Caught Inside a Seminar with a Consultant Man Again!

Today I experienced one of the most challenging, annoying, and disturbing seminars in a very long time. Firstly, with more than five decades of church life under my belt, there are few fads that have not ended up costing me time and money for some class or seminar someplace. In the 60s it was the charismatic renewal, in the 70s church growth. Spiritual gifts followed and then leadership and vision seminars. Lately, we have seen a spate of conferences dealing with the emerging church and ministry to postmoderns.

I have sat through more than enough sessions on “reaching the unreached,” becoming “seeker sensitive,” pioneering a contemporary service, and the like. Today was no different. With words like “missional community,” moving from an “attraction model to an incarnational model,” “apostolic leadership,” and a small rucksack full of specialty vocabulary, it felt like being force fed a year’s worth of Leadership Net material through a fire hose.

In the interests of full disclosure, I am not immune to the appeal of this kind of material. Indeed, a quest to master this arcane literature led me to complete a masters degree in organizational management at a secular business school during the mid-90s. My more than 500 page thesis surveyed virtually every bit of leadership material then extant as well as conducting some major social science research on correlations between pastoral leadership style and ministerial effectiveness. However, I have come to believe that just as the CEO model for the pastor has proven disastrously unhelpful, so will this newest fad.

During the sessions today some familiar themes were sounded: replacing “church growth” with a vision for kingdom growth; developing disciples instead of members; encouraging a new apostolic leadership; moving away from a program centered preoccupation to focusing on spiritual formation; and shifting from planning to preparing for a challenging and uncertain world.

What I appreciated was the encouragement for church leaders to think “outside the box” and to find creative ways to impact their communities for Christ and to encourage their people to do the same. Some of the ideas mentioned were positively genius! Also, the humorous delivery and relentless teasing made the time pass quickly.

However, when we move beyond these helpful pointers, there was much that was disturbing in the day. With clear echoes of Barna and Viola, the speaker constantly carped on the superiority of missional communities and house churches as an answer to “Constantinian” Christianity. Evidently practically everything wrong with Christianity today could be solved by promoting missional communities, house churches, and “missionaries” doing intentional outreach in apartment buildings and labs instead of being part of a traditional church. Much as I felt when reading Barna’s Revolution, my mind kept wondering if this speaker was not working over much hard to justify the fact that he evidently does not like going to church and left the pastorate for the peripatetic role of seminar speaker and consultant.

In the estimation of some of the architects of what’s next, the church of the future will be multiform. Mega churches or “big box churches” will not fade away since there will always be “somebody” who likes that sort of thing. But, one gets the impression that the real action will be had in the trenches where the truly committed eschew conventional church involvement in favor of so-called pre-contstantinian “market place” Christianity without buildings, liturgy, or programs.

Rather than being a “project manager,” “cruise ship director,” or other demeaning description of contemporary pastors, spiritually alive folks will devote themselves to the kind of house church structures that are so in vogue in the minds of progressive church consultants today. And, even if these missional communities do not involve themselves in corporate worship, that is no great loss. Our leader explained that he has been to a lot of church worship services and “they ain’t so good.” He assured us that you “won’t be hurt” by missing weekly worship. As for the biblical admonition to "forsake not the assembling of yourselves together," that will take place in the various ad hoc missional activities that people "feel led" to engage in throughout their communities.

A more disturbing casualty of this churchless utopia would seem to be the Bible. The Corinthians did not have a Bible to read, preachers to sermonize, or programs to sign up for, we were told. Yet, they were able to experience a vital spiritual dynamic. They simply followed the mystical leading of the Holy Spirit.Church history instructs us at this point. I wonder if the seminar speaker ever heard of the Zwickau prophets, early 16th century Anabaptist enthusiasts opposed forcefully by Luther.

“What is the use,” said they, “of clinging so closely to the Bible? The Bible! always the Bible! Can the Bible preach to us? Is it sufficient for our instruction? If God had designed to instruct us by a book, would he not have sent us a Bible from heaven? It is by the Spirit alone that we can be enlightened. God himself speaks to us. God himself reveals to us what we should do, and what we should preach.”

Even Luther’s dear colleague, Andreas Carlstadt, “lost himself in the clouds of a confused mysticism and spiritualism, and appealed, like the Zwickau Prophets, to immediate inspirations.” Luther wryly observed of his friend: "He has swallowed the Holy Spirit, feathers and all."

An evangelicalism untethered from the Word will soon dissipate into little more than social good works or theological irrelevance. And, if history teaches us anything, it demonstrates that diminishing the Word of God always leads to a denial of other core beliefs. Disciples of Christ without a church where the Word is faithfully preached, the sacraments are rightly administered, and discipline is exercised are much like fish out of water. And, they will end up with the same fate.

Consultants always come with a brief case overflowing with ideas. But, any idea broker who dismisses the church of Jesus Christ as a "constantinian" error, depreciates the importance of Christian corporate worship, and uses immediacy of divine direction as an argument to dispense with the preached Word of God will not lead to a strengthening of God's kingdom or his church. No matter how humorous the delivery or winsome the personality, snarky put downs and non-stop examples of church problems do not a change agent make.

Frighteningly, this man is widely published, highly regarded, teaches D.Min. courses at my alma mater, and consults with several of the major evangelical denominations and many of the para-church agencies out there today.

My lingering questions at the end of the day: Why would church leaders pay outrageous sums of money to listen to this nonsense? And, if they did actually take the advice to heart, how well would most churches respond to proposals to eliminate buildings, stated worship services, and the like? Finally, what would prompt pastors to bring their lay leaders to a conference in order to be told by a man who no longers participates in an organzied church how to dispense with organized churches? I can only assume that the sponsors of this event either did not know what the speaker believed or thought that the listeners would simply go for the atmospherics and the show and ignore the actual advice.

Expelled Exposes Antipathy to God in the Academy

Expelled is the kind of documentary for those who like their highly technical information served up with a wry sense of humor, lots of creative use of old fashioned video clips, and an exposition of the topic using a relentless metaphor of the Berlin Wall as the intellectual backdrop. And, for good measure, process the whole thing through the sardonic Buster Keaton deadpan of economist, Yale Law valedictorian, White House speech writer, law professor, columnist, game show host, and actor famous for the words: “Bueller, Bueller.”

Expelled is the vehicle for Ben Stein to present a sustained call for freedom of thought and inquiry against the environment of academic totalitarianism. Exposed are the deans, PR flacks, and professors who are willing to deny tenure and ruin the careers of well educated science professors for the singular crime of suggesting that the Darwinian emperor has no clothes. Citing both the defenders of evolutionary ideology and those who have raised questions challenging it, we see more Cambridge, Berkeley, and University of Chicago trained PhD's than have probably appeared in any movie in history.

Stein traipses through the documentary in suit and tennis shoes, asking awkward questions, pushing fabulously educated scholars to affirm the logical conclusions of their pronouncements. Especially ill-served by the format is the narcissistic atheist Richard Dawkins. He actually says on film that Darwinism leads logically to atheism, that atheists make common cause with gullible mainstream Christians to win their support in the pro-evolution war, and that belief in God is irrational and virtually impossible but life on earth may have been “seeded” by space aliens.

Stein is no fundamentalist and he strongly denies young earth creationism. He simply argues that the complexity of life at the molecular level cannot be conceived of without some kind of intelligent design. And, his documentary parades scientists, journalists, and public intellectuals—some of whom are either agnostic or irreligious—through the film with cutouts to scenes of totalitarianism and repeated images of the Berlin Wall.

The “Wall” is Stein’s metaphor for what he sees as the storm trooper tactics of the academic establishment, the media, and the courts to stifle dissent. In his view, this kind of policy robs Americans of precious freedom of thought, speech, and religion. Indeed, for Stein, we are in danger of losing our freedoms at the hands of these intellectual fascists.

For those who rankle at the term “fascist,” the most difficult part of the movie may be Stein’s assertion that Darwinian thought motivated not only Hitler and his final solution, but the Eugenics movement behind people such as Planned Parenthood’s founder Margaret Sanger. Here Stein uses interviews to make his point, one that might more convincingly have been made simply by citing chapter and verse out of Mein Kampf where Hitler drew the same causal line of association between Darwin and his own ideas.

Stein recognizes that behind the equations, talk of scientific method, and calls for progress one can often discern an implacable hatred of God. Some of those interviewed in defense of evolution seemed to harbor a visceral antipathy to God and condescending disdain for religious people. Near the end of the documentary when Stein pushes Dawkins to admit that the chances of God existing are less than 1%, he also goads him into saying that one of the more likely scenarios for the emergence of life from non-life would be aliens seeding this planet with the original organisms from which we all evolved.

Radio host and film reviewer Michael Medved reports that wherever the movie screens, there has been a tendency for audiences to cheer at the end. Indeed, Stein appears unperturbed by the height of the wall erected to keep out free inquiry. But, he has made this movie to challenge some to dare to scale it. The only question is who will do it?

Anyone? Anyone?

What About the "Non Violent Atonement"?

“A God without wrath brought men without sin into a kingdom without judgment through the ministrations of a Christ without a cross” (H. Richard Niebuhr)

One of the truly great summaries of liberal Protestantism in the last century, Niebuhr’s quote has found new currency in the present church environment. A group called Preaching Peace (http://www.preachingpeace.org/) has taken on the task of holistically reconceptualizing Christian theology in light of the insights of Rene Girard, the French anthropological philosopher, and the application of his “mimetic theory” or the observation that human desire and behavior involves deep levels of imitation. Essentially, we borrow our desires from others in an endless drama of mythic themes and human imitation.

Girard’s 1972 book, Violence and the Sacred developed Girard’s “second great insight: “the victimary process, which is at the origin of archaic religion.” In Girard’s thinking, the Gospels offer a typical mythical account with “a victim-god lynched by a unanimous crowd.” However, unlike the normal myth, this one proclaims the innocence of the victim.

In Preaching Peace’s perspective, the Gospels appear to present themselves as a typical mythical account, with a victim-god lynched by a unanimous crowd, an event that is then commemorated by Christians through ritual sacrifice — symbolic in this case — in the Eucharist. Yet the parallel is perfect except for one detail: the truth of the innocence of the victim is proclaimed by the text and the writer.

For the Preaching Peace group, peace is a hermeneutic. When Jesus said, “Peace I give to you,” they see this as exposing “all of our theologies and faiths and religions where we fail to see that Peace is . . . an interpretive choice.”

Applied to the cross of Christ, the Preaching Peace folks want to strip away all of the violence-saturated language of Christian theology (getting rid of the shadow of Augustine and Eusebius) and apply the insights of Girard and the “hermeneutic of peace” to understanding it.

Take Romans 3:25, for instance. Paul says God presented Jesus to be the “propitiation for our sins.” Unlike other words for forgiveness which refer to wiping clean the slate or remitting sin, propitiation (hilastarion) has been understood as assuaging the righteous wrath of a holy God against sin. Jesus’ death satisfied God’s righteous anger or made him “propitious.”

The Preaching Peace view asks the questions: “Does Jesus reveal God's love for us, or placate God's wrath towards us? And doesn't this way of thinking presuppose that you can attain a good, loving result through violence? Does the end justify the violent means? Isn't this the sort of thinking that has fueled the endless cycle of violence that's characterized human history?”

In the last century, liberal Protestantism got around the cross by seeing the ministry of Christ as exemplary of divine love. Now, we have a sophisticated anthropological analysis of human history being used to empty the cross of any meaning other than a pyrrhic victory over violence through innocent suffering. And, major denominational groups are promoting the "non-violent atonement" seminars. I know of at least one denomination that has been sending e-mails to their pastors recommending the resources. And, it has been enthusiastically endorsed by Brian McLaren and other members of the emerging church.

Before I overturn Paul, Augustine, Calvin, Luther, Owen, Edwards, and a host of Christian heroes, I will need more than Girard’s musings about mimetics. It's almost enough to make one want to echo the Apostle Paul: "For I determined to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and Him crucified" 1 Corinthians 2:2 (HCSB).

What Motivates Us to Change Our Deeply Held Convictions?

One of the most difficult issues facing Christians in our post-modern era relates to the source(s) of authority and how we are to balance between competing values in coming to positions on controversial subjects.

Traditional evangelicals never tire of repeating, to the point of carping, the importance of the Bible (and time-tested consensus in the history of interpretation) in determining the “will of God.” Even self-avowed theological liberals typically mitigate (conservatives would say muddy) conclusions about biblical teaching by raising social, cultural, and historical reasons for contrary views. Few of them, Bishop Spong being a notable exception that proves the rule, actually come out “against” the Bible’s clear teaching per se. More often than not, they use the legerdemain of scholarship to “explain away” the uncomfortable seemingly plain biblical teachings.

Recently, however, I came across an unusually bald statement in favor of setting aside the “clear teaching” of scripture. Dr. Timothy Luke Johnson, R. W. Woodruff Professor of New Testament and Christian Origins at Candler School of Theology and a Senior Fellow at the Center for the Study of Law and Religion at Emory University, is straightforward about why he supports same-sex unions:

I think it is important to state clearly that we do, in fact, reject the straightforward commands of Scripture, and appeal instead to another authority when we declare that same-sex unions can be holy and good. And what exactly is that authority? We appeal explicitly to the weight of our own experience and the experience thousands of others have witnessed to, which tells us that to claim our own sexual orientation is in fact to accept the way in which God has created us.

Again, hear the words of Dr. Johnson:

Our situation vis-à-vis the authority of Scripture is not unlike that of abolitionists in nineteenth-century America. During the 1850s, arguments raged over the morality of slave-holding, and the exegesis of Scripture played a key role in those debates. The exegetical battles were one-sided: all abolitionists could point to was Galatians 3:28 and the Letter of Philemon, while slave owners had the rest of the Old and New Testaments, which gave every indication that slaveholding was a legitimate, indeed God-ordained social arrangement, one to which neither Moses nor Jesus nor Paul raised a fundamental objection. So how is it that now, in the early twenty-first century, the authority of the scriptural texts on slavery and the arguments made on their basis appear to all of us, without exception, as completely beside the point and deeply wrong?

The answer is that over time the human experience of slavery and its horror came home to the popular conscience-through personal testimony and direct personal contact, through fiction like Uncle Tom’s Cabin, and, of course, through a great Civil War in which ghastly numbers of people gave their lives so that slaves could be seen not as property but as persons. As persons, they could be treated by the same law of love that governed relations among all Christians, and could therefore eventually also realize full civil rights within society. And once that experience of their full humanity and the evil of their bondage reached a stage of critical consciousness, this nation could neither turn back to the practice of slavery nor ever read the Bible in the same way again.

Many of us who stand for the full recognition of gay and lesbian persons within the Christian communion find ourselves in a position similar to that of the early abolitionists-and of the early advocates for women’s full and equal roles in church and society. We are fully aware of the weight of scriptural evidence pointing away from our position, yet place our trust in the power of the living God to reveal as powerfully through personal experience and testimony as through written texts. To justify this trust, we invoke the basic Pauline principle that the Spirit gives life but the letter kills (2 Corinthians 3:6). And if the letter of Scripture cannot find room for the activity of the living God in the transformation of human lives, then trust and obedience must be paid to the living God rather than to the words of Scripture.

OK, so now we have an "evangelical-friendly" scholar who has been a frequent contributor (and interviewee) in Chrisitanity Today explaining that we don't have to follow the Bible or nearly two millennia of Christian interpretation because we have another source of authority: experience. Wow! When pushed, he admits that this is not in accord with the “weight of scriptural evidence.” However, we "trust in the power of the living God to reveal as powerfully through personal experience and testimony as through the written texts."

What motivates a much lauded New Testament specialist, known for his critiques of the historical skepticism of the Jesus Seminar and for his defense of the historicity of biblical accounts, to reach such an unusual conclusion?

My long-held view is that “cognitive dissonance,” that very human desire to avoid the pain of disagreeing with those we love and the internal conflict it creates, often precipitates a crisis of faith when our experience does not agree with our political theory or theology. Dr. Bart Ehrman, another famous NT specialist, has moved from a Moody Bible Institute student to an agnostic professor at UNC and author of the recent book, God’s Problem. It it he tells of his struggle to resolve doubts about the existence of God after grapling with the ancient “problem of evil.” When cognitive dissonance comes face-to-face with existential angst, the results can be explosive and unpredictable.

For Dr. Johnson, the cause of his crisis of cognitive dissonance was more personal. He writes:

In my case, I trusted that God was at work in the life of one of my four daughters, who struggled against bigotry to claim her sexual identity as a lesbian. I trusted God was at work in the life she shares with her partner-a long-lasting and fruitful marriage dedicated to the care of others, and one that has borne fruit in a wonderful little girl who is among my and my wife’s dear grandchildren.

A prodigal son, reverses in the lives of daddy’s girl, a chronic and intractable spousal illness, and a host of other very personal crises often precipitate radical changes in long-held beliefs. I know of pastors who now reject a belief in hell, not because of the weight of biblical data or due to a convincing exegetical argument, but because of a rebellious child or a reluctant parent. As long as we walk around in these “earthen vessels,” we will continue to struggle with the intersection of immutable truth and our personal pain.

The wise ones tell us that pain should drive us to God afresh for grace to bear up under it. But, sometimes, the vice-like grip of pain seems to nurture in us an urge to opt out, to reconcile our view of God with our view of the world in ways that do violence to our trust in the Lord and in his revealed truth.

Cognitive dissonance as a driver of belief. What a concept! Imagine the “cognitive dissonance” of a sovereign and holy, yet loving, God dealing with you and me!

Bishop Threatens to Suspend J.I. Packer from Ministry

It is one thing to face high level dissension bordering on schism in your church. But, when you threaten a man hailed by Time Magazine as one of the most influential evangelicals in the world . . . yikes!

Packer, the squinty-eyed, jazz-loving, octagenarian represents one of the great thinkers in the evangelical fold and an extremely irenic exemplar of Calvinist soteriology. Known to millions for his classic, Knowing God, he has maintained loyalty to his Anglican tradition while standing squarely in the eveangelical camp. The letter threatening him shows how much brinkmanship is involved in ecclesiastical politics today.

As evidence of the escalating crisis in the global Anglican Communion, today one of the of the world’s most esteemed Christian theologians, Dr. J.I. Packer, received a letter threatening suspension from ministry by the controversial Bishop of New Westminster, Michael Ingham. Bishop Ingham accused Dr. Packer, hailed by Time Magazine as the “doctrinal Solomon” of Christian thinkers, “to have abandoned the exercise of ministry” after the church where he is a member voted to separate from the diocese and join the Anglican Province of the Southern Cone under the oversight of Anglican Archbishop Gregory Venables. Dr. Packer, who was ordained in the Church of England, is the author of the Christian classic, “Knowing God,” and joined Billy Graham and Richard John Neuhaus as one of Time Magazine’s 25 most influential evangelicals in 2005.

Dr. Packer, who received his theological education at Wycliffe Hall, Oxford, was ordained a deacon (1952) and priest (1953) in the Church of England. He was Assistant Curate of Harborne Heath in Birmingham 1952-54 and Lecturer at Tyndale Hall, Bristol 1955-61. He was Librarian of Latimer House, Oxford 1961-62 and Principal 1962-69. In 1970 he became Principal of Tyndale Hall, Bristol, and from 1971 until 1979 he was Associate Prinicipal of Trinity College, Bristol. In addition to his published works, he has served as general editor for the English Standard Version of the Bible. He currently serves as the Board of Governors’ Professor of Theology at Regent College in Vancouver, British Columbia.

He will be 82 in July.

http://www.lambethconference.net/canada/?p=92

U.S. Religous Landscape Survey - New Light for Understanding Trends

The Pew people have another great survey that sheds light on some of the trends reported in my last blog. For a summary of the U.S. Religious Landscape Survey, cf. http://religions.pewforum.org/reports

Among the interesting conclusions,

The Landscape Survey confirms that the United States is on the verge of becoming a minority Protestant country; the number of Americans who report that they are members of Protestant denominations now stands at barely 51%. Moreover, the Protestant population is characterized by significant internal diversity and fragmentation, encompassing hundreds of different denominations loosely grouped around three fairly distinct religious traditions - evangelical Protestant churches (26.3% of the overall adult population), mainline Protestant churches (18.1%) and historically black Protestant churches (6.9%).

Latest Church Trends

What is happening in the church today (as well as a couple of our sectarian/cultic cousins)? Check out this report from yesterday's The Wasthington Times.

Note that the Lutheran Church -Missouri Synod, a conservative denomination, shows continued erosion, contradicting the general trend for more conservative groups to grow and more progressive organizations to decline. Perhaps the LCMS situation may be due to the more ethnic and sectarian identity of this conservative Lutheran body. Also note that many historically African-American denominations tend to report "no change" in response to these types of surveys. http //video1.washingtontimes.com/beliefblog/2008/02/which_ churches_are_the_country.html

1. The Roman Catholic Church, 67,515,016 members, an increase of .87 percent.

2. Southern Baptist Convention, 16,306,246 members, an increase of .22 percent.

3. The United Methodist Church, 7,995,456 members, a decrease of .99 percent.

4. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 5,779,316 members, an increase of 1.56 percent.

5. The Church of God in Christ, 5,499,875 members, no increase or decrease reported.

6. National Baptist Convention, U.S.A., Inc., 5,000,000 members, no increase or decrease reported.

7. Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, 4,774,203 members, a decrease of 1.58 percent.

8. National Baptist Convention of America, Inc., 3,500,000 members, no increase or decrease reported.

9. Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), 3,025,740 members, a decrease of 2.36 percent.

10. Assemblies of God, 2,836,174 members, an increase of .19 percent.

11. African Methodist Episcopal Church, 2,500,000 members, no increase or decrease reported.

11. National Missionary Baptist Convention of America, 2,500,000 members, no increase or decrease reported.

11. Progressive National Baptist Convention, Inc., 2,500,000 members, no increase or decrease reported.

14. The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod (LCMS), 2,417,997 members, a decrease of .94 percent.

15. Episcopal Church, 2,154,572 members, a decrease of 4.15 percent.

16. Churches of Christ, 1,639,495 members, no increase or decrease reported.

17. Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, 1,500,000 members, no increase or decrease reported.

17. Pentecostal Assemblies of the World, Inc., 1,500,000 members, no increase or decrease reported.

19. The African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church, 1,443,405 members, an increase of .21 percent.

20. American Baptist Churches in the U.S.A., 1,371,278 members, a decrease of 1.82 percent.

21. United Church of Christ, 1,218,541 members, a decrease of 0.47 percent.

22. Baptist Bible Fellowship International, 1,200,000, no increase or decrease reported.

23. Christian Churches and Churches of Christ, 1,071,616 members, no increase or decrease reported.

24. The Orthodox Church in America, 1,064,000, no increase or decrease reported.

25. Jehovah's Witnesses, 1,069,530 members, an increase of 2.25 percent.

Welcome Rylan Everett McFadden!

Last Tuesday my eldest son and his wife welcomed their third son, Rylan Everett McFadden, weighing in a 8lbs 3 oz. Rylan's daddy is associate pastor of a church in Minooka, IL. Rylan Everett is the son of Rev. Arol Everett McFadden, the son of Dennis Everett McFadden, the son of Everett McFadden. He is healthy, we are ecstatic! Rylan is our fourth grandson.

Jeanette and I traveled to the midwest late last week to attend the memorial service for our older daughter's mother-in-law (she was only 58) in Fort Wayne. Following the service, which was an amazing testimony to God's grace, we went to Chicagoland to spend a few days after the service with our oldest son and family (including Rylan) in the Chicago area.

Like any good son of Illinois, our grandson was born on Lincoln's birthday.

Celebrating Abortion's Anniversary?

Thanks to the Weekly Standard (2/4/08) for this one . . .

How should one celebrate the 35th anniversary of the Roe v. Wade decision? The Planned Parenthood chapter in Schenectady invited clergy to "bless" its new 18,000 square-foot "clinic."

The Times Union reports that "Rev. Larry Phillips of Schedectady's Emmanuel-Friedens Church . . . declared the ground 'sacred and holy . . . where women's voices and stories are welcomed, valued, and affirmed; sacred ground where women are treated with dignity, supported in their role as moral decision-makers . . . sacred ground where the violent voices of hatred and oppression are quelled.'"

Anthony Sacramone, over at First Things blog, proffered his own idea of what a blessing of a Planned Parenthood establishment might sound like.

O Ba'al, God of Thunder:
We beseech Ye in the name of science
In the name of self-actualization and personal autonomy
That the procedures and terminations wrought on this choice piece of real estate
Permit no hope
Silence all screams
And leave no child behind.

"O Ba'al" indeed.

Differing Views of Muslim-Christian Dialogue

A few months ago 138 Christian leaders, including a number of evangelical notables from Fuller Theological Seminary, Christianity Today, and the National Association of Evangelicals were signatories to an open letter, "Loving God and Neighbor Together: A Christian Response to 'A Common Word Between Us and You.'" Originating with several significant scholars from the Yale Center for Faith & Culture, and published in the Novemeber 18, 2007 New York Times , it was a response to an open letter by 138 leading Muslim scholars, clerics, and intellectuals from around the world.

This week leaders from several Baptist bodies (American Baptist Churches USA, Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, and Alliance of Baptists) announced that they had met on January 4-5 in Hartford, Conn with Dr. Sayyid Syeed of the Islamic Society of North America "to begin discussions on ways Baptist and Muslims can speak, share and learn from each other as we seek to fulfill Paul's admonition in Romans 12:18 'If it is possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all.'"

Since this is an important subject as well as a timely one, I wanted to refer my readers to the recent statement on the subject of Christian-Muslim dialogue by Dr. John Piper:




One can hardly listen to the passionate appeal of Dr. Piper without being moved by his sincerity and urgency of concern for the lost. Piper has long been a model of lifting high the cross of Jesus Christ as the only hope for an alienated humanity. He delivered his message without harsh words or bitter acrimony. Indeed, the power of his message is strengthened by the humble passion coupled with burning zeal for the glory of God. Since so many of those connected with the Yale effort are fellow alums with him of Fuller seminary, it will be interesting to see what response they make to it.

References:
Yale Center for Faith & Culture - http://www.yale.edu/faith/abou-commonword.htm
Baptist press release - http://www.abc-usa.org/news/2008/20080123a.htm
John Piper video - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rTY-9FY13kw

2008 Soul Health Prescription: Take Twelve Puritans and Pray for Me in the Morning

Why not start out 2008 with a challenge more beneficial and spiritually uplifting than any resolution? Timmy Brister has issued a book-a-month plan for reading 12 Puritan classics during this year (http://timmybrister.com/2008/01/07/join-the-2008-puritan-reading-challenge/). Reformation Heritage Books, a well known seller of Reformation and Puritan classics has obliged by packaging the dozen Banner of Truth books for a substantial 36%discount. http://www.heritagebooks.org/bookstore/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=8016&osCsid=hk0ttecnf9ask3vs20pfce1oe0.

If you have never tried reading Sibbes, Flavel, Watson, Bunyan, Burroughs, or Baxter, what better time than now? Mr. Brister describes the reasons for this project quite simply:

First, the Puritans had a relentless pursuit of God. In their writings you will find believers who knew their God deeply through a rich God-centeredness that affected every area of their lives. We are living in a day where it is hard to find folks who know their God well.

Second, the Puritans were physicians of souls. These men studied themselves and had a real, experimental knowledge of Christianity. Nowhere will you find more “uses” and applications for your life than in their writings. Not only did they know God well, they knew the minds, hearts, and consciences of men well.

Third, the Puritans possessed genuine piety because they knew how to fight the fight of faith. These men took direct aim at indwelling sin and fought hard for their personal sanctification. Their writings are incredibly pastoral and at the same time intimately convicting.

Fourth, the Puritans were pacesetters in church history. They ran in such a way to win, and whether it is their study of Scripture, commitment to family worship, personal devotion to prayer, or caring for the souls in their community, these men ran and ran hard.

Fifthly, reading the Puritans will provide you a healthy perspective so as to prevent chronological snobbery. Let’s face it. It is tempting to read only what is novel, trendy, and popular. Yet it is worthwhile to read books 100 years or older to understand how Christians lived, face struggles, dealt with issues (doctrinal, ecclesiological, ethical, etc.), and experienced God. Frankly speaking, you will not find anything close to Owen, Watson, Brooks, and Baxter on the front shelves of your local bookstore.

Here is the schedule:

January- Sibbes, Bruised Reed

February- Flavel, Mystery of Providence

March -Watson, Godly Man's Picture

April -Brooks, Precious Remedies Against Satan's Devices

May -Bunyan, Come and Welcome

June -Owen, Mortification of Sin

July -Bridge, Lifting Up

August -Burroughs, Rare Jewel

September- Bolton, True Bounds

October -Guthrie, Christian's Great Interest

November -Baxter, Reformed Pastor

December -Alleine, Sure Guide

Both my wife, Jeanette, and I plan to augment our devotional reading this year with some of the most soul nourishing writing in the history of Christianity! Join us!

The Best Dog at My Son's Wedding Reception - Tux and All

On Saturday, our fourth child, Nathan and his bride Bethany, had their wedding reception. Since it was a "special" day, family member McDoggie "Mac" Everett McFadden was also present, tux and all.

Mac sleeps with Jeanette and me. And, when I am listening to theology lectures on iPod, he cocks his head, furrows his brow, and you would swear he was analyzing the points. Of course, he does specialize in dogmatics.

On Banning "Wordsmithing," "Waterboarding," and Describing Colors that "Pop" - Scolds on a Tear

The Lake Superior State University censors released their annual list of words to be banned earlier this week. I wanted to see how many of them could be worked into a single paragraph. http://www.lssu.edu/whats_new/articles.php?articleid=1431

In a scene that can only be called “emotional,” I read the list of proposed banned words "authored" (or is it "wordsmithed"???) by the Lake Superior State University experts in their latest attempt to throw the majority of us careless speakers “under the bus” for one more time. Oh well, “it is what it is.” A bunch of academic snobs, bored with writing about “Black Friday,” engage in a deconstruction of the vernacular of American English that can only be described as totally “random” and bereft of a raison d'etre. In this “Post 9/11” world, I suppose academics have nothing better to do than to critique the “organic” nature of spoken English. All such snobs who declare that such prissiness “is the new tolerance,” should be subjected to “waterboarding” and made to participate in their own inane “webinar.” What happened to noblesse oblige and the sense of “give back” by those who have been privileged to enjoy such a top rate education? “Back in the day” when people used Blackberry’s without a Bluetooth, before people described contrasting colors as making things really “pop,” academics generally left insipid locution alone. But, in the “perfect storm” environment of serious daily news regarding the “surge,” economic downturn numbers as the housing bubble bursts, and a “decimating” of standards for education in most states, couldn’t the scholars from Michigan come up with something more important to proscribe than a few dumb colloquialisms? Or, as the teens say today in response to everything from pictures of underclad women to winning football games, from consuming a satisfying meal to getting an unexpected snow day: “Sweet.”

Have a Blessed New Year in 2008!

I find myself in agreement (again) with Dr. Glenn Layne's positive comments about Transformation Ministries. Check out his "Happy New Year Thoughts" over at Durable Data (http://www.durabledata.blogspot.com/). The number of congregations intentionally covenanting together to do ministry has inched over 100. 150 active covenanting congregations by the end of the year would not be unlikely (deo volente).

We are blessed to have such a Godly leader in Dr. Dale Salico. He was at the church where I was preaching last Sunday. The man is focused, pumped, and ready for 2008. We are even beginning to hear of currently unaffiliated churches that want to be part of a more missional movement. It is truly an exciting time to be doing ministry!

Muzzling the Dog: No More Munching on "Ole Roy" (the Walmart Dog Food That Is)

His Barking Dog began at the instigation of Durable Data's Glenn Layne. Durable felt that it would be valuable to have a wider range of reporting and commentary on ABC related issues, particularly given the paucity of reliable information from the standard denominational sources. Few organizations have a greater corporate ethos of self-protection and ingrained denial than the American Baptist Churches (IMO). Corporate actions often bear only a passing resemblance to what is actually reported. And, the corporate culture over decades has shielded decision makers from the consequences of significant ethical and moral lapses.

Given the fact that several of my friends continue to serve in the hierarchy, it seemed a natural idea to begin blogging. And for a time, my keyboard clattered away with piece after piece, offering an evangelical commentary on all things ABC. When my judicatory, ABCPSW, voted to withdraw from the larger family, my postings dropped significantly, both in volume and as a percentage of topics tackled in this venue.

This week, it came to my attention that some of my blogs and message board postings have had damaging repercussions on the cause of Christ and involved people I love in legal complications. Now that I am somewhat an insider at Transformation Ministries as Treasurer of the organization, this will simply no longer do.

When my postings end up being referenced in attorney's letters to people I care about, enough is enough. Since there is no practical way to avoid legal repercussions arising from comments about the way VF does things (even when the statistics and reporting are strictly accurate), I have concluded that it might be better to retire from reporting and commenting on the ABC entirely. Ultimately, it really doesn't matter anyway. And, the cost to people I care about is too great. An important lesson to be learned from the original Star Wars movie comes from the advice C3PO gave to R2D2 when Han Solo advised him that angry Wookies pull their opponents' arms out of their sockets: "New strategy R2, let the Wookie win." With respect to the politics of the ABC, C3PO's admonition is just as valuable.

His Barking Dog will still speak on issues of importance and consequence from an evangelical and Baptist perspective at this web address. However, there will be no more comments about the organization known as ABCUSA.