Politics

The One Maxim That Comforts My Soul in the Midst of Social & Political Storms

/ Dennis Griffith / Leave a comment

On this Election Day, wearied by the rancor that too much permeates our culture – and that has infested the Church – these words from slave-trader-turned-pastor/poet John Newton are at the forefront of my mind:

I meddle not with the disputes of party, nor concern myself with any political maxims, but such as are laid down in Scripture. 

There is one political maxim which comforts me: ‘The Lord reigns.’ His hand guides the storm; and He knows them that are His, how to protect, support, and deliver them.

It is a comfort to my soul and to my mind to remember that “The Lord Reigns”. I regularly need to remind myself that it is not just that the Lord will reign someday – though that is certainty God’s promise. The Lord Reigns NOW! – Today. When Jesus came on the scene he declared: “The Kingdom of God is at hand!” This means that in his first advent – his first appearance – he began to reclaim all that belongs to him – (which is everything). He reigns today in the hearts and lives of his people throughout the World. And he is sovereign over all creation, so that whether people bow to Him and honor Him as Lord or not, he is still working out his purposes. (see Psalm 2) He cannot be stopped. He Reigns. He will Reign. And with the mess I see all around me, or whenever I turn on the news, “the Lord Reigns ” is a comfort to me, no matter what the election results are tonight, and in the coming days.

As a fan of John Newton, I also began my day today by re-reading this short letter from Newton to a friend, from which the quotes above are taken. The context of this letter is a call to his fellow Englishmen to pray for the renewal of his homeland, prompted by news of “hostilities” in the American colonies. Though this letter was written in August 1775, the wisdom and the tone are timeless. (From The Works of John Newton, v. 2)

“O what a Shepherd! Let us love, and sing, and wonder.

I hope the good people at Bristol, and everywhere else, are praying for our sinful, distracted land, in this dark day. The Lord is angry, the sword is drawn, and I am afraid nothing but the spirit of wrestling prayer can prevail for the returning it into the scabbard.

Could things have proceeded to these extremities, except the Lord had withdrawn His salutary blessing from both sides? It is a time of prayer.

We see the beginning of trouble, but who can foresee the possible consequences? The fire is kindled; but how far it may spread, those who are above may perhaps know better than we.

I meddle not with the disputes of party, nor concern myself with any political maxims, but such as are laid down in Scripture. There I read that righteousness exalteth a nation, and that sin is the reproach, and, if persisted in, the ruin of any people.

Some people are startled at the enormous sum of our national debt: they who understand spiritual arithmetic may be well startled if they sit down and compute the debt of national sin.

Imprimis, Infidelity: Item, Contempt of the Gospel: Item, The profligacy of manners: Item, Perjury: Item, The cry of blood, the blood of thousands, perhaps millions, from the East Indies.

It would take sheets, yea quires (i.e. 25 sheets of paper), to draw out the particulars under each of these heads, and then much would remain untold. What can we answer, when the Lord saith, ‘Shall not I visit for these things? Shall not My soul be avenged on such a nation as this?’

Since we received the news of the first hostilities in America, we have had an additional prayer-meeting. Could I hear that professors in general, instead of wasting their breath in censuring men and measures, were plying the Throne of Grace, I should still hope for a respite.

Poor New England! Once the glory of the earth, now likely to be visited with fire and sword. They have left their first love, and the Lord is sorely contending with them.

Yet surely their sins as a people are not to be compared with ours. I am just so much affected with these things as to know, that I am not affected enough.

Oh! My spirit is sadly cold and insensible, or I should lay them to heart in a different manner: yet I endeavour to give the alarm as far as I can.

There is one political maxim which comforts me: ‘The Lord reigns.’ His hand guides the storm; and He knows them that are His, how to protect, support, and deliver them.

He will take care of His own cause; yea, He will extend His kingdom, even by these formidable methods.

Men have one thing in view; He has another, and His counsel shall stand.”

Selling Out the Gospel at the Altar of Politics

/ Dennis Griffith / 4 Comments

Divided Heart (Pink-Green)

I don’t do politics on social media (nor in the pulpit), but I feel an exception is warranted – on social media, anyway. With the exception that I don’t really care that Donald Trump has not previously held public office, nor do I care that neither Ben Carson nor Carly Fiorina have ever held public office, pretty much everything else Peter Wehner writes in his Op Ed for the New York Times, Why I Will Never Vote for Donald Trump, reflects my sentiments. I am disturbed by Trump’s behavior, and even more so by some of his supporters who have compromised core values and beliefs to empower him.

I know. This is politics. And Trump’s supporters have every right to support him, for whatever the reasons.  For a time I was open to the possibility, despite questions about the basis of his present positions.  I accept that people change.  But with no history, or substantive rationale for changes in convictions, I can only wonder how long it will be, or what circumstances might arise, before we see some of these key convictions shift back.

More disturbing to me than Trump are some of his supporters.  Here I do not mean the rank-and-file Trump supporters, who enjoy the bravado, and with whom the simple catch phrase “Make America Great Again” resonates.  I too am entertained, or at least I have been, to a degree. And I appreciate the vision of restoring the greatness of the USA – even if I am a little unclear whether Trump’s definition of what would make America great and my definition are similar; and even if Trump’s specific plans to usher in such restoration seem a little fuzzy to me.  I am disturbed most by those who are endorsing Trump, even when Trump clearly does not represent their core values and beliefs.  In other words, I am most chagrined by Christians – especially those claiming to be Evangelicals – who are compromising their faith to endorse Trump.

Now let me be clear here.  Every citizen of the USA has a right to support whatever candidate they want. I do not believe Christians have a responsibility to restrict their vote to only Christian candidates. Therefore, I support the right of my fellow Christians, even fellow Evangelicals, to support Trump, if they believe he would be the best leader for our country. (Check out Mark Tooley’s thoughtful piece: Trump, Evangelicals & Security.) What I do not accept are Christians – especially Evangelicals – who will rewrite the Faith to justify their support.

The poster boy of my ire is Jerry Falwell, Jr.

In recent months Falwell has made some asinine statements and decisions. Among them was to invite Trump to speak at Liberty University, where Falwell is currently president, on Martin Luther King Day.  Again, I need to be clear. I support Liberty University’s decision to have Trump speak, just as I appreciated them inviting Bernie Sanders to speak. A university is a place of ideas, where a variety of viewpoints should be allowed to be expressed.  So as long as a clear distinction is made between a chapel service (during which any speakers should intelligently and faithfully exalt the One True God) and a convocation (where any variety of ideas could be expressed) I have no problem.  But given Trump’s history, or at least his reputation, of bigoted statements, it seems more wisdom could have been exercised about the date when Trump would be invited to speak.  A day that is designated to highlight efforts to bring about racial reconciliation does not seem the most sensitive or appropriate.  Of course that is just a judgment call. (For anyone interested, my friend Marc Corbett, a Liberty University alumnus, wrote an excellent piece for The Gospel Coalition.  Take a moment to listen to Marc’s lament: Why I Will Protest a School I Love.)

Most disturbing to me is Falwell’s recent total redefinition of Christianity in his justification for inviting Trump to speak on MLK Day, and in his subsequent official endorsement of Trump.  Again, I believe Falwell has the right to support, and even endorse, whoever he wants.  In his formal endorsement Falwell said only that:

“[Trump is] a successful executive and entrepreneur, a wonderful father and a man who I believe can lead our country to greatness again.”

But Falwell’s previous justification and reasoning was this:

“I have seen firsthand that his staff loves him and is loyal to him because of his servant leadership. In my opinion Donald Trump lives a life of loving and helping others as Jesus taught in the great commandment.”

Falwell has since offered an explanation, an Op Ed in the Washington Post.  And I concur with much of his reasoning, even if I would not land on the same candidate. Nevertheless, his reasoning and his freedom – both as an American and as a Christian – to endorse Trump does not negate Falwell’s compromise of the gospel,  and his misuse of the scripture.

Continue reading →

Evangelical Typecasts

/ Dennis Griffith / Leave a comment

For God and Country

It is interesting. It is even more troubling.  CNN Religion Editor Daniel Burke has posted an article to CNN Politics titled 7 Types of Evangelicals: And How They’ll Effect the Presidential Race.  The post is interesting in that it describes differences among those who label themselves “Evangelical”, and creates categories for each.  It is troubling, at least to me, because little to nothing in the post conveys what an actual Evangelical essentially is.

Burke begins with the tired old refrain:

It’s an axiom in American politics, duly repeated every four years: Evangelicals are the country’s biggest and most powerful religious voting bloc, especially during the GOP primaries.

But then he offers something that offers a hint of something fresh:

Like many political axioms, though, it papers over a complex reality.

It is true, Evangelicals are not monolithic.  Evangelicals are individuals who have different ideas about different candidates for office – from both parties.  Many of us are able to see positive characteristics even in candidates with whom we disagree.  Few of us are likely to find any candidate that represents everything we would prefer.  At least not those of us who think for ourselves – as God gifted us (and all humanity) to do. So I appreciate Burke’s explanation to those who do not understand Evangelicalism that we Evangelicals reflect a complex reality.  Our complexity should not be confusing, just diverse.

Evangelicals are diverse in may ways. Some among us believe more water should be used in a baptism than others of us do; and some believe a lower age for that baptism is appropriate (maybe even preferable) than others of us.  Some among us like a little wine or a few beers, others prefer to stick with Iced Tea. Some among us like the excitement and activity of a large church, others among us prefer the intimacy of a small family-like church; most among us are somewhere in between. Some of us prefer newer songs, others the hymns from ages past; some prefer cheerful music, others tunes that set a more reflective tone; most enjoy a mix of all of the above.  Some of us appreciate the connectivity of a denominational affiliation; others, aware that no denomination has the corner on the market of God’s favor, choose to remain organizationally independent.  There are all sorts of ways in which Evangelicals are diverse, different, complex.  But none of these differences has anything to do with what makes us Evangelicals in the first place. Nor does Burke in his attempt to analyze and categorize an Evangelical political landscape.

Burke’s categories are interesting, even somewhat amusing. They are as follows:

  1. Old Guard
  2. Institutional Evangelicals
  3. Entrepreneurial Evangelicals
  4. Arm’s Length Evangelicals
  5. Millennial Evangelicals
  6. Liberal Evangelicals
  7. Cultural Evangelicals

Continue reading →

Kingdom of God is BIGGER Than Your Political Party

/ Dennis Griffith / Leave a comment

A week has passed since the 2012 Presidential Election, and many (who voted like me) are still licking their wounds and awaiting armageddon.  OK. That may be a bit too strong, but that is what it has at times seemed like to speak with those who (like me) did not support the re-election of Barrack Obama.

I understand the disappointment, and even the concerns. But what troubles me, more than anything else, is when I hear Christians demonizing other people, especially other Christians,  just because they voted for Obama.  I do not want to minimize the passions. I just want us to regain our perspective.

Here is a penetrating question posed by one writer:

If I feel more of a kindred solidarity with those who share my politics but not my faith than I feel with those who share my faith but not my politics, what does it say about me?

I find that question, which I read in piece by Scott Sauls in Redeemer City to City, to be an excellent perspective-shaping querry.

Sauls goes on, and profoundly answers his own question:

“… It suggests that I have sold out to Rome. I have rendered to God what belongs to Caesar, and to Caesar what belongs to God.”

Maybe you can’t bring yourself to agree with Sauls’ specific conclusion. But I hope you will find his prevailing premise resonates with you, as it does with me.  In short, if you find yourself more akin with folks who share your political persuasions than you do those who share your faith foundations, something is amiss.

So, if either of the following describes you:

  • You are struggling with resentment about the results of our recent election, or when you find yourself in the midst of people who voted for Obama
  • You are so elated that you find it difficult to refrain from gloating and you feel twinges of subtle delight for any opportunity you get to rub Obama’s re-election in the face of your more conservative colleagues

… let me encourage you to consider Sauls’ whole article: To My Elated & Despairing Post-Election Friends.

Here is what I have been reminding myself for the past week: God says, “I have set my King on Zion, my holy hill.” (Psalm 2.6)  That’s all I really need to know.

The Kingdom of Heaven is bigger than a political party.

Christians & Politics: Faith-filled or Faith Fooled?

/ Dennis Griffith / Leave a comment

In case you have been sleeping like Rip Van Winkle, this is a Presidential Election year in the USA.  Faith will be declared, inspected, invoked, and provoked from all sides over these next few months.  Some will offer opinions from positions of knowledge, while others will offer authoritative sounding opinions from positions of functional ignorance.  It may become particularly true of this election since both presumed candidates have expressed faith traditions outside the American norm.  One, the Republican, is in no respects a Christian. The other, the incumbent Democrat, professes a form of Christianity that leaves many understandably skeptical.

So, given these choices, how should American Evangelicals approach the coming season?    Should we vote for a darkhorse Independent or Third Party candidate, who has no realistic chance to win but, who matches our Evangelical identity?  Should we sit this one out, and wait until next time when we might have a viable candidate more in line with our theological ideologies?

Dick Doster says forgoing the election is not an acceptable option. Here’s why:

Christians, when rightly informed and motivated, change the character of political debate. They bring the moral standards of God’s kingdom into the civic realm and thereby become agents of His common grace — of His provision for those who believe as well as those who don’t.

This is the opening paragraph of Doster’s thought provoking article, Politics: Why Christians Must Be Involved, published at byFaith Magaizne.  Click the article title to read Doster’s whole piece.

Obama’s Faith

/ Dennis Griffith / 4 Comments

Suspicions abound. The questions perhaps even more.   What I am referring to is the faith of President Barrack Obama: Is he a Muslim, or what?

Though I did not vote for him, I was pleasantly intrigued during the 2008 campaign when Obama, speaking with Rick Warren at a forum at Saddleback Church, gave a testimony of personal faith that was both clear and substantive.  He certainly was more on target than anything John McCain offered about his own faith.  But the skeptics still wouldn’t buy it.

I’ll have to admit, some of Obama’s policies give me reason to question, if not the veracity, the consistency and substance of his faith.  But then again, my own sin and short-comings may sometimes give people I encounter reason to wonder about my faith.

Then in a speech yesterday, for the National Prayer Breakfast, President Obama gave us another glimpse of his personal faith. CNN  provides the video: Obama’s Faith.

Many people I know were moved by his words.  But as I’ve listened to the speech a few times, I am still not sure what it reveals.  It seemed genuine, and it was certainly Biblical – far more Biblically faithful than anything I’ve heard Glenn Beck or Sean Hannity utter.  Shoot, he was more Biblical than Joel Osteen.  But some questions remain. There was still something missing.

My intent is not to knock Mr. Obama, nor his moving,  heartfelt testimony.  The fact is what was missing from his message is often missing from many pulpits.  There was a lot of religion, moralism, and Bible quotes, but there was no Christ.  It was a vivid example of what Michael Horton refers to as Christless Christianity.

Christ-less Christianity expresses the morals and mandates from the Bible, but makes no mention of Jesus.  He may be assumed or he may be ignored, I don’t know.  And most who express this probably believe in Jesus.  But he is absent from the conversation; never mentioned, invoked, or referred to.

The problem with Christ-less Christianity is that, at least rhetorically, it cuts the heart out of the Christian faith. It makes Christianity to be like all other religions – merely moralistic.  Jesus Christ is the heart of Christianity – particularly what he accomplished on the Cross and by his Resurrection.  It is by this work of Christ that the Believer is forgiven of sin, adopted by God, declared righteous, and destined for Heaven – if these benefits are appropriated through faith.

I don’t know the “reality” of Obama’s faith.  I will likely never know.  I never met the guy, and never expect to meet him.  I am not suggesting he is not a Christian.  I was pleased by what he did say.  But I am reminded by what he did not say – what many do not say – that we can never deny nor simply assume Christ if we are trying to testify about the Christian faith.

As Paul declared:

He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.  For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him.  He is before all things, and in him all things hold together.    And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy.  For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him,  and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.      – Colossians 1.15-20

Never Exchange the Pulpit

/ Dennis Griffith / 4 Comments

 

With all the hubub that has surrounded Glen Beck and his aspiration to ascend to top of the Religious Right leadership, I was encouraged by an open letter written by Nancy Guthrie to the pastors of her church. 

Guthrie states that what has concerned her more than the fact that Beck is a Morman is a statement Beck made on The O’Reilly Factor:

“240 pastors, priests, rabbis, and imams on stage all locked arms saying the principles of America need to be taught from the pulpit.”

In short, Guthrie affirms her love for America, but is grateful that her pastors have refused to neglect the preaching of the gospel in exchange for preaching American principles. 

Like the Apostle Paul, I am “astonished” that so many are turning from the Gospel that they claim to have received (and are charged to preach) and are turning to another gospel – which is no gospel at all. (Galatians 1.6-9) 

If the ministers of the gospel turn to preach politics, who will proclaim the Word of Life?

To read Nancy Guthries thoughts, click: Open Letter

What’s Glenn Beck Doing at Liberty University?

/ Dennis Griffith / 2 Comments

It was with some bemusement that I took note of the speaker for Liberty University’s 2010 Commencement: Glenn Beck.  I am not sure what message was conveyed by this choice. One possibility seems commendable. Another possibility, I fear, may be a sad reflection of attitudes within and around contemporary American Evangelicalism.

Liberty University, long steeped in Baptistic Fundamentalism, maintained its commitment to the conservative politics held by founder Jerry Falwell while broadening its umbrella in recent years by making a transition to be more of an Evangelical institution.   I applaud them for this move.  Not only do I believe that Evangelicalism is  more Biblical than Fundamentalism, an Evangelical worldview is unquestionably more conducive to a comprehensive education. 

Glenn Beck, while controversial, is a voice in the Public Square not to be ignored. I don’t much buy into Beck’s conspiracy theories. And I categorically oppose his audacious and unqualified call for people to leave churches that promote ‘social justice’.  But I do not dismiss him, as some on the far Left are inclined to do – or, at least, wish they could do.  (i.e.: MSNBC)  In short, not only is Beck an intelligent and articulate pundit for cultural conservatism, he also freelyspeaks about God.  BUT Beck is a Mormon, not a Christian.  So the god he speaks about, therefore, is NOT the Triune God revealed in the Bible.

So what is a Mormon doing speaking at a Baptist graduation? Continue reading →

To Speak or Not to Speak

/ Dennis Griffith / 1 Comment

I am torn.

According to a recent article by the Florida Baptist Witness, a group of concerned citizens are recruiting pastors to challenge a 55 year old law that prohibits non-profit organizations, including churches, from endorsing specific political candidates.  Practically speaking this law empowers the IRS to censor the content that is offered from church pulpits. 

On the one hand, I am sympathetic to this cause because I do not believe that anyone should censor legitimate speach.  In a free society political speach should not be censored. Further, while not being an alarmist, I am concerned that allowing the government this authority to regulate what is proclaimed from a church pulpit may one day broaden and include other issues that are moral-theological in nature but that have political implications – or that have simply become politicized.  The IRS is an agency with all authority and functions with a “guilty until proven innocent” M.O.  Having them as regulators is a dangerous proposition.

On the other hand, the pulpit is a place that should be unconditionally reserved for the proclamation of the Gospel.  PERIOD! While I do not like my civil rights infringed, I have no right, under God’s direction, to use the pulpit for anything other than declaring, teaching, and applying God’s Word.  Political speach becomes an easy – and often seductive – substitute for the real responsibility that ministers of the Gospel are charged to do.  Loosening the present law will not change my conviction, nor my practice, whatsoever.  But if the present law will keep some of my clergical colleagues focused on our collective purpose, well, that seems to be a good thing.

For those interested in this discussion, you might want to check out: Speak Up Movement

Manhattan Declaration

/ Dennis Griffith / Leave a comment

From time to time a new and faithful expression of faith is necessary. I am not speaking of a new faith, or of new doctrines, but of the historic Christian faith prophetically applied to current and world events.  Such a statement of faith has recently been produced: The Manhattan Declaration.

The Manhattan Declaration is a collective affirmation of fundamental Truths shared by Evangelicals, Roman Catholics, and Eastern Orthodox Christians living in the United States. In particular, this declaration addresses:

  • Sanctity of Human Life
  • Sanctity of Marriage
  • Rights of Conscience and Religious Liberty

Some may question why believers who hold some vastly different perspectives would join together and unite their voices to address these social issues.  On the other hand, why would they not?  These issues that both result from and contribute to our social decay are intolerable and need to be addressed.  Francis Schaeffer referred to such joint operations as “co-beligerence”.

This afternoon I signed my name to this declaration. While I don’t presume anyone really cares what I sign, or even what I think, it was a way for me to lend my voice to an effort that needs to be heard.  I invite you to check it out – and sign-on, if you share the concerns and agree to these solutions.

Manhattan Declaration(.doc)

Navigating the Narrow Path Between the Gospel and Politics

/ Dennis Griffith / Leave a comment

Golden Path

It is a constant tension for me.  How do I juggle my personal political views with my responsibility to remain faithful to the Gospel? How do I strive to keep the Gospel message pure and not pollute my teaching with  political biases interjected?

It is a difficult dilemma. Many political issues have moral roots, and can be informed by theological reflection.  At the same time God is not partisan. No party, nor candidate, can claim God’s endorsement.  All are flawed to some degree – some more obvious tha others. None sufficiently reflect the character and commands of God.

In fact, the Gospel itself creates somewhat of a tension. It simultaneously compels us to be both conservative and liberal.  It leads toward conservatism in the sense that it compels us to recognize that there is absolute truth, there is right and wrong, righteousness and evil.  God calls us to seek truth and to walk in the light of truth.  Yet the heart of the message of the Gospel has a very liberal emphasis: God gives graciously and lavishly to those who do not deserve what they receive.  We are to seek justice and to show mercy, two words often associated more with classical liberalism yet are reflections of the character of God.

Rejecting the notion that there can be a pure Church-State, a theocracy, in this era between ancient Israel and the future Kingdom, I am left with the realization that we are to discern wisdom in order to govern effectively, and to address contemporary problems.  Wisdom is discerned from God’s Word. But specific application of wisdom to lifes various issues is not always spelled out by God’s Word.  That leaves room for good people to disagree about solutions, and sometimes even about the nature of the problems.

I cringe whenever I hear Christians indiscriminately integrate a party platform with the true Faith, as if it is an undeniable marriage, making it impossible to distinguish or separate one from the other; or that to choose an opposing party is akin to spiritual adultery.  In my circles, which tends to lean right, even far right,  I hear stupid things said – including from some pulpits – such as: “I don’t see how anyone can be a Democrat and a Christian”.  I try to stay as far away from such inane rhetoric as I can. But I suspect sometimes I try too hard, and therefore stand too far away.

I want to be clear: Such sentiments are not only wrong, they are EVIL.  To attach partisan politics to the Gospel is a distortion of the Gospel. It keeps people from understanding, and sometimes embracing, the only hope we have, which is God’s grace received through faith in Christ.  It prevents some from thinking outside the box of strict conservatism, and therefore may rob our society of possible solutions for very real problems, that just may be both Biblical AND “liberal”.  All of these are, in my estimation, evil consequences, no matter how well intentioned the rationale behind it.

But lacking wisdom about how to navigate the narrow path beween politics and the Gospel, my tactic has been to forgo engaging in political discussion at all, except in close circles where I am sure not to offend.  I am becomming convinced that this is not really wisdom, it is wimpy-ness on my part.

I have very definite political views. I have strong opinions about many of the issues that are plaguing our society and world; and which divide people.  If I refrain from partaking in the conversation I offer nothing toward the solutions. I want to re-enter the discussion.

Here are a few things I will need to do to keep my balance on this narrow path:

1. I will continue to refrain from bringing my partisan views into the pulpit.  This includes not only avoiding stupid comments like the one I previously mentioned, but personal or partisan allusions that could reasonably alienate or offend people of either political leanings. The pulpit is for the proclamation of the Gospel. If the Gospel is not proclaimed from the pulpit, not only is it an abuse of the purpose of the pulpit, but it is to deny the people the Gospel. If the Gospel is not proclaimed in the pulpit, it will not be proclaimed anywhere else.

2. I need to grow in my ability to clearly communicate the  various aspects of the Gospel, and affirming the tension it creates for those who follow Jesus.  The Gospel is an offense. It is like a stone that makes man stumble, a rock that causes them to trip and fall.  If I am faithful and articulate I should become an equal-opportunity offender, causing discomfort to people on both the Left and the Right.

3. I will commit to pray for the good of those who are in positions of authority, especially the President, whether I agree with them or not; whether I even like them or not.  God has commanded that we do this. My personal preferences cannot mitigate God’s clear command. (See Presidential Prayer Team) 

4. I will be diligent to dilineate political views in such a way that I give no occasion for anyone to infer that I am making them a basis of  Christian fellowship.  Somehow I must learn how to enter the discussion without attaching Gospel authority to my political perspective.  In other words, I want to learn how to dialogue yet affirm that those who differ may well still be more godly than I am – whether they are wrong and I right or I am wrong and they are right.  Fellowship is rooted in what Christ has done, PERIOD.

None of this is profound, I know.  But I just need to wrestle through it to guide me if and when I address any political issues.  If anyone has other suggestions, I’m all ears.

Commissioner-in-Chief?

/ Dennis Griffith / Leave a comment

washington

A day after Tea Parties were held across our land, I learn that our money is not the only thing our elected officials in Washington are concerned about afterall.  With wars looming, pirates pestering American freighters, and our economy still in the gallows, apparently Congress has its eyes on college football. They want to fix the BCS. 

While I cannot endorse all his positions, I have to support David Climer of the Tennessean, who in his April 12 column spoke to the issue: Congress Has Bigger Problems to Address Than BCS.

Hi Ho, Hi Ho… It’s Off to the Polls I Go

/ Dennis Griffith / Leave a comment

abstractionxxxii

Call me old fashioned, but I don’t open presents before Christmas morning. And I don’t vote before election day. That’s not a point of pride. It’s just what I do.  I am comfortable that way.

I go off the the polls this morning comforted by these thoughts:

1.  I am confident about the “class” of both major candidates. Unlike in the last couple of elections, I don’t expect the loser to act with sour grapes, and threaten lawsuits to prolong the race.  I recognize that the election is likely to be close, and therefore perhaps not resolved tonight. I understand there is widespread concern about voter fraud that needs to be rectified, which may require some additonal time.  But I am not expecting a poor loser who will, even years later, still claim to have had the election “stolen”.  This year will be a refreshing change.

2. Regardless of who wins, God is still in control.  While he has not promised that all things will go to our liking, or even that we will experience only bliss if we follow Christ, nevertheless, my hope is in him.  My aim is to align myself to His eternal purpose, not to try to sway him to my determined purposes. 

My prayer: “Your will be done, not mine, O Lord.”

Pigs & Politics? Plee-aze, No More!

/ Dennis Griffith / Leave a comment

  

Let’s get some perspective.  I am chagrinned to see the current state of our election process.  Not enough substance, and too much knit-pickey junior highish rhetoric.  The most recent example of it this week being the accusations that Barrack Obama dissed Sarah Palin by calling her a pig.  I’m not an Obama supporter, but I don’t think so.

I saw the video of Obama’s speech in Lebanon, VA, where he said: “You can put lipstick on a pig, but it’s still a pig”, and really thought nothing of his comments. It was obvious that he was trying, yet again, to link John McCain with George W. Bush.  That’s fair game. To read anything else into it says more about the listener than the speaker.

But I will admit, when I saw it a second time, after people started making a big deal out of his “Pig in Lipstick” anaology, I did notice something.  The crowd seemed to infer something that Obama did not seem to intend.  Obama appears to have quickly recognized what they were reacting too. He may have even been somewhat amused by their reaction.  But all he did was finish his thought.  No slam. No sexist implications. Just politics. 

While I expect nothing of substance from the media, I am disappointed with the two campaigns.

The McCain people should have simply ignored it.  Perhaps more appropriate, Sarah Palin should have risen above it all, and released a statement that Obama was not talking about her.  I realize that this would have then become a missed opportuity at keeping the Obama people off their game. But that’s precisely the problem that causes me disappointment.  Both campaigns are treating this campaign like a game – a childish game.  And the presidency is not a game.

My disappointment in Obama is because of his response to the accusations.  I understand what it is like to be misunderstood, to have your words twisted and applied in a way that they were never intended. It is very frustrating. I understand that there are people out there just looking to take offense, and willfully look for every opportunity to do so.  And I believe, in this case, Obama has fallen to just that trap.  However, his response was shrill, and, I think, weak.  Rather than recognizing that even his own supporters inferred something, and then disarmingly and firmly reiterating his intended point, Obama moved back into the junior high level himself.  With a feaux bravado, he declared: “Enough!  I’ll not have another election stolen…” 

Mr. Obama, no election has been stolen. Recent elections have simply been lost. 

Why do I write about this? Well, because I’m praying for both of these guys who are running for president. And I’m praying for our country.  I’d like to see that these guys are taking seriously the problems and challenges facing the people they hope to lead.  It’s time that they get back to thinking and acting like grown-ups.  It’s time they act like leaders.

Why I Am NOT Part of the Religious Right

/ Dennis Griffith / 1 Comment

stump-speaking

One would think I’d be a good prospect to be a part of the Religious Right.

1. I am a conservative Evangelical pastor.

2. I first identified my political identity as a Republican in the 2nd Grade.

(My teacher at Cedar Road Elementary School, Mrs. Manning, wanting to teach us a little about Civics, listed several candidates running in local elections on the board.  I mistakenly thought the Republican candidate for one of the offices was my across-the-street-neighbor, so my hand went up as being for that group.)

3. By the fourth grade I actively worked for the campaign of the Republican running for County Commissioner in Montgomery County, Pennsylvania.

(No I was not that advanced. My father was working on the campaign, and I delivered flyers all around our town.  Come to think of it, it was probably good that I identified as a Republican in the 2nd Grade.  I’m not sure how it would have been growing up if my father had a Democrat for a son!)

4. And now that I am at least a little more aware of politics and the issues than I was when I was in the 2nd Grade, and now that I think for myself, I find I share most of the social concerns expressed by the Religious Right; and I am at least sympathetic to most of their positions.

Still, I am not part of the Religious Right, and have no desire to be identified with them.

Why not?

1. The Religious Right trusts too much in government.

It is odd. One of the loudest laments of conservatives is that Democrats historically favor BIG government; that Democrats believe that government will solve our social problems.  So I find it ironic that those identified as the Religious Right place such faith in electing the right people.  In other words, it seems to me they are putting their hope in those governing.

Don’t get me wrong.  Electing qualified people is important to the functioning of our government, in its various spheres (i.e. Federal, State, Municipal, etc.).  But the social problems we have are more a reflection of the heart than imposition of public policy.  Further, I do believe that there are policies that are immoral. These policies are in place either as a reflection of or to address the corruption of our hearts – the effect of sin.  But the policies do not shape our hearts.

Like him now or not, I remember when George W. Bush was running in the primaries of Y2K, he was asked about a particular policy- I think it was hate crimes. Bush said: “You cannot legislate the heart.”  I think that is profoundly true.

Notice he did not say the typical “You can’t legislate morality.”  That is an absurd statement. All legislation is an expression of morality (or lack of it).  He said “You cannot legislate the heart.”  I’ll go a step further, “You cannot legislate Righteousness”.  Right behavior is not itself Righteousness.  Without faith it is impossible to please God. Righteousness is faith expressing itself in right action – in behavior reflective of God’s character and standards.

Please understand, there are a number of laws and practices I want to see changed; and others I want to see averted.  As a whole our society would be better off.  This would restrain behavior influenced by our sin-infected hearts.  But this is still not Righteousness.  And anyone who believes that simple laws will make us righteous is kidding himself.

Civil Government has a God-given sphere.  It is to provide structure for society. And Civil Government has authority to enforce the common standards for the benefit and protection of the members of society.  It is an important but limited role.

Matters of faith – faith that shapes values & behavior – belongs in the other two governing spheres: Family & Church.  It is God’s Word that instructs us concerning what we are to believe, and what is good & right.  This faith is shaped and expressed in the family and Church.  And when we live-out our faith, we express the righteousness God is working in us.

I’m afraid the Religious Right converges & confuses these God-given spheres.  Consequently many are trusting too much in government, and not enough in what God does, and is doing, by the power of the Gospel.

2. The Religious Right Distorts the Gospel

The Gospel is not: “Be good and you will be righteous.”  It is certainly not: “If you don’t do evil, you are righteous.”

The Gospel is: There is none righteous. But despite the fact we are not good, God has loved us. He sent his Son to take upon himself our guilt and punishment. Whoever trusts in Him – and particularly what He has done on the Cross – is not only forgiven of sin & debt to God, but declared by Divine judiciary to be righteous; we are credited with the righteousness of Christ.

All of this is a matter of faith.  And faith cannot be removed from righteousness.

Faith that is genuine will be expressed in a noticeable improvement of our attitudes and actions (in other words, they will incrementally become more in line with Christ’s).  These actions of faith are what the Bible calls works of righteousness.  Again, righteousness is not the actions themselves.

Sadly, I believe the political emphasis of the Religious Right distorts the Gospel by too often appealing to behavior as the basis of our relationship with God, and not in faith in Christ.  I recognize that the vast majority of those who identify themselves as part of the Religious Right personally make this distinction, but in the heat of political battle the message is not clearly or often enough expressed.

I also often wonder if the leaders of the Religious Right appreciate the power of the Gospel to bring change to individual lives, and thus to a society.  Far better to have people experiencing the power of the Gospel that transforms our hearts, our perspective, our desires, and ultimately our behavior, than to merely restrain behavior.

Government cannot change anyone, really. That is why the efforts of the Religious Right to energize the Evangelical Church into little better than a Political Action Committee sadden me – and angers me.  Too often politics has become the substitute mission of the church.  But the message being proclaimed is no substitute for the Gospel.

3. The Religious Right Has Made Partisanship a Condition of Christianity

I have no idea how many times I have heard it: “I don’t know how someone can be a Christian and be a Democrat”.

I know when that is said it is almost always in reference to some of the social issues, that I agree need to be addressed and, that are supported more prominently by Democrats than Republicans.  But I fear that some may really wonder if political affiliation is a condition for salvation – in other words, that receiving Christ requires Faith AND Voters Registration.  NO! NO! NO!

Being a Christian = trusting in Christ + NOTHING!  Salvation is by Grace alone, through Faith alone, in Christ alone.  PERIOD.

How we live that faith out may vary. And I see both parties lacking.

Again, I am a lifelong Republican. But I must recognize that Republicans do not always have a good track record, for instance, for directly helping the poor & outcastes.  I don’t think it is as bad as caricatured. Neither are the Democrat policies as good as some would want us to believe. (See Marvin Olasky’s The Tragedy of American Compassion.) But I understand how someone filled by the compassion of Christ would choose to identify with those promising direct involvement and resources for the poor. This is an expression of their Faith. One can do this without necessarily embracing every plank of the party’s platform.  And I can understand them, without necessarily agreeing with them.

I was struck several years ago by this comment byMichael Horton:

“At the risk of hyperbole, one wonders today what would be more dangerous in some Evangelical gatherings: disagreeing with someone over the doctrine of the Incarnation or disagreeing with Rush Limbaugh.”

(From Beyond Culture Wars, pg 18)

Sadly, I think the emphasis of the Religious Right, for whatever good may have been done, has had this effect on many conservatives.

Today is Super Tuesday. And now that I got all that off my chest, it’s time for me to go vote.  I have been wrestling with this for several weeks, and made my decision a few weeks ago.  But I’ll refrain from  naming my candidate.  I’ll cast my vote and pray…

“Lord, Have Mercy on Us!”