Weblog
Friday, 02 October 2009
-
How Long Must We Suffer the Consequences of Our Worst Sins?
name="Title" content=""> name="Keywords" content=""> http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"> name="ProgId" content="Word.Document"> name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 2008"> name="Originator" content="Microsoft Word 2008">Should a person be forever defined by his or her worst sin? This question has long haunted me but it’s pushed its way to the front of my brain lately because of a disgraced film director and a disgraced football player being in the news today.
Not long ago, Atlanta Falcons quarterback Michael Vick was riding the tidal wave of his success on the gridiron. Brash and flush with cash from his pro contract and lucrative endorsement deals, Vick was the epitome of the instant fame and fortune that are the consequences of bringing instant credibility to a formally mediocre and obscure football team. But all of that went down the toilet in 2007 when the rumors about his being involved in illegal dog-fighting proved to be true. Vick eventually was convicted of lying to the judge about running this heinous operation and was sentenced to serve 23 months in prison for his crimes. The NFL and his team cut him loose and he lost his endorsements. During his incarceration, Vick famously repented of his wrongdoings and recently completed his sentence. He was conditionally re-instated by the NFL and signed to play with the Philadelphia Eagles. Animal lovers around the world were aghast that Vick would get another shot at playing football for an insane amount of money while some football fans felt that he had paid his debt in full and deserved a chance to redeem himself doing what he does best.
And then there’s the current attempt to extradite infamous Hollywood director Roman Polanski, who’d managed to elude the long arm of American justice since fleeing the country after his 1977 conviction of the statutory rape of a 13-year-old girl in Los Angeles. The director of such notable films as “Rosemary’s Baby,” “Chinatown,” and “The Pianist,” the now-seventy-six-year-old Polanski was in Switzerland, attending the Zurich Film Festival when Swiss authorities arrested him on behalf of the U.S. government. Many of today’s liberal Hollywood luminaries are arguing that he should not be extradited to serve his sentence now, since he has proven himself to be much more than a pedophile. Conservatives are demanding that he be made to return to the scene of his unquestioned crime of 32 years ago and suffer the full consequences.
So should a person—whether famous or only known to just a few—be forever defined his or her worst sin? I’ve long believed that while Jesus offers complete and unconditional forgiveness of our sins (1 John 1:9f), he doesn’t offer or promise always to remove the consequences of our sin. If you are convicted of pulling out dogs’ teeth with pliers or electrocuting those who stopped performing well in the ring, people aren’t going to forget that, even if you’ve served your time. Or if you drugged a 13-year-old and then sodomized her—even if this happened more than three decades ago—don’t be surprised if most people will forever associate you with that perverted act of lust. I don’t know if either Vick or Polanski has ever begged Jesus for forgiveness, but if they did, the Bible tells us that Jesus would forgive them, no questions asked. However, some of the consequences of their sins may still apply, maybe for the rest of their lives.
What’s your worst sin? If you weren’t able to keep it a secret, have you had to suffer the consequences of that sin for the rest of your life? What have some of those consequences been? Do you still feel that Jesus has completely forgiven you even if you are still made to suffer the consequences, maybe always? Jesus forgives but quite often people—especially those we’ve sinned against—don’t forget.
Jesus forgives and then forgets. Jesus calls us to forgive too, but our problem is we can’t or won't forget.
I don’t know about you, but I know that I have not been forever defined by my worst sin. Is that a byproduct of the fact that my worst sin wasn’t a legal matter or because, in this day and age, it’s not as scandalous as it used to be? Could it be because my worst sin is something that many of my would-be condemners have also committed? All I know is that my life today and my involvement in God’s kingdom-work isn’t limited by my worst sin. I’m certainly not proud about having this in my past but neither will I allow myself or others to think that I have no rap sheet. Instead, I am committed to coming alongside others who are struggling with similar sins and extending the experience of Jesus’ amazing grace. And while there still may have to be consequences to be suffered, I will emphasize that what should define all of us hapless and hopeless sinners today is who we are to Jesus and who we are in Jesus.
Wednesday, 24 June 2009
-
What We Typically Do When Our Leaders Fail Us
When President Clinton had nowhere to hide from his affair with Monica Lewinsky, former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich vociferously condemned the President and demanded that he resign his office. It was only years later that Gingrich confessed that he himself was entangled in an adulterous affair while he was busy attacking Clinton. One of the other politicians who led the charge to get Clinton to resign was Senator John Ensign (R-Nevada). I don't recall Ensign being part of that outcry over ten years ago, but the fact that he was is now clear because just this week, Senator Ensign confessed to having an affair with the wife of one of his staff members. So the press is having a field day now with his apparent double standard.
Last year, former Democratic golden boy and presidential candidate John Edwards came out about his illicit activities with a campaign photographer and producer. Predictably, those on the right side of the aisle had a field day tearing Edwards apart, especially since his wife Elizabeth had garnered sympathy during the primaries with her ongoing battle against breast cancer. There were calls for his resignation, though, because he no longer was an office holder. But there were plenty of bold predictions that Edwards' lack of self-discipline and poor judgment had killed his hopes of becoming the Democrats' choice for president someday.
And then we have the most recent case of Gov. Mark Sanford (R-S. Carolina). Not long ago, he grabbed headlines with his libertarian-like rejection of federal bailout money for his state's schools, but he was overruled by the courts. Three days ago, articles began popping up in the papers and on the internet, stating that he had gone missing this past weekend. His wife said she didn't know where he was but wasn't worried. His lieutenant governor (and political rival) said it was highly inappropriate for the governor just to disappear like that without letting him or other state officials know of his whereabouts. His staff at first also said that they had no idea where he was, but then began stating that Gov. Sanford had always been an 'outdoorsy' guy and that he was somewhere on the 2,500 mile Appalachian Trail, where he was hiking to recover from that recent legislative donnybrook. Like vultures drawn to a decaying carcass, this benign mystery began to attract growing numbers of Democrats and reporters in general as Sanford continued to be missing in action and further evidence seemed to point to a remote airport, not a remote hiking trail.
This latest politician's nightmare came to a head today when Gov. Sanford called a press conference and admitted that he'd been in Argentina trying to wrap up a months-long affair he'd been having with a close friend in that country. Apparently, his wife was told of his unfaithfulness five months ago and they've been seeking help and counsel. He announced that he had resigned his position as chair of the Republican Governors Association so that he would have more time to figure out what this all means for his marriage and his family. Repeatedly, he admitted that he had violated "God's moral law," was now suffering the consequences of that failure, and apologized explicitly and profusely.
As if on cue, those on the left side of the aisle are not surprisingly screaming "Hypocrite!" and demanding that Senator Ensign follow his oft-declared "Promise Keeper" Christian credentials and resign, but thus far he has said nothing to indicate that he will do this. Those mainly on the left are also calling for Gov. Sanford to resign since he clearly has failed to live up to his own conservative, Christian standards.
Sitting here in my study, all of this is like watching some really lame ping pong match, where the spectators are either major 'homers' who would rather drink acid than ever support the other team's player or they are objective observers who are completely turned off by the blatant hypocrisy of both sides. If someone really believes that cheating on one's spouse or cruising for a sex partner in a public men's room are clear signs that the guilty party has violated the public trust, disregarded their vows of holy matrimony and shown themselves to be such flawed human beings that have disqualified themselves from ever holding public office, then that standard should be applied to all public leaders, even the 'golden guys/gals' of your favorite team, right? Or do we each have a hidden well of unconditional mercy and grace for those we see as the standard bearers of our particular party or issues? Talking heads on the far right side of the radio dial today were dipping deeply into that reservoir of forebearance as they dealt with Sanford's admission of guilt today and with Ensign's the other day. Pointing a sharper accusing finger at guilty people like Edwards or Clinton is disengenuous at best and hypocritical at worst. And for talking heads on the other side of the dial to be gleefully going after Ensign and Sanford this week reeks too with the same flawed and biased double-standard. "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" seems like a concept from an alien planet rather than a fundamental teaching from the book that both sides, especially the right, like to cite.
Clearly, the history of the world is proof positive that all of our leaders are flawed human beings, some more than others. Some more obviously than others. Yet some proved to be solid and needed leaders in spite of their obvious shortcomings. Others leaders on the public stage apparently had inconsequential flaws, with some even being paragons of virtue, even Christian values. Yet some of those proved to be horrible leaders.
As this latest pair of scandals plays itself out around the watercoolers and air-waves, I am doing my darndest not to revel in the trevails of Ensign or Sanford in the same way that I didn't revel in the messes that Clinton and Edwards made for themselves. As fellow flawed human beings who just don't have our sins and shortcomings dragged before the public eye, we should know that we have established an impossible standard for all of our leaders to follow. Some have gone too far, claiming far more perfection than is humanly possible and Scripturally provable, in an effort to garner votes, worship, and confidence. They add to their moral resumes by being some of the earliest and loudest voices to condemn those who have been exposed. How can I show mercy to those who have been merciless? That's where I struggle. Or how can I be understanding and forgiving when the adulterous leader isn't repentant, doesn't return to the marriage and family, but instead chooses to be with the other illicit party? Honestly, that's where I really don't know how to respond or even how to feel.
My hope is that each of us who claim to follow Jesus will never stop struggling to apply God's Golden Rule evenly to everybody, even our worst enemies or our most hated political foes. Let's not let partisanship ruin our witness for Jesus.
Monday, 27 April 2009
-
The Real Torture of Being a Pastor
An essential part of my morning habit is to retrieve my newspaper from wherever it was heaved and retreat to my spot in the house where I can scan the headlines to see what’s transpired while I was asleep. Perhaps as a sign of my age or life stage, I turn to the editorial pages now before I peruse the sports section. Given the debate that is being waged on talk radio these days on America’s use of torture during the just-finished Bush administration, I wasn’t the least bit surprised one recent morning to spy several headlines about this issue. What lured me into reading it, though, was a piece by former CIA interrogator who had been ordered to torture captured enemy soldiers during the Viet Nam War. The CIA believed that it had captured a high-ranking NVA officer, but despite subjecting him to all kinds of gruesome cruelty, the soldier kept denying that he was the officer in question. Finally, when the writer got involved, it was after the CIA had moved the prisoner to a small, completely white cell with no windows. They had kept him isolated there for three years, never turning off the bright overhead lights, always keeping the room temperature frosty. He only began to tell the truth when the interrogator became the only person to shatter his enforced solitude. The officer had been well-trained to endure excruciating pain and suffering. What broke him was a combination of extreme loneliness and the eventual inability to keep track of the passage of time.
While being the pastor of a local church is nothing like being tortured as a prisoner of war, it nevertheless often brings with it it’s own unique kind of torture. Speaking at a recent national gathering of Christian pastors, Pastor Rob Bell of Michigan’s Mars Hill Bible Church described our job as “death by a thousand paper cuts.” Every pastor in that audience immediately thought of the damage done by innumerable and incessant little criticisms, of the impossible-to-meet expectations and demands on the pastor and his/her family. Years and years of feeling taken for granted or not being respected also take their toll on every pastor’s spirit. Yet like God’s elite soldiers, we pastors are trained somehow to endure whatever punishment our deacons and church members can do to us. The only confession they’ll hear from us is “Thanks for sharing your concern with me. God bless you for your honesty.”
While some pastors finally succumb, many of us soldier on, seemingly impervious to repeated violations and degradations. However, our ultimate downfall is quite often the same thing that broke the NVA officer. It is not so much the ‘paper cuts’ but the ongoing isolation from meaningful contact with other pastors that, in the end, crushes our wills and defeats our spirits.
Years ago, I came to the realization that I—and not anyone else—was cutting myself off from regular, meaningful contact with other local pastors. Consumed by the boundary-less expanse of pastoring, my days, weeks, and months blurred into one continuous ball of concerns, meetings and messages. To remedy this, I called together an eclectic bunch of pastors to meet over lunch on the 4th Tuesday of each month. A few were already friends of mine; others were from nearby churches. Some of the originals are still here, others have dropped out, and each year we add a few more. The only prayer we utter is over our fast-food or leftovers. The rest of the two hours is reserved for sharing concerns, personnel issues, discussing trends, or seeking advice from peers. Being together has been meaningful if only because there is no need to explain what you do or to convince each other of the unique joys and sorrows of our shared calling. We have walked each other through the dark night of a church split. We have tried to parse the underlying issues surrounding ministering to homosexuals and their families. We have enjoyed plotting each other’s upcoming sabbaticals. Currently, we are weighing bringing our churches together to assist homeless families year-round.
Although I host our gathering, no one is ‘in charge.’ It’s really a circle of equals, regardless of the size of our budgets or the state of our churches. It’s become one of those unique groups where pastors aren’t trying to impress each other with factoids that rarely get at what matters to God. The time together goes by quickly. At two o’clock, we part company and scatter back to the broken people and fractured communities that Jesus has called us to love and shepherd. We return to worlds that haven’t been altered by our time with each other. But somehow it makes a huge difference to know that someone really understands and that we are not alone.
Monday, 30 March 2009
-
Infiniti Weekend Getaways Widget
I just posted this Infiniti Weekend Getaways widget for 500 credits. You can earn free credits too!
Thursday, 05 March 2009
-
How to Judge a Tree
Having been in full-time pastoral ministry close to three decades (and all at the same church!), I've definitely seen my share of trends, fads, and movements sweep through pockets of our church. At first, you would think that these "upswellings" would be impossible to predict. But in retrospect, we should have seen quite a few of them coming from a long way off. For example, the small groups movement that arose in the Seventies seemed to be a reaction or correction to the impersonal, institutional nature of the mainline churches from the previous decade or so. And the charismatic renewal that spread like wildfire in the late Seventies, followed predictably by the prophetic phenomenon in the early Eighties, were perhaps corrections to an overly knowledge-based and experience-lite emphasis in many congregations. The re-emergence of social activism in the late Nineties till today arose in reaction to the predictable movement from the inner life to spiritual narcissism. Even the current exploration of the ancients' writings and spiritual disciplines today is no doubt an attempt to re-balance the focus on doing with being.
EvergreenLA has been around nearly 80 years and has witnessed or at least felt the effect of most of the trends, fads, and movements that have transpired. Like an ancient Sequoia, this church has witnessed the coming and going not only of thousands of people over the years, but of a plethora of activities. During the turbulent Sixties, EvergreenLA preached against racism, war, and injustice. During the Seventies, it struggled to find the balance with the small groups movement. The frustrated pastor, who wanted to see a radical commitment to small group life, left with some young idealists and eventually formed a radical Asian American Christian community that, in its heyday, produced the seminal worship songs that Asian American churches embraced in the late Seventies and throughout the Eighties. But in the end, he became overly controlling and it became a dangerous cult.
The Eighties also ignited a small but fervent group of those who began to speak in 'tongues' and to anoint the sick with oil and pray for miraculous healings. Pastor John Wimber (The Vineyard Christian Fellowship) was teaching an evening class at Fuller Seminary called "Signs and Wonders" and numerous EvergreenLA young adults flocked to it, whether registered or not, in order not to miss experiencing the weekly miracles that seemed to be in abundance there. Some went even further, becoming adherents of the radical Kansas City prophets stream, straining to catch what fresh revelation that the Spirit of God was apparently making known. Others from EBCLA went in a different direction, getting trained by the Vineyard's Living Waters program in deliverance ministries. Freedom from demonic oppression, sexual brokenness, and other typically top secret sins was all the rage in that sector. There was even a sliver of 'generational healing of curses' that also occurred at that time.
In the late Nineties till now, there have been two prominent movements in evidence here at EvergreenLA. The first is the desire to cultivate greater intimacy with God and thus a deeper spirituality. Some began to experiment with ancient spiritual disciplines that heretofore seemed off limits because they had Roman Catholic roots. Now however, Baptists were hooking up with Catholic spiritual directors, retreating to their monasteries, reciting their liturgies in dim, candle-lit rooms. The second is the compulsion to look for Jesus in the eyes of the down and out, to follow Jesus into battle against unjust systems and apathetic saints.
Yes, this old church has seen all of that. And she has also witnessed one sad but consistent thing that all of these diverse movements have had in common. Can you hazard a guess?
Whatever some of the people got extremely into and excited about, they all eventually began to judge everyone else who didn't share their interest or passion. If you weren't into what I was so into, then you must not be as right with God as I am. Or as the people who share my pursuit. Over and over again, regardless of what it was, I have seen subcultures within our church begin to criticize those who (a) didn't speak in tongues, (b) didn't march in the streets with them, (c) didn't study the Bible with their method, (d) weren't regulars at the healing prayer sessions, (e) refused to join an intimate-sharing small group, (f) didn't have a prayer journal or embrace times of silence and solitude, or (g) weren't taking on evil, injustice or poverty. I think you catch my drift.
My prayer is that, however the Spirit chooses to move and whomever the Spirit chooses to move among, we would all display the fruit of that Spirit's transformative ministry within and among us. Because no matter how much any of us might like to claim that whatever we're into is something God is doing, God's Spirit doesn't inspire envy, anger, or dissension. God's Spirit will NEVER divide the Body of Christ. That's the 'fruit' of fallible, sinful human beings. When the Spirit of God is truly at work, there is amazing unity amidst mind-boggling diversity. And the fruit of the Spirit's true work is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, gentleness, meekness, and self-control. When the Spirit is allowed to bring forth that fruit from all of us and each of us, there can only be a supernatural unity, even though there are many different passions at work in the church.
These many, many years at EvergreenLA, I've learned to judge a tree strictly by its fruit.
