Baptists and Baptist Theology

The folks over on over on SBC Outpost are providing a glimpse into Baptist life and the development of Baptist theology. The owner of the blog posted a passage from Scripture. Everybody commented on what he thinks it means and debated the other guys about whose definition was right.

Ruth Ann Foster

Dr. Ruth Ann Foster passed away today around 2 p.m. after a long battle with cancer.

I was in her neighborhood several weeks ago. I wrote her a note but did not leave it in her mailbox as intended. I wrote:

"Dr. Foster -
I was visiting a friend in teh neighborhood. i just want you to know hat you and your mom are in our prayers. I hope that you can take a modicum of comfort in the fact that your memory and your legacy will live for decades through the hundreds of students that you influenced. My first semester with you shaped me as much as anything I encountered at Truett. Your pedagogy plus your pastoral care of new students like me made me a better pastor, student and person. I wish there as something I coudl do or say, but I can leave you only with a pathetic expression of my love an appreciation that is neither worthy or your legacy nor sufficient to express your impact on my life; but I hope at least it may bring a smile. Thinking of you now and forever. May God's peace comfort you and His love surround you."

Dr. Foster helped students with little or no biblical studies backgrounds catch up to the theological know-it-alls from small Baptist colleges.
Dr. Foster helped studens whose exposure to the Bible had been only through Sunday School or fundamentalist Bible colleges cope with the reality of academic biblical interpretation.
Dr. Foster married within biblical studies the integrity to the Academy with the reality that ultimately Scripture is a canon for and tool of faith.

God Bless You Mother Mater.

Denominations

In an email to a colleague a few days ago, I made the off-hand remark: "denominations sprung from one charismatic person's theological pet peeve." While I was being hyperbolic, I am not sure how far off I am. From Henry VIII and the Reformers through John Wesley and William Miller, did not people begin to follow a person who had a particular take and emphasis on Scripture? For Luther and Calvin it was soteriology. For Smyth and Helwys more ecclessiology. For Miller, eschatology. There are some gems in each of their movements, but it seems each one loses a little bit of the Great Tradition, so we're left with bits and pieces of Christianity.

I may be off base, but if anyone actually cares to post, I would love to read others' thoughts.

Missing Clinton

Former President Bill Clinton's meltdown on Fox News Sunday made me sentimental for the old guy. Clinton was elected during the halcyon days, and he was always good for entertainment value. Only Clinton could look a camera in the eye with a straight face and compare his eight years to fight terrorism with Bush's eight months and to claim a vast right-wing conspiracy in the media (this famously coined by his wife who blamed the conspiracy for making up the Lewinsky story). And I think he may actually believe it. Regardless of how one feels about Clinton's politics - I am not sure he actually believes anything - one has to admire his style and political acumen. He take your last dollar and have you thanking him for doing it.

What I also remember about Clinton were all the conspiracy kooks he created. There were all kinds of people writing all kinds of books about him: good, bad but never indifferent. I thought the crazy right-wingers were bad ... but they cannot carry the pants of the crazy left kooks that have been out in force since Bush took office. With blogs and the Internet, there are sites dedicated to proving Bush kills children and hates puppies.

It is sad how discourse has become so hyperbolic and mean during the Clinton and Bush years. People pick a side and then form their opinions based on their side ... folks, it is supposed to be the opposite: form your opinions based on facts and then pick the side that best fits you. The pendulum will swing back, but right now we must deal with the extreme, closed-minded, fact-fearing discourse from both sides of the aisle.

A Real Paige Patterson Post

The folks over on SBC Outpost have dedicated today's discussion to this enigmatic leader of the Fundamentalist Takeover of the SBC. I have never met nor seen Paige Patterson - I know of him only by reputation and anecdote. To the fundamentalists in the SBC, he is the hero of the revolution. To the conservatives and moderates, he is an agent of the devil that divided a denomination. Regardless of one's stand, usually he will illicit a strong reaction.

I thought it was an interesting testament to his power, James Hunt posts on SBC Outpost that he had Patterson sign his Bible. I am not sure if it is heretical, but there is something creepy about having someone "sign" your Bible like its Barry Bonds or something. (I do not mean a gift Bible's dedication, but this was like post-sermon autograph session)

This post made me bemoan the tremendous amount of time, energy and resources spent in Baptist life playing politics. Think about all the mission dollars spent on non-biblical initiatives - like monitoring blogs and political power plays. While we claim not to use the episkopos, I think Baptists might have more bishops and rely more on the network of episkopos than other hierarchical traditions. Try getting a job with out the blessing of the episkopos. He might not have a title and a "funny" hat, but he is as or more influential than the Catholic, Anglican or Methodist bishops. How many placements has Patterson made?

I feel naive, but it seems like Baptist life is less concerned with evangelism and mission than with star power and politics. We anoint the youngest "preaching superstars" and then the good-ole-boy network makes sure he gets in the right places. This is done with little regard to theology, morality or ethics.

The Dixie Chicks

The Dixie Chicks were on the Ellen show last week playing their predictable mix of "poor us" and "posterchildren for the First Amendment." While I love their music, I find the Dixie Chicks annoying.

First, they pander. They first pandered to the audience in Great Britain by making "The Comment." Then they pandered to their American audience by apologizing for "The Comment." Then they pandered to perceived anti-Bush sentiment by unapologizing for "The Comment." Then, they pander to their newer, smaller anti-Bush audience by making even more silly remarks.

Second, they think they're smart. You're talented musicians Chicks, but experts on geo-politics you're not. Remember when you dressed up like Hee-Haw and played on the streets of Dallas? You were good at that. Focus on where your gifts are. If you do want to remark on world policy and issues, say something smart - not The Comment.

Third, they think they're martyrs. The Comment was not brave. The Comment was not original. It was the obvious and easiest thing to say before they're audience. Conversely, I would argue that it would have taken real courage to actually stand up to the British audience not just pander to it. You took the easy way out Chicks, and it cost you.

My beef really lies with this final point: those like the Dixie Chicks, Ellen and other Establishment types who would want to deny the freedom of speech of others. Sure, they're championing the Chicks for their freedom of speech but wish to criticize others - like the country audience - for exercising its speech by not buying records or concert tickets. The latter's freedom is just as valid as the Chicks'. If you speak out, but prepared to suffer the consequences ... this is another classic Big Left double standard: we support free speech as long as it agrees with us.

I still love the Dixie Chicks' music; I may even buy the new album. While I think The Comment was easy and irresponsible, I support their "right" to say it (folks, freedom of speech and the IA involve the government quelching speech ... this never was a IA issue). I also support others' rights not to buy their stuff.

I Need Hits

Paige Patterson Paige Patterson Paige Patterson
Paige Patterson Paige Patterson Paige Patterson
Paige Patterson Paige Patterson Paige Patterson
Paige Patterson Paige Patterson Paige Patterson

What are the implications if Coopeartive Program money is being spent to monitor blogs for salicious or slanderous comments about denominational leaders? Is this a good use of God's resources? Is this just more proof that the Fundamentalist Takeover always about power and never about God; or is this just responsibly monitoring information for inaccuracy and character assassination?

On a similar note, I am concerned with how much time blogging seems to consume for some pastors. While I do not know exactly how much time individual pastors spend blogging or if it neglects from other responsibilities, but clearly it takes time that once was spent doing something else. I understand their value but I also understand their distraction.

Clearly, they are making some waves in church life. Not only are pastors and ministers connecting across geographic and other lines, but it is certainly leading to a great decentralization of power and authority.

Visit with Priest

I had a good visit yesterday with a new priest(Episcopalian) friend. We talked about many things, but one thing he discussed was the idea of "spiritual calasthynics." It is this idea of "working out the spirit" through ritualized prayer, "quiet time," Bible reading, etc. He was juxtaposing that idea with the concept of surrender. It think he was getting at was the concept of Noise that C.S. Lewis considers in The Screwtape Letters. The idea being that essentially we busy ourselves with activity - even spiritual activity - as a means to keep us busy. Instead of being still and silent and surrenduring to God, we occupy ourselves with the trappings of popular Christianity. I do not think he was advocating the cessation of lectio divina (etc.) but rather not letting our spiritual routine distract us from the voice of God. Do we substitute our riturals for reliance? .... hmmm ....

BTW - it is a real joy to have the opportunity to share another perspective, from one who does not carry all of the Baptist baggage.

Paige Patterson

There is a funny discussion going on at another blog about SBC employees being paid to monitor blogs. Some people related some anecdotes about using the name "Paige Patterson" and getting a lot more site hits. So I am going to try.

Paige Patterson
Paige Patterson
Paige Patterson
Paige Patterson
Paige Patterson
Paige Patterson

Bono Bad

I have many character flaws ... I have come to terms with this. One of them that always pops up is the great contempt for which I hold all things trendy. Sometimes, I manipulate myself into adopting opinions contrary simply because of trendiness.

However, in this case, I am not speaking against Bono simply because he is the trendy, cool Christian du jour. My U2 cred goes back almost two decades from the day I brought home a poster from the county fair. I took a date to see Rattle and Hum. I own every album and two U2 iPods. I am no "worship leader come lately" who loves U2 now that they're "cool" and "Christian." I have been discussing God and U2 for more than 10 years.

Bono, like most liberals, is a hypocrite. Recently, UK papers reported that Bono moved much of his assets out of Ireland to avoid paying taxes. This is a man who travels the world asking countries to forgive debts of poor, corrupt governments and to spend more money on AIDS and other endeavors. Well, what is government money? Taxes. Now Bono is shirking his responsibility to pay taxes by using a foregin tax shelter. Even worse, U2 benefited for years from Ireland's pro-artist programs, and now that it is successful, the band does not want to return the gratitude to other artits.

Whether it is pro-environmental Ted Kennedy and other liberals quelching a wind-powered installation near Martha's Vineyard or anti-gun liberal Rosie O'Donnell having her bodyguards armed, this is another case of what is good for the goose is not good for the liberal gander. I am not looking to have a liberal polemic, but one reason I could never join their ranks is because liberals are always telling other people what to do but rarely following their own advice. I remember Sarah Jessica Parker complaining how one of Bush's budgets would hurt her family because they depend on government aid -- like person who makes $10 million a year for reading a teleprompter cannot support her family? I mean, could she not forgo one pair of designer shoes so Uncle Ricky can eat?

I still love U2 and love Bono. Despite his personal hypocrisy, he still presents one of the most "Christian" messages in the public arena. I am just disappointed. I would like to see someone - particularly liberals - actually practice what they preach.

Six Feet Under

Yesterday provided a surrealy sad day. When HBO's Six Feet Under series came out, my wife and I became faithful watchers. It is a gritty, disturbing show that shocks one into recalling what the world is like for many. The characters mostly are narcissistic, amoral and contradicted.

I received seasons four and five as gifts - we dropped HBO after season three, so we had a lot of catching up to do. Well, last night, we finally finished. The conclusion was the best I ever have seen in a TV show besides Dawson's Creek, whose finale still ranks as the best.

As you clever ones might have figured out by now, Six Feet Under deals with death. Each episode begins with a random death, which the main characters - proprieters of a funeral home - service during the rest of the episode.

The finale of Six Feet Under concluded with a future portrayal of each main character's death. The protagonist died several episodes ago, but as the youngest daugther drove across the country - from L.A. to New York City - to start her new life, viewers were shown highlights of what the future brings for each character and ultimately his or her death. I was strangely powerful and affecting.

I think what affected me so much was the realization of how the present affects the future. I know, Capt. Obvious; but seening deployed in such a manner offered a stark reality. We had lived with these people for five years, and witnessing the effects of their choices and their ultimatley end was strangely sad. Excellent cinema. I found myself being actually happy and sad as the characters died - never before (that I have seen) has a movie shown the finality of every character.

While many will be appalled by the amoral and mature themes discussed in the series, I think it provides a great snapshot into much of the world.

Sermon Plagiarism

I had a sneaky suspicion that the sermon referenced in the post below was a cookie-cutter message. Sure enough, a quick Google searched proved that the pastor had stolen the sermon directly from Bill Hybels, the Willow Creek guy. Here is a link.

Believe me, I certainly have borrowed ideas and illustrations from other pastors; but I credit them (not illustrations usually because we all "steal" those). But it offends me as a pastor that this guy would compltely rip off another sermon and never once tell the congregation.

You did a bad thing Senior Pastor John McKinzie.

I think this brings up a lot of questions. Primarily, where is his sermon preparation. If he is just preaching Hybels' sermons, what does he do all week? Where is his preparation, his study? Why would I want to go watch somebody do a poor job of preaching Hybels' sermons when I can watch Hybels on the Interent?

Church Visit: Hope Fellowship

Being an unemployed minister has given me the opportunity to visit some other churches. I have tried to use the time to visit a variety of churches: Episcopalian, traditional Baptist, contemporary Baptist, etc. This morning, I decided (the girls were out of town) to visit one of those pop churches - Hope Fellowship.

This church is right out of the youth ministry church playbook: casual atmosphere, praise music, "relevant" sermon. The "worship center" looked like all of these churches: dark lighting, Pottery Barn paint, comfy chairs and a stage.

The event began with a concert by the band. They play for about half an hour. I am not a big fan of P&W concerts, so I did not find the "evangelical nursery rymes" particular fulfilling.

Next, we did celebrate communion. Unfortunately, it was done with neither intention or reverence. It almost seemed like there was little thought given to it. The ushers handed out elements to everyone present - regardless if one was a Christian or not - read the Corinthians passage, and we took communion. It took about five minutes.

Communion was followed by a slew of announcements and thanks for the coffee ministry, the computer ministry, the parking ministry, etc. And then the sermon.

The preacher seemed like a sincere and good guy; of course he was dressed like all these guys are dressed: untucked American Eagle button down shirt, faded jeans, Garth Brook mike, and spikey hair. I do not want my pastor to look like a banker, but I also do not want him to look like an MTV VJ.

As I expected, the sermon light on theology and heavy on application. He explicated - i.e. read - Luke 5:5-10 (interestingly, he used the Living Bible) and came up with the following analysis. It was the final sermon in a series called "The Office." Today's question was "Would Jesus hire you?" He explained that Jesus would hire you - like he did Peter - if you pass the following tests. Jesus used this tests - as shown in Luke - to hire the disciples:

1. Bias toward action test
- be a "get it done" person

2. Can you follow directions test
- support the agenda of those in charge

3. Who deserves the credit test
- do your best even if you do not get a pat on the back

4. Grand vision test
- sacrifice your vision for the larger vision

The conclusion of the sermon demonstrated the quagmire that all of these churches face: biblical fundamentalism with American capitalism. In this sermon, he concluded by challenging the group to drop everything and follow Christ like Peter did. Then, he watered it down by saying do not quit your job, do not feel the need to abandon "the success thing," and be an action-oriented, direction-following, credit-giving, vision-following worker.

The entire "Would Jesus hire you?" premise notwithstanding, the sermon made me ask more questions than it gave me answers. How does one follow Jesus at work? He did not answer. Surely being a Christian is more than being action-oriented, following directions, working without credit, and submitting to company goals?

Is there more?

Follow Up


Returning home today found no new church solicitations, but I found the one from yesterday (subject of the post below). This new church is called Northstar, which is planted by something called Church on the Move. The famous pastor is a feller named Baline Bartel. It seems this gentleman is a famous youth minister. That is interesting.

There is that old joke that God always calls pastors to bigger churches and fatter bank accounts. I am noticing that God also calls church planters to fast-growing, affluent areas. How much megachurch success is related to simple demographic shifts? Does this not show a tremendous lack of faith in the Holy Spirit - let's plant a church in one of the nation's top-10 fastest-growing areas and then pat ourselves on the backs for growing so much - while claiming God's blessing upon our vision. Since there already are more McChurches up here than I can shake a stick at, why does God never call churches to be planted in slow-growing, poorer areas?

I think it is interesting the jump Mr. Bartel is making from youth ministry to pastoring a McChurch. What does that say about the theology and orthopraxy of this group? I looked on its web site, and again - not shockingly - found little theology but much about Mr. Bartel and his stardom. Get this ... the giving online section is prominent!

Church Marketing II

When I returned home from work yesterday, I had yet another direct mail piece from another new church start. This slick ad promoted the quality of the new members, which included "CEOs and soccer moms." There was little about Jesus, the Gospel or theology, but there was an entire section about the new pastor. Although I had never heard of the guy - who looked about 35 - apparently he is very famous and once had the world's largest youth ministry. He also apparently is a best-selling author; but again, I had never seen on of his books.

Church Marketing

I never cease to be amazed at the amount of direct mail I receive from churches. They might as well be nail salons or dry cleaners. Recently I received a drop piece from The Journey. Obviously, The Journey even has a catchy name and clearly a nice Web site. According to the pastor's bio, The Journey is a "children's focused church." Now that is interesting. There are many things a church might focus on, but I am not sure if children is one of them. Do not get me wrong, I know children are critical - but should a church focus on children? I have some stereotypes about what this church might believe, so I wanted to see. Unfortunately, I was unable to find out. However, The Journey - despite the pastor's apparent degress in Bible, does offer "seminars" in parenting, leadership, finances and "Church Stinks." I am wondering if I have a pastor of a life-coach. Fortunately, as if this church needs to baptize any more American business, it offers a "guarantee." I am begging to ask if I can get my offering back if I do not like the sermon.

In addition to The Journey, I get bombarded weekly with direct mail from Prestonwood Baptist Church, which is opening a new franchise near my town. Actually, despite the fact that its pastor, Jack Graham, led the SBC a couple of years ago, the church now is just Prestonwood. Graham is such a good businessman, he actually named his radio show PowerPoint. Come to think of it, Microsoft really has good church names for its software: I am having trouble naming my radio ministry Excel or Word. Do you think radio show about leadership could be called Excel? I am copyrighting this right now! Anyway ...

What might you expect Prestonwood to advertise? Theology? no. Salvation? no. Why should my family attend Prestonwood? Because they "proudly server Starbucks coffee" and offer pre- and post-service buffets. Is this church or Las Vegas? Please do not answer that.

Digression Warning: Okay, I'm reviewing the Web site, and it actually says this: "if God is calling you to join our staff, please view our current employment opportunities." I could get days out of this. This is the token religiosity that we drape our churches in. Do they really think if God called me to work at Prestonwood that I - or God - would need to check employement opportunities? If God called me to work there, why would I need to apply? Please no smarmy comments about some SBC fundamentalist leaders like Jack Graham who act as if they trump God.

In conclusion, you do not have to remind me how easy it is to take pot shots from a distance. I suspect these pastors generally are good guys and are just doing what "works." But at what cost? Did Jesus not teach that His Way is difficult? Did Jesus not teach that following Him is hard? Did Jesus die on the Cross at Calvary so we could enjoy Starbucks before a praise concert?

I suspect this is a weakness in Baptist folk theology: ask Jesus into my heart, and I've purchased my fire insurance. With the premium paid at Golgotha, I can free to play with matches. Surely, this is cheap grace to too easy. An American culture exacerbates this reality. We want our food, our gratification and apparently our faith quick, easy, painless and thoughtless.

How easy it is to build an organization high on promises and easy on committment. How easy to promise people bad (but well marketed) coffee, a better financial situation, and how tos about everything; but is that Gospel? Is that Church?

Isn't it ironic that the SBC's leading fundamentalist church brags about selling a product that uses a pagan idol as its logo? We've brought the pagan back into the church if it means a little better marketing. George Truett and Frank Norris would be rolling over in their graves.

Not much to say today besides remembering the five-year anniversary of the "9/11 Attacks." I cannot believe has been five years. During Sept. 11, 2001, I was in a Montreal hotel room at an airport trade show. I had taken a nap after and before the exhibition hall, and I got tired of watching ESPN - so I flipped through the channels to hit CNN and watch as the second World Trade Center tower fell.

Many things are the same since 2001, and many things are different. I cannot believe that we have not caught Osama bin Laden. I cannot believe we are fighting a war in Iraq. I cannot believe so many people think George W. Bush caused the attacks.

I pray today people on both sides of the aisle take a break from petty political bigotry to remember those who lost loved ones.