The Burr in the Burgh

This is me delivering my in-depth sectional at the Higher Things youth conference last week in St. Louis. My topic was Christ in Fantasy Lit and Movies. The room seated 300 and we had maybe 200 or 250. The technology available was excellent. I used Powerpoint for the first time (only had a couple of goof-ups). But the techies were on the mark.

Some time ago, I wrote about a storm brewing among Connecticut Episcopalians. A handful of conservative-ish priests and their parishes objected to their bishop, Andrew Smith, participating in the consecration of an openly gay bishop in 2003. They requested to be placed under the ecclesiastical supervision of a more conservative bishop, as an alternative to being under Smith's oversight, something that Episcopal polity allows. When Smith refused to allow that, six congregations began withholding their offerings to the national church.

Well, here is what happened next. I'm here summarizing an article in the latest WORLD magazine. In March, Bishop Smith suspended the six priests. But they rejected his discipline and continued to minister to their congregations. Further, they protested Bishop Smith's oversight by asserting that he would not be welcome to preach or administer the sacraments in their parishes.

Then at 9:30 a.m. on July 13, Bishop Smith and his stormtroopers raided St. John's Episcopal Church in Bristol, Conn., the church of Rev. Mark Hansen, one of the six dissenters. They pried open Father Hansen's office door, confiscated all church records, shut down the congregation's website redirecting traffic to the diocesan site. They changed the locks on all the doors and announced to the congregation that Hansen was no longer their pastor and a Susan McCone would now be in charge. To add insult to injury, Rev. Hansen is forbidden to set foot on the church property or even to communicate with any of the church members.

Bishop Smith claimed that the dissenting priests had "abandoned the communion" when they protested against his spiritual oversight of their parishes. Now if that isn't the pot calling the kettle every shade of black.

Every 10 years, the worldwide Anglican communion holds their Lambeth Conference, a meeting of bishops which governs the church. At the last Lambeth Conference, in 1998, the bishops voted overwhelmingly that homosexual practice is "incompatible with Scripture." Add to this the fact that the Anglican primates (chief bishops) met recently and scolded the Episcopal Church USA for consecrating an openly gay bishop and placed a suspension on the entire EC-USA. If the EC-USA does not repent of its action, it may very well be booted from the Anglican communion entirely.

So let me see if I have this straight. The primate bishops of world Anglicanism condemned the consecration in which Smith participated and which Hansen protests. And the most recent meeting of the highest governing council (Lambeth) in Anglicanism declared homosexual practice to be contrary to the Scripture. These are decisions that Rev. Mark Hansen and his congregation agree with. Yet, Bishop Smith says that Hansen is the one being divisive? Woe to those who call evil good and good evil.

This just goes to prove, that in liberal Christianity, everything is tolerated...except conservatives.

Fellow blogger, Rev. Paul McCain, has posted an exceptional piece answering whether Lutherans prefer crucifixes or bare crosses. Go here for that. It is a frequent misconception that Lutherans, lumped in with Reformed churches, oppose the use of a crucifix (that is a cross with the statue of Jesus on it). Nothing could be further from the truth. Crucifixes universally adorned Lutheran altars until about 50 years ago.

I did hear a Lutheran pastor one time say that we shouldn't use the crucifix because, y'know, Jesus isn't still on the cross. This is to suggest that a bare cross somehow reflects the bodily resurrection of Jesus. But I have NEVER understood this reasoning. Rev. McCain rightly points out that the cross would have been empty whether Jesus rose from the tomb or not. I have also often noted that Christians who object to the crucifix on the grounds that Jesus is not still on the cross seem to have no trouble with nativity scenes. Is Jesus still in the manger?

I think the real problem is a malady that I have termed Romo-phobia. (This is the new favorite word of fellow Pgh blogger Ales Rarus.) Frankly, I think we should leave the matter up to Christian liberty. But my personal vote is for the crucifix as a superior means of illustrating the basis of our salvation.

The highlight of the past week in St. Louis with the Higher Things Youth Conference was undoubtedly the worship. You haven't lived until you've heard 1200 teenagers absolutely belting out all 10 verses of Salvation Unto Us has Come. People who say that you can't use traditional liturgy and hymnody with youth simply do not know what they are talking about.

I was the preacher at one of the services so I was sitting in the front able to see the faces of the congregation. And I can tell you that these high school men and women were singing and chanting away with gusto. They were, as a whole, more attentive and engaged than any congregation of adults I have ever witnessed - except for when I was in the Sudan.

But the other big strength of this week's conference were the sectionals. Since my wife and I were both leading sectionals ourselves, I did not have the opportunity to sit in on others as I would have liked. I did catch two superb presentations however.

Rev. Todd Wilken, of the Issues Etc. radio broadcast gave a fun and interesting presentation on UFOs.

But I was also deeply impressed with Pastor Klemet Preus's sectional entitled: How to Argue About Jesus. The room he was in seated 300 people. And I would guess that there were 350 in attendance. The title is intentionally provocative. "Argue" sounds so negative. And aren't Christians supposed to be positive people all the time?

But Pr. Preus does us a favor by defining argument for us as simply explaining the reasons one has for one's beliefs. And then arguing about Jesus becomes not only acceptable, but a biblical mandate for all Christians. Essentially, this was a presentation on critical thinking, logic and debate in relation to spreading the Christian message. Preus clarified that we only fight because we don't know how to argue.

Hey all, I apologize for being quiet the past few days. But as I'd mentioned, I've been in St. Louis all week with the Higher Things Youth Conference. And it has gone fabulously well! The sectionals are meaty and interesting. The worship is excellent. And the campus of St. Louis University is a very good facility for this sort of thing.

I did a three-day in-depth sectional on religious/worldview themes in pop culture. My first foray into the world of Powerpoint. I only had one major glitch and that was the day I forgot to plug in the laptop. So I got about three quarters of the way through my presentation and then *blink,* lights out baby! Apparantly, batteries don't last indefinitely.

I will say this. Higher Things is the finest Lutheran youth ministry I have ever encountered or been involved with. The level of biblical teaching that is taking place is out of sight. And I have to say that I have been extremely impressed with the theological integrity and knowledge and maturity of the teens I've met.

One thing floored me on the first day of my presentation. At the end, after talking about movies and such for 45 minutes, I made a side comment that maybe we'd all be better off if we frankly just turned off the blasted TV sets and read a book. And 200 teenagers applauded. I, for one, am glad they are the future and many of the current generation of leaders will soon be the past.

On my way to the Higher Things Lutheran youth conference in St. Louis, MO where I'll be preaching and delivering some sectionals.

It seems to me that youth ministry, at its best, does three things well:

- Worship
- Teaching
- Fun

We do all three, but we know how to keep them separate.

In a time when entertainment is seen by many as the highest good, much that passes for youth ministry actually does little to hand on the Christian faith. The new book Soul Searching: The Religious and Spiritual Lives of American Teenagers points out that the average American teenager, even those that regularly attend "conservative" churches, actually knows very little of the substance of Christian doctrine. The authors describe the typical teen as a Moralistic Therapeutic Deist.

I had a parishoner one time ask me, "Why do we feel like we have to 'fun-ize' everything?" Good question. It seems to me that we should be able to have a good time in youth ministry, to enjoy ourselves, but also know the difference between a rock concert and a worship service, between a video game and a Bible study.

I have been doing a bit of research lately for a three-part presentation I'm doing next week in St. Louis for 1200 teenagers. My topic is fantasy lit and movies. I will incorporate everything from sci-fi to horror to comic book superheroes to what I'd call fantasy proper: Narnia, Lord of the Rings, and Harry Potter.

And I came across this very helpful article by Dr. Gene Edward Veith entitled: Good Fantasy and Bad Fantasy. I recommend it to you highly. It is a pdf file, so be alert to that before you click on it. I'm sure you could find it in html on the net.

My blogging buddy, Pastor Tom Chryst, over at Preachrblog, has a good insight that he posted yesterday.

We commonly hear that God hates the sin, but loves the sinner. And I have often thought that that could be a bit misleading. Pastor Chryst does a good job explaining why.

It has always seemed a bit gnostic to me (as long as I have known what gnosticism is), to separate the sin from the sinner. You see, there is no such thing as sin in the abstract. Evil is not some platonic idea in the mind of God. There is only sin insofar as there are sinners. It is not, after all, abstract sins that God condemns to hell. Sins don't go to hell. People do.

At the same time, we preach the cross of Jesus. And there we see that God also, paradoxically, loves sinners and chose to redeem them. Jesus didn't die for abstract principles or ideals. He was no martry. And no one took His life from Him. He freely gave it. Jesus died for real flesh-and-bone people, sinners like me.

This is the slogan I have heard used to defend abortion, euthanasia, the legalization of marijuana or narcotic use, even prostitution. "It's my body, so no one can tell me what to do with it." But is that actually true? Not in the understanding of Christianity. Our Scriptures state: "Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God? You are not your own (1Co 6:19)."

That passage applies to Christians, but it is true of all people that God has given us our bodies and lives, not to abuse selfishly or to terminate at will, but to put into service of our neighbor.

But it just sounds so un-American to say that you are not your own to do with as you please. We freedom-loving people run the danger of making an idol out of personal liberty.

A few weeks ago, my wife and I were watching some news coverage of the Michael Jackson trial and I commented on how strange he looks these days. We've all seen the photos of Mr. Jackson today alongside photos from 5, 10, 20 years ago. The man has had plastic surgery, to an extreme. His nose is so narrow, he looks disfigured. And I told my wife that I could not understand why any doctor would agree to do that to him, even at Jackson's request. Does the argument that "it's my body" really have no limits? What about a doctor who agrees to amputate a healthy arm or leg, because the patient/consumer wants it done - for sick reasons? Want to read something grisly? Check this out.

Wilfred McClay, over at Mere Comments, makes some enlightening observation on ethics and the limits of personal liberty.

Hey all you sci-fi geeks out there!

I'm preparing some presentations that I'll be giving for the Higher Things Youth Gathering in St. Louis next week. And right now, I'm thinking about the genre of science fiction. It seems to me that there are mainly two types of science fiction.

The first type is optimistic about human nature and our use of reason and posits that mankind will gradually evolve and, by means of science and technology, solve all our problems. Under this category, I'd include Gene Roddenberry's Star Trek series and movies.

The second type is pessimistic about human nature and serves to caution us against the folly of placing too much faith in science and technology. Under this category, I'd place Andromeda Strain, I Robot (the movie), Westworld, and Frankenstein.

Movies like Star Wars seem to me to fit better under the fantasy genre. They contain advanced technologies, but the stories aren't about the technology and its potential for good vs. its risks. They're about the characters and the technology is mainly a part of the setting.

Anyone have thoughts to share on this subject?