Wednesday, November 14, 2012

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

Monday, November 12, 2012

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.




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

Wednesday, November 7, 2012

"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) 

Tuesday, November 6, 2012

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)


Monday, November 5, 2012

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. 


Sunday, November 4, 2012

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

 

Friday, November 2, 2012

David D. Colby, resurrection or same gender marriage?



This sermon, “A Reformed Understanding of Marriage” raises so many questions and has so many errors that one must explore and write. It was preached for the Covenant Network of Presbyterians by David D. Colby in Minnesota and is aimed at the vote that is being taken there on the definition of marriage. Colby uses Romans 8:23 as his text and, for me at least, raises questions about the biblical meaning of the believer’s adoption as sons and daughters of God. In fact, the reformed doctrine of salvation is distorted in this sermon, as Colby tries to use the idea of adoption to make a case for same gender marriage.
But first some of the other errors:

1.       Colby tries to use the Bible’s honest telling of humanity’s disregard of God’s original intention for marriage. Quoting an article, “Traditional Marriage: One Man, Many Women, Some Girls, Some Slaves,” by Jay Michaelson, Colby insists that there is no certain definition of marriage in the word of God. However, the Bible does not hold up polygamy as a model, instead there is the beautiful creation story of God providing for and instituting the first marriage, between man and woman. Jesus uses this first union to teach about the covenant of marriage. (Matt. 19: 3-9) And 1 Timothy 3, insists that an ‘overseer’ must be the husband of one wife. The Bible’s standard isn't anything goes, but from the very beginning, “...a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife and they shall become one flesh.”

2.     Colby states that for the Roman Catholic Church, it is the celibate priests who hold the sacred office and those who are married are considered profane. “Marriage and intimacy was and is considered profane, basic.” But this is not true, for the Catholic Church both are sacred; ordination is a sacrament but so is marriage. He then moves to the Reformation teaching that all should be married, that none should be forced to live a celibate life. Colby uses the Reformation teaching to insist that those with same gender attraction should be allowed to marry. But this is simply apples and oranges. Biblically, marriage is between a man and a woman. And same gender sex is sin, not marriage.

3.      Colby states: “The Gospel always comes wrapped in culture and, try as we might, there is no “pure Gospel” that can be separated out with any certainty from the culture in which Jesus was born, the culture of the New Testament writers, our own culture or some combination of the three.” At first sight this seems confusing—but not really. The Incarnation, Jesus, his life, death and resurrection are the pure gospel—and the whole story, the whole text, that surrounds the life, death and resurrection of Jesus becomes the word of God because Jesus wraps the whole story around himself and molds it to his meaning. (The Old Testament is included in that wrapping.)The life of Christ either blesses or judges the culture. It does not matter, Jesus’ culture, the apostles’ culture, our culture. They are all judged or blessed by how Jesus is received or rejected.


4.     Colby adds to his formula, “The good news always comes wrapped in culture” and it falls to us to sort out what is the good news, and what is the culture.” Well, yes, we need to understand what ancient culture was, what they thought and taught—but the good news is that Jesus overcame the culture of his time—he entered it and either changed it or left it to diminish and perish. For instance in 1 Corinthians we see that there were fornicators, idolaters adulterers effeminate, homosexuals, thieves, covetous, drunkards, revilers and swindlers, (the Scripture text lets us know they were sinners no matter what the culture believed), but Christ transformed some of them. They were washed, and sanctified and justified in Christ and in the Holy Spirit. God took a community of unrighteousness and turned them into saints bearing the righteousness of Christ. The good news is that Jesus changed those who received him and he still does. Jesus is Lord over culture not wrapped in it.

And this is a good place to write about adoption. Colby writes:

The apostle Paul writes, “We know that the whole creation has been groaning in labor pains until now; and not only the creation, but we ourselves” (Romans 8:22).  It is as if the gospel is being birthed, Paul writes.  Being birthed and coming into being amidst changing cultural norms and expectations.  And it is our job to sort out what is gospel from what is culture. 

And:
I want you to have, deep in your bones, the belief and instinct that for a church reformed and always reforming according to the Word of God that God’s work is still unfolding.  That the whole creation, as Paul puts it in our reading today, is “groaning in labor pains” while we are awaiting adoption.  Waiting to be embraced in God’s love.  Waiting to be adopted.

Colby is confused about the meaning of adoption in Romans 8. And he is confused about the gospel “being birthed.” And he is confused about what our job is in the midst of changing cultural norms and expectations.

When Paul writes about adoption in verse 23, he is writing about our final and complete redemption, that is the resurrection of our bodies. That is why it is connected to the redemption of creation. “And not only this, [creations pains of childbirth] but we ourselves, having the first fruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our body.” This is not a birthing of the gospel—Christ on the cross and in his resurrection provided us with the good news. We are already now the adopted sons and daughters of God through Jesus Christ. We are, in suffering, awaiting glory and so is creation.

And it is in that final completeness that there will be no more striving against sin. We struggle now to lay aside our sin and walk more closely with Jesus, in the transformation of creation we will be utterly like him. This is not about the unconditional acceptance of sinners, but the transformation of sinners. And we are not waiting to be embraced in God’s love, because Christ has redeemed us we are embraced in his love. We are adopted as sons and daughters—waiting for the final transformation, the resurrection. F.F. Bruce puts it very well:
If inanimate creation longs blindly for the day of its liberation, the community of the redeemed, who see the glory shining before them, strain forward intelligently for the consummation. For them it is the day when they will be publicly and universally acknowledged as the sons and daughters of God; for them, too, it is the day of resurrection, when the present body of humiliation will be transformed into the likeness of Christ’s glorified body, when the whole human personality will finally experience the benefits of his redemptive work.

This is the hope of the people of God – ‘Christ in you, the hope of glory’, as Paul puts it in another letter (Col. 1:27). This hope is an essential element in their salvation; it enables them to accept the trials of the present, so that by patient endurance they may win their lives; it is, along with faith and love, one of the crowning graces of the Christian life.”

These beautiful promises to the Christian rather than having to do with some final acceptance of same gender sex have to do with the final transformation of all kinds of sinners. We are adopted, we will be finally, and completely new at the coming of Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior.