Gerry Charlotte Phelps

Getting Rid of Christians in Myanmar

                                   (Image from economist.com)

(From Chuck Colson's Breakpoint today, at www.breakpoint.org:)

The news from Myanmar/Burma keeps getting worse.  As of May 11, nearly 300,000 were dead or missing.  The UN said 1.2 - 1.9 million were struggling to survive after the storm.

But the conduct of the Burmese junta is even more appalling.  It actively hinders relief operations.  After it seized food aid last week, the UN had to stop sending it.

...a week after the cyclone, the junta was still refusing to let relief workers into the country, insisting that countries send only supplies and not personnel. 

The junta eventually relented, but only after stamping their own names on the boxes, and not soon enough to prevent a catastrophe.

Their intransigence may have already doomed a generation of Burmese children, according to international aid agencies. They warned of epidemics of “apocalyptic proportions.” The death toll from the epidemics and starvation could exceed the death toll from the storm itself.

The junta does not value the lives of its people.

Burma's Christians know this better than anyone.  The junta has used...

...ethnic cleansing of Christian minority groups, destruction of villages, forced conversions and even rape and murder...“to create a uniform society in which the race and language is Burmese and the only accepted religion is Buddhism.”  (bolding added)

The mainstream media has mostly ignored this story.  Most Westerners do not even know that Burma has a substantial Christian population.

We ought to be at the forefront of alleviating the suffering of the Burmese people.

But at the same time, we ought to point out to the world that while cyclones do not discriminate between Buddhists and Christians, this junta does.

And our nation ought to be mobilizing world opinion to bring down this oppressive regime.

The Importance of the UMC Judicial Council

                             (Image from static.howstuffworks.com)

The UMC Judicial Council is the UM equivalent of the Supreme Court, where final decisions are made on the legal decisions made lower down in the UMC judicial system.  Its role is not to make church law - on the contrary.  Only the General Conference can do that.   Rather, it is to ensure that the UM judicial system upholds church law.  The Judicial Council's task is not to nullify that law or to change it by judicial fiat, but to enforce it

On Monday the General Conference will receive nominations for the Judicial Council.  Church Agencies, the Bishops and the Reform Conference will all present lists of nominees.

The concern should be to nominate people who agree to fulfill the lawful role of the Judicial Council, and not to nullify it in order to reach conclusions counter to church law.  Thwarting the will of the representatives of a majority in the church who are elected every four years to make church law in the General Conference is undemocratic.  The UMC claims to be democratically-run.  The only way to do that is to respect the General Conference's role as the only law maker of the church.

When people are unhappy with church law, they have the option of trying to persuade the General Conference to agree with them.  They have no business trying to nullify that law through other, anti-democratic processes.

Watch carefully who is elected to the Judicial Council.  It will be one of the most important things that can happen at General Conference this time.

This is a time to pray for the General Conference Delegates, that God will guide them in selecting the right Judicial Council members.

Running the Methodists Out of Russia

To see video, click on this link:  A Crackdown on Russian Protestants

"At Expense of All Others, Putin Picks A Church" according to the New York Times at http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/24/world/europe/24church.html?th&emc=th   

After the USSR imploded in 1991, and suddenly was open to the world after being tightly sealed for so long, Western Protestant missionaries flooded into Russia.  They made remarkable gains until 1997, when opposition to them began to stiffen.  Now the Protestants, at about 2 million of Russia's 142 million people, are finding their proselytizing severely limited.  Even their ability to worship together is under attack.

Putin recently associated himself with the Russian Orthodox Church, and sometimes wears a cross now.  See the video above for a description of how badly this has worked out for Protestants in Russia.  The general feeling seems to be that the Protestants are a foreign influence, financed by the West and perhaps being used for spying on Russia.  The hostility is not just from the government, but from ordinary Russians as well.

(Hat Tip to Allan Bevere at http://arbevere.blogspot.com/ and Dave Camphouse at http://revcamp.blogspot.com/2008/04/methodists-run-out.html)

A Time of Decision

                 (Image from bainbridgega.com)

The UMC General Conference begins in two days in Ft. Worth.  Held every four years, this is the body that determines church law.  It is usually a contentious conference, in a mainline church much concerned about a 40-year decline and a graying membership with an average age of 60.

At such a time, a new book - "Taking Back the United Methodist Church" by Mark Tooley - could help clarify key issues, from the point of view of the UMC majority in the pews.

The book has some very positive reviews:  The Rev. Richard Neuhaus, Editor in Chief of First Things, says:

You don't have to be a Methodist to be intensely interested in the integrity of faith and life in a Christian community whose influence touches us all.  We are indebted to Mark Tooley for this lively account of the heirs of John Wesley who are fighting the good fight.

Also from Dr. Ira Galloway, Asst. Exec. Dir. of the Confessing Movement:

Mark Tooley has been one of the significant players in the renewal movement in the UMC.  In this book he gives a clear overview of his work and the work of UMAction to restore United Methodism to its historic role as an Apostolic Church.

    Mark Tooley

(Image:christianpost.com)

Mark Tooley agreed to be interviewed online by this blog.  The interview follows below.

1.   How did you come to your view of the UMC?

From growing up in my local church in Arlington, Virginia, which was a typical UM congregation, with mostly traditional beliefs about Christianity.

2.  How did the UMC agencies get started?  Who holds them accountable?  Should they continue to exist?

They evolved over time within the Methodist system, formally being established by the governing General Conference, which meets every 4 years.  They are governed by boards of directors elected by the quadrenial jurisdictional conferences.  Yes, we need church agencies to continue the ministry of the church, but the bureaucracy needs to be pruned and reorganized, making it more accountable.

3.  What do you see as the major struggle in the UMC at this time?

Helping the evangelical majority within our denomination work to reclaim the church bureaucracy so that once again it is fully oriented towards traditional Methodist beliefs and accountable to the church's membership.

4.  What should the General Conference do, and not do, in 2008?

It should reaffirm our church's traditional beliefs on theology and sexuality, integrate the overseas United Methodists more fully into our governing structures, and mandate that the church agencies be reoriented toward the church's priorities.

5.  How should UMC members help change the UMC?

By becoming involved in church governance, serving on local church administrative boards, going to the annual conference, serving on conference committees,  and ultimately getting elected to General Conference.  And they should help inform their local congregation about what is happening in the denomination.

6.  What should the UMC do to grow?  How can it best serve Christ?

The UMC should return to its historic Wesleyan emphases on salvation, transformation and holiness.

(Mark Tooley is Director of UMAction, of the Institute for Religion and Democracy.)

Pope Benedict XVI Will Make History

                                     (Image from olgstrstford.com)

So writes George Weigel in the April 21, 2008 Newsweek, at http://www.newsweek.com/id/131774?GT1=43002.

This Pope is not a superstar like John Paul II, but a master teacher.  People came to see John Paul.  They come to hear Benedict XVI.

John Paul helped bring the USSR down by his purely religious, non-political visit to Poland in 1979.  The USSR took him so seriously that they attempted to assassinate him, but he survived the bullets and lived to see the demise of the USSR.

Since then, Benedict XVI has opened the issue with the Muslim world.  Cries of fear and alarm followed his remarks at Regensburg in 2006, where he merely quoted an historical criticism of Islam during a lecture.  But after the turmoil, important parts of the Muslim world began to respond. A year later Muslim religious leaders wrote him.

Now Muslim and Catholic scholars have opened a dialogue on basic issues of conscience, human rights and separation of religion and state authority.  They will meet twice yearly, in Amman, Jordan and in Rome.

Recently King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia visited him in October 2007.  Now he has helped him open the first catholic church in Doha, Qatar, and they are discussing building another one in the Saudi Kingdom.

Now in his visit to the U.S., he is expected to open a new era of relations between the Catholic church and its congregations.  Even though there are many difficult issues to be addressed, underestimating him would probably be a to miss an understanding of a moment in history.

Gorbachev Admits He Is A Christian

     (Image from staff.harrisonburg.k12.va.us)

By Malcolm Moore in London, Telegraph.co.uk., 3-19-09, here

Mikhail Gorbachev, the last Communist leader of the Soviet Union, has acknowledged his Christian faith for the first time, paying a surprise visit to pray at the tomb of St Francis of Assisi.

Accompanied by his daughter Irina, Mr Gorbachev spent half an hour on his knees in silent prayer at the tomb.

His arrival in Assisi was described as "spiritual perestroika" by La Stampa, the Italian newspaper.

"St Francis is, for me, the alter Christus, the other Christ," said Mr Gorbachev. "His story fascinates me and has played a fundamental role in my life," he added.

Mr Gorbachev's surprise visit confirmed decades of rumours that, although he was forced to publicly pronounce himself an atheist, he was in fact a Christian, and casts a meeting with Pope John Paul II in 1989 in a new light.

Mr Gorbachev, 77, was baptised into the Russian Orthodox Church and his parents were Christians.

In addition, the parents of his wife Raisa were deeply religious and were killed during the Second World War for having religious icons in their home.

Ronald Reagan, the former United States president, allegedly told his close aides on a number of occasions that he felt his opponent during the Cold War was a "closet believer".

Mr Reagan held deep religious convictions himself. However, until now Mr Gorbachev has allowed himself to express only pantheistic views, saying in one interview "nature is my god".

After his prayers, Mr Gorbachev toured the Basilica of St Francis and asked in particular to be shown an icon of St Francis portraying his "dream at Spoleto".

St Francis, who lived in the 12th century, was a troubadour and a poet before the spiritual vision caused him to return to Assisi and contemplate a religious life.

Even in his early days, St Francis helped the poor, once giving all of his money to a beggar. As well as spending time in the wilderness, he also nursed lepers and eventually became a priest.

"It was through St Francis that I arrived at the Church, so it was important that I came to visit his tomb," said Mr Gorbachev.

"I feel very emotional to be here at such an important place not only for the Catholic faith, but for all humanity."

He also asked the monks for theological books to help him understand St Francis's life.

Father Miroslavo Anuskevic, who accompanied the former Soviet leader, said: "He was not recognised by any of the worshippers in the church, and silently meditated at the tomb for a while. He seemed a man deeply inspired by charity, and told me that he was involved in a project to help children with cancer.

"He talked a lot about Russia and said that even though the transition to democracy had been very important for the world, it was very painful for Russia. He said it was a country which has a great history, and also a great spirituality."

(Hat Tip to Belmont Club here,  from a comment.) 

Methodists Turning from Decline, Ossification and Splitting

      ( Image from joshuatreevillage.com)

At least, an effort is being made.  Apparently the leaders are beginning to draw back from the abyss  looming ahead -  the onrushing disappearance of the United Methodist Church, through long-term steady decline or through splitting.  After some 40 years of steady decline, and risk of splitting, some willingness is developing to do what it takes to avoid extinction.

Is this too harsh a summary?  Not when we consider that the average age of Methodists is an amazing 60 years old.  Why is that?  Because, like their secular friends, they were reluctant to have children.  Especially spiritual children, that is.  The "children" or offspring of a church are its new converts.  And enough new converts would make the average age much lower.

Methodists, however, largely quit doing what it took to make new converts a long time ago.  Now they say they are going to try to make converts again - to evangelize.  But they no longer know how.  Their evangelism committees go through contortions to avoid ever actually talking to anyone about their salvation.  Practicing avoidance of any such encounters, they often claim "evangelism" means things like compiling recipe books.  Anything to avoid actually doing evangelism.  Unfortunately, this includes many, maybe most, Methodist pastors as well.

The new compromise is to change to four major goals; two each for the conservatives and the liberals.  The two for the conservatives are the things that, if they are not done, the UMC will die.  They are, one, starting new churches and renewing old ones (which can happen only through evangelism.)  And two, developing new leaders (only 3.4% of Methodist fully-credentialed clergy are under 35.)   The liberals get two social-action goals.  ministry with the poor, and improving health globally.  They probably would not stay without something similar.  The conservatives are happy with all four of these goals.  The liberals, maybe only the last two.

The first two goals are needed to prevent the United Methodist Church from dying slowly.  The second two - and the relinquishing of older social goals - is  needed to avoid abrupt death from splitting.

While the lack of evangelism has kept new members from being brought in, the social goals of the last 40 years have propelled many old members out the door.  These old social goals have been identity-group oriented.  They were set in concrete in the activist 60s by setting up agencies dedicated to them.  The agencies since then have spread out like ossified coral reefs, using up the nutrients and hogging the available sunlight.  Climbing up into the agencies and into their leadership became the way to "move up," through work on committees and commissions.

The agencies actually produce little but endless meetings, conferences, negotiated proposals with little action or results, lobbying, expensive budgets, controvery and extreme public pronouncements that have offended many ordinary Methodists and driven them away.  Whatever services they may have provided could have been done more effectively and at less cost by utilizing outside specialists and ministries.  (As when the UMC hooked up with Chuck Colson's Prison Ministries rather than starting their own.) 

The big social agenda that has nearly split the church is the hard-edged push by some, including some bishops, to force Methodists to ordain acknowledged homosexuals, and to support gay marriage.  That, presumably, is being tacitly dropped - at least by the bishops.  Even though such proposals have been resoundingly voted down by large majorities every time they have been proposed, the efforts of the activists have only intensified.  This is the big controversy that has all but consumed the agenda every four years at the General Conference - the body that makes church law.  This new arrangement seems to be intended to replace that situation with this new one.  If so, it could work.

It remains to be seen what would be done with the agencies.  The presumption would seem to be that they will be replaced by new agencies focused on the new goals.  The same risk of ossification of the new agencies, so that goals can hardly be changed, is there.  Then there is also the problem of what to do with current old-agency employees.  Following the model of government bureaucracies, when one program is over and a new one begun, most old employees are simply folded into the new program.  Which can cause the new program to be just more of the same old problem.  Only a replacement by people with the proven skills necessary for the new programs would offer much hope for success.

The biggest, most difficult change, however, will be to re-introduce massive, increasingly-skilled evangelism and discipling into seminaries and churches, with the scale and speed needed to turn around the denomination, on time.

  It is hard to know just how much time is left.  Like people who won't change their lifestyle until the cancer shows up or it's time for the heart surgery or kidney dialysis or liver transplant, so that they can no longer deny that their life is on the line, the needed change can come too late in the game.  If it is only half-hearted, it can be too little, too late as well.  Medicine alone can't do it at that point.  The life-style must change for life to continue..

Methodists are attempting a long-delayed first step toward a turn-around in their denomination's lifestyle.  The Methodist church will need a lot of prayers from a lot of people for a lot of time, for this to work.  But we must do something like this, soon, to grow instead of declining, and to stay together instead of splitting.

"Christians, Come Back To Your Home, Iraq"

          Photo by independent embedded journalist Michael Yon, here. 

This is the same church pictured in my post 11/9/07, here, with Christians and Muslims putting the wooden cross back up on the church roof. 

Now Michael Yon reports this:

Today, Muslims mostly filled the front pews of St John’s. Muslims who want their Christian friends and neighbors to come home. The Christians who might see these photos likely will recognize their friends here.

The Muslims in this neighborhood worry that other people will take the homes of their Christian neighbors, and that the Christians will never come back. And so they came to St John’s today in force, and they showed their faces, and they said, “Come back to Iraq. Come home.”

They wanted the cameras to catch it. They wanted to spread the word: Come home. Muslims keep telling me to get it on the news. “Tell the Christians to come home to their country Iraq.”

                           LTC Stephen Michael at St John’s.   

Michael Yon writes:

LTC Michael told me today that when al Qaeda came to Dora, they began harassing Christians first, charging them “rent.”

It was the local Muslims, according to LTC Michael, who first came to him for help to protect the Christians in his area. That’s right. LTC Michael told me more than once that the Muslims reached out to him to protect the Christians from al Qaeda. Real Muslims here are quick to say that al Qaeda members are not true Muslims.

From charging “rent,” al Qaeda’s harassment escalated to killing Christians, and also Muslims. Untold thousands of Christians and Muslims fled Baghdad in the wake of the darkness of civil war.  Most of the Christians are gone now; having fled to Syria, Jordan or Northern Iraq.

                                                    The interpreter “Ice”

Yon writes:

Ice, pictured here with members of the congregation outside St John’s after mass, grew up in this neighborhood. His family is Christian and St. John’s is their church. I asked Ice if the Muslims treat the Christians poorly in Iraq, and he said what other Iraqi Christians and Muslims have also told me: an unequivocal “No.” Ice said they had no problems at all until al Qaeda instigated friction between people.

John Wesley on YouTube

Here is a fascinating view of the young Wesley and the first Methodists.  Three brief videos, 3 minutes each.  Credit and thanks to Rev. Allan Bevere at www.arbevere.blogspot.com.

Part 1:

Part 2:

Part 3:

Where Is Your Church - and When?

         (Image from collegeparkbaptist.org)

Not only where is your church, but when is it? And what is it?  Rubel Shelly, guest blogger,  tells this story:

Dr. Halverson was chaplain of the United STates Senate for several years.  He would occasionally visit the seminary where Cook was a student.  After one of those visits to speak to students, he joined a group of them for coffee and made himself available for informal conversation.

"Dr. Halverson," began one of the seminarians, "where is your church?"  The student was asking about the street location of the Presbyterian Church Halverson served, but he got a deeper and more insightful answer.

"Well, it's three o'clock in Washington, D.C.  The church I pastor is all over the city right now.  It's driving buses, serving meals in restaurants, sitting in board meetings, having discussions in the Pentabon, deliberating in Congress."  He proceeded with a long list of roles and responsibilities where his church was functioning that day.  "And periodically we get together at a building on Fourth Street," he added, "but we don't spend a lot of our time there."

Then Rubel comments,

The pastor-chaplain was not naive with his answer.  He was brilliant.  And he had the clear intent to challenge a young would-be pastor to raise his sights above the Sunday event of the church as an assembly.  Or even church as programs and budgets and organization.

The church was never intended to be isolated from the world but to penetrate it as salt does food.  Jesus wants his people to be "in the world" but not "of the world" - functioning as light to dark places.

Thanks Rubel.  I needed that.  Maybe some others could use it too.

(Rubel Shelly's weekly FAX of Life can be emailed to you free.  Just email him at GBCIII@aol.com )

Beginnings of Christian-Muslim Friendship in Iraq

Michael Yon, brave independent reporter in Iraq, took this icon of a photo.*  He wrote here

A Muslim man had invited the American soldiers from “Chosen” Company 2-12 Infantry to the church, where I videotaped as Muslims and Christians worked and rejoiced at the reopening of St John’s, an occasion all viewed as a sign of hope.

The Iraqis asked me to convey a message of thanks to the American people. ” Thank you, thank you,” the people were saying. One man said, “Thank you for peace.” Another man, a Muslim, said “All the people, all the people in Iraq, Muslim and Christian, is brother.” The men and women were holding bells, and for the first time in memory freedom rang over the ravaged land between two rivers. (Videotape to follow.)

Wretchard at The Belmont Club, here, says:

Joe Rosenthal didn't know what was in his camera the day he snapped the flag-raising at Iwo Jima. There are times when a single picture captures the essence of an entire campaign. Maybe Michael Yon's picture from Baghdad has done it for the Surge.

This is the iconic photo on Mount Suribachi on Iwo Jima during WWII.  Wretchard adds:

All just wars are about the restoration of peace. But it's important to remember that the flag raising on Suribachi occurred on the fourth day of a campaign that would last a month longer. In the War against extremism, as in Iwo Jima, the worst may be yet to come. But it's good to take a deep breath and remember what the journey is all about..

Finally, another famous photo, of the last U.S. helicopter out of Saigon, Viet Nam.  The scene is the U.S. Embassy in Saigon.  The helicopter was about to leave for the last time, unable to take the hundreds of waiting Vietnamese allies whose frantic hope was to leave with them.  It is in stark contrast to the other two photos above.

_________

*  Michael Yon does not receive funding or financial support from Fox News, or from any network, movie, book or television deals at this time. He is entirely reader supported. He relies on his readers to help him replace his equipment and cover his expenses so that he may remain in Iraq and bring you the stories of our soldiers. If you value his work, please consider supporting his mission.

For All The Saints

For those who have forgotten, All Saints' Day is always the day after Halloween.  And to refresh our collective memory, Halloween was never meant to celebrate hobgoblins and monsters, but to fondly remember and commemorate our dead, those we love who have passed on.  So it was originally Hallowed Evening, contracted to Hallow e'en, then to Halloween.

Here then is Allan Bevere's short list of saints we should know about and learn from, here:

.Aimee Semple Mcpherson

Ambrose of Milan

Athanasius

Bernard of Clairvaux

Blaise Pascal

Brother Lawrence

Catherine of Siena

Charles Finney

Charles Spurgeon

Charles Wesley

Clement of Alexandria

Dietrich Bonhoeffer

Dorothy Sayers

Elizabeth Fry

Fanny Crosby

Francis Asbury

G. K. Chesterton

George Whitefield

Harriet Tubman

Hildegard of Bingen

Joan of Arc

John Calvin

John of Damascus

John Donne

John Huss

John Newton

John Wesley

Jonathan Edwards

Karl Barth

Martin Luther

Perpetua

Phoebe Palmer

Polycarp

Richard Allen

Sojourner Truth

Teresa of Avila

The Venerable Bede

Ulrich Zwingli

Walter Rauschenbusch

William Tyndale

Many, many thanks to Rev.  Allan Bevere for his labor in compiling and linking this list! See his excellent blog at www.arbevere.blogspot.com

Apologetics Is Getting Big

                                 (Image from seopher.com)

Which of us has never had any doubts about our faith?  And when we doubt, who is there to help?  That is what Christian apologists have done through the centuries.  They don't "apologize" for the faith; they defend it.

Many people do not know that Christianity can be defended on every front, including scientific, philosophical, and historical.  Most people have heard claims that science has disproved the Bible and the existence of God.   

Now atheists have become more militant and angry.  A spate of books by well-known atheists arrived this year.  As a result, many more Christians have questions about their faith. 

Recently a debate took place in Birmingham, Alabama between the famous Oxford biologist and atheist Richard Dawkins, author of "The God Delusion," and Oxford mathetician and Christian, John Lennox  It was sold out 3 weeks in advance and tickets were going for 3 times their face value, according to Naomi Schaefer Riley at the Wall Street Journal, here.

Such propositions were debated as:

"Faith is blind; science is evidence based," "Design is dead, otherwise one must explain who designed the designer" and "Christianity is dangerous."  The two oxford professors, who had never met before this evening, both displayed rhetorical skills in the best British tradition.

They clashed over whether it was Christianity that began the scientific revolution, whether the universe's complexity was evidence for a creator and whether atheism was itself a sort of faith.  Some of the exchanges were funny, as when Mr. Lennox suggested that his opponent believed that his wife loved him even though it's not scientifically provable.  "Is there any evidence for that?" Mr. Lennox asked.  "Yes, plenty of evidence," Mr. Dawkins answered.  "Never mind about my wife."

Pastors say that congregants are aware of these recent atheist best-sellers and want to know how to respond to such arguments.  Such works as "The Case for Christ" and "The Case for Faith" by Lee Strobel, formerly a teaching pastor at Saddleback Church, have sold well.  So have Josh McDowell's "Evidence that Demands a Verdict," Ravi Zacharias' "Reasons for Faith" and this month's "Apologetics Study Bible," whose contributors include Chuck Colson and former Southern Baptist Seminary   

Then there is my own favorite, "The Defender's Bible" by Henry Morris, Bible teacher, scientist and founder of the Institute for Creation Research, www.icr.org.  Plus his book "Many Infallible Proofs."

Defenders of the faith are drawing crowds of thousands in person as well.  Next month, the Southern Evangelical Seminary will host a National Conference on Christian Apologetics, which will include a special segment for teens.  Younger people are some of the most avid consumers of apologetics texts, according to Christian author Johalyn Fincher, who speaks to college and high-school groups regularly.  She says that in the 20th century, Christians often reacted to science's attacks on religion by "running away from culture."  But in recent years more Christians have begun to take the attitude, "If our God is the God of truth, what are we afraid of?"

Note: If you like this article and would like for others to read it, please go here and vote for it.  (If 5 votes accumulate soon enough, this post will appear on the front page of realclearpolitics.com, then will be read by many people.)

Sheep, Wolves, Sheepdogs - and Pastors

                    (Image from bbc.co.uk)

Mitch Lewis is a military chaplain who writes a marvelous blog.  One of his finest posts, I think, is "Sheep, Wolves and Sheepdogs," here.  It is a compelling read. 

Mitch quotes from Greyhawk in  “Wolves among us,” at MudvilleGazette, who comments on Dave Grossman’s essay, “On Sheep, Wolves and Sheepdogs.”  Grossman, a professor at the U.S. Military Academy, has a simple metaphor: 

There are sheep, wolves and sheepdogs in this world. The wolves prey on the sheep; the sheepdogs protect them. Both wolves and sheepdogs have fangs, but they use them for quite different purposes.

He quotes an old veteran:

“Then there are the wolves,” the old war veteran said, “and the wolves feed on the sheep without mercy.” Do you believe there are wolves out there who will feed on the flock without mercy? You better believe it. There are evil men in this world and they are capable of evil deeds. The moment you forget that or pretend it is not so, you become a sheep. There is no safety in denial.

“Then there are sheepdogs,” he went on, “and I’m a sheepdog. I live to protect the flock and confront the wolf.”

    (Image from imagecache2.allposters.com)

Mitch continues Grossman's quote:

If you want to be a sheep, then you can be a sheep and that is okay, but you must understand the price you pay. When the wolf comes, you and your loved ones are going to die if there is not a sheepdog there to protect you. If you want to be a wolf, you can be one, but the sheepdogs are going to hunt you down and you will never have rest, safety, trust or love. But if you want to be a sheepdog and walk the warrior’s path, then you must make a conscious and moral decision every day to dedicate, equip and prepare yourself to thrive in that toxic, corrosive moment when the wolf comes knocking at the door.

Greyhawk quotes this part of Grossman:

The sheep generally do not like the sheepdog. He looks a lot like the wolf. He has fangs and the capacity for violence. The difference, though, is that the sheepdog must not, can not and will not ever harm the sheep. Any sheep dog who intentionally harms the lowliest little lamb will be punished and removed. The world cannot work any other way, at least not in a representative democracy or a republic such as ours.

Still, the sheepdog disturbs the sheep. He is a constant reminder that there are wolves in the land. They would prefer that he didn’t tell them where to go, or give them traffic tickets, or stand at the ready in our airports in camouflage fatigues holding an M-16. The sheep would much rather have the sheepdog cash in his fangs, spray paint himself white, and go, “Baa.”

Until the wolf shows up. Then the entire flock tries desperately to hide behind one lonely sheepdog.

Mitch added this comment to his post:

For me, “sheep” is not a pejorative term. I don’t say it with a sneer, as does Nietzsche. The only reason that you NEED sheepdogs is to protect the sheep. The sheepdog’s battle with the wolf is not simply a contest of wills between combatants; its purpose is found in the flock it protects.

We sheepdogs should be under no illusion that we bring anything other than temporary, localized, imperfect relief from the threats of this world. Still, it would hardly be an act of love to stand by and watch the flock be devoured by wolves. We do what we can.

But what struck me was the role of pastors in protecting the sheep. 

    (Image from bbc.co.uk)

In my comment on Mitch's post I wrote this:

"What I’m also thinking about is the role of shepherds. And the Christian possibility of transforming wolves into sheep or sheepdogs. It does happen, sometimes. Though through all my years in prison, I never saw it happen except through Christ.  Also, of how sheep can get transformed into shepherds or sheepdogs.

"Funny - somehow over the years as a pastor, I stopped thinking of myself as the shepherd of the flock. Instead, I thought of myself as the shepherd’s sheepdog.

"Jesus is The Shepherd. My job as pastor/sheepdog was to guide the flock to the right places, see that they were tended, fed and watered, and to protect them from predators. And from The Predator.

"I even kept a print on my wall of a modern shepherd with a cowboy hat on, with a sheepdog on his lap, as he pulled burrs out of the dog’s coat. I saw myaslf as that dusty, tired, foot-sore sheepdog, getting welcome relief from those burrs.

"Christian sheepdogs do more for the sheep than protecting them from predators. But they do that too, if they do their jobs.

"God bless you, Mitch and all like you. And God bless all sheepdogs, whether pastors or soldiers."

Restructuring the Methodist Church for Survival

                      (Image from ariustile.com)                     

Organization and structure is not all there is to a church or denomination. Far from it! Nonetheless, it is crucial.

The Methodist Church in particular had an organizational genius in its founder, John Wesley.  His carefully structured roots-up organization (based on rapidly proliferating "classes" of 12 people plus one leader each) did much to enable the speedy yet solidly-grounded growth of the Methodists in England in the 18th century.

Today, because of great changes in technology, we are better able to "flatten" organizational structures.  This has caused an explosive release of individual talent and incentive, fueling the unprecedented inventiveness and prosperity of our time.  It has also made organizational decision-making enormously more effective by decentralizing it, moving it further "down the line" to those closer to the action.   Centralized "command and control" is less effective than more dispersed decision making.  Now, thanks to high tech communication abilities, more dispersed decision making has become both possible and practical.

Yet while "flatter" organizations are much more possible now, most mainline denominations are "steep" in structure.  The UMC is top-heavy.  Too much responsibility is given to the bloated, ineffective agencies.  Too much decision-making is loaded onto the Bishops.

Further, there is also far too little accountability at the top for the UMC to flourish.  The resulting superstructure is so insulated from penalty that it functions all too often by relying on being overbearing rather than on persuasion.  Such an over-protected "center" can be more comfortable in its isolation at the top.  But it cannot effectively lead its congregations or mobilize its resources.  If the UMC were an army, battlefield losses would impel accountability.  The structure would get flattened and win more battles, or stay the same and lose them.  If the UMC were a business, losing money would impel accountability.  The structure would flatten and gain in effectiveness, or stay the same and the business would vanish.

Accountability for the UMC agencies quite likely simply is not possible.*  After all, they are gigantic bureaucracies.  Bureaucracies always spend too much and produce too little.  Holding them accountable is an unending, exhausting, yet ultimately impossible task.  Most of them could be effectively replaced by outsourcing their functions to independent ministries (who are more effective simply because they go out of business if they are not.)  Few UMC agencies would be missed at the congregational level.  In fact, their absence might not even be noticed, so small is their effect on the needs of the congregations..

Further, such independent replacement-ministries could be paid on a voluntary basis by congregations rather than having an unearned income from compulsory appropriations.  Earning their income would incentivize them further to produce good results, more in line with the perceived needs of the congregations.

Accountability for the Bishops could be improved by ending life-time tenures, and by excluding retired bishops from the Council of Bishops.  Bishops would be much more accountable - that is, more responsive to the church at large - if they had to be re-elected every eight years or so.  Or if they were term-limited to eight years, closer to the six-year term-limits of District Superintendents.  That way, the body of the church would have a greater impact on the actions of its Bishop-leaders.

Would that affect the "prophetic function" of the Bishops?  One would hope not.  It would merely subject Bishops to penalties for being prophetic, just like everyone else.  That should not stop anyone with integrity from being prophetic, regardless of the consequences.  Being cost-free is not a requirement for prophetic ministry.  Just ask some of your pastors who have suffered such penalties, and have not given up prophetic ministry on that account.

Finally, the property deed-requirement should be abandoned.  The threat hanging over each congregations that, if all their efforts at local decision-making are thwarted by the hierarchy, they cannot resort to the ultimate recourse of leaving the denomination without losing their property, is effective but counter-productive.  Let them have their ultimate recourse.  It will make their ruling hierarchy more responsive to their needs. 

Any organization that relies on such a drastic penalty from the top to keep its constituents at the bottom in line is fated to be tremendously ineffective, so great will its unresponsiveness and unaccountability become.  Methodists should let it go.  It helps keep them in decline. 

As a result, a few congregations might leave initially.  But if they also saw other accountability-enhancing measures being enacted at the same time, most would be willing to stay awhile longer, to see what develops.  After all, hundreds of UMC congregations die every year already, due to abandonment by their members.  Many such congregations might survive if there were a more accountable, responsive super-structure.

Such basic ideas as these are only preliminary.  The General Conference needs to task itself with enabling the UMC to grow.by flattening its structure and increasing its built-in accountability, while at the same time continuing to actively promote such activities as planting churches. 

The more flattened structure has become absolutely necessary.  Without it, what the UMC does for growth with one hand will be thwarted by the other.

If the UMC will evangelize its members, disciple them and encourage them, the members can be trusted to hold the church accountable.  Further, there are many, many more members than Bishops, District Superintendents or even pastors.  If we want the UMC to grow explosively, just equip the pastors and the members and turn them loose.  And stand back.  Stop hoarding so much decision-making at the top.  If we dare to trust more and more of it to our District Superintendents, pastors and lay people - those closest to the front lines - the growth will not stop this time around. 

_____

* For more on UMC bureaucracies, see the post below here.

____

* For more on UMC bureaucracies, see the post below here.

Methodist-Endorsed Coalition Defends Partial-Birth Abortion

                       (Image from ariustile.com)

The United Methodist Church officially opposes partial-birth abortion.  In fact, delegates to the 2004 UM General Conference voted overwhelmingly to include such opposition in the UM Social Principles. 

Yet two UM agencies - the UM Women's Division and the UM Board of Church and Society - both belong to a group which supports partial-birth abortion.  That is the Washington-based Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice (RCRC), which has denounced the Supreme Court's ruling upholding the U.S. law that prohibits this gruesome procedure. 

How is it that any UM agencies whatsoever feel free to publicly defy positions taken by the UM General Conference - the one and only law-making body in the UMC?  That is possible because of their being largely independent of what anyone in the UMC thinks or votes - even free from rulings of the General Conference, in effect.  They simply go their own way.  Regardless.

At one time, the Bishops had more responsibility for what the UM agencies did.  But I think I remember that at some point they gave up most of their authority over the agencies.  Since then, the UM agencies have been largely unaccountable to the UMC.  They have done mostly whatever they want, regardless of the official positions of the UMC.  They frequently make public statements supporting exactly the opposite of UMC official positions.  And obviously, they give many the impression that they are speaking for the UMC in such statements.

Even more strange, these largely-autonomous, unrepresentative agencies are given their own delegates to the quadrennial UM General Conference, along with the elected clergy and lay delegates.  This adds to their power.

Two more things can be said about the UM agencies. 

First, the UMC agencies are distressingly unproductive and incompetent. They are huge, swollen, ineffectual bureaucracies.  They accomplish little that is actually helpful to UM congregations or their pastors.  Instead of helping the church to grow, they have presided over its decline.  What they are tasked to produce - help for the church in fulfilling its mission - is of poor quality, largely inferior to what could be obtained by outsourcing with various excellent, more expert para-church ministries from outside the UMC.

Examples?  Sunday school materials, for one.  Pastors have complained for years, or suffered in silence, because the UMC-produced materials are so inadequate.  Much better material can easily be obtained from outside the UMC.

Missions, for another. The General Board of Global Missions (GBGM), on an operating budget of $67 million, fields only 127 missionaries.who are commissioned as salaried, career missionaries overseas.  Even then, most of these are not actually traditional missionaries - evangelists and church planters that is - but teachers of English, etc.  Then there are also hundreds of non-missionary staff.  Yet over 100 years ago, when the Methodist church was a fourth of its present size, it sent around 3000 domestic missionaries, just within the U.S. alone.* 

Today, the Mission Society for United Methodists (MSUM) presently fields 210 missionaries on a budget of only $8 million, with a support staff of only 33   This tiny independent Mission Society, with money voluntarily given, without compulsion, by Methodist individuals and congregations, outstrips the performance of the bloated and far richer GBGM, with 1/8 of the budget and a fraction of the staff.**

Second, the UMC agencies are prohibitively expensive.  Even after successive budget cuts because the denomination is shrinking, these agencies still spend hundreds of millions of dollars a year.  Further, these funds are forced giving through the compulsory "apportionments" required of all UMC churches.  Methodists are given no choice about such giving.  Yet, what they get in return for such compulsory giving is getting it spent lavishly on atrociously low productivity. 

The UMC agencies are certainly not the sole reason the UMC continues to decline even while the population grows.  But they are a huge part of the institutional "brake" impeding the forward motion of the UMC.  In addition, their continual defiance of the rulings of the General Conference, with public pronouncements so contrary to the beliefs of a great majority of the UMC, do in fact have a negative effect on many congregations, tending to increase the further decline of the UMC.

Can Methodists not manage to do something about their out-of-control agencies? 

_____

* See http://www.ird-renew.org/site/apps/nl/content2.asp?c=fvKVLfMVIsG&b=391221&ct=4075395

** For more detail, see their website, www.themissionarysociety.org  .

China May Be New Center of Christianity

                                          (Image from lancs.ac.uk)

Ten thousand Chinese a day become Christians.  Currently there are as many as 111 million Christians in China (of whom 90% are Protestants.) 

Many are severely persecuted by the Chinese government.  But they also are zealous missionaries and evangelists.   Two Protestant seminaries in China are secretly training missionaries to the Muslims.

By 2050, there are expected to be some 200 million Christians in China.  That would make China the second nation in Christianity, behind only the United States.  (Brazil would be the third.)

So writes "Spengler," the pen-name of the esteemed journalist and thinker who writes anonymously at the Asian Times.  He suspects that:

...Christianity will have become a Sino-centric religion two generations from now.  China may be for the 21st century what Europe was during the 8th-11th centuries, and what America has been for the last 200 years: the natural ground for mass evangelism.  If this occurs, the world will change beyond our capacity to recognize it.  Islam might defeat the Western Europeans, simply by replacing their diminishing numbers with immigrants, but it will crumble beneath the challenge from the East. 

People do not live in a spiritual vacuum, Spengler continues.

...where a spiritual vacuum exists, as in western Europe and the former Soviet Union, people simply die or fail to breed...When war or economics tear people away from their roots in traditional life, what once appeared constant is now shown to be ephemeral.  Christianity is the great liquidator of traditional society, calling individuals out of their tribes and nations to join the ekklesia (church), which transcends race and nation.

The movement of the Chinese into Christianity is their greatest hope for democracy, writes Spengler.

China's network of house churches may turn out to be the leaven of democracy, like the radical Puritans of England who became the Congregationists of New England.  Freedom of worship is the first pre-condition of democracy, for it makes possible freedom of conscience.  The fearless evangelists at the grassroots of China will, in the fullness of time, do more to bring U.S.-style democracy to the world than all the blustering nation-building of President George W. Bush and his advisors.   

(For the effects of migration on the spread of Christianity, and more, read the whole fascinating article.)

Lutherans Indirectly OK Actively-Gay Clergy

                          (Image from ulcsc.org)

The 4.8 million member Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ECLA) has just loosened its standards prohibiting gay clergy again. 

At its weeklong assembly that ended Saturday, delegates voted down a measure that would have ended the church's requirement for celibacy for gay clergy.

But then they countered that by voting for another measure that nullified the first, by encouraging church leaders to "exercise restraint" when it came to enforcing the first measure by disciplining gay clergy who are in committed relationsips.

What that means, of course, is that bishops can do whatever they please about gay clergy.  They are expected to  continue to be permissive with them rather than disciplining them.  (As is true in other "mainline" denominations, clergy and bishops are much more liberal than most church members, often acting against rules passed by the church as a whole.)

So what the Lutherans did with one hand, they took away with the other.  Clearly, they hoped to disguise what they were doing.  That will work.  Most Lutherans may not notice for awhile.  But eventually they will.  When they do, they can be expected to continue leaving the church in even-greater numbers, in a church already suffering from long-term membership decline.  They can also be expected to increase efforts to split the Lutheran church - again.  (It already split in the 70s and 80s, over the related issue of Bible inerrancy.)

Either way, the decline of the Lutherans will speed up, just as happened when Episcopalians took the same "gradualist" path toward approving actively-homosexual clergy, and eventually, actively-homosexual bishops.

US Military Chaplain Proudly Salutes Flag of Another Nation

If you have not yet discovered the blog of military chaplain Mitch Lewis at http://mitchlewis.net/blog/ , this post from his blog today will give you a very partial idea of what you have been missing.

                            (Image from whirledview.typepad.com)

SALUTING THE FLAG(S)

I saluted the flag today, and stood at attention as the national anthem was played. Actually, I did it several times as I attended a number of different ceremonies on post. Oh, and it wasn’t always the U.S. flag or “The Star Spangled Banner” that I was saluting. I stood at attention and rendered honors to the colors of our host nation as its beautiful national anthem was played. In fact, our two nation’s flags fly side-by-side all over post.

The people of the nation in which I am stationed are proud of their country and its flag. They have plenty of reason to be proud of their accomplishments over the past half-century and their thousand year old culture.

As I stood saluting the colors of a nation not my own - but which I will spend the next two years defending - I thought about the ignorant argument of some self-described “progressive” Christians that equates patriotism and patriotic acts with idolatry. The existence of nation-states is NOT the root of the world’s problems. Love of one’s own country does not stop one from respecting or cooperating with the people of other nations. It certainly does not imply that one has given one’s nation the absolute and unconditional loyalty due only to God.

If some misguided Christians think that I’m committing idolatry and worshiping “the American imperial god” when I salute my national colors, I wonder what god they think I’m worshiping when I salute the flag of my host nation.

Military chaplains are often in as much danger as the service men and women they serve.  Chaplains fill a vital role in supporting their spiritual needs, standing beside them in grief and addressing their searching questions.  They are too little in our prayers.  And we honor them too little. 

Do yourself a favor and track Mitch's blog.  Do him a favor by adding him and other chaplains to your prayers.

(Mitch cannot say where he is stationed, only that it is not Iraq or Afganistan.  The photo above is not from his location.)

(See also Marvin Olasky's article "Caught With Their Flags Down", at the excellent World Magazine, at http://www.worldmag.com/articles/13016.  Hat Tip to Joseph Slife.)

Force Methodist Campground to Host Homosexual Union?

(Image from home.centurytel)

We have already learned that our Constitutional First Amendment rights of freedom of religion and freedom of speech can be threatened by laws protecting homosexual marriage, here,  homosexual adoption, here, and anti-discrimination laws aimed at protecting homosexuals, here.

Now, the lastest example is a lesbian couple in New Jersey who have filed a civil rights complaint because a Methodist campground will not allow them to be united in a ceremony there.   New Jersey's laws prohibiting anti-homosexual discrimination on public property are the basis of their complaint.  Even though the campground is private property and used for religious purposes, the suit has still been filed.

The laws of the United Methodist Church forbid hosting such ceremonies.  Their church law also prohibits homosexual ordination or marriage. 

This latest legal action is another blatant attempt to take away religious freedoms not only from Methodists, but from all other churches and religions.  At issue is the freedom of religions and religious people to believe and practice what they choose. 

Obviously immigrants cannot expect to come into the U.S. and practice things that were already against U.S. law before they arrived, such as polgamy, ritually-sanctioned mutilations and murders, wife-beating, etc., because their religions sanction these.  They are expected to accept our laws as a condition of coming here.

What is at stake here, however, is taking away religious freedoms that American citizens already have.  There is a great difference.  Such efforts are increasing ever more rapidly.  Once our freedoms are lost, it would be much more difficult to get them back.  We need to make a stand, now and whenever attacked in the future.  If not, we could lose the constitutionally-protected freedoms of religion and speech that our ancestors sacrificed so much to establish and protect.

Are the Biblical Gospels Accurate and True?

CAN WE TRUST THE GOSPELS?  Bible Scholar Mark D. Robert's new book says "Yes!"

"Investigating the Reliability of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John"

is now available.

Order it from Amazon by clicking here

This book is a clear, straightforward explanation of why we can trust the New Testament Gospels to give us solid historical information about Jesus. I deal with such questions as:

• Can we know what the original Gospel manuscripts really
said?

• Did the evangelists know Jesus personally?

• When were the Gospels written?

• What sources did the Gospel writers use?

• Did early Christian oral tradition reliably pass down the
truth about Jesus?

• What are the New Testament Gospels?

• What difference does it make that there are four Gospels?

• Are there contradictions in the Gospels?

• If the Gospels are theology, can they be history?

• Do miracles undermine the reliability of the Gospels?

• Do historical sources from the era of the Gospels support their reliability?

• Does archeology support the reliability of the Gospels?

• Did the political agenda of the early church influence the content of the Gospels?

• Why do we have only four Gospels in the Bible?

• Can we trust the Gospels after all?

I have written this book not for experts in biblical studies, but for all people who seek to understand the Gospels as trustworthy historical documents.

Endorsements for Can We Trust the Gospels?

“What F. F. Bruce did for my generation of students, Mark Roberts has done for the current generation. Any student who asks me if our Gospels are reliable will be given this book, and then I’ll buy another copy for the next student!”

—Scot McKnight, Karl A. Olsson Professor in Religious Studies, North Park University

“Mark Roberts has produced what has long been needed: a highly read- able and compelling account of why Christians can indeed trust the Gospels. Dr. Roberts is a formidable scholar whose reputation is very high among academics. He is a skilled writer and teacher. He is also an innovative force in the world of Christian apologetics, among the very first to see the potential for blogging as a formidable means of pursuing the Great Commission.

“I have had Dr. Roberts on my radio show more than any other theolo- gian or pastor, for several reasons. First, he has been a very good friend for a long time. But much more important is his ability to communicate and the knowledge he has accumulated through his three decades of serious and thorough study of the Gospels and the scholarship around them. Whenever a major controversy erupts that touches on the Christian faith, I call on Dr. Roberts.

“Can We Trust the Gospels? is quite simply the best effort I have ever read by a serious scholar to communicate what scholars know about the Gospels and why that should indeed encourage us to trust them and thus to trust Jesus Christ.”

—Hugh Hewitt, radio talk show host, author, blogger, and Professor of Law at Chapman University School of Law 

“There is a crisis of confidence about the Gospels, fueled by sensational claims about supposedly new Gnostic Gospels with a ‘revised standard’ view of Jesus. With a pastor’s insight but a scholar’s critical acumen, Mark Roberts provides a readable guide to answering the question, Can we trust the Gospels? As Mark makes clear, the earliest and best evidence we have for the real Jesus is the canonical Gospels, not the much later Gnostic ones.”

—Ben Witherington III, Professor of New Testament, Asbury Theological Seminary, author of What Have They Done with Jesus?

“Can We Trust The Gospels? caught me completely by surprise. While I knew a scholar of Mark Roberts’s caliber could convince skeptics the Gospels are reliable, I never expected to have my own preconceptions uprooted and replaced with a more solid trust in these biblical texts. This book not only makes a compelling case for trusting the Gospels, it illuminates the creative ways in which God worked to bring us His Word. Roberts’s brilliant little book deserves to be widely read by both skeptics and believers.”

—Joe Carter, blogger (evangelicaloutpost.com) and Director of Communications for the Family Research Council

Order Can We Trust the Gospels? from Amazon by clicking here

Update to "Hillary, George, Methodists and Homosexuality

(Image from home.centurytel)

James Taranto had this follow-up on Friday, June 8, 2007, at "Best of the Web Today," Opinion Journal, Wall Street Journal, to his article on Thursday, June 7, 2007 "What Would Methodists Do Without Experts?*

"Yesterday we noted that President Bush's nominee for surgeon general, James Holsinger, is under attack for a 1991 paper in which he observed that the sexes are 'fully complementary' and that some forms of male homosexual activity are considerably more dangerous than ordinary intercourse.

"The Associated Press reports that Holsinger's detractors are also complaining about his religious activities:

• -"Holsinger has come under fire from gay rights groups for voting to expel a lesbian pastor from the United Methodist Church.**
• -"Also, Holsinger helped found a Methodist congretation that, according to gay rights activists, believes homosexuality is a matter of choice and can be 'cured.'
• -"As president of the Methodist Church's national Judicial Council, Holsinger voted last year to support a pastor who blocked a gay man from joining the congregation.  In 2004, he voted to expel a lesbian from the clergy.  The majority of the panel voted to keep the lesbian associate pastor in place, citing questions about whether she had openly declared her homosexuality, but Holsinger dissented.
• -"As for the congregation Holsinger helped establish, Hope Springs Community Church, the Rev. David Calhoun told the Lexington Herald Leader last week that the Lexington church helps some gay members to 'walk out of that lifestyle.'
• -"The National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, which is opposing the nomination along with the Human Rights Campaign and other local and national groups, calls such a practice 'nothing short of torture' for gays."

"This is an attack not only on Holsinger but also on the U.S. Constitution.  The First Amendment guarantees freedom of religion, which means that the government has no business dictating its moral preferences to the United Methodist Church.  That same First Amendmant protects all congregants who find the Hope Springs approach objectionable.  They are free to follow their conscience, or to find another congregation, denomination or religion.

"U.S. senators, however, are bound by the Constitution, which stipulates in Article VI that 'no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.'  Any senator who votes against Holsinger's confirmation because of his church activity is defying the Constitution (although there is probably no way to hold such a senator to account apart from the ballot box).

"Finally, take note of that quote, which comes from a statement by the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, that so-called reparative therapy is 'nothing short of torture.'  This may shed ight on some of the hysterical claims about the treatment of terrorists at Guantanamo.  After all, if voluntery counseling is 'torture,' then pretty much everything is."

________

*Available free by email from the Wall Street Journal.

**Actually this pastor was expelled from the clergy, not from the United Methodist Church.