by Steve | Nov 29, 1995 | Archive - 1995
Archive: Too Much Arrival—Not Enough Survival
By Duffy Robbins
The Christian life is a marathon. It is not about speed; it is about distance. It’s not about how fast our kids grow; it’s about how far our kids grow. If we want to nurture in our students a faith that does not fail, we need to focus on strategies that encourage survival, not just arrival.
In the last issue of Good News, we discussed the problem of what we called “Tarzan Christianity“—an up-and-down Christian commitment that survives only by swinging from one “tree top” experience to the next. It is a discipleship that looks great in the high times, but then fades in the jungle. Unfortunately, it is also a virus of anemic Christianity that seems to thrive in strong, active youth groups.
Our intention in the next several issues of Good News is to discuss some of the errors of imbalance that allow Tarzan Christianity to breed within our youth groups. Without question, the most common error is rooted in an imbalance between outreach and nurture—an approach that focuses too much on arrival, and not enough on survival.
Our mandate as youth workers is to make disciples (cf. Matthew 28:19, II Timothy 2:2). Nowhere in Scripture are we called to make Christians. Only God can make Christians. Only disciples can make disciples. That is not to say that outreach is unimportant. Obviously, we are commanded to be witnesses for Jesus (Acts 1:8). Those who pit discipleship against evangelism as opposing goals do not understand that evangelism is the first stage in the process of discipleship. No one has ever been discipled who was not first evangelized.
I have met “discipleship snobs” who talk about evangelism and outreach as if it were a lower life-form of youth ministry. “I don’t have time to mess around with kids who aren’t interested in doing something radical for Jesus! I didn’t get into the ministry so I could do fun and games.”
Standing on the beach that day, Jesus looked squarely into Peter’s eyes and said, “from now on you will catch men” (Luke 5:10). And yet, as a fisherman, Peter knew the actual joy of hauling in the net was only part of the job. There were nets to mend and nets to wash, bait to set, and boats to repair; and after all that, long nights on the boat waiting for the fish to come.
Imagine Peter complaining that he was through with “all-nighters,” that he had more important things to do than sit in a boat and wait for fish to come, that this business of fishing is too important to waste time with “fun and games.”
It takes two things to catch fish: bait and patience. Whether we like it or not, fishing for men will always involve both (and it may occasionally require an all-nighter or two). That’s the evangelistic task.
On the other hand, no fisherman in his right mind continues to catch fish without giving some thought to how he will preserve them and keep them fresh. Otherwise, at the end of the day, all he has to show for his labor is a big boat filled with smelly, dead fish. Big catch. Big deal.
The problem is that catching fish is more exhilarating than scaling them, cleaning them, and preserving them. Evangelism generates greater excitement and bigger numbers than discipleship and nurture.
There is always more excitement in the arrival than there is in survival. There are hugs and kisses and animated conversations when the guests first arrive. Who wouldn’t want to focus their ministry on that end of the equation?
But then, after a few days of sharing the bathroom and cleaning up someone else’s mess, we begin the mundane work of life in a shared community. That’s not quite as exhilarating.
Storming the beachhead is exciting. Fighting it out in the trenches to maintain your ground—that’s just hard work.
Witnessing Lazarus’ raising from the dead. That’s a miracle. Helping Lazarus to strip away his grave clothes after four days of death. That’s just gross, smelly work.
So much of our youth ministry effort is focused on helping kids to “become Christians” that we have lost sight of our central God-given mandate. We get all excited just because a large number of students show up, but Scripture has always made it clear that our task is to help them spiritually to grow up. There are too many youth groups that are ten miles wide and one foot deep.
Our task in youth ministry is not just helping kids become Christians; it’s helping kids be the Christians they’ve become. There is nothing wrong with cook-outs, ski trips, movie nights and bowling parties that draw a big crowd. But when it’s all said and done, we dare not focus so much on getting kids to arrive that we neglect the hard, less glamorous work of helping them to survive.
by Steve | Nov 29, 1995 | Archive - 1995
Archive: Precious Extract
The customer entered the pet store looking for bird to take home. There before him perched two parrots. They were identical in size and color, yet one bird had a list price of $75 while the other boasted a $150 tag. Looking to the proprietor, the buyer said: “What makes the parrot in this cage double the price of the other?” “Very simple,” retorted the store owner. “The $150 bird knows what he’s talking about!”
To make a positive impact in our culture we need to be folks who know what we’re talking about. The question is “how.” Paul declares in II Timothy 3:16 that the Bible is alive and useful. In it God reveals himself and teaches us his standard. The Bible shows us how we fall short, sets us on the mark again, and trains us for everyday living. Why? “… so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work” (verse 17).
We are people of God who want to be about the work of being in the world but not of it. That requires discernment. Samuel Johnson is credited with saying that expert discernment is “the power to tell the good from the bad, and the genuine from the counterfeit; and to prefer the good and genuine to the bad and the counterfeit.”
Discernment is scary. It forces a choice; and options require a standard. I submit that the only true truth can come from Jesus—the way, the truth and the life (John 14:6). What is good, therefore, is what God says is good. Doesn’t it make sense, then, that the book he wrote should be the gauge for discernment in living?
Jeremiah 15:19 says “If you return, then I will restore you; before me you will stand. And, if you extract the precious from the worthless, you will become my spokesman.” Discernment is precious extract; more special than the extract that makes our holiday cookies taste great. The verse goes on to say: “They for their part, may turn to you; but as for you, you must not turn to them.” It’s imperative that God’s people do not turn to the world for the standard of discernment, but to God and his Word.
In his book, A Call To Discernment, Jay Adams sees the Word of God like a screen. That mesh allows fresh air in and keeps insects out. The Bible, too, is a grid—the standard by which all else can be judged. The United Methodist Book of Discipline agrees. While reason, tradition, and experience are helpful, Scripture is primary.
What, then, should be our relationship with the Word? Each verse of Scripture prompts the gamut of responses—from contempt to control—of our behavior. It has been said that “men don’t usually reject the Bible because it contradicts itself, but because it contradicts them.” Romans 2:13 says, “… it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God’s sight, but it is those who obey the law …”
For instance, suppose I have a neighbor who strews his garbage on my front lawn every collection day. God’s Word tells me to love my neighbor, but I’d like to throw the trash back at him. Conflict occurs. Will I be in contempt of the lifegiving Word? I can study about blessing those who persecute me in Sunday school, but will I let it control me on Monday as I face coffee grounds and banana peels on my grass? If I am truly commissioned by the Word, then, not only will I clean up the trash, but I’ll bake a cake to share with those next door.
If we desire to be used of God in our land, we will need to be people of the Word—proficient in extracting the precious from the worthless. FBI agents are trained in just such a manner. To detect counterfeit bills they study not the imitation but real currency. Being so accustomed to the true version, phony bills are easily spotted. To be like the sons of Issachar, “… men who understood the times, with knowledge of what Israel should do …” (I Chronicles 12:32), we will need to be discerning. We need to use the roadmap God gives us for the journey. We must not only get a grip on the Bible, but allow it to get a grip on us.
We would do well to heed Moses’ challenge in Deuteronomy 32:46-47. “Take to heart all the words I have solemnly declared to you this day, so that you may command your children to obey carefully all the words of this law. They are not just idle words for you—they are your life.”
This is your life! What will you do with it?
by Steve | Nov 20, 1995 | Archive - 1995
Archive: Generational reconciliation modeled at Aldersgate ’95
Lively preaching and vibrant praise to God have always been hallmarks of United Methodism’s annual conference on the Holy Spirit, known as Aldersgate. This year’s early-August event was no exception, as more than 1,500 United Methodists gathered in Orlando, Florida to enthusiastically worship God with uplifted hands and spirited music, while some even danced in the aisles.
Prayers and Scriptures were integral parts of the lessons and sermons. Days began with 6:30 a.m. prayer and concluded with an invitation at the end of each evening worship service. Prayer teams ministered to the sick, anointing them with oil. Other conference participants sought a fresh touch from the Holy Spirit.
A major highlight during the final evening session was a time set aside for generational reconciliation between those born after 1961—sometimes known as Generation X—and those born before that date. The reconciliation exercise was led by Beth Brown, youth pastor at First UM Church in Abilene, Texas. Mischaracterizations and excessively negative stereotypes about Generation X are held by both the secular media and the church, she said.
Brown called Generation X the “most-aborted generation” and compared it to the generations of Moses and Jesus—two generations that experienced both a concentrated effort to kill infants and a powerful move of God. “Revival is coming,” Brown announced, “and it is coming through Generation X.”
“It is time that we break some of the curses that have been spoken over Generation X,” Brown said. “As a church we have got to start blessing Generation X and releasing them to carry the torch.” She called the interdependence and reconciliation of generations the “true Methodist connectional system.”
“I believe God is doing something powerful and amazing,” said Gary Moore, executive director of Aldersgate Renewal Ministries. He reminded the conference of Nehemiah’s approach to the city of Jerusalem when he found its “walls broken down and its gates burned.” The prophet’s response was to weep over the city, fast, and repent—both for his own generation and for the sins of his forefathers.
“God always moves when there is repentance,” said Moore. “We have cut off their hope, and the only way to turn that around is to bless and encourage, and to say: ‘You’ve got a destiny and we believe in you.”‘
With members of Generation X facing the audience in front of the stage, Moore instructed members of previous generations to leave their seats and stand toe-to-toe with the young generation. Both groups were led in prayers of repentance to God and one another.
Moore instructed the older generations in praying to “break the curse that is over Generation X” and then to “speak words of blessing” over the young people. The reaction by participants was emotional and often tearful.
“I think the reconciliation time between generations opened doors in the heavenlies, releasing Generation X to fulfill their destiny,” Brown told Good News. “Reconciliation has been on the heart of the Father,” she said. “I pray what we experienced in Orlando will be the beginning of many generational reconciliation services. The Church can no longer afford to ignore Generation X.”
The annual Aldersgate gathering attempts to educate the UM Church on the work of the Holy Spirit in the world today, provide an encouraging environment for the use of spiritual gifts, and promote spiritual renewal in the denomination. The event—which has become United Methodism’s largest annual gathering—is sponsored by Aldersgate Renewal Ministries (ARM), an affiliate of the denomination’s Board of Discipleship (the formal name is United Methodist Renewal Services Fellowship).
“The Holy Spirit is totally and utterly sovereign,” said conference speaker Dr. William J. Abraham, theology professor at Perkins School of Theology in Dallas. “We must not dictate how and where to work.” Much of Abraham’s presentation examined the often mysterious nature of the Holy Spirit’s ministry, and the historic understanding of the relationship of the Holy Spirit to the Trinity. His sermon also explored the role of the Holy Spirit in evangelism, sanctification, suffering, and perseverance.
“The Holy Spirit will surprise us,” Abraham said. “The power is palpable.” It is not uncommon for physical phenomena to accompany a work of the Holy Spirit, he reminded the conference. Often times the power will be felt, he said, “and we should relax about it.”
Other keynote speakers included the Rev. Peter Lord, senior minister of Park Avenue Baptist Church in Titusville, Florida; and Lee Ann Williamson, music evangelist with “Grace & Gladness Ministry,” based in Starkville, Mississippi.
Aldersgate offered more than 40 workshops dealing with subjects such as prayer, prophecy, the worldwide charismatic revival, godly relationships, worship, UM doctrine and church renewal, missions, and healing.
In 1996, the 18th annual conference on the Holy Spirit will be held in Nashville, Tennessee.
by Steve | Nov 12, 1995 | Archive - 1995
Archive: Vital Methodism and the fire of God
While recently discussing the preliminary findings of a four-year study of United Methodism and American culture, the Rev. Dennis M. Campbell, dean of the Duke University Divinity School, touched upon the theme of our denominational identity crisis. He believes that the answer to our lack of theological identity is not to turn back to some imagined earlier time of doctrinal agreement.
“Our research shows that no such time ever existed in Methodism,” he reported. “It is simply not the case that growth and vitality were the result of uniform thinking and practice.”
So, how did growth and vitality occur within Methodism? Readers of early Methodist history will know that the denomination exploded because the countryside was covered with young circuit riding preachers who pursued their calling with dogged zeal and enthusiasm. They were filled with the fire of the Holy Spirit and anointed to preach the gospel with passion. One of them referred to it as an irresistible “Holy ‘knock-em-down’ power.”
While itinerating in the 1780s, Benjamin Abbott discovered that some feared to sit too near him, “having been informed that the people on the circuit fell like dead men” when he preached. When one man in Delaware invited Thomas Smith to preach at his home on New Year’s day 1801, this is what followed: “At the very commencement of the meeting the Spirit of the Lord came as a rushing, mighty wind—the people fell before it, and lay in heaps all over the floor. The work continued all night, nor did it stop in the morning, but continued for thirteen days and nights without interruption; some coming, some going, so that the meeting was kept up day and night.”
Growth and vitality occurred because the Spirit of the Lord fell on Methodist meetings. Furthermore, we expected God’s mighty presence.
“Between 1770 and 1820, American Methodists achieved a virtual miracle of growth,” reports historian John H. Wigger, “rising from fewer than 1,000 members to more than 250,000.” Methodism blazed through American society. “In 1775, fewer than one out of every 800 Americans was a Methodist; by 1812, Methodists numbered one out of every 36 Americans,” says Wigger.
The key to this explosion was the faith and spirit of the circuit riders. They were willing to go anywhere and do anything for the God who so graciously loved and redeemed them. These early Methodists were radically saved.
Peter Cartwright (1785-1872) sought the Lord with diligence and fervor. He attended a meeting where the “power of God was wonderfully displayed” and “Christians shouted aloud for joy.” He wrote: “To this meeting I repaired—a guilty, wretched sinner. On the Saturday evening, I went with weeping multitudes and bowed before the stand and earnestly prayed for mercy. In the midst of a solemn struggle of soul, an impression was made on my mind, as though a voice said to me, ‘Thy sins are all forgiven thee.’ Divine light flashed all around me, unspeakable joy sprung up in my soul.
“I rose to my feet, opened my eyes, and it really seemed as if I was in heaven—the trees, the leaves on them, and everything, I really thought, were praising God. My mother raised the shout, my Christian friends crowded around me and joined me in praising God. And though I have been since then, in many instances, unfaithful, yet I have never, for one moment, doubted that the Lord did, then and there, forgive my sins and give me religion.”
His religion was complete redemption.
Early Methodism was also shouting Methodism. We used to be a noisy bunch, interrupting our preachers with “Praise the Lord,” “Hallelujah,” and “Amen.” One observer of early Methodist camp meetings reported that the “periodical Amens dispossess demons, storm heaven, shut the gates of hell, and drive Satan from the camp.”
We used to be excited about our faith in the Lord. Today, we are under the mistaken impression that somberness is next to godliness. Too often we all prefer the stiff-upper-lip version of worship to the extravagant praise that David offered as he danced before the Lord. Our legitimate fear of emotionalism has too often quenched our ability to allow the Spirit of the Lord to genuinely touch our emotions. We don’t need hype, but we do need more of the Holy Spirit. Our services need not be rodeos, but they should be celebrations.
One thing is for certain, the early Methodist explosion cannot be attributed to the rise of theological liberalism, Boston Personalism, process theology, or any other religious fad. The growth and vitality of Methodism occurred because our preachers were radically saved, the Spirit of God fell on our meetings, and we were filled with Holy Spirit excitement about Jesus. A contemporary revival of all three factors would do wonders for our identity crisis.
by Steve | Nov 4, 1995 | Archive - 1995
Archive: “By Water and the Spirit”—Understanding Baptism
The new baptism statement needs further study before it becomes the doctrine and practice of the church. At this point in time too many questions remain unanswered. The church should avoid the disaster of 1972 when the General Conference made a hasty decision on church structure and prepared a doctrinal statement.
The new structure gave us unwieldy boards and agencies and an unworkable “Council on Ministries.” The doctrinal statement imposed upon the church theological “pluralism,” the conciliar principle, the doctrinal standards as “landmark” (and thus not fully authoritative) statements, and the quadrilateral (a four-legged stool with uneven legs). We are still burdened with the structure, though a later General Conference was able finally to undo the damage of a doctrinal statement that was passed without careful examination.
The church ought not change its theology and way of doing things without a much more careful consideration of the implications of what is being proposed. That’s why the baptism statement needs more time.
Specifically, the General Conference should raise questions about:
1. The amount of time required between distribution of the final draft of the baptism statement and the beginning of General Conference. The baptism statement has undergone at least four revisions. After the last meeting of the study committee, the chairperson said that the final paper is “significantly different” from earlier drafts. There is enough difference between the revisions that one should legitimately ask, “What is it, really, that is being presented?” A major revision was made, with a new writer, since the document was presented to the General Conference in 1992 and presumably studied by the churches. It would be a travesty if the final document did not reach the delegates until after the deadline to submit petitions for amendment (December 15, 1995). One would wonder if the last-minute presentation of the document is a strategy to inhibit debate. Despite claims to the contrary, this statement has not yet been studied or understood by the church.
2. The Disciplinary changes that will be required since our understandings of baptism, church membership, and salvation are being radically revised. For example, one consistent theme throughout the statement’s revisions is its clearly stated objective that the basis of church membership is to be changed. According to the new baptism statement, persons will no longer be made church members by profession of faith in Jesus Christ, but by baptism. Is the church so quickly willing to jettison 200 years of American church belief and practice without carefully considering how this changes the nature of United Methodism?
Since the teaching that salvation and church membership is dependent not upon baptism but upon faith in Christ, and since this teaching is reflected in a number of places in our present Book of Discipline, should we not know exactly how radically our Discipline will need to be changed? It is certain, for example, that paragraphs 208 through 243 will need major revision.
3. How this fits into the beliefs and practices of United Methodists in central conferences and other Methodist bodies around the world. Discussions on the baptism statement to this point have been embarrassingly parochial. None of the previous drafts were translated into Spanish, or Korean, or any other language. The final draft has not even been seen by Americans, let alone any of the central conferences. Is it fair to impose on the church in Zaire this American parochialism? The baptism beliefs and practices in our world-wide denomination vary greatly. Those variations need to be treated with sensitivity. Do we leave ourselves open to the charge of cultural and theological imperialism?
4. Practical and logistics problems. Treating baptized persons as church members, which is without precedent in American Methodism, can lead only to confusion. What about infants baptized in one church whose parents attend elsewhere? What about persons baptized away from the church setting, at camps or retreats, for example?
If there is another category of membership (such as professed/confirmed members) in addition to baptized members, and if apportionments are based not on “members” but on “professed/confirmed members” can we believe that the “baptized members” roll will be kept with any seriousness? Since rebaptism is being disallowed, what will constitute a valid baptism in the first place (what about baptism in the name of a different god, such as Creator, Redeemer, Sustainer)? How will baptized, but inactive, members be removed from the roll?
General Conference delegates have not distinguished themselves for their careful theological reflection. It would be a shame if the baptism statement is passed without a great deal more serious consideration.
by Steve | Nov 3, 1995 | Archive - 1995
Archive: Putting an end to the Catholic bashing!
My boyhood years during the 1940s were spent in a small town in southwestern Minnesota. That idyllic community had many virtues, but religious tolerance and ecumenism were not among them. The virus of anti-Catholicism was as pervasive as polio. Unlike polio, however, hating Catholics was popular and widely supported.
Catholics were second-class citizens, not quite fully American. They were supposed to have a secret plan to subvert cherished American ideals and undermine American institutions by means of parochial schools. The board of our public school was entirely Protestant and the superintendent was on notice to refrain from hiring more than a token number of Catholics.
“Teachers, especially coaches, get very close to students,” reflected one board member. “We don’t want any proselytizing.” Protestants inwardly rejoiced when a succession of priests were unsuccessful in raising money to build a parochial school. They breathed a sigh of relief when the inadequate funds went to refurbish a bingo parlor. “How characteristically Catholic,” mused a Baptist pastor.
Fifty years ago we called Catholics “mackerel snappers” and nuns “penguins.” There were lurid tales of lascivious sex between priests and imprisoned sisters behind monastery walls. The pope was called the anti-Christ by a number of preachers.
Those were the days before John F. Kennedy. His election in 1960 was supposed to have symbolized the final acceptance of Catholics as full-fledged citizens. In Boston, his ancestors had seen signs, “No Catholics or Dogs Need Apply.” Mobs had burned monasteries and rectories when Nativism and the Know Nothing Party rode high in the saddle. During the Civil War WASPs (White Anglo-Saxon Protestants) subject to the draft paid Catholic immigrants $120 to wear the Union blue in their stead. Tens of thousands of Catholic proletarians died to preserve the nation and free the slaves.
But Kennedy’s election proved, said most political scientists, that this form of religious bigotry was now finally over. Tragically, recent events have proved them wrong:
- In Boston, members of the militant Queer Nation have thrown condoms and shouted obscenities at newly ordained Catholic priests and their families.
- In Los Angeles, nine Catholic churches have experienced a wave of anti-Catholic hate crimes and have been vandalized with graffiti, painted swastikas, and smashed and decapitated statues.
- At St. Patrick’s Cathedral in New York City, demonstrators routinely desecrate the Mass by shouting protests and holding lewd parodies of the Catholic liturgy.
- During “Saturday Night Live,” millions of viewers witnessed singer Sinead O’Connor tearing up a picture of Pope John Paul II.
As a Protestant religion professor, I am deeply troubled that the media has failed to come to the defense of the Catholic Church. If such attacks were directed against an African-American denomination, an Islamic mosque, or Native American rituals, outrage by the media, the academy, and the opinion makers would be fortissimo. When the Pope recently visited Denver the media again gave the back of its hand to Catholics. It focused on those who disagree with established Church doctrine, such as Catholic feminists, homosexuals, and those who no longer participate in the church.
When a gay man, infected with HIV, suddenly recovered a “repressed memory” after 20 years and said that Chicago’s Cardinal Joseph Bernardin sexually abused him, why did the media give knee jerk credence to his charges? The accusation has now been withdrawn but a sterling character has been defamed and sullied. Meanwhile, both the California and Minnesota Boards of Medical Examiners are bringing charges against psychologists and psychiatrists who have been charged with injecting “repressed memories” of sexual abuse in their adolescent clients. The Catholic Church, it seems, has “deep pockets” for unethical counselors and their clients.
Catholic bashing makes good copy, for there is a deep and visceral hatred of Catholicism among the media elite and opinion makers. To be sure, at times their church officials have not properly handled mentally and sexually sick priests. But then, has not this also been true of the legal, the medical, and the Protestant church ad judicatories? Where in the media is fairness, compassion, and understanding?
Hilton Kramer, a former New York Times reporter, states that “the bias that the media has against Catholics has no rival anywhere in the population.” When Khalid Abdul Muhammad, a disciple of the Nation of Islam’s Louis Farrakhan, delivered his infamous Kean College attack against Jews, Catholics, Nazis, whites, and homosexuals, the Times strongly criticized the speech, but neglected to mention the tirade against Catholicism. Indeed, Mr. Muhammad spent more time blasting Catholics than he did homosexuals. The following is a small sample of his speech:
“Go to the Vatican in Rome when the old no-good Pope—you know that cracker, somebody need to raise that dress up and see what’s really under there—when the old Pope was shot, he didn’t pray in front of no white Mary.”
Why didn’t the New York Times mention the attack on the Pope? Perhaps this is more than callous indifference to Catholic bashing. “Put plainly,” comments William A. Donohue, president of the Catholic League For Religious And Civil Rights, “if the politically correct police have assigned a victimizer status to the Catholic Church, then the Church cannot readily be transformed into a victim.”
Perhaps the issue is abortion. Polls indicate that those in the media are 98 percent “pro choice.” Journalists find it hard to be objective about an issue they feel passionately about. Simply put, their fault is ethical reductionism. Are there not many issues—poverty, health care, race, unemployment, peace—where the church is on the side of the angels? Catholic parochial schools are one of the few bright lights of our urban ghettos—with minority children struggling to enroll.
Among many of my liberal friends, it is fashionable to bash Catholicism. It is their form of anti-Semitism. The very existence of the Catholic Church offends them. “How can people believe that stuff” is their common mantra. Of course, as a Protestant, I see Catholic doctrines with which I disagree.
Nevertheless, I am pleased that the Catholic Church is strikingly countercultural. It holds to a moral hierarchy in spite of the moral rot, drift, and pathology that stalks our land. A “go-with-the-flow” morality is no morality worthy of a name. Instead, Catholic moral universals are an anchor of comfort and guidance to millions in a way that “feel-good” situationalism, relativism, and nihilism do not provide.
Unlike mainline Protestantism, evangelical Protestantism is forging common bonds with Catholic social witness. Neither group can condone the increasing disrespect for life, media sensuality, public school incompetence and arrogance, statist intrusion into familial and private matters, or the diminishing of decency and civility in our public life.
Boston’s Cardinal Bernard Law has stated: “The tension between Church and culture has increased in this past decade. In the past, even those who disagreed with the Church acknowledged with respect the validity of her role to offer our society a vision of life which everyone understood was intended for the common good. That has changed. There is an evident anti-Catholic bias that manifests itself constantly. The Church’s refusal to bend her teaching to the ways of the world has escalated the attacks upon her. What once would have been veiled has become a blatant and mean-spirited prejudice.”
As a Protestant, I want Catholicism to flourish. The church has a core of teaching and tradition that has endured. It is not a weather vane that is subject to every changing moral or cultural fad. After 37 years of teaching I find that many of my Catholic students have a firm hold on life. They have been enriched—not impoverished—by their faith. There is little that is antiquarian, regressive, or bigoted in their familial or church training. They seem to have a spiritual centeredness and a moral compass that will guide them well in life.
“There are so many more reasons why I am grateful for the spiritual and moral formation given to me by my church,” commented one of my Catholic students, “that I can tolerate a few of the instances in which I disagree with its teachings.”
Liberals should embody that cardinal virtue of tolerance, and pledge themselves to make Catholic bashing as politically incorrect as antipathy toward African-Americans, Jews, Hispanics, Native Americans, and homosexuals. Moreover, they should read contemporary Catholic theology and ethics so that their data base is larger than a few hoary stories of those who left the church some time ago. Let us get beyond the paradigm of “Us v. Them” prevalent during an earlier era of bigotry in America.
Our society needs a vibrant Catholicism to help heal the terrible social pathologies of our society.
Walter W. Benjamin, Ph.D., is professor of religion emeritus at Hamline University in Minneapolis, Minnesota, where he taught for 28 years. His area of concentration is medical and business ethics in both teaching and research.
