Respect and building bridges

In an article posted this afternoon at the Washington Post web page, NBA coach Doc Rivers tells the story about the incident that led him to stop having his teams pray before games. It was 1999 and Rivers was the head coach of the Orlando Magic. He happened to look up when the team was engaged in its normal pregame prayer and he saw that one player, Tariq Abdul-Wahad, a Muslim, had his arms folded and he appeared very uncomfortable.

Rivers describes himself as very religious and he grew up in the Second Baptist Church of Maywood, Illinois. He says that he has prayed on his knees every night from the time he was a child and he still does. Even so, before the next game, Rivers made a point of telling the team that there were differing religious views represented among them. Instead of the normal group prayer, he asked everyone to close their eyes and he encouraged the players and other coaches to take a moment to compose themselves and to pray silently or simply to meditate as they chose.  

After the game, Abdul-Wahad came to Rivers with tears in his eyes and he hugged him and said, "Thank you. That is so important to me. No one has ever respected my religion. I'm going to give you everything I've got." 

It seems to me that when Christians insist on making a show of praying in places where non-Christians are present that we run the risk of burning more bridges than we build. Certain settings present exceptions, to be sure. But in most cases when we leave unbelievers with little option but to participate, actively or passively, in a religious rite that is not their own then don't we, perhaps inadvertently, express a certain level of disrespect for them? 

True faith can't be forced. Jesus rebuked his disciples every time they staked out a position of power. Sure, we Christians wish that everyone believed in Jesus. But Jesus didn't attract others to follow him by disrespecting them and I don't think his followers will either.  

Government instructions on how to pray

The Supreme court, in a divided 5-4 decision, today upheld the practice of public prayer before town board meetings, rejecting the notion that overwhelmingly Christian invocations violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. There is a lot that I could say about this ruling, and I probably will. However, for the time being, I found it very interesting that Justice Anthony Kennedy, in his majority opinion, gave some Supreme Court guidelines  for appropriate and inappropriate prayers for opening government meetings.

According to Justice Kennedy, prayer that is "solemn and respectful in tone, that invites lawmakers to reflect upon shared ideals and common ends" is okay.  (I suppose in future court cases we might look for the high court to become arbiters of what constitutes "solemn and respectful tone.") On the other hand, prayers that do things like "preach conversion" are not okay. 

That's one thing about government sanctioned prayer. In the end the government starts telling you what to pray and how to pray it. 

Is it fair to lump all Baptists together like that?

The members of Westboro Baptist Church are up to their normal evil. On Saturday they engaged in one of their famous homophobic protests at the University of Missouri. They stood outside the basketball arena in conjunction with a home game holding signs proclaiming hatred and violence against gays and lesbians because the entire Missouri football team was scheduled to be recognized at halftime. A few days ago Michael Sam, a star defensive player for Missouri and a NFL prospect, announced that he is gay.

I doubt that news organizations would have reported Westboro's latest antics except for what the students did in response. They turned their backs to the small group of protesters and formed a human shield. Then they sang the Missouri alma mater. So the protesters could not be seen or heard because of the actions of the students.

I really like what those students did. They didn't get in the faces of the Westboro protesters. They didn't make obscene gestures toward them or trade the church members' curses with their own. They simply turned their backs on them and drowned them out. Nice work!

But the main reason I bring up the latest Westboro protest is the way Yahoo Sports reported it. Assistant Editor Kyle Ringo didn't mention the name of the church in his article on the incident. Apparently he didn't want to give the Westboro folks any of the attention that they obviously sought. 

I initially saw the news about the protest at Yahoo Sports and I assumed that Westboro was behind it. However, I had to go to other news outlets to confirm this.  

I can't blame Ringo for attempting to deny Westboro another moment in the spotlight. I would be for nearly anything that thwarts the group in its hateful agenda. However, I'm concerned that Ringo might have unwittingly lumped all Baptists with Westboro Baptist in his approach.

Consider this line from the article: "Members of a Baptist church stood outside the arena holding signs that condemned the community's and school's support for Sam." In an article that nowhere mentions the specific church, Ringo's approach leaves the impression that this sort of activity could be typical of members of any Baptist church.

There is no question that there is plenty of homophobia to go around in many Baptist circles. There has been, unfortunately, no shortage of Baptist leaders who have, in recent years, grabbed headlines for spewing hatred against against the LGBTQ community. That said, is it fair to lump all Baptists with the singularly virulent homophobia of Westboro Baptist Church?  

In a USA Today piece on Saturday's protest, there are photos showing the Westboro protesters carrying signs declaring messages typical of their rallies such as "Death penalty 4 [homosexuals]" and "God hates [homosexuals]." Many, many Baptists do not share such sentiments.

I have a Baptist pastor friend who says that Baptists are like dogs. (Careful, don't jump to any conclusions before I finish his thought.) "If I tell you that I have a dog," he says, "I haven't told you much unless I tell you what kind of dog it is." Dogs come in a multitude of shapes, colors, sizes and personalities and it is much the same with Baptists.

Some Baptists are welcoming and affirming of members of the LGBTQ community. Many Baptists are welcoming but not affirming. Many Baptists are neither welcoming nor affirming.    

On the face of it, I don't think it's fair to lump all Baptists with the members of Westboro Baptist Church because many Baptists abhor their vile strain of homophobia. That said, to the degree that there is any hatred toward the LGBTQ community among Baptists, it is too much. After all, we follow the one who said the Greatest Commandment, the most important thing we do, includes loving our neighbors as ourselves. Jesus listed no exceptions to this commandment.
======
Addendum: I emailed this post to Kyle Ringo and he changed the article to include the name of the church.   
.

Calling attention to Jesus

In the sermon that I preached yesterday I mentioned a story that pastor and author Rob Bell told about a man that he called Bullhorn Guy. Bell and some of his friends were in the midst of a crowd of people walking toward a concert hall to hear a band. As they approached the venue, Bell could hear a man yelling angrily through a bullhorn. As they got closer, Bell heard the man yelling words like sin, burn, hell, repent, and Jesus. No one was pausing to hear more of what Bullhorn Guy had to say and no one was taking the pamphlets that he was trying to distribute.

Bell said that he wanted to tell that man, "Bullhorn Guy, I don't think it's working ... I actually think it's making things worse."

I agree that Bullhorn Guy's method of calling attention to Jesus is most likely counterproductive in our culture. But it's pretty easy to tell Bullhorn Guy that the way he calls attention to Jesus is probably a really bad idea. A good question for Christ-followers is this: What are we doing to call attention to Jesus?

We can't just stop at telling Bullhorn Guy that his method stinks. We need to make sure that we are dedicated to calling attention to Jesus in loving, Spirit-led ways.

After all, we do consider Jesus worthy of calling attention to, don't we?

Does baptism mean anything at all?

Some years back, Baptist historian Bill Leonard said that questions about baptism used to be about how we do it.  Infants or adults?  Sprinkling, pouring, or immersion?  Stuff like that.  But now, Leonard says, the question has become, “Does baptism mean anything at all?”

Should we care about baptism? If so, why should we care?

Matthew’s account of Jesus’ baptism gives us some great reasons to care about baptism. According to this passage (Matt. 3:13-17), Jesus insisted on being baptized and the Spirit came down and heavenly Father was pleased. 

When Jesus came to John the Baptist to be baptized, John tried to stop him.  He said, “Look, you should be baptizing me, not the other way around.”  

The great John the Baptist tried to dissuade Jesus from being baptized. True, the passage suggests that John tried to stop Jesus because he considered himself unworthy to baptize the Messiah. Reason aside, however, verse 14 tells that John tried to prevent Jesus from being baptized

But Jesus insisted on being baptized. Why?

In his book entitled Simply Jesus, N. T. Wright mentions that Jesus’ baptism is one of numerous events recorded in the gospels that bring together three important vocations of Jesus: Messiah, servant, and God. Wright says that, in Israel’s history, these streams had been separate, but in Jesus they are gloriously brought together in one person.

Matthew’s account of Jesus’ baptism mentions a voice from the heavens which Wright describes as a sudden joining of heaven and earth through which the “royal vocation of the Messiah” is exposed. Wright also joins with many other scholars in noting that “[a]ll the signs are that Jesus understood his baptism as the moment when he was ‘anointed,’ like Israel’s kings long ago …”

In verse 11, we are told that John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance—repentance of sin. Jesus had no sins of which he needed to repent. In submitting to John’s baptism of repentance, Jesus, as a servant, identified himself with those he came to save. In the tradition of the Servant Song of Isaiah 53, Jesus “was numbered with the transgressors” (Isa. 53:12, NRSV).

The voice from heaven identified Jesus as “my Son” indicating, in the words of Wright, “Israel’s God was acting through him, in him, as him.” By the way, we should not overlook the mention of the Trinity in this passage as we see references to the Father, the Son, and the Spirit.

So, in Jesus’ baptism, we see an example of these three streams, Messiah, servant, and God, coming together in the person of Jesus. If passages like this one are to be believed, then Jesus was much more than a good man and a great teacher. Something much bigger and more wonderful was going on in him and through him. God was becoming King with a view toward seeing God’s will be done on earth as it is in heaven.

And baptism was and is part of that glorious plan.

Jesus insisted on being baptized “to fulfill all righteousness” (v. 15, NRSV). Ben Witherington III understands this phrase to mean that “Jesus will do everything he can and all that is required to fulfill God’s loving plan.” 

What was happening in Jesus’ baptism? There was a glorious joining of the streams of Messiah, servant, and God coming together in the person of Jesus. Baptism was for our Lord one way that he did everything he could and all that was required to fulfill God’s loving plan.

No wonder Jesus insisted on being baptized.

But what does Jesus’ baptism mean for us now?

On a somewhat shallow level, we could say simply that, if baptism was important for Jesus, then it must be important for his followers. Even if we fail to grasp any degree of the meaning behind the ritual, the fact that Jesus insisted on being baptized should be enough to convince his followers to insist on baptism.

Yet there is more to this ritual than we can experience on the surface. In fact there is more to baptism than I can fully explain or, frankly, understand.

One thing that we can see readily is that the heavenly Father was pleased by Jesus’ choice to be baptized as our passage says. This hasn’t changed. When we baptize new believers today I am convinced that the Father says again, “I am well pleased” (v. 17, NRSV).

We can also easily see that the Holy Spirit, God’s real presence, was involved in Jesus’ baptism because, again, the passage says so. This hasn’t changed either. The Holy Spirit is involved in baptisms today just as surely as this was the case at Jesus’ baptism.

I cannot explain all the mysteries of baptism. There is more to it than just water and words.  If I could explain the depths of the meaning of baptism then I would be able to explain the depths of the meaning of love and I can’t do that either.

But I think there is something very important that we see in Matthew’s account of Jesus’ baptism that brings into sharp focus one facet of what baptism means to us today. Again, Jesus said that his baptism would “fulfill all righteousness” (v. 15). Baptism was for our Lord one way that he did everything he could and all that was required to fulfill God’s loving plan.

This also hasn’t changed. When new believers are baptized today they take an important step in doing everything they can and all that is required in fulfilling God’s loving plan. It’s important to note that baptism isn’t the last step in this regard—it's but one step, but an important one. A step that was important to Jesus himself.

Baptism is in part our promise before God and the church that we will leave the water committed to do everything we can and all that is required in every aspect of our lives to fulfill God’s loving plan. Jesus was baptized in part to lovingly identify himself with us—with those he came to save. When we submit to baptism we identify ourselves with him. We mark ourselves publicly as the subjects of this King who got in line with sinners at the Jordan one day and then embarked on a journey that would lead him to the cross of Calvary and to a tomb that he would leave empty.

Does baptism mean anything at all? Oh yeah. Jesus insisted on being baptized and the Spirit came down and heavenly Father was pleased. If it was true then it is true now and it was true then. 

Making a mole hill out of a mountain

If you haven't read Michael Gerson's opinion piece in the Washington Post of December 27, I recommend that you give it a look. He lists a few terrible examples of recent, intensifying persecution of Christians in some nations where the followers of Jesus are in the minority. In light of the command of Hebrews 13:3 that Christians remember their fellow believers who are imprisoned or being tortured as if we are imprisoned or being tortured as well, we should not ignore the plight of our persecuted brothers and sisters.

Besides the obvious moral and theological issues that should inspire our concern about the mistreatment of Christians, there is also a vital practical matter at stake. Gerson points out the high correlation between religious persecution and national security threats. According to William Inboden of the University of Texas, every major war involving the U.S. of the last 70 years has been against an enemy that does not prize religious liberty. Conversely, no nation that respects religious freedom poses a security threat to the U.S.

Yet it is Gerson's mention of America's strange disengagement regarding religious persecution that really grabbed my attention. He provides this disturbing quote from  Economist editors John Micklethwait and Adrian Wooldridge: “One of America’s oddest failures in recent years is its inability to draw any global lessons from its unique success in dealing with religion at home. It is a mystery why a country so rooted in pluralism has made so little of religious freedom.”

It seems that we the people of the United States may have succeeded in generally making a mole hill out of a glorious mountain. This was the first nation on earth to guarantee religious liberty in its founding documents. This grand experiment is an obvious and remarkable success. 

History and recent headlines reveal the humanitarian abuses that inevitably arise in countries where religious freedom is not protected. Yet, in this nation in which we revere not mere religious toleration but religious liberty for all, violence in the name of religion is nearly nonexistent. On the rare occasions that there is brutality linked to religion here, it is quickly and widely denounced.

We've a story to tell to the nations regarding religious liberty. But, by and large, we are silent, or close to it. Even worse, it is common in many evangelical circles these days to attack the mechanism that protects religious liberty in this country, namely church-state separation. Baptists in particular, once stalwart defenders of separation of church and state, now largely decry the concept. Perhaps more evangelicals would again embrace separation if they paid more attention to the world headlines that describe atrocities committed in places where religion and government are united. 

Be that as it may, I think Micklethwait and Wooldridge are onto something. We don't make enough of the American heritage of religious liberty. We are not as deliberate as we should be about remembering and celebrating our roots in this regard. By continuing to neglect our story about religious freedom we run the risk of letting this right slip away for ourselves and we lose our voice in the world on a point at which we have something important and wonderful to say.   

Drafty tents in a season in which we remember a drafty stable

Does it ever seem to you that there are too things many that we should care about? There are so many needs, so many heart-breaking situations in our world, that it just becomes overwhelming at times. One of the circumstances that has captured my attention of late is the plight of Syrian refugees who have fled their country to escape a bloody civil war. 

I read an article a couple of days ago that told of a Syrian mother of seven named Aisha. They all live in one tent in Lebanon. They had just received a wood burning stove and some fuel for it. Aisha claims that she and her family would soon have frozen to death without the stove. They are but eight of the more than two million Syrian refugees living in neighboring countries. Many are ill-clad with little food and living under pieces of canvas or plastic trying to survive the frigid Lebanese winter. 

In a season in which we mark the time that God gave everything to help a world of people in need, shouldn't we make some effort to remember people like Aisha and her children? It's a good thing to gather with family and friends in warm places in this season and to enjoy fellowship together. Truly, this is a good thing. But as we remember a baby born in a drafty stable, shouldn't we also remember families huddled in drafty tents along the borders surrounding Syria?

It's really not that far from Bethlehem to Lebanon.

There are numerous reputable aid organizations helping Syrian refugees.