Tuesday, March 4, 2008
Faithful Friends and Faithless Tales
Several summers ago my husband and I ate with several renewal leaders while they were in Sacramento at a meeting. We took them to one of our favorite places to eat, the Tower Café, which is by that once famous music store also called Tower and right next to the Tower Theater. The Reverend James (Jim) Berkley was one of our guests.
We had not met Jim, but that evening we were able to enjoy his clarity, Christianity and good humor, and by the way, he use to go to the Tower Theater to watch French movies, something we also have enjoyed doing over the years. “Mr. Hulot’s Holiday,” was a movie he mentioned.
We discovered that Jim was once a Pastor in a small town near us. During that time he send articles to Christianity Today’s, Leadership Journal. The magazine eventually asked him to become their Editor. Jim at some point worked with Presbyterians for Renewal. He now works for Presbyterian Action with the Institute of Religion and Democracy where you can read his complete bio.
My point in writing this little piece is (1.) that Jim and his wife Debbie are Christian friends and their Christianity reaches into a lot of places in this world. Jim may spend time at important conferences but he also takes time to minister to individuals along the way. Not long ago a young Christian pastor, Brian, told me of how Jim, at a conference, took the time to pray with him. Brian was mourning the death of his baby daughter and he was very touched by Jim's prayer.
But (2) I grieve deeply that Jim and his wife Debbie have had to suffer so much verbal and written persecution because of the work Jim does. And it is all distortions and lies. But I for one am extremely thankful that they are my Christian Brother and Sister in the Lord. I think it is very important, in such times as this, that Christians uphold each other with both words and prayer.
Since someone maliciously decided to post more awful material against Jim and the IRD, I am re-posting an article I wrote several months ago which refutes one of those articles. It of course only covers a small amount of the articles published, but at least with this one can see the faulty thinking and distortions of those who write against the IRD.
Embracing Conspiracy Theories: The John Birch Society & PublicEye’s John Dorhauer
-Dr. John C. Dorhauer, a staff member for the United Church of Christ, has written an article for Public Eye Magazine entitled “Churches Under Seige [sic]: Exposing the Right’s Attacks on Mainline Protestantism.” His target is the Institute of Religion and Democracyand all of the renewal groups in all of the mainline churches.
Dorhauer’s article reminded me of the John Birch Society’s view of the world back in the 1960s and 70s. The only difference, of course, is their political ideologies. It can be shown that Dorhauer and Robert Welsh, founder of the John Birch Society, share some similarities in their theological outlook and more importantly their use of conspiracy theories. (Robert Welsh had an unquestionable “progressive” view of religion.)
More then ten years ago I wrote an article for the Christian Research Journal on “Christian Identity” a group within the Neo-Nazi movement in America. In the article, I used the John Birch Society as an example of an organization that uses conspiracy theories. I showed how their conspiracies fed into the various racist groups although the society, itself, is not racist.
A member of the John Birch Society was bothered by my article and wrote me a long letter explaining how useful conspiracy theories are. In return I wrote a letter back which I later made into an article and placed it on my web site “Naming the Grace.”
But it isn’t just the far right which spins conspiracy theories, the far left is also becoming quite good at the enterprise. Take for instance process theologian, David Ray Griffin, who wrote a book contending that President Bush was behind the 9-11 attacks in New York City. Now John Dorhauer and the PublicEye Magazine are making use of a conspiracy theory to slander other Christians with whom they disagree.
The article Dorhauer has written is filled with historical mistakes, strange theological statements and conspiracy theories. For instance Dorhauer suggests that it was President George W.H. Bush who attempted to have Justice Robert Bork nominated to the Supreme Court when it was President Ronald Reagan who nominated Bork.
Dorhauer mentions Bork because Bork’s wife, Mary Ellen Bork, is on the Board of Directors of IRD. Indeed, the Board is made up of such respected individuals as Dr. Thomas C. Oden, Professor of Theology and Ethics (emeritus), Drew University, Rev. Richard J. Neuhaus, The Institute on Religion and Public Life and Dr. Robert George, Professor, Princeton University.
After looking at one interesting, but strange, theological statement by Dorhauer, I will take two thoughts from my article on conspiracy theories and use it to analyze Dorhauer’s article.
The rather weird statement is this: “They [renewal groups] emphasize a person's direct relationship with Jesus in the fashion of evangelicals, and so oppose the dominant Protestant church tradition of freedom of the pulpit and the freedom to express one's own theology without the constriction of a mandate from above.” Although I do not totally understand all that Dorhauer means by his statement, I will, at least, try to address it.
First of all, as noted above, Dorhauer is coming from a United Church of Christ background and aiming mainly at those renewal groups in that denomination. They are congregational in government so it is understandable that they do not expect anyone above the congregation telling their Pastor what to preach.
Nonetheless, it is not true that congregationalism is the dominant characteristic of Protestant denominations. Furthermore, the congregation or the governing body within each local church in a congregational type of church has the right to ask that their Pastor preach biblical truth.
Dorhauer seems to be making three theological points about the United Church of Christ. One, the United Church of Christ does not emphasize a person’s direct relationship with Jesus and two the only evangelicals in that denomination are all in renewal groups.
The third point he seems to be making I consider of utmost importance. Since Dorhauer thinks those in renewal groups have a different theology than other members in the UCC, that is, they believe in a direct relationship with Jesus, it would seem he is saying the usual connection between UCC members and Jesus Christ is by some other mediator. Or maybe they have no relationship with Jesus? Hmm – I wonder if that is true. What a great mission field for orthodox and evangelical Christians.
Going beyond even the polity part of Dorhauer’s statement it seems nonsensical to suggest that having a personal relationship with Christ and seeing that as one of the important tenets of Christianity somehow affects the freedom of the pulpit. Unless he means that preachers should have the freedom to preach that a personal relationship with Jesus is unimportant!
Going even deeper than theology about our relationship to Christ, the question should be asked: is Dorhauer suggesting that it is more important to have the “freedom to express one’s own theology” than it is to preach biblical truth?
But as to conspiracy theories: Dorhauer purports to have found the smoking gun, the document that tells all. The Institute for Religion and Democracy is supposedly conspiring to use renewal groups to undermine all of the mainline denominations.
Dorhauer writes, “The IRD's training sessions are by invitation-only and its allies within churches meet in secret. At best, we are able to present strong circumstantial evidence that what is happening in our local churches and to our denominational leaders is the direct byproduct of the covert tactics of the IRD and their trained insurgents.”
Dorhauer continues, “We have few smoking gun moments: moments where the fomenters of dissent acknowledge their cooperation with or even awareness of the IRD. (In many ways, the IRD's ability to effect cooperation even from those who don't know they exist shows the success of its initiative.)”
And writing of the smoking gun, the IRD’s four year plan, Dorhauer states: “But one smoking gun moment came recently when the executive summary of the IRD's four-year plan leaked out of its secretive networks into the hands of its enemies.” (Bold letters mine.)
Just to make sure his readers understand that this is truly a conspiracy Dorhauer writes, “And it [the planning document] confirms what pastors across Protestant denominations have long felt, that our denominations are being attacked in a coordinated fashion - that we are not just falling into conspiratorial thinking. There is a conspiracy.”
Turning to my article, “Conspiracy and the Christian,” the John Birch Society member asked this question, “Why not view world events from a conspiratorial view?” As an aside, Dorhauer may not understand that he is suggesting a conspiracy taken to the level of world events. But, he is, because those in the renewal groups, including the IRD, are connected to a two-thousand year history of the Church with its biblical views and traditions. They are also committed to world missions as well as helping the poor and the prisoner. (Dorhauer scathingly points out that the leader of IRD is Jim Tonkowich, former head of Charles Colson’s Prison Ministry.)
Using two of my answers in my article, I will show how they fit with Dorhauer’s theories. First, “the advocates of conspiracy theories often understand goodness and evil within the framework of the theory.” Dorhauer, using his idea of conspiracy, effectively covers over the real questions of good and evil.
The renewal groups, including IRD, are concerned about such social issues as abortion and the ordination of practicing homosexuals. They are also committed to upholding the Lordship of Jesus Christ in the face of a growing pluralism within the mainline denominations. Those issues are not addressed in the article; rather the IRD and other renewal groups are tarred and feathered with the crime of being secret agents of chaos.
In fact, Dorhauer takes his conspiracy theory and shapes an abominable lie. He writes:
"The IRD exists for one reason only. It is not to steal churches out of our denomination, nor to defrock ministers, not to establish certain religious, theological, or biblical principles. The IRD only exists to tie up churches and judicatories in dissent. That is it. So, its staff really doesn't care if the resolutions they are teaching their activists to present pass or not. They don't care if the church supports gay marriage or not. They don't care if the Bible is interpreted literally or not. They only care that activists keep pushing buttons, fomenting dissent, and tying up congregational, judicatory, and denominational leaders in one argument, one battle, one fierce debate after another as a way to weaken churches interested in social justice."
Dorhauer has posted not one shred of evidence to back his statement. And he obviously hasn’t read anything that writers such as Jim Berkley or Alan Wisdom have written. Conspiracy theories lead to making the person you disagree with the “outsider.” Rather than defending your own position on issues, you defame and slander those who should be your friend in Christ. Dorhauer sees the “other” as someone who has “enemies.” This must mean he also has named himself their enemy.
Another problem with conspiracy theories is that “the theory often serves as truth rather than documented evidence.” And this is also true in Dorhauer’s case. He began with his theory, not with any documentation, so anything he finds is interpreted from his conspiracy formula.
Dorhauer is unable to comprehend the viewpoints of many people in the mainline denominations who are concerned about the numerous theological and social issues slipping into the Church via a broken humanity. He is unable to grasp the idea that many, many committed Christians have formed renewal groups and made commitments to work for renewal with the understanding that such work is faithful work for Jesus Christ.
Dorhauer takes his theory so seriously that any negative evidence to the contrary gets absorbed into his theory. That is why he makes the ridiculous statement, “In many ways, the IRD's ability to effect cooperation even from those who don't know they exist shows the success of its initiative.” So, most of us have been manipulated and we didn’t even know it? Dorhauer's conspiracy theory has become his truth.
Dorhauer undoubtedly believes he is doing good work by exposing the “conspirators,” but what he is actually doing is slanderous work such as was used against the Jews in pre-war Germany. If Dorhauer believes ordaining practicing homosexuals is right, if he thinks that abortion is honorable, if he feels that pluralism is more acceptable for Christians than upholding Jesus Christ as the only Lord, then let him argue his positions in an honest way, without resorting to slanderous accusations.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
Viola,
Your compassion for your friend is right and commendable, but let's not keep our blinders on too tight here. Jim gives as good as he gets. He is frequently insulting to those he disagrees with and whether you regard his insults as more 'true' than those of John Shuck you must recognize that Shuck has his own friends who also regard him as a good and loyal minister and out of compassion feel it necessary to defend him from the constant "persecution", to use your word, that is aimed at him.
If you honestly believe Jim is the innocent, "persecuted" party here then you could benefit from some perspective.
Aric,
There have been times over at Shuck’s blog when you have defended the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ as a true and excellent apologist against his unbelief. But in this case when Jim asked for moderate Progressives to disagree or disapprove of Shuck’s language such as:
“You right-wing bastards won't even allow a freaking scruple. Now it is war again. I tell you, if there was a proposal now that would remove G-6.0106b and the 1993 AI and allow congregations to leave with the denomination's property free of charge, I would be for it just to get rid of you SOBs. I feel no affection for you and your Taliban theology. You are destroying our denomination. I despise you today.”
You never popped up over there and yet the minute I put something good about Jim here and defend him and the organization he works for you are immediately here defending John Shuck. What’s going on?
And you know you have never seen Jim write anything like that. Besides that I don’t think you read the article I wrote. Jim has a whole herd of people after him. And because they can’t or won’t defend their own positions biblically or even from reason they instead develop conspiracy theories.
Vi,
It is amazing the theoretical gymnastics the human heart will lead the mind into, to get its own way, isn't it?
The idea that you can't discern the conspiracy around the IRD, proves how good they are, and just another nail in the coffin 'proving' the reality of the theory.
Jeremiah's curse indeed, "the human heart is deceitful, above all else, and desperately wicked."
sorry, that last post was from Mr. "I was just thinking..." my computer is at the office.
Viola,
I have opted not to comment on Jim Berkley's blog for many reasons. In the past my attempts to engage with him in good faith have been met with contempt, insults and treatment of such low quality that I was quite tempted to think of him exactly what his detractors have described. It is not that I am incapable of engaging with people who disagree with me. I have actually had quite a positive experience in interacting with Chris Larson, Dave Moody, John Ertheim, Toby, yourself and others via these blogs.
Furthermore, I am not about to pop into the middle of this childish spat the two of them are having. I commented here, primarily because I felt that you, being someone I regard as reasonable, would also do better to stay out of it.
I did read the article you wrote. I didn't comment because I did not feel it bore directly on the present kerfuffle. As for the subject of the article I agree that the language of 'conspiracy' and 'enemy' is overblown. Actually I think it is exactly like what Jim himself says when he describes all those people he disagrees with as "turkeys". Once we dismiss people on the other side (either by regarding them as enemies or by regarding them as idiots) then we are no longer obliged to attempt to engage with them productively. It is more mature and a better Christian response to attempt to find common ground and begin to work through our differences with a presumption of the honesty and intelligence of the other party.
John thinks Jim is the enemy.
Jim thinks John is a fool.
It's essentially the same mistake.
Mr. I was just thinking, I believe the verse you just quoted sums it all up.
Strange --I have been reading Jeremiah as part of my Lenten devotions. There is a great deal about that fire in the bones but Jeremiah is used by God not only to denounce Israel for social injustice but a great deal because they have forsaken the Lord for other gods such as the Queen of Heaven. I think a certain someone has their curse mixed up!
Did Barb get a new Computer? I was hoping she would.
Incidentally, When I said Chris Larson, I meant Chris Larimer. I was crossing his last name with yours...
Oops.
I don’t know Aric, I think I would rather be called a turkey than an “SOB” or an “ignorant bastard.”
Viola,
What is relevant is not what you would prefer, but whether you can understand the insult from the perspective of the injured party. For myself, I'd rather be regarded as an enemy than an idiot, because an enemy is someone you take seriously. An idiot is someone you dismiss. However, I can see why others might think the "fool" label is more innocuous.
Still, isn't it a bit ridiculous to be comparing whose insults are more insulting? Isn't it more honest just to admit that behavior on both sides has been less than Christian?
But then maybe it’s just my generation that doesn’t think vulgar language is acceptable or Christian
Aric,
I am not stupid and neither are you. Not by any means. Posting pictures of cartoon-like people and calling them by the names of Renewal people, who by the way have not in any way spoken against John Shuck, using cursing language and telling other people you despise them is sinful. Jim Berkley was defending those who are part of the renewal network including myself. This is not just a spat between Shuck and Jim Berkley it is a Christian man defending other Christians. I don’t intend to argue the point with you anymore. Jim has never treated others like that.
Very well. My apologies if I have offended you. I will leave it be, allowing you the last word.
Viola
I've stayed out of the stuff(?) on John Shuck's site for a long time now. Was I better to go or should I have stayed? Was I a moderating voice?
Certainly my life has been more peaceful without it and I've focused more on my local ministry
Bob Campbell
Pastor Bob,
I think that what you did was right. I don't like writing over there, which I just did, or writing about over there. But when other people, who love Jesus are being attacked it is sometimes hard, at least for me, to be quiet. It is also hard to be quiet when Jesus Christ is being made fun of. The two things often go together. Remember when Paul was confronted by Jesus on the road to Damascus. Jesus didn't ask him way he was persecuting Christians; he asked Paul why he was persecuting him. When he told Paul who he was he once again informed him that he was Jesus who Paul was persecuting.
I think there is a time to be friends, as you most certainly were and are, and a time to confront, which you finally, I think out of kindness did. You must follow wherever Christ leads you but I don’t think very much has changed, if anything it is growing worse.
Post a Comment