Many evangelical Christians trace their personal awareness of the importance of social justice to something they read: perhaps the straightforward history of Timothy Smith’s Revivalism and Social Reform or the portrayal of global inequalities in Ron Sider’s Rich Christians in an Age of Hunger or the exegetical surprises of John Howard Yoder’s The Politics of Jesus. Those sources and many others helped to turn evangelicals from asking “Should we engage in social transformation?” to “How shall we work for justice?” The pen can be a mighty adjunct to the rice bowl.
CT senior writer Tim Stafford says no book gave him a social justice aha! Such concern was always part of his faith. Not having been shaped by the prophets of social justice, Tim came to this issue’s cover story with his journalistic objectivity intact.
When Rich Christians was published in 1977, it created a stir. In CT that year, Sider argued for the connection between evangelism and social ministry; a few months later, CT published a temperate but thorough critique of Sider’s book. Other critics were less kind.
But Sider turned the stinging criticism to good, revising Rich Christians and taking many suggestions into account.
“Many readers think of Ron as an ideologue,” says Tim, “but that is the last thing he is. He painstakingly tries to understand what different people are saying.” Tim saw that openness in action as he observed Sider on the weekend when all America was transfixed by Clarence Thomas’s and Anita Hill’s conflicting stories. “Ron really wanted to believe them both,” reports Tim. “His response was a model of a fair-minded spirit.”
Two articles in this issue recount the saga of how evangelicals became committed to social change and the man who got some of the credit and most of the criticism (see pages 18 and 23).
DAVID NEFF, Managing Editor
Cover photograph by Eugene Mopsik.
Compounding the Sin
I read “Conduct Unbecoming a Preacher” [by Joy Jordan-Lake, Feb. 10] with interest. Some things needed to be added from the perspective of one who has been there as part of the family of the preacher gone astray sexually.
The big difference between the weak and the strong—preachers or layman—is what they do with the sin once they recognize, if they are indeed strong enough to recognize, that it is wrong. If they rationalize and justify it, then they only compound the sin by refusing to admit it for what it is. Preachers seem to have an especially hard job admitting when they have sinned.
Shirley M. Bottiglia
Harrisburg, Pa.
The article left the impression there are few if any biblical principles for addressing this behavior. Let me see if I understand correctly your position on pastoral counseling, based on the sidebar, “Pastors Who Love too Much.” Suppose a woman, who was a victim of “sexual misconduct” (a.k.a. sin), came to her pastor with that problem. The pastor, based on your definition, would “merely” help her find strength in God’s presence. I assume you are implying that the spiritual regeneration of God’s presence is on the whole insufficient to alleviate the ravages of sin—for either perpetrator or victim. It appears that the only “divine direction” the pastor could offer would be directions to the nearest “professional” counselor or psychiatrist.
Your statement declares clergy incompetent to deal with emotional problems while elevating psychological professionals as able to “divide soul and spirit.” That is a rather lofty endorsement for a profession several centuries younger than the God-ordained pastor.
Valjean Robidoux
Fallbrook, Calif.
Your articles might have prevented my 16 years in prison had they been printed 30 years ago and properly acted upon by competent churchmen. As a respected youth leader, my position of power may have surpassed that of our pastors. I fit the model of several examples you cited.
I thank God that after 30 years, current therapy has helped me identify myself as a “sexual addict.” The simplistic [advice to] “pray about it” or ignoring it and then making me feel unwelcome in church only frustrated me, drove me deeper underground—yet each time I’ve been “caught” I brought on my arrests by increasing the (mostly subconscious) messages I had been sending to others for help all along.
I thank God for deliverance—provided to me in the form of tools I can use with the help of Christians who pray for me and provide support, and professionals God is working through in my behalf.
An Indiana Prisoner
I was disappointed to read a comment by your editors stating it is a myth that a pastor is competent to counsel his parishioners. It is my firm conviction that any pastor who knows God’s Word is competent to counsel. Far more competent, I might add, than someone well-versed in behavioral therapies who has no biblical presuppositions or understanding. There are times when it may be appropriate to refer, but let’s not contribute to the notion that pastors aren’t competent to counsel or should leave counseling to the “professionals.”
Billy A. Melvin, Executive Director
National Association of Evangelicals
Carol Stream, Ill.
Thank you for publishing my article “Secret Sins in the Church Closet” [Feb. 10] following the excellent article by Joy Jordan-Lake. One observation did not survive your editorial process: On page 31 I note that “some organizations—because of their internal structure and unwritten rules—actually function to enable abuse behavior.” Originally I defined enable thus: “ ‘Enable’ in this context does not mean ‘to cause,’ but rather to provide an organizational climate in which incestuous conduct is more likely to occur. The offender remains fully responsible for his or her misconduct, regardless of the organizational climate.”
David R. Brubaker
Lancaster, Pa.
Why Ask Why?
As a young believer, I fancied myself a cutting-edge theologian. I was convinced that in my generation—and with my help—such great theological mysteries as the Trinity and the problem of evil would finally be unraveled. But, alas, I’ve spent my years introducing new mysteries, instead of solving old ones.
Why, for example, is it that denominations that don’t practice full immersion can be all wet on other issues? Or that some denominations that do dunk can seem so arid? Why is it that women who are kind, sensitive, intelligent, and servant-minded (in a word, pastoral) seem to be the ones most likely to oppose women’s ordination? Why is it that some who argue most strongly that the Bible is inerrant have their morning devotions with a paraphrased version?
Why do people who oppose gambling attend so many potlucks? Why do so many Baptists pronounce the word “Bab-dist”? Why do Calvinists take up free will offerings? Why do some preachers who believe strongly that we are in the last days seem to have such big plans for the future? Why do so many people who admit they are totally depraved turn out to be such nice folks?
Why don’t I go back to trying to solve the problem of evil?
EUTYCHUS
Architecture hinders kneeling
I greatly appreciated Dean Merrill’s article concerning the nearly forsaken practice of kneeling for prayer [“Whatever Happened to Kneeling?” Feb. 10]. He confirmed thoughts I have had on this matter and also rekindled my concern. This motivated me to integrate kneeling into our small community church. Unfortunately, architecture makes kneeling among the pews a near impossibility for even the able-bodied. This problem is not unique with our facility, but it is apparent in any evangelical/Protestant church I have been in. I hope those involved in future church construction will consider this need as being integral to worship.
Pastor Harry Rosenkrantz
Landers Community Church
Landers, Calif.
Kneeling is truly not merely a “Romish” custom, but biblical body language that reminds us of our position before the sovereign, transcendent God. When we kneel in prayer and worship, we humble ourselves as creatures before our Creator, as servants before our Lord, as accountable persons before our righteous Judge, and as the grateful redeemed before our gracious Savior.
Lewis Kash
Port Neches, Tex.
Kneeling always has been the fitting pose for prayer in family worship. But the early Christian church stood to pray in public. The Protestant Reformers returned to this posture. One may suspect that kneeling in public has tended to cultivate subservience to the ecclesiastical and civil higher-ups, while standing expresses respect for the God of the justified and accountable. Do you suppose sitting to pray became popular from a lack of reverence, and/or because our forefathers toiled long and hard six days, instead of being couch potatoes and desk sitters?
Richard W. Hudelson
Holland, Mich.
Christians on the PC bandwagon
Kudos for your coverage of political correctness on campus [“Campus Christians and the New Thought Police,” Feb. 10]. As a professor at Duke, I have seen how PC bigotry—Christophobia, I call it—expresses itself in McCarthyesque persecution of Christians in the academy. Campus ministries have a difficult time coping; many are searching for the best response. Some seem to have chosen a co-optative approach: recast the gospel in politically correct terms—à la “Jesus came to save the campus in all its ethnic and gender diversity.” If it stops there, it is at worst pandering and at best a harmless recitation of the obvious.
But some campus ministries are in danger of going further—forgetting the cure and catching the disease by enforcing multiculturalist allegiance from its staff. The test will be whether traditional evangelical ministries will act decisively to protect the rights of staff to disagree with the politically correct vision, or whether management will toss overboard staff members slow to jump on the PC bandwagon.
Prof. Peter D. Feaver
Duke University
Durham, N.C.
Groups of the downtrodden—such as feminists, people of color, homosexuals—have all achieved positions of social sensitivity through vocal and written protest. The basis for their outrage has been that they have suffered discrimination for conditions of “being” over which they have had no control. The next politically active group demanding recognition and rights may well be the pedophiles—those advocating sex with children—who are now organizing. What may follow from this multiculturalism may be other groups—those promoting incest, perhaps—who also ask for inclusion based upon a “quirk of birth.”
I am chagrined that mainstream denominations now lean toward promotion of perverse lifestyles. Will they next ordain members of other vocal groups with other platforms of sin to be considered “inclusive” and politically correct?
Steven Richards
Johnson City, Tenn.
In the last 80 years, the church has given the university away to the control of secular thought. In what church bodies are students (or professors) being prepared or even encouraged to be salt and light in such a climate? Where are the young people whose churches have trained them to understand eternal truth and meaning, as well as individual salvation? Where are the leaders burdened for secular education, who dare to believe that God’s Spirit protects not only Truth, but the representatives of Truth?
InterVarsity’s plan to target graduate schools to ready a new generation of professors for university witness excites us. We need people to enter the core of university life and ask the questions that could expose the dogmatic relativism that presently traps campus thought. The Christian mind needs to find its voice for the sake of the kingdom of God, and for the good of a morally deficient society.
Keith and Gladys Hunt
Ann Arbor, Mich.
Buchanan a “spiffed-up” Duke?
David Neff’s editorial attacking Republican presidential candidate Patrick Buchanan (“Bigots in Patriots’ Clothing,” Feb. 10) was a low point for CT. The depiction of Buchanan’s character and views borders on slander. Neff seems compelled to bias his readers by echoing oft-repeated and off-base judgments of the liberal media establishment that Buchanan is simply a spiffed-up David Duke. Nothing in Buchanan’s past or present indicates racist attitudes or intolerance towards people unlike himself; any antagonism he exhibits is aimed at the warped ideas and offensive actions of individuals and groups who assault traditional morality and natural law. His forte is an unparalleled ability to define controversial issues clearly—something most in politics are loath to do—and some of his remarks may appear sharp to those who put sensitivity above substance.
What piques me most is Neff’s admonition to categorically reject Buchanan as a viable candidate, besmirching his record and reputation with frenzied warnings of “manipulation” and “demagoguery.” I find it amusing this censure appears in an issue devoted to the problems of “political correctness” and “thought police” in higher education.
Meredith J. Lee
Glen Rock, N.J.
When did commentators William F. Buckley, Jr., and William Safire become the “liberal media establishment”? The evaluations of Pat Buchanan by these conservative friends have been the most careful—and most critical.
—Eds.
Negative implications and assumptions about Patrick Buchanan are not fair. The editorial commendably states that the rising tide of bigotry is a serious side effect as ethnic populations find new independence today, but slides into an uncharitable character assassination of one as capable and compassionate as any of the presidential candidates.
Bob Mitcham
Foresthill, Calif.
Finding Vincent of Lerins
Thomas C. Oden writes of Vincent of Lerins (“Last Wednesday’s Theology,” Feb. 10) and a “reliable threefold method for identifying orthodoxy.” That is well and good for those with access to large theological libraries or whose education in theology is superior to most; but to the rest of us living in our huts “where not even the king can enter without a search warrant, or permission,” where can we find out anything about Vincent of Lerins?
One cult, or sect, has reading rooms in every town in the U.S. that has a church. In San Francisco they have six reading rooms; one can walk right in without entering the church. “Orthodox” Christians, however, have no such place to go. If there is a genuine desire to evangelize, not just set up revenue sources, then as many Christian libraries should be established as possible, as soon as possible, on a worldwide basis.
Lester V. Tinnin
Daly City, Calif.
Confusing fiction with nonfiction
Mark Horne’s review of The Coming Economic Earthquake [Books, Feb. 10] mistakenly merged his review of my nonfiction book, The Coming Economic Earthquake, with my totally fiction book, The Illuminati. I made it abundantly clear in The Illuminati that it is fiction supported only by my imagination. It is purely coincidental that the two publishers released the books in the same time period.
I pray The Coming Economic Earthquake will be used to alert and awaken God’s people to the crisis. I regret that confusion over the novel might detract from this goal.
Larry Burkett
Christian Financial Concepts
Gainesville, Ga.
