The Call to High Adventure

Vida Dutton Scudder. Image is in the public domain.

Vida Dutton Scudder (1861-1954) was a professor at Wellesly College, a member of the Socialist party, and a prominent activist in the Episcopal Church.  She was involved in the Social Gospel movement, the campaign for labor rights, the equality of women, and (eventually) pacifism.  She helped to organize the Women’s Trade Union League, the Episcopal Church Socialist League, and joined the Society of the Companions of the Holy Cross.  Vida and her partner, Florence Converse, lived together for 35 years, from 1919 until Vida’s death in 1954.  She is celebrated in the Episcopal Church’s calendar of saints: her feast day is on October 10.

Earlier today, as I was reading Diana Butler Bass’s book A People’s History of Christianity, I came across an amazing prediction of Scudder’s that Butler Bass took from Scudder’s 1912 book Socialism and Character.  In this passage, Scudder prophesies the advent of mainline church decline, which eventually started to happen in the latter half of the 20th century.  I was amazed at how closely Scudder’s views resemble my own, except that she was writing a full century before I started thinking about it.  Listen to what Scudder has to say:

One certitude is forced on us : it is unlikely that Christianity will retain so nominally exclusive a sway as it has hitherto done in western Europe. In all probability, the day of its conventional social control is passing and will soon be forgotten. The time will come when the Christian faith will have to fight for right of way among crowding antagonists as vigorously as in the times of Athanasius and Augustine.

And in thoughts like these all genuine Christians must rejoice. Without the call to high adventure, the faith has never flourished.

 

 

 

A Matter of Conscience (An Open Letter to Evangelicals)

Thanks to a post I published over a month ago, I’ve managed to build some good will and credibility capital with my evangelical brothers and sisters, especially those in the Presbyterian Church (USA).  Today, I want to “cash in” on some of that capital.

We’re all well aware of the renewed heat underlying the debate about same-sex marriage that expands far beyond the boundaries of our own denomination.  In recent weeks, North Carolina passed Amendment One and President Obama publicly endorsed marriage equality.

Most of the evangelical Christians I know are intelligent, compassionate, and dedicated people who despise the use of verbal or physical violence against any group of people.  I wish that more of them understood the nature of systemic violence that forms the backbone of oppression and heterosexism, but I’m willing to accept that most of them are not conscious homophobes or bigots.

Over the last 25 years or so, evangelicals have evolved in their understanding of and fight against HIV/AIDS.  In the early 1980s, it was more common for well-known preachers to deem the virus a plague of God’s wrath against the LGBT community.  Since then, the majority of mainstream evangelicals have come to realize that this is a global health issue.  Evangelical churches like Central Presbyterian Church in Baltimore have started outreach programs like Hope Springs to treat and prevent HIV/AIDS in their own communities.  Like President Obama’s views on marriage, it’s fair to say that the mainstream evangelical perspective on the HIV/AIDS crisis has “evolved”.

Today, I would encourage evangelicals toward a similar “evolution” in the fight against homophobia.  I repeat that most evangelicals are not homophobes.  The vast majority of the ones I know are sickened by stories of physical violence levied against people because of their gender identity or sexual orientation.

This country needs a widespread call from evangelical pulpits that takes a firm stance against homophobia as a sin against God.  This is not to say that such churches should immediately alter their views on marriage or interpretations of scripture.  Keep those as they are for now.

But evangelicals should take seriously the ends and means that they already espouse.  Their endgame is to lead the whole world toward greater wholeness through a relationship with Christ.  They passionately believe in preaching the Christian gospel in word and deed wherever they go.  They affirm that friendship is the single best method of evangelism.

What would it do for their witness to Christ if there was a large movement of traditional and orthodox evangelicals who, while maintaining their views on marriage, called for an end to homophobia and violence?  What would happen if they, as entire churches, consciously nurtured personal relationships with folks in the LGBT community?  What kind of gospel credibility would be built if evangelical pastors made a sustained effort at condemning homophobia from their pulpits?

Let me offer you a picture of the other side.  This is a sample of what folks in the LGBT community are hearing from evangelicals:

The first video is Rev. Charles Worley of Providence Road Baptist Church, the second is Rev. Sean Harris of Berean Baptist Church.

Most evangelicals I know detest this kind of talk.  They would agree that it does nothing but damage the entire church’s witness to Christ.  However, the voices of these bigots are much louder than the voices of evangelicals I know.  The message that folks in the LGBT community are hearing is not the one that says “Jesus loves you.”  The voices being heard are the ones that say, “You’re disgusting.  You’re an abomination.  You don’t matter in this country.  We wish you didn’t exist.”

It’s up to evangelical Christians to change all this, if they want to be effective witnesses for Christ.  Even those evangelicals who limit their understanding of marriage to heterosexual couples need to stand up and add their voices to the fight against homophobia.  Pastors, don’t keep silent out of fear of what your congregation will think.  Your silence implies agreement with bigots and hate-mongers.  What’s more important to you as evangelicals: not appearing “soft on homosexuality” to your congregants or effectively witnessing to the love of Jesus?

You don’t have to change your views on marriage or re-interpret your Bible, just be faithful to what you already believe the Bible is telling you.

Take a stand against violence and homophobia.  Preach the gospel.  Be the gospel.

Recommended Reading on Liberal Christianity

Here is a link to an excellent annotated bibliography of several popular-level primers on Liberal (a.k.a. ‘Progressive’) Christianity.  For those who wonder what we’re all about, I’d say this is a good place to start.  If your looking for one book to begin with, I’d recommend the one at the very top: Marcus Borg’s The Heart of ChristianityIt’s concise and well-written for folks on a non-academic level.

20 Books on Progressive Christian Spirituality

It’s an article on the website Spirituality & Practice, which I found by hanging around at Abundance Trek, which is just one of the blogs kept up by my friend, John Wilde.  There are many people in this world who strive to be unique individuals who defy all conventional categories; John is one of the very few souls who actually accomplishes it.  How like Jesus…

God Has No Grandchildren: Evangelical Lessons For Liberal Christians

Image by Paul M. Walsh

It’s been an interesting year for me as I’ve consciously completed a theological shift that began almost a decade ago.  In many ways, it feels a lot like a return to a trajectory I was on before I immersed myself in the subculture of fundamentalism during high school and college.  As I’ve stated elsewhere, the years I spent in that subculture pretty much ruined me for evangelicalism, even in its more moderate, intelligent, and compassionate expressions.  This blog represents one attempt on my part to think out loud and publicly about the theological implications of my current trajectory.

The past few weeks have presented me with an unbelievable diversity of reactions from folks in the evangelical camp.  At one point, things got so bad that my wife asked me if I was “a lightning rod for angry fundamentalists.”  At another point, I was being thanked for my words by evangelical members of my own denomination.

[Side note: Before I continue, it bears noting that I do not use the related terms evangelical and fundamentalist synonymously.  All (Protestant) fundamentalists are evangelical, but not all evangelicals are fundamentalists.  I would once again recommend the many fine books of folks like Brian McLaren, Jim Wallis, N.T. Wright, and Tony Campolo.  I would describe all of the above authors as non-fundamentalist evangelicals.  And this list is by no means exhaustive.  Most of my evangelical friends tend to identify themselves with Martin Luther and John Wesley rather than William Jennings Bryan and John Gresham Machen.  End side note.]

With all of this activity going on, it seems like a good time for me to list the things that I value from my evangelical upbringing.  These are the gifts of this tradition that I hope to carry with me and use to “brighten the [theological] corner” where I now find myself.  There are three such gifts, which I will label as follows: Spirituality, Bible, and Mission.  The first two I came up with through my own reflection but later found in Jack Rogers’ book, Jesus, the Bible, and Homosexuality (WJK: 2006).  The third gift is one that Rogers listed and I missed in my initial assessment.  These gifts are not unique to evangelicalism, but represent distinct theological emphases that the movement has embodied and enacted in a particularly effective way.  I will discuss each of these gifts in separate blog posts.

Spirituality

“God has no grandchildren.”

This particular turn of phrase came to me from my mother and I love it.  To me, it speaks of taking personal ownership of one’s spirituality.  In an effort to respect diversity in church, liberal Christians have too often shied away from being very public about their personal relationship with God.  Such reticence has led many unsympathetic outsiders to presume that we don’t have one (which is not true).  We tend to do such a bad job at this that our own children can grow up in our churches and leave without coming to an awareness of the spiritual depth that is there.  A few of them find their way to evangelical churches but most simply abandon church altogether.

The necessity for taking personal ownership of one’s spirituality is one thing that evangelicals do extremely well.  They intentionally provide an access portal to the divine that allows their adherents to engage with faith and grow in a way that is energetic and dynamic.  While I hate it when people bash the term religion (a beautiful word that needs rescuing these days), I can appreciate what evangelicals mean when they say that, for them, Christianity is “a relationship, not a religion.”

I think it’s high time that liberal Christians got more vocal about our personal relationship with God.  We need to build one another up with the stories of our encounters with the divine.  We need to let our children (and the world) know that there is a vast and deep reservoir of power and love in which we live, move, and have our being.  This reservoir is available to any and all who desire to drink from its living waters.  Respecting diversity does not mean watering down our spirituality to the lowest common denominator.  Consciously embracing the life of the spirit does not necessarily make us into fanatics.  In fact, it has the effect of empowering us in our ministries of compassion and justice.  Too often, I’ve seen well-meaning activists burn out and lose hope in the struggle for justice.  They have a desperate need for enthusiasm in its most literal sense (“God-full-ness“).

I am reminded of Martin Luther King’s famous “kitchen table” experience where he found himself exhausted and at the end of his rope late one night after a threatening phone call.  He sat with a cup of coffee at his kitchen table and contemplated giving up the fight for justice and equality.  In prayer, he confessed his weakness and asked for help.  And, just then, he felt like he heard an inner voice saying to him (I paraphrase), “Stand up for righteousness and I will be with you.”

Liberal Christians need to start sharing stories like this one with one another.  Too many folks inside and outside our churches assume that, because we don’t talk about our relationship with God, we don’t have one.  Many (unfairly and erroneously) call us “dead churches.”  It’s time to show them how wrong they are.  Gone are they days when speaking openly about spirituality was taboo.  Provided that we maintain respect for those whose spiritual experience is different from our own, we carry within ourselves the capacity to feed ourselves and one another with our stories.  The light that is within us can help to illumine the path for those around us.  Let’s not hide that light under a bushel!  Liberal Christians, let it shine!

Journeying on by Stages

Abram's Altar

It’s no secret that I’ve been part of several different varieties of Protestant church: Baptist, Evangelical, Charismatic, Emergent, Episcopal, Presbyterian…

All this time, I’ve been longing for a tradition, something bigger than my little self, of which I can be a part.  Each time I land somewhere new, I think I’ve found it, that is, the place where I will finally put down roots and stay forever.  And each time, I end up leaving after a few years.  I’m beginning to think my ecclesiology is not as strong as I once thought.

I tend to leave each tradition with a keen (and perhaps overdeveloped) sense of what is wrong with it.  My most severe criticism has been reserved for the one tradition that, during my youngest years, shaped me more than any other: the Baptists.

I graduated from a private Christian high school in the Bible belt that was run by a Baptist church (watch the film Saved! for an idea of my high school experience).  I got to see the very worst of the Baptist tradition there.  Theologically, they were the sweaty-brow, pulpit-pounding, Bible-beating, hellfire-and-damnation preachers for which the American south has become famous.  Their commitment to ignorance was the foundation of their stupidity.

At no time was their hypocrisy more apparent than during my senior year when the pastor of that church sexually assaulted a student and the church covered it up.  Meanwhile, that student’s mother (who happened to be a teacher at the school) was fired from her job.  Later that year, another student was expelled from school because she was caught drinking at a party.  The administration defended their actions, citing “discipleship” and not “evangelism” as the institution’s raison d’être.

After that experience, the one variety of church that I intentionally avoided was Baptist.  To me, they represented the very worst of dogmatic and legalistic Christianity that was devoid of any mysticism, relationality, or intellectual integrity.

More recently, as I’ve been exploring what it means to believe and live as a self-identified liberal Christian, I have been basking in the light of several authors whose lives and words have touched me deeply.  Specifically, I am referring to Howard Thurman, Walter Rauschenbusch, Harry Emerson Fosdick, and Martin Luther King, Jr.  These icons of liberal Protestantism have touched me deeply with their commitment to everything I thought was lacking in my experience of the Baptist tradition.

And then it hit me: these four men had one thing in common that had eluded my consciousness until now.  They were all Baptist ministers.

Delving a little more deeply, I discovered a whole new perspective on the Baptist tradition that I hadn’t noticed until now.  Apart from the die-hard fundamentalists among them, Baptists are (and have been for four hundred years) committed to the power of freedom.

Walter Shurden has articulated the Baptist commitment to freedom in terms of four central values (I have lifted the following summary from Wikipedia):

Soul freedom: the soul is competent before God, and capable of making decisions in matters of faith without coercion or compulsion by any larger religious or civil body

Church freedom: freedom of the local church from outside interference, whether government or civilian (subject only to the law where it does not interfere with the religious teachings and practices of the church)

Bible freedom: the individual is free to interpret the Bible for himself or herself, using the best tools of scholarship and biblical study available to the individual

Religious freedom: the individual is free to choose whether to practice their religion, another religion, or no religion; Separation of church and state is often called the “civil corollary” of religious freedom

Needless to say, this discovery has sparked a reconsideration of my theological roots, dare I say it, the tradition in which I was raised.  Upon further reflection and research, I came to another realization about my heritage:

Apart from the high school I attended, my experience of Baptist churches via the ones I attended as a child was an experience of very moderate to liberal Baptists.  My parents, who I would describe as moderate in most respects, brought us to two different Baptist churches during my youth: First Baptist Church of Melrose, Massachusetts and Binkley Baptist Church in Chapel Hill, North Carolina.  First Baptist of Melrose is where I have my earliest memories of church.  Binkley Baptist is where I received my first Bible in the third grade.  Both of these churches are American Baptist, formerly known as Northern Baptist, a much more diverse and moderate denomination than its southern counterpart.  Binkley Baptist is also affiliated with the Alliance of Baptists, a very liberal denomination that split off from the Southern Baptist Convention in the mid-1980s.  That same church made waves decades ago by hiring an openly gay minister before it was popular, even among mainline Protestants.  Upon close re-examination, I would say that my perspective on my Baptist roots is shifting dramatically.

Having just completed my transition to the Presbyterian Church in the last twelve months, I’m not looking to make another switch.  However, if one were to ask me what I see God doing in my personal life right now, I would probably point to the way in which my relationship toward my Baptist heritage is being redeemed in my own memory.

For the last several years (before this process began in earnest), I’ve even had recurring dreams of returning to Binkley.  One involved making my way down a snowy path through the woods behind my childhood home and arriving at Binkley in order to talk with their pastor.  In another dream, I was worshiping in their sanctuary on a Sunday morning, but the internal arrangement of the church (pulpit, pews, etc.) was 180 degrees opposite to what it had been when I attended there.  Those are striking images, considering what I’ve been talking about here.  Could it be that this internal redemption of my denominational heritage was an unconscious work-in-progress for several ears?

All of this material came up in my mind yesterday during my personal devotions.  I was reading a passage from Genesis 12, where Abram is called away to an unknown land under divine guidance.  The voice said to him, “Go from your country and your kindred and your father’s house to the land that I will show you.”  He had no idea of where he was going.  All Abram knew was that he would be blessed and would be a blessing to “all the families of the earth.”

You would think that this would be the beginning of a long epic that ended years later with his arrival in the Promised Land.  However, such is not the case.  We read in the text that Abram arrived in the Canaan by the end of the next paragraph.  That seems rather anti-climactic and counter-intuitive to me.  Where was the author’s sense of story and adventure?  Odysseus took fourteen years to get where he was going, Abram took a paragraph.

But then I noticed something else: Abram’s journey did not end with his arrival in the Promised Land.  It was only beginning.  He continued to live as a nomad in Canaan, moving from place to place, “journeying on by stages,” as the text says.  And at each stage along the way, he set up an altar.  He acknowledged the sacredness of each patch of earth and gave thanks to the One who had called him in the beginning, guided him thus far, and promised to bless him until the end.

As it was with Abram, so I believe it is with me.  Perhaps I have been in the Promised Land all along, still living as a nomad, traveling from place to place and church to church.  Perhaps that sense of tradition and belonging for which I yearn has been with me the whole time.  Maybe it is only now, as I am being led to embrace the part of my heritage I have despised most, that I am finally able to see my real tradition.

I build an altar here, acknowledging the sacredness of this patch of earth called ‘Baptist’ and blessing the One who brought me to and through its territory.  I do likewise for the other theological provinces I have visited: Evangelical, Charismatic, Emergent, Episcopal, and Presbyterian.  I do not know where my journey will lead me from here, but I look forward to exploring the land that is being shown to me and experiencing the mutual interflow of blessing between myself and all the families of the earth.

Seeds of Peace

The Achtiname (Charter of Privileges) of the Prophet Muhammad, given to the monks of St. Catherine's monastery.

Last Sunday, I preached against Islamophobia from the pulpit of Boonville Presbyterian Church.  As a supportive addendum to that message, I offer this post in hopes of fostering greater goodwill and understanding between Christians and Muslims.

The purpose of this post is to lead readers from all religions toward more peaceful coexistence.  If that’s not something you want, then don’t read or comment on this article.  All offensive comments will be deleted.  I’m telling you now so that you don’t take it personally when it happens. 

The following verses from the Qur’an and the English translation of the Achtiname of Muhammad were found in an article by Dr. Zakir Naik in the online magazine Islamic Voice.  You can visit their website at: www.islamicvoice.com

Passages from the Qur’an on violence and forced conversions:

  • “Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from error” [Al-Qur’an 2:256]
  • “Invite (all) to the way of thy Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching; and argue with them in ways that are best and most gracious.” [Al-Qur’an 16:125]

The Achtiname (Charter of Privileges) is a document produced by the Prophet Muhammad himself for the monks of St. Catherine’s monastery on Mt. Sinai.  The document provides a beautiful insight on the Prophet’s attitude toward Christians.  The document has been preserved by the monks for centuries and stands as a memorial to interfaith respect.

Charter of Privileges

This is a message from Muhammad ibn Abdullah, as a covenant to those who adopt Christianity, near and far, we are with them. Verily I, the servants, the helpers, and my followers defend them, because Christians are my citizens; and by Allah! I hold out against anything that displeases them. No compulsion is to be on them.

Neither are their judges to be removed from their jobs nor their monks from their monasteries. No one is to destroy a house of their religion, to damage it, or to carry anything from it to the Muslims’ houses.

Should anyone take any of these, he would spoil God’s covenant and disobey His Prophet. Verily, they are my allies and have my secure charter against all that they hate.

No one is to force them to travel or to oblige them to fight.

The Muslims are to fight for them. If a female Christian is married to a Muslim, it is not to take place without her approval. She is not to be prevented from visiting her church to pray. Their churches are to be respected. They are neither to be prevented from repairing them nor the sacredness of their covenants.

No one of the nation (Muslims) is to disobey the covenant till the Last Day (end of the world).