just gave it.  "Well, I see you wearing expensive Ralph Lauren shirts."  I bought one of those at Ohio Thrift for $3.00.  The other one I bought for $7.00 at the outlet mall. Anything I own that is name brand I bought at a thrift store, off a clearance rack, or it was given to me as a gift.  "But sometimes you play golf."  Whenever I play golf I only do it when someone else is paying for it or if I've been given a little extra money as a gift.  Plus, my set of clubs was given to me for free from someone who pieced it together from spare clubs.  I drive a 2005 Toyota Matrix with 125,000 miles on it and stains on the seats.  Danielle drives a Mazda with 50,000 miles on it. We've never bought a new car or owned a luxury car and we do not plan to do either one.  This church provides generously for my family but all of our money goes back to the church, to pay bills, or to provide opportunities like scouts, piano lessons, and ballet lessons for our kids.  

I'm certainly not the Bishop of Bling or Joyce Meyer, but I must continually allow myself to be critiqued by the words of Jesus.  We all must allow ourselves to be critiqued by his words.  As we celebrate Reformation Sunday this week, let us remember that reformation is always needed in our larger church bodies, in our local congregations, and most importantly in our own lives.  May the controversy over the "Bishop of Bling" be to us a reminder to search our own hearts.  Let us all remember the words of our Lord Jesus, "Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust consume and where thieves break in and steal; but store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust consumes and where thieves do not break in and steal.  For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also."  

It is my prayer that this week we will all realize and live into the fact that we are blessed by God in order to be blessings to others.  See you on Reformation Sunday!

Grace and Peace,

Everett