Dr. Mark Achtemeier & God's plan B

This is a word to Dr. Mark Achtemeier, Presbyterian pastor and theologian. Be careful of the future path you are making for old friends. Your words may influence badly those whose morality knows no light at all. Yesterday, November 16, Hans Cornelder, of ChurchandWorld  linked to an interview CNN did with Franklin Graham; he noted that the comments were “enlightening.” When I looked there were several about a bloodbath.

 Achtemeier has at times, undoubtedly, been too badly chastised by those disappointed in his change of mind about LGBT ordination and same gender marriage. Generally attacking the person rather than his theology is not a good idea—it is not Christian unless the person is extremely unkind in his actions toward others. I heard Achtemeier speak at the Confessing Church Celebration—so many light years ago—the sermon was good; it was about the greed troubling so many Christians.  But he is now, seemingly, throwing old friends under the train. And he has, I believe, twisted Reformation history and Scripture in order to make that acceptable. 

The Covenant Network of Presbyterians has posted, on their site, Achtemeier’s sermon, “The plan-B God,” given at one of the Network’s regional conferences.   

While, being insistent that most of the people he ministered with in the renewal groups, who are against gay marriage, have such perspectives from a “compassion and a desire to help people who were struggling,” Achtemeier nonetheless sees those perspectives as influencing the culture to see Christianity as hateful and bigoted. He pleads with those in the denomination who agree with him, about same gender marriage and ordination, to not be silent, stating:

This is our present reality: While the PC (USA) keeps silence, other churches across the land loudly proclaim that their opposition to gay marriage is deeply rooted in the Gospel and the Scripture. And because of this, broad reaches of American culture have become convinced that the Christian Gospel is something hateful.”

Of course Achtemeier is right, “broad reaches of American culture have become convinced that the Christian Gospel is something hateful,” but he believes that Christians who hold that the Bible teaches that same gender sex is sin are the problem.  He sees the Covenant Network and other groups that uphold LGBT ordination and same gender marriage as the solution. Achtemeier insists that the Covenant Network and all the others must use the Bible and reformation teaching as the basis for allowing same gender marriage and LGBT ordination. He states:

 The vocation of groups like the Covenant Network will be critically important in the months and years ahead. It is not within our power to turn back the rising tide of cultural and historical forces that are sweeping our church into a period of decline. But we are confident that the day will come when God will purge the poisonous legacy of exclusion and hatefulness from our culture’s image of Christianity. Until that time it falls to you and me to keep the lights of a gracious witness burning in the midst of the surrounding darkness.

Achtemeier reminds his readers that the reformers insisted that all monks, priests and nuns be allowed to marry. Only he puts it a bit differently.  “When Martin Luther and John Calvin went back to the Bible to purify the life and witness of the Church, their conclusions included the strong conviction that it was unfaithful and cruel to impose vows of mandatory celibacy upon whole classes of people.” But it should be noted that it wasn’t about whole classes of people. It was about priests, monks and nuns. And it wasn’t a rule that all of them should get married, only those who wished to be married.

The truth is that the sexual sins troubling the Catholic Church and its monks and priests were both fornication and same gender sex.  Luther certainly wrote to correct fornication with the covenant of marriage but the problem of same gender sex was not corrected in that manner. [1]

The bigger problem has to do with Achtemeier’s title, “The Plan-B God.” It is Achtemeier understanding that for God, when plan A doesn’t work, plan B will be the alternative.  For instance when the temple and its priests, sacrifices and laws did not work God had a plan B. As Achtemeier puts it: “Note this carefully: “God’s redemption of the world through the cross of Christ is a “Plan-B” arrangement that stands dramatically apart from God’s ordinary “Plan-A” religious establishment of the Holy Temple and the Holy Priesthood in the Holy City of Jerusalem.”

So in the same way, Achtemeier sees same gender marriage as an alternative to the original plan A of marriage existing between one man and one woman. Achtemeier goes through several biblical accounts of what he believes are plan A becoming plan B, including the Hebrews becoming slaves in Egypt, but he forgets a very important Reformation teaching. That is the sovereign predetermined plans of God:

Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, just as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we would be blameless and holy before him. He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to himself according to the kind intention of his will, to the praise of the glory of his grace, which he freely bestowed on us in the Beloved. (Eph. 1:3-6)

To go further all that we see God doing in the Scripture is one straight line, not different plans. God doesn’t plan one thing and when that doesn’t work do something else. As Paul tells his reader’s the law is a school master that brings us to Christ. The rites of the temple pointed to Christ. The promises, God’s plans, were for both the Old Testament people who looked toward Christ and the New Testament people who were given Christ. Achtemeier, in his arguments, is not presenting reformation theology—but there are several other problems.

 Two other ways Achtemeier deals with Scripture. He suggests that the Genesis account that Jesus uses when speaking about divorce (Genesis 2-Matt. 19-3-6) does not constitute “Jesus’ own endorsement of heterosexual marriage as God’s exclusively authorized pattern for human life.” His proof is that Jesus did not marry. But once again the emphasis isn’t on a commandment to marry but rather a commandment to stay married because God has made them one flesh. It is totally illogical to insist that because people are allowed to be single, others should be allowed to marry same gender people.

The other problem is far greater since it rests on an assumption that not all Scripture is inspired. Achtemeier suggests that the prophet Malachi is correcting Ezra and Nehemiah. Both Ezra and Nehemiah raged against some of the returning exiles because they had married foreign women, after they returned to Judah, thus endangering the Jewish people to once again worship false gods. Marriage was after all a covenant between the two people and their deity. The men divorced their foreign wives. Achtemeier states that Malachi who lived reasonably close to their era was speaking to the divorces when he states:

Enter Malachi the prophet. Following on this great purification, Malachi brings a word from the Lord that first of all reiterates the command to marry within the tribe of Israel. But then in Malachi chapter 2 the prophet delivers a blistering condemnation of the decision to divorce the foreign wives and children.

[T]he Lord was a witness between you and the wife of your youth, to whom you have been faithless, though she is your companion and your wife by covenant…

In the face of irregular marriages contracted in direct opposition to the divine command, God elects to bring blessing anyway. God rejects in the strongest terms the peoples’ pious attempts to force their marriages back into a normative Plan-A pattern.

So once again Achtemeier sees Plan A being routed by Plan B. 

But there is a better interpretation which makes better sense of the text. Elizabeth Achtemeier in her Interpretation commentary of Nahum-Malachi admits that the text is difficult but writes:

The charge is twofold: First, some in the community have broken the Sinai covenant with the Lord by turning to the idolatrous worship of their wives’ heathen gods (v.v. 10-12); second, some have broken their marriage covenant by divorcing their wives of many years (vv. 13-16).[2] 

Using the key word of “faithless” to pull this section together Elizabeth Achtemeier then writes: “It can therefore be assumed that the wives (vv. 13-16) have been divorced in order that the husbands may marry non-Israelite women (vv. 10-12).” This has nothing to do with Plan –B over Plan-A, but instead focuses on the covenant of marriage as it pertains to a man and woman and God. In fact, this text neatly nests in Genesis 2.

The gospel—the good news of Jesus’ life, death and resurrection is not hateful. Neither is that part of the gospel that declares “Go and sin no more.” Jesus picks up our fallen pieces and over a lifetime puts us back together. If the shed blood of Jesus must be drug through the dirt of other people’s speech we will be there with him, he with us—but it is necessary to keep proclaiming that Jesus died to save sinners (we are included) and call them to repentance.

---

[1]] Bernard Hamilton, Religion in the Medieval West, (London: Arnold 1986) 137-138.

[2] Elizabeth Achtemeier, Nahum-Malachi, Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching, James L. Mays, Series Editor(Louisville: John Knox Press 1986) 181.

Dr. Peter Makari: A denominational leader making friends with hate

It has been several years since I looked through my racists and anti-Semitic files. It is like rummaging through garbage—I feel as though I need to wash my hands afterwards. Tonight I had reason to pull them out and reread. I was interested in some files on the Liberty Lobby—their paper Spotlight as well as the Institute For Historical Review. All founded by Willis Carto. The latter is an organization whose main purpose is to deny the Holocaust.  One brochure I have from them, yellow with age, entitled, “Leon Degrelle Epic: The Story of the Waffen begins with this.

A Million European Volunteers fighting on the Eastern Front—Fighting to save Europe, their homelands and families. Less than half of them were German, yet they all fought side by side—the first truly European army ever to exist.

The words are of course referring to Hitler’s army.

In another paper, tapes of conferences speeches are offered such as “The International Holocaust Controversy” by Arthur R. Butz., or “SS ‘Confessions’ about Auschwitz.” These are denials of the Holocaust. 

  

I write this because recently, Dr. Peter Makari, Executive for Middle East and Europe, United Church of Christ and Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), two of the denominations who along with most mainline denominations, including my denomination, the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), sent a letter to Congress asking them to investigate Israel before sending them anymore military aid, gave an interview to the “successor” of Liberty Lobby, American Free Press.[1] 

The title of the interview is Churches call for Congressional investigation on Military aid to Israel. The Simon Wiesenthal Center in their press release, Wiesenthal Center denounces church’s senior Middle East Executive interview with extremist American Free Press  explains that American Free Press “is regarded as the successor to the now defunct Liberty Lobby’s Spotlight.

 American free Press offers such books as Made in Israel: 9-11 and the Jewish Plot Against America and Northern Traditions. Amazon includes, in their description of the latter book,                            “By combining academic level material with practical work the aim of the book is to take contemporary pagan practices to a new level where they can be accepted as a serious spiritual movement.” American Free Press gives this description:

Faith in the old gods of the Germanic people has been reawakening in the modern world as the Christian religion is forcibly sucked into New World Order socialism and perverted by the forces of political correctness. But who are the ancient gods of the white race, and what do the ancient scriptures of the pagan religion mean?

On the site of American Free Press, at the time of my writing, is an article and pod-cast, “Black gun violence leaves white man paralyzed. There is an ad for anti-Semite identity preacher, Pete Peter’s, radio program. There is a link, hard to find, to The Barnes Review with a link on that page back to the American Free Press. The Barnes Review is connected to the American Free Press. It was founded by the same person who founded the Institute For Historical Review, Willis Carto. On the Barnes Review are such books as “The Work of All Ages: The Ongoing Plot to Rule the World from Biblical Times to the Present,” which seems to be another version of the Protocol’s of the Elders of Zion.

All of the dirtiness of the Nazi area is on the pages of these two sites, and yet Makari is willing to give them an interview. The letter sent to Congress by the leadership of the mainline denominations was outrageous but the connection between Makari and American Free Press is obscene. [2]

---

[1] Part of the letter stated, “We urge Congress to undertake careful scrutiny to ensure that our aid is not supporting actions by the government of Israel that undermine prospects for peace. We urge Congress to hold hearings to examine Israel’s compliance, and we request regular reporting on compliance and the withholding of military aid for non-compliance. “

[2] See also,

Mainline Spokesman Speaks to Anti-Semitic Publication by David Fischler

The kingdom of God or the Church?

When denominational leadership starts advising by the use of unnatural dichotomies such as “We must remember that we don’t serve the church — we serve the kingdom,” deep and painful theological problems lie ahead. According to the Presbyterian News Service, the unnatural dichotomy was uttered by Rev. Herbert J. Nelson, Director of the PC (U.S.A.)’s Office of Public Witness. In an article, Elasticity of spirit, written by Bethany Daily, one learns that the advice was given during the Presbyterian Moderator’s Conference.

Nelson was undoubtedly speaking of the Kingdom of God—so we should explore the Kingdom in relationship to the Church. But first some other thoughts. Nelson was speaking of the problems the PC (U.S.A.) is having as church after church leaves. He offers an analysis and a solution. I agree with the words of his analysis but not his meaning. And I am horrified at his callous disregard for empty churches, undoubtedly left so by congregations who were not allowed to take their property with them as they exited the denomination.

What I see as Nelson’s analysis is:

The PC(USA) has fallen to the temptations of outside pressure and needs to answer the call to engage in kingdom thinking.

Yes, the PC (USA) has fallen to the temptations of outside pressure. If one lingers on the More Light Presbyterian site, reading and then following the links they often end up at secular sites such as The Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation and The National Gay and Lesbian TaskForce.[1] The secular organizations are pouring money and resources into denominational groups seeking to further the LGBT agenda.

Nelson’s ideas about the outside pressure fits with his praise of one particular presbytery executive he spoke with, as the PNS author states:

He [Nelson] spoke about a recent conversation he had with a presbytery executive about churches that have left the PC(USA). That pastor looked at the possibilities that that situation brings and told Nelson how the empty church buildings are now being used to distribute school supplies to children in need.

“They had a vision for restoring the integrity of God’s work on behalf of the PC(USA),” he said.

What might happen if other empty church buildings were used for tutoring centers, medical clinics or social service agencies?

This sounds good and charitable but it is about a building which once held a congregation that lost their church property. The empty church has been turned into a school supply distribution center. It is appalling that one should hear praise that houses of worship are becoming social service centers instead of places where the word of God is preached.  But this is the problem that I began with, Nelson’s insistence that Presbyterian moderators do not serve the Church but instead the kingdom of God. 

In George Eldon Ladd’s book The Gospel of the Kingdom, he uses the parable that Jesus told of the nobleman who after leaving his vineyard with caretakers went away to obtain a kingdom. Ladd writes:

We read in Luke 19: 11-12, “As they heard these things, he proceeded to tell a parable, because he was near to Jerusalem, and because they supposed that the kingdom of God was to appear immediately. He said therefore, “A nobleman went into a far country to receive a basileia and then return.’” The nobleman did not go away to get a realm, an area over which to rule. The realm over which he wanted to reign was at hand. The territory over which he was to rule was this place he left. The problem was that he was no king. He needed authority, the right to rule. He went off to get to get a “kingdom,” i.e., kingship, authority. The Revised Standard Version has therefore translated the word “kingly power.” [2]

Ladd explains that the kingdom of God is defined as God’s power, his will, his authority. The kingdom of God is also the kingdom of Christ. His authority, power and rule, occurs in the midst of humanity because of his redemptive work. The church, of which Christ is Lord, proclaims Jesus’ redemptive work, which is the good news. Proclaiming the kingdom-God’s rule and redemption in Christ is the work of the Church. The two are intertwined. While the kingdom is not the church, one cannot serve the kingdom of God unless one serves the Church, because there God’s power, rule and authority are proclaimed and made known to the world.

The kingdom is present now in the Church—and the Church’s existence and message in the world is why the enemy rages so harshly—that is why the saints do battle. In our union with Jesus Christ we are a part of his kingdom—we share in his death, suffering and resurrection. The kingdom will be complete at the coming of the King.

“For he rescued us from the domain of darkness and transferred us to the kingdom of his beloved Son, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.” Col. 1:13-14.

---

[1] For more information see, “From Madison Avenue to Out of a Far Country: From Darkness to Light”

[2]George Eldon Ladd, The Gospel of the Kingdom, reprint, (Grand Rapids: WM. B. Eerdmans 1973) 20-21.

"The Church's task is the preaching of the word"

After Tuesday’s election, reading the religious section of the Huffington Post, I found plenty of advice for Christians, in particular, for orthodox and evangelical Christians.  Most of the articles could be wrapped up with the expression, “you are bigots.” The article I was drawn to was Emily Timbol’s, “America Has Spoken Christians Need to Listen.” Timbol is a progressive Christian and her main thought seems to be that Christians who want to influence other Americans need to hear what the culture is telling them and move in that direction. Timbol, with the usual tired words of fear and discrimination, writes:

America said, loud and clear, that they support measures that protect equality. They also elected a president who believes the same. This does not mean that America has become a godless, heathen nation. It means that conservative Christians have stopped listening to America. Specifically those Americans on the opposite side of the aisle who worship the same God. By fighting against the growing movement of inclusion into the body of Christ, for all people, conservative Christians are just showing how out of touch they truly are. Does that matter, if Christians should be listening to Christ, and the Bible above all else? Yes. Because God did not say that we should live in a bubble. He commanded us to go out and reach the world.

What became clear last night is the way to reach the world is not through fear, discrimination or a movement farther right. It's through faith, love and equal treatment of all people. If the majority of Christians reject this, and further alienate Americans who disagree with them, they'll be doing a great disservice to the church.

Immediately my mind, and heart, went to some words that Karl Barth wrote in his small booklet, Theological Existence Today. He was questioning some doctrines published by the German Christians of his day. The German Christians were writing that the German people wanted to return to the church and therefore the church needed to “prove herself to be the Church for the German people. …” Barth’s answer was very direct and the church in America needs to hear his answer to this particular doctrine. I will quote it but substitute the title American for his use of German.

1.      "The Church has not “to do everything” so that the American people” may find again the way into the Church,” but so that within the church the people may find the Commandment and promise of the free and pure Word of God.

2.      It is not the Church’s function to help the American people to recognize and fulfil any one “vocation” different from the “calling” from and to Christ. The American people receives its vocation from Christ to Christ through the Word of God to be preached according to the Scriptures. The Church's task is the preaching of the Word."

There were several movements in Germany during the Nazi era; Barth disapproved of most of them including the ‘New Reformation Movement.’ He found they were compromising too much with the German Christians.  During the crisis in Germany, Barth pushed toward a church that emphasized prayer and proclamation of the word. And so must the American church including the mainline denominations.

Later in his writing Barth was to point out that while the church believes the state is to be “guardian and administrator of public law and order,” it nonetheless does not “believe in any state.” Therefore “The Church preaches the Gospel in all the kingdoms of this world.” He enlarges his thought to insist the church does not preach “under or in the spirit of the Third Reich.”

In the same way the American church, be it Catholic, Protestant or any other, may not rightly preach the word under or in the spirit of any government. While praying for the government, obeying, in the Lord, what can be obeyed, she only and always preaches the word of God so that the people who hear may be fed, converted and transformed by the good news of Jesus Christ.

And what is said of a government must also be said of a culture. A church might use the goods of a culture, that is its music, art, food and even customs  but the church cannot, must not, preach the culture back to the culture. If we hear Americans saying that killing the unborn is acceptable, that greed is a good, that sex outside of marriage is fine, that same gender sex is a gift, that using drugs is okay, we may tremble but we must keep proclaiming the pure word of God. If we see government beginning to enforce laws that undergird a broken society, providing rights for its dark temptations, thus putting religious freedom in harms way, still the word of God must be proclaimed.

“lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age.” (Matt. 28:20.) The word of God is not fettered.” (II Tim. 2:9)

The Church’s commission upon which its freedom is founded, consists in delivering the message of the free grace of God to all people in Christ’s stead, and therefore in the ministry of his own Word and work through sermon and Sacrament.

We reject the false doctrine as though the Church in human arrogance could place the Word and the work of the Lord in the service of any arbitrarily chosen desires, purposes, and plans.” (The Theological Declaration of Barmen 8.25-8-27) 

Outside the camp--for us

Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.  … We have an altar from which those who serve the tabernacle have no right to eat. For the bodies of those animals whose blood is brought into the holy place by the high priest as an offering for sin, are burned outside the camp. Therefore Jesus also that he might sanctify the people through his own blood suffered outside the gate. So let us go out to him outside the camp, bearing his reproach. For here we do not have a city, but we are seeking the city which is to come. (Heb. 12:8, 10-14)

My vote on November 6th

This is for November 6th, voting day. I am a Democrat who will vote for life, upholding the biblical view of marriage between a man and a woman (rather then redefining it), and freedom of religion. Asking religious institutions, who believe abortion is murder, to pay for abortion is a violation of their religious freedom. I placed the video below on my site once before. But today is a good day to place it there again. There is an Evangelical version of this but I prefer the Catholic one because I agree strongly with the Cardinal Dolan quote. 

Iran's persecution of Christians

A few days ago a friend sent me an article on the persecution of Christians in Iran. The article entitled, Shining a Spotlight on Iran’s persecution of Christians is written by David Burrowes. It begins:

Have you heard the one about the American and the Iranian Christian? The American asked him when his family converted to Christianity, expecting the response to speak of a recent transition from Islam. The Iranian replied, 'about two thousand years ago'. This conversation could have taken place throughout the Middle East - Syria, Lebanon, Turkey, Jordan, Israel, Palestine, Egypt, Iraq and Iran where many family lines lead back to the earliest Christian Church - as well as many from other religious backgrounds who have come to faith in Jesus Christ.

The Iranian could also have pointed out that Christianity was embedded in Persian society - along with Zoroastrianism and Judaism - long before the arrival of Islam. He could express pride that Iran provided the backdrop for five books of the Bible and recall the time when missionaries from the early Iranian Church brought the Christian message to China, India, Central Asia and even England.

Burrowes also writes:

We have heard evidence of widespread, state-perpetrated attacks on a Church which has been driven underground through fear. Our report, which will be launched later today, catalogues abuses including the arbitrary arrest and imprisonment of more than 300 Christians in the past two years — including Church leaders such as Farshid Fathi, who was arrested in December 2010 and sentenced to six years in prison. My colleagues and I heard heart-breaking evidence of physical and psychological torture, and the murder by government agents of Christian pastors. The testimonies of Iranian witnesses included evidence of education and employment discrimination driven by the state and other direct and indirect persecution.

I have not found the report that the author writes about. But when I do I will post a link to the report. But it is important to take note of Iranian persecution of Christians. Some in the PCUSA have not acknowledged that there is persecution in Iran. Pray for the Iranian Christians.

Shining a Spotlight on Iran’s persecution of Christians
Hat tip to Kathryn Churchill.

Here is another report on the report which was evidently made by a group of Christian members of Parliament.: British Members of Parliament release report on intensifying pressure on Iranian Christian converts