The Cross and the Sword
Even though my beliefs are orthodox (and somewhat conservative, if defined properly), I find myself less and less comfortable with the Evangelical world. In America this has come to mean one way to vote, one nation to defend. It tends to see all truth as CLEAR and OBVIOUS to anyone with a brain. It shuns doubt, mystery, and nuance.
Maybe others will find this article from the NY Times stimulating.
It begins:
MAPLEWOOD, Minn. — Like most pastors who lead thriving evangelical megachurches, the Rev. Gregory A. Boyd was asked frequently to give his blessing — and the church’s — to conservative political candidates and causes.
The requests came from church members and visitors alike: Would he please announce a rally against gay marriage during services? Would he introduce a politician from the pulpit? Could members set up a table in the lobby promoting their anti-abortion work? Would the church distribute “voters’ guides” that all but endorsed Republican candidates? And with the country at war, please couldn’t the church hang an American flag in the sanctuary?
After refusing each time, Mr. Boyd finally became fed up, he said. Before the last presidential election, he preached six sermons called “The Cross and the Sword” in which he said the church should steer clear of politics, give up moralizing on sexual issues, stop claiming the United States as a “Christian nation” and stop glorifying American military campaigns.
“When the church wins the culture wars, it inevitably loses,” Mr. Boyd preached. “When it conquers the world, it becomes the world. When you put your trust in the sword, you lose the cross.”
Mr. Boyd says he is no liberal. He is opposed to abortion and thinks homosexuality is not God’s ideal. The response from his congregation at Woodland Hills Church here in suburban St. Paul — packed mostly with politically and theologically conservative, middle-class evangelicals — was passionate. Some members walked out of a sermon and never returned. By the time the dust had settled, Woodland Hills, which Mr. Boyd founded in 1992, had lost about 1,000 of its 5,000 members.
But there were also congregants who thanked Mr. Boyd, telling him they were moved to tears to hear him voice concerns they had been too afraid to share.
For more, follow the link.
- – - -
Who is Agnieszka Tennant — and will we get to read more from her? Her article entitled “What (Not All) Women Want” in the current issue of Christianity Today is phenomenal. (I can’t find it online to provide a link.)
She responds to the book Captivating by John and Stasi Eldredge. Here are a few of her words:
The gist of Captivating is this: “Every woman longs for three things: to be swept up into a romance, to play an irreplaceable role in a great adventure, and to be the Beauty of the story.” I used to want such things — when I was a girl who didn’t understand how her womanizing father messed up her heart and when I fed my imagination with soft heart-porn like Pretty Woman. But doesn’t there come a time when we must grow out of the kind of self-regard that was cute when we were girls?
What do I long for? To trust God always, no matter what happens. That’s my trembling prayer.
And this: To figure out why, in a country as filled with devout churchgoers as my motherland, Poland, corruption is much more prominent and insidious than in the reputed atheistic countries of Europe. That’s why I’m going to grad school this fall. I want to do my little part to fight a battle against corruption. It will be an adventure. (But wait: Does this kind of talk make me sound like a man, since “in the heart of every man is a deserate desire for a battle to fight, an adventure to live, and a beauty to rescue” — and since intellectual curiosity doesn’t seem to mark a truly Captivating woman?)
I may not be an Eldredge kind of lady, but I know beauty when I see it. And the most regrettable failure of Captivating is its tame idea of beauty. “Beauty is core to a woman — who she is and what she longs to be,” Stasi Eldredge writes. “Beauty is what the world longs to experience from a woman.” She gives examples: “Pioneer women brought china teacups into the wilderness, and I bring a pretty tablecloth to eat on when my family camps. We wear perfume, paint our toenails, color our hair, and pierce our ears, all in an effort to be ever more beautiful.” Sure. But there’s so much more.
Beauty draws blood to the heart and speeds up the pulse; sometimes it evokes repentance. I wish more Christians were comfortable with its pull. Too often, beauty raptures us so forcibly that we fear it will lead to temptation. So we avert our eyes. What if we turned our ecstasy into worship? . . .
True beauty is precarious, unbound.
It cannot be confined to pre-approved tastes or to one gender. It is wild at heart. Like Christ. And like the complicated men and women who follow him . . . .
I love that commentor Chris believes Belinda’s experience is singular and an exception. I’m glad your church family does not struggle with this, but I’m afraid that in some parts of the county. . .your experience is the exception. Many churches are speaking openly from their pulpits about the need to support mainly Republican ideals and to fully support the war efforts in Iraq (and elsewhere) because we are Christians. Many other churches are working hard to strike a balance between appropriate public commentary and prayers on these subjects without appearing to condone a specific political side, as well. Some of us attend diverse churches with a wide spread of opinions and age groups, and it can be a difficult dance to both honor God with unflinching truth and be attentive to the sensibilities of a less open-minded brother at the same time.
Please don’t take that incorrectly. . .I’m not suggesting churches give in to policitically safe rhetoric, but stomping all over a brother’s traditional, conservative views with harsh anti-political attitudes doesn’t help him love God any more either. Some Christians in America have lived their whole, long lives being taught that Christianity was directly tied to a specific political party and its ideals. Realizing that leadership and teaching mistake now does not give us the right to judge harshly against those who are sticking to what they grew up believing was true.
I was directed by one of my elders from the pulpit just a month or so ago to call my senators and tell them how they should vote for the Gay Marriage ban vote coming up. I was told that this gay marriage was a horrible issue and that America needed to get back on track as a “Christian Nation.” This was a large church of Christ (1500 members) in a church of Christ university town.
The republican agenda is alive and thriving in the pulpits of Alabama!
T. Sherwood, I had my friend by the name of Etheredge on the brain. Didn’t even notice until you pointed it out.
I have read most of “Wild at Heart”, excerpts from other Eldredge books, and read a number of interviews with him. I know enough to be familiar with his ethos as it pertains to gender roles, and this editorial backed up my prior knowledge. On the other hand, he’s never met me, so he hasn’t the slightest idea what THIS woman wants.
I shudder to think of a young couple who ties themselves in knots trying to fit (or waits for a partner to fit) these roles when it’s not necessarily how God created them as personalities. Don’t scoff; I’ve seen it happen.
Just found your blog–quite good and a very interesting read. Thanks for speaking out on matters of truth. About Eldridge’s books, I’ve read a couple, and won’t buy anymore. His theology bothers me. I’m tired of books that elevate the needs of man over a growing relationship with Christ. The gist of Captivating doesn’t appeal to me at all. Christ’s love has already swept me away!
Laura, Again, as I said earlier, I do not think this is a how-to book for everyone. I didn’t agree with everything that was written, but as I said earlier it prompted me to dig deeper. There are a number of writers out there that write things that I agree with, that I disagree with, and then there are other things that make me think deeper. That is the point I was making. And I was only responding to your post that you hadn’t even read the book.
It is sort of like the DaVinci Code, which is probably another blog that I missed and don’t want to get into. Or anything else for that matter, just because so-and-so doesn’t like it, or him, or that idea doesn’t necessarily mean you won’t. Read the book, watch the movie, meet the person, be informed. Take it or leave it. But to make another person feel badly because they didn’t like it or did is very much the same as the other topic of this post, Republican or Democrat?
I have read John Eldredge’s books, some of them several times. They have been a huge help in my life and have brought me much closer to God than before. Upon reading Captivating I had no idea if it was true so I asked my wife and she agreed in large part with the book. So it was good for her. I liked Wild at Heart but I did not think it fit my personality that well. I do know people it fits to a tee. Someone mentioned “Blue Like Jazz”. My wife and daughter liked the book but it did nothing for me. I guess what I am saying is that I do not think one can make blanket statements about books and assume it is true for everybody. Secondly there is “chaff” in about every book one must separate from the wheat.
I find it interesting that people will extend the scholarly benefit of the doubt to Someone who says, “unless you hate your father and mother, you cannot be my disciple,” and then turn around and fail to see the hyperbolic nature of the statement, “every woman longs to be…”
Read _Captivating_ in its entirety and with a generous heart (Stasi and John are, after all, your brother and sister in Christ) before you rush to pious conclusions about what the Eldredges may or may not be saying. One can criticize _Captivating_ for a number of reasons and on a number of levels, but a failure to understand the uniqueness of each woman is not one of them. If all that Stasi and John have accomplished with _Captivating_ is to remind our utilitarian, results-oriented, success-obsessed culture of the essentiality of beauty to an understanding of God and the worship of God (and, by extension, Satan’s obsession with destroying it), they will have done us a great favor.
qb
Mike (and others),
Ever read any of the “Free in Christ” series by Cecil Hook’s books? They’re all free and online at http://www.freedomsring.org under “Books”. Some of my favorite ideas from him:
“Unity does not mean conformity”
“In Romans 14 and elsewhere Paul called for consideration of persons with scruples about meats, days, and circumcision, yet he did not permit them to bind diet, days, or circumcision. We must not continue to allow contentious people to limit Christian liberty by binding their convictions.” (his chapter on “The Remaining Restriction for Women” in the “Free to Accept” book is Awesome!)
“We in the CofC have emphsized study of the scriptures…becoming lawyers of the word…evaluating legal requirments” I would say lawyers indeed.
I’m not always so sure that a deeper reading of the scripture gets you anymore understanding of God. The first century believers didn’t have all the scriptures, and yet they were considered disciples? Right?
As I reread this today I couldn’t help but think how God gives life and takes away. I have always been taught a child, any child is a precious gift of God. If one political party is screeming for abortion rights and at the same time tells me an animal is more precious than a human child, well I don’t go along with that.
Now I had a son in the Army, if that same political group says soldiers are Satan and thay should die, well, I don’t go along with that either. I don’t need anyone to tell me what my own ears hear. The Bible also tells me if I have ears to hear, let them hear. I do.
I HAVE read Captivating and Wild at Heart. I love to read and see how others discern the Spirit’s leading. I have also heard MANY men and women speak of how blessed they have been by both of those books. Wild at Heart was just interesting for me being a woman and Captivating was good, but had some “over the top” parts for me. There was a particular part that God clearly used to help me work through a subtle stronghold in my life. That is huge. I find that even if a book isn’t my favorite, there is usually SOMETHING that I can take from it.
Gabe,
I have read much of Cecil Hook’s website. The guy is amazing. He really has a lot to say that can break people free from legalism.
Mike,
You were my preacher in Searcy during my most formative years. Tonight, out of late night curiosity, I did a google search for your name and found this site. I was amazed to see that you posted about this article. I read it the other day myself and sent it to my sister, who’s husband, Jim Bob, is a minister at our local non-denominational church.
Thank you for helping to open the mind of young person many years ago. I kept the outlines of your sermons, written by me in elementary and jr high, for many years, and I will keep the ideas they inspired for the rest of my life.
Dean Priest Jr – Conway, AR
Brother Mike…Of the relatively few blog sites that I read, yours appears in nearly everyone’s link site, so I decided to “check in”, and I’m so glad I did, having read a great deal of your published works. As I read the article about politics in our churches, a familiar phrase taught to me in high school, no less, 45 years ago, kept buzzing in my head. As I read the comments to this entry, I was delighted to actually see it in print by J Pierpont. The phrase was “legislate morality”. The teacher of my younger years stated that history has shown us over and over again that you just can’t “legislate morality”. (I learn a great deal from blg comments as well) What my teacher didn’t say, however, is that morality has to come from within the heart, as the commenter said.
Quite frankly, I am getting so weary of all the well-meaning ultra-conservative “spam” e-mails I receive…some of them spin history around so blatantly to prove their point that I have even resorted to replying to the sender, informing them that just because I am a Christian who in intensely patriotic, who has a fond interest in history, and who is also a registered Democrat, it does NOT mean that I don’t support our troops, wherever they are, or that I follow the party line, whether it be Republican or Democrat or Libertarian. They are trying to compare apples to oranges! I’ve even expressed that today it seems people “follow” a political line like hysterical lemmings, without any thought or study of the issues. The lack of critical thinking skills is so obvious in today’s world . ALL Christians should vote responsibly…they should be informed with no blinders on. This nation needs to stop this polarization, blind loyalty, and extremism in politics in the name of Christ, and we, as Christians, should look more closely at what Christ really taught, as we exercise our privilege and responsibility to vote. It’s all about loving each other and doing what is good for all, and not labeling or judging each other. We’ve already observed the relationship of corporate greed and politics. How much of this has filtered down to the actions of professed Christians? What does the Bible teach us about greed? No, we do not need politics in the pulpit, but we sure do need to hear more about the ultimate message of Christ, to do more as Christ asked us to do, and to BE more Christ-like rather than keep our focus on “liberalism” or “conservatism”.
Of note…one of my political “heroes” was a Christian. He was one of the most humble, kind, selfless, and respected individuals I have ever had the joy of knowing, and was a member of the House of Representatives for many, many years…a voice of reason and wisdom. He was a member of the CofC. I can’t even remember what “party” he was affiliated with…all I know is that he was a Christian in it’s truest form. If there were more people like him in our nation’s leadership, I don’t think we would be having all the problems we have today.
The author of this article in CT just e-mailed me to tell me that her full article is now available online. You can find it here: http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2006/008/25.60.html
Dean – Would love to know how your dad is doing. He was a very important person in my life during those seven years of preaching in Searcy.
Google is the best search engine
I must have missed this post and I’m very sorry to have. My ex-boyfriend actually gave me the book Captivating. (No, that’s not why I broke up with him, but I can’t say it helped the situation…)
John Eldridge presents a view of men and women that I personally believe is endlessly damaging. If you’re not “wild at heart,” you’re not a man and if you’re not “captivating,” you’re no woman.
Meh. John Eldridge just makes excuses for people to be as shallow and surface-loving as the rest of the world — only he looks to the victorian world rather than the Bible.
Women, in my experience (and my life), want what everyone wants: to be valued for who they are. Not what they look like, what they can do, whom they can please. We want recognition of our humanity and to be treated with respect and compassion.
But, well, I guess its all moot. This is a 2 year old post and I’m singing the same old song I always have.
Hrm. I promise not to comment on every old post that makes me think. Maybe.