Vintage Green

If you want a break from the unbridled coverage of Michael Jackson's death and legacy, check out the Relevant article, "Vintage Green," by Kaylin King. The colloquial web exclusive opens with a story about King's grandmother to illustrate that living "green" often means rediscovering the way life used to be. "Not only did (my grandmother) sew and mend many of her own clothes, but she washed them by hand, and, with great care, hung the clothes up to dry," she writes. "The neighbors’ chickens provided eggs for the entire neighborhood, while the milkman came weekly."

In fact, this point has been made by author Bill McKibben in his bestselling book, Deep Economy. As King summarizes, "McKibben argued that by replacing community with cheap convenience, our society has sold out our collective integrity for quantity. We have chosen to become families who work tirelessly outside the home in order to afford newer vehicles, bigger houses and lavish vacations. In the crux of this busyness, we are forced to forgo the “good” in exchange for the quick and easy."

I think about my own grandmother who seems a lot like King's. Growing up, my grandmother also made many of her own clothes and depended on her direct community for support and survival. When she tells me stories about "better days," it makes me wonder if all of our technology and creature comforts and wealth has improved life at all. Perhaps we don't need to look ahead to a so-called "green revolution." Maybe yesterday is the key to a better tomorrow.

Thoughts?

Political Scandals Breed Cynicism Among Evangelicals

America can't stop talking about South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford, the cheating state executive who disappeared for several days to make a love connection with his Argentinian mistress. In fact, Sanford is probably the only person in the United States who was giddy to learn that Michael Jackson had died because it would eat up some of his air time on the evening news.

It was this scandal that inspired the L.A. Times to run a fascinating story entitled, "Will scandals inspire evangelicals to stray from the Republican party?," which bolsters a trend that I have seen for some time. Christ-followers are becoming fed up with their traditional party of choice, but aren't finding the alternative Democratic Party a much better option. Instead, they are becoming increasingly convinced about "the unholiness of the political realm."

"The...rumors and sexual details make me want to avoid the voting booth altogether," Margaret Feinberg told the L.A. Times. "My head says that every vote counts, but my heart aches at the impropriety. How can I trust someone to uphold the laws of the land when they can't uphold their marriage vows?"

While Sanford's particular story is unusually shocking, political scandals in general have sadly become commonplace to many Americans. If you are like me, a Fox News Alert about a Governor who has embezzled money to bankroll his secret addiction or a Congressman whose been getting some nookie from his housekeeper doesn't make me bowl over anymore. As I speak with others like me, I am realizing that this creeping cynicism toward all things political may be pushing evangelicals into a less political phase of cultural engagement.

Have Western Christians placed too much trust in one particular political party? How can we be appropriately involved in the political arena as good citizens while maintaining our convictions as good Christians?

Falwell Jr. Does the Right Thing

A few weeks ago, I was outraged when I read in the Washington Times that Liberty University's administration revoked the official club status of its College Democrats. I am not a registered Democrat, but I am a Liberty alumnus. Anything that so blatantly squelches the free exchange of ideas on a university campus will naturally compromise that university's (and its graduates') credibility. I sent out a tweet about this expressing my outrage.

Let's be honest. If Harvard had revoked the official status of their College Republicans while leaving their College Democrats untouched, Sean Hannity would be broadcasting his television show from Harvard's campus the next evening! Treating these opposing entities differently is not only unfair, it is inappropriate for an institution of higher learning.

Yesterday, I was pleased to learn that Liberty's Chancellor, Jerry Falwell Jr., had reached a compromise that will treat all political clubs in the same fashion. They will all be allowed to use Liberty's name and meeting facilities, but none will be officially endorsed by the University. I am often guilty of criticizing whenever I feel compelled, but not always giving credit when due. So here it is: To the Chancellor and his administration, I say kudos. This alum is proud of your ability to compromise and respect the integrity of your institution.

What are your thoughts, faithful readers?

SBC 2009: Actually Excited

Early tomorrow, I will be leaving Atlanta for Louisville, home of the famous baseball bat, which bears the city's name. The large Kentucky metropolis is also host to this year's Southern Baptist Convention, an event that promises to have people swinging a few clubs of their own. The SBC annual convention is always a great place to watch old people cat-fight over things the rest of the world cares nothing about.

A few weeks ago, I wrote about the dire situation in the SBC with younger leaders looking for a place to participate and many more looking for the exit. I am more excited to attend this year than in many previous years combined (and I sense others are too) because this year might be a turning point for what has become a poorly-branded, pseudo-political organization of late. The Great Commission Resurgence must receive the lion's share of credit for renewed interest in this year's annual meeting.

I was quoted in two well-written articles on the upcoming meeting, and I wanted to link to them both:

- Louisville Courier-Journal: "Convention Growing Grayer"

- Associated Press: "Southern Baptists to Gather in Kentucky"

If you are interested in these sort of things, please leave a comment. I'd love to hear your thoughts. If not, I promise to return to regularly scheduled programming very soon.

The Hard Work of Being Pro-Life

I have said before that pro-life Christians must move beyond the sandwich board, candidate-driven mentality and be willing to do the hard work that our faith demands. Peachtree Presbyterian in my hometown of Atlanta is a perfect example. Their pastor has announced that they will accept any unwanted babies that the community brings them. Working with Bethany Christian Services, the nation's largest adoption agency, Peacthree Pres will care for these newborns and find them loving homes. Want an example of what it means to be a pro-life Christian in the 21st Century? Here you go.

Southern Baptists' Choice: Change or Die

FACT: The Southern Baptist Convention is an archaic denominational dinosaur with a bloated bureaucratic infrastructure on the fast track to irrelevance. Whew. I said it. The decline of the SBC has been signaled again and again by the work of individuals like Ed Stetzer who speak with the authority of rigorous research. It can no longer be denied.

To illustrate the progression of SBC internal inflation, Biblical Recorder editor Norm Jameson recently wrote, "Now, Baptists are like all other Americans. We complain about the size of the government but we demand more services from the government all the time. Government wants to be responsive, so they provide the services. We can't demand the services and then complain about their cost." When Jameson was at the Executive Committee in 1983 there were 17 people on staff (including the mail room and a janitor) and an annual budget of $801,200. Today, the Executive Committee has 38 staff members and an annual budget of $9,470,373.00. This growth--all too common among the internal ranks of the SBC--must be rectified or the SBC will die a not-so-slow death.

That may sting a little for those of us who sang out of the Baptist Hymnal as children, made the decision to follow Christ in a Southern Baptist church, and used LifeWay Sunday School materials even before LifeWay was "LifeWay." Yet, denying the truth only kicks the can of reality farther down the road.

FACT: The Southern Baptist Convention does more missions work than any other organization on this planet and has many other vibrant and impactful ministries. Through the International Mission Board, the SBC supports nearly 6,000 international missionaries in countries you've never even heard of. Additionally, the SBC has other vibrant divisions, such as the second largest disaster relief service in the United States. In many ways, we do great work.

You may notice the tension mounting at the interface of these two facts. On the one hand, Southern Baptists cannot and should not stand for the wasteful and overextended bureaucracy. (Rising generations, with their disdain for heavily organized Christianity, certaintly won't.) On the other hand, the SBC is a great vehicle for kingdom work and fulfilling the Great Commission. That begs a question: Is there a way to reform, revise and restructure in order to preserve the good and do away with the bad?

Enter the Great Commission Resurgence (GCR). The GCR is an effort to bring the two facts listed above into harmony that is spearheaded by influential SBC leaders and "regular joe/jane" laypeople. Anyone can sign the petition online, and 3,000 already have. There are daunting odds against the success of such an aggresive initiative, but the value and nobility of the GCR compells me to support it. Southern Baptists are faced with a choice from which they cannot hide. Either they will keep kicking the can of reality while they fade into cultural irrelevance or they will act aggresively to refine our processes while preserving the wonderful work being done by so many. Southern Baptists have a choice: change or die.

Shifting Views on Same Sex Issues

Thursday, the Chicago-Sun Times released a story titled, "Gay marriage views all about age, region," which pointed out the shifts going on over same sex issues. The article cited the 22-year-long "Political Values and Core Attitudes" study conducted by The Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, which shows that public opinion over gay rights has changed significantly among the religious. This is especially true among younger Christians.

This shouldn't come as a surprise to any of you who follow my blog. I have been noting this shift for some time. Last year, I appeared on PBS' Religion and Ethics Newsweekly to comment on a PBS/Greenburg Study stating that 58% of young evangelicals say they support some form of legal recognition of same sex unions. Not long after, Public Religion Research and Faith in Public Life released "The Faith and American Politics Survey" stating that a majority of young evangelicals favor some sort of legal recognition of same sex unions. By all indications, evangelical opinion is shifting on this issue, like it or not.

That brings me back to the Sun-Times article in which I stated, "I don't think [recognition of same sex unions] is an issue that my generation will fight over, at least not with the tenacity that the previous generations did." I have gotten several emails telling me that I ceded too much ground, that I gave away too much information. But as the paragraph above illustrates, I am not saying anything new, but rather stating a fact that is consistent with at least three reputable, national surveys and my own conversations with younger Christians all across America.

I am personally opposed to a redefinition of marriage. Until the latter part of the 20th century, marriage has been defined as a union between a man and a woman for every civilizations for all time. To change the definition of marriage is to change the nature of marriage. Claiming that marriage should be something more than that is like saying red should now also include orange and yellow. Most marriages are imperfect and many are unstable, but the fact remains that a two parent household is the most stable environment to raise a family, and healthy families are a vital part of any healthy society. Our government should remain committed to supporting the most stable family situation possible--a loving home with both a mother and a father. If the rising generation buckles on this issue, and it seems we will, that will be a mistake.

At the same time, Christians should make sure that our support of marriage does not blind us to the injustices placed on many homosexuals in our society. For example, we should aggressively oppose workplace discrimination, and anyone (outside of religious organizations) who fires or refuses to hire someone simply because of their sexual orientation should be held accountable. I think Christians can be biblical and commonsensical at the same. I think we can live by our faith's teachings without becoming angry culture warriors. I think we should support traditional marriage while we look for ways to build bridges of reconciliation with those cultural groups that have often been the objects of our public disdain. What about you?