The Satisfaction of Good Stories

I recently took an entire week off work. It was mainly to finish my book for B&H Academic, tentatively called From Futility to Hope: A Theology for Creation Care. I also tried to unravel the knots of stress and encroaching burnout I was feeling from months of busy work, teaching Sunday School, trying to finish the book, with the only break since the New Year having been invested in the not-so-restful travel to the annual meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention.

To set the mood for what I hoped would be a creative and productive week of editing, I kicked the week off by reading a completely fluffy book: Lee Child’s first novel, Reacher: Killing Floor. It was a recommendation from a friend. It sounded interesting because I was looking for some relatively mindless reading that I could consume without too much effort.

Reacher met the mark. It was largely predictable and cliché. It was filled with the nearly-super hero who went to “the Point,” which is what Naval Academy graduates call their second choice. There were cultural inconsistencies, a really odd career timeline for Reacher (which Child acknowledges), and attractive women who were suddenly attracted to the rugged protagonist. Aside from the lack of sharks, the book is prime beach reading.

The story had few redeeming qualities, other than being quite engaging and thoroughly entertaining.

Sneaky Serious Content

The introduction, however, was a sneak attack on the person looking for brain candy. There are some nuggets worth considering that Childs tossed into his introduction, added fifteen years after the book was first published.

When mulling the genre of this novel, Childs assesses why his books were widely popular. It was because he was writing for the audience, but he wasn’t writing down to the audience, which results in cheesy, overdone fiction. Instead, he notes, “Along the way, I discovered I was the audience.” He quotes Chesterton on Dickens, “Dickens didn’t write what people wanted. Dickens wanted what people wanted.” Thus, he’s writing lowbrow fiction in exactly the fashion he would like to receive it.

There’s a secret there, I think. C. S. Lewis, in his essay, On Three Ways of Writing for Children, describes (1) writing down to children, (2) writing for particular children, and (3) “writing a children’s story because a children’s story is the best art-form for something you have to say.” Lewis affirms the second and participates in the third way of writing to children. The first he describes as being “generally a bad way,” which is pretty severe criticism in the vernacular of the British Isles.

Childs’ assessment is fair. It is obvious in Reacher that the writer is enjoying the little plot twists too coincidental to be believable, the overdone perfection of the main character’s ability and perceptions, and inevitability that the hero will ride off into the sunset to his next adventure.

The book—and I presume the series––rely on Reacher as the prime mover and only focus for the story. There isn’t so much a plot as performance art by the ex-Army MP. Childs admits that storyline and plot are secondary elements for his writing: “Character is king. . . . So, my lead character to carry the whole weight.” And he does.

A Western Connection

The result is a fairy story for adult males. Childs claims to have modeled it after stories of knights errant. I tend to agree with other readers who, as Childs notes, “classify the series as a set of modern-day Westerns.” Though he does not fully agree, he notes this Western-Reacher connection “is convincing in terms of feel and structure.” Childs claims not to be a fan of Westerns, but he has noted that “Westerns too have strong roots in the medieval knight-errant sagas.”

I read the introduction after I read the rest of the book—remember, I was trying to veg out. But I had already pegged this is a Louis L’Amour (Childs references Zane Grey) with more sex and more graphic descriptions of violence. Childs is on the right track here.

This is a knight-errant story. It is a modern Western. It is exactly what many readers want to read.

The Reacher Series has been successful because it provides a good guy––without doubt about his moral compass––who is trying to unself-consciously punch the big guy in the face and set wrongs to right. This is a book about a character who knows which way he is headed and won’t bend to polls or shifts in public opinion.

The Power of Stories

So many contemporary stories–-movies and books––fall short because, to quote Harry Flugelman from The Three Amigos, they “strayed from the formula, and [they] paid the price.”

This is why the recent sequel to Top Gun has had ridiculous box office success and staying power. Maverick is predictable, it is cliché, and it is thoroughly enjoyable. The same is true of Louis L’Amour and the Lee Childs novels.

What do the people want? They want someone to look up to who isn’t really just a villain in disguise. They want to be treated as if goodness, honesty, and self-confidence are admirable traits. They want the hero to win and the bad guy to lose, but not just on a technicality.

The fact that people want that—even people who think the metanarrative of Scripture is a new Facebook feature––is an indication of the eternity that is written on the hearts of all humans. (cf. Eccl 3:11) It can be a foothold for the gospel, if we are willing to tell the old, old story well.

That desire for wrong to be set right and for a hero who is a good guy can point straight to the greatest story ever told. I think that is what makes Reacher: Killing Floor such an engaging story. And that makes me question how we Christians are telling stories and telling the story.

Maybe telling the great story of Scripture is more powerful than reasoning people to Christ. And we may find it helps that our great hero story also happens to be true.

Walkable City - A Review

I have a theory—as yet nowhere near proved—that one of the most significant ways to combat poverty in the US would be to make it easier to walk or ride a bike.

If you look at a map of suburbia or even of development in small towns, it becomes clear that everything has been designed to maximize the convenience of cars. This reality obviously serves me well as I drive my car to and from my home, but it creates the situation that there is no truly safe way for me to get to the grocery store that is 1.5 miles from my house without taking a car. There is a decent shoulder on much of the road, but the last half mile or so is a four-lane road with a turn lane, but no shoulder and no sidewalk. There is a decent chance I could make it every time, but it can be a little nerve wracking given how fast some people drive in the 45-mile per hour stretch of road.

If you see someone walking in many places, the assumption is either that he is homeless or is having car trouble. This is a problem that makes everything more expensive, people less healthy, and life less enjoyable.

Jeff Speck’s book, Walkable City: How Downtown Can Save America, One Step at a Time is an argument for cities that have mixed-use areas and the ability to transit via foot-power to all the necessary resources. He argues that progress toward this end would be good for people, good for the planet, and good for communities.

Step By Step Walkability

Jane Jacobs cast a vision that is still shaping the goals of city planning in our day. Her book, The Death and Life of Great American Cities, set in motion a movement that has come to be accepted as generally correct. Urban centers are less crime-filled when there is activity at all hours, when the usage is mixed between residential, business, and light industry, when the sidewalks are wide and the blocks are short, and when people have to interact because they bump into one another more frequently. Speck points back to Jacobs’ vision as the appropriate starting point for his ideas about walkable cities.

There are ten key steps in Speck’s progress toward walkability:

“Step 1: Put Cars in Their Place” The idea is to allow car access, but not to build the world around autos. Walking needs to be the priority in dense areas, not the passage of cars. Too often, the order is reversed.

“Step 2: Mix the Uses” This is a basic city planning element that encourages walking by allowing apartments, bodegas, offices, and restaurants to mix within a general area. This will offer a reason for walking.

“Step 3: Get the Parking Right” Free parking makes the parking situation worse. Having lots and on-street parking that cost encourages people to value their parking decisions. If off-street parking is expensive and on-street parking is cheap, then parking and traffic will become a problem as people circle blocks or double park to get cheap parking. Making parking expensive often makes parking more available and solves a number of issues.

“Step 4: Let Transit Work” Speck is a fan of mass transit, especially into and through neighborhoods. He argues that it raises the value of the neighborhoods it serves. Though it often runs in the red on the city ledger it can often put the city in the black.

“Step 5: Protect the Pedestrian” People need to feel like they aren’t going to die if they are going to walk. Speck offers some suggestions that would seem to counter our instincts, but has evidence they work.

“Step 6: Welcome Bikes” Obviously, if you can walk, you can bike. He argues that measures that improve bikeability will make life better overall, especially for walkers.

“Step 7: Shape the Space” Speck’s research shows that large, open spaces tend to discourage walkers, so some creative structure and planning to right size walkways can encourage that behavior.

“Step 8: Plant Trees” The shade, the oxygen, and the pleasure of being around trees all encourage walking.

“Step 9: Make Friendly and Unique Faces” Various in facades, especially facades that have some life to them are good for walkability.

“Step 10: Pick Your Winners” Choose the sections of the city or town that will be walkable. It isn’t plausible to make the entire space perfect for the pedestrian, so a little triage is the way to make things work.

Conclusion and Analysis

Obviously, there is a lot more to the book than the summaries I offered for each of the steps to walkability. Even if you don’t come to full agreement with Speck on every point, there is a lot in this to think about.

One of the limitations of the book is that it is particularly focused on larger urban areas. Some of ideas, like having mass transit, may not be feasible on a smaller scale. However, there are aspects of design and planning that could be worth considering even in less populated areas.

Speck’s approach is refreshing because it is balanced and realistic. He recognizes that taking a purist approach to city planning is bound to lead to failure. He also understands that many plans take decades to implement. This is not a book about fixing everything right away, but about setting in motion a change in expectation that will allow conditions to improve in the future.

This is an interesting book to consider as a conservative that values community and livability for the world. It is a book that provides helpful insights into design and planning that could make the world greener. It is also a book that demonstrates how poverty could be mitigated to some degree by making some areas of cities and towns more livable and walkable.

WALKABLE CITY: How Downtown Can Save America, One Step at a Time

By Speck, Jeff

Buy on Amazon

You're Only Human - A Review

Billions of advertising dollars are spent each year to tell us which products can help us break through our own limits or the limits of human existence. They tell us that we can be all things at all times. The world is open to us with unending possibilities.

It is a powerful message. When we see the ads it seems empowering, because we all want to feel like heroes––like superhumans––as if there is no end to what we can do.

But what if it’s all a lie? What if we are really limited as human beings and as individuals with specific gifts, responsibilities, and experiences? What if the result of trying to live as if all boundaries are fake, all limits are self-imposed, and all desires for more are good is not a good thing? What if wanting to be more than what we were created to be is not a secret to a fulfilled, happy life but the recipe for a life of constant angst and stress?

Kelly Kapic explains the goodness of the limits that God has designed into our humanity in his book, You’re Only Human. This is a theologically rich and pastoral book that can serve people in every stage of life. This is a book for the pastor trying to do it all. It’s a book for the teen heading out to take over the world. It’s a book for the middle-aged church member lamenting the things they didn’t accomplish in their life and wishing that so many windows had not already closed.

The epigram at the beginning of the first chapter sums up the book: “Many of us fail to understand that our limitations are a gift from God, and therefore good. This produces in us the burden of trying to be something we are not and cannot be.”

Kapic is right. We are all tired as a result of our unnecessary burden.

Summary

The book is divided into two basically even parts. Part One has five chapters and wrestles with the fact that we have each been given by God a particular location, situation, and calling as well as limits that are unique to us. He shows how the gospel changes us and sets us free from sin, but it does not make us superhuman. He reflects on the goodness of the limited body, the importance of physical touch––an important reminder in light of our recent isolation––and the ways that our identify is formed by our community, not just by an act of the will.

Part Two also has five chapters that explore the nature of a healthy dependence. All five chapters help remind readers that God put us in community for a reason and that we were not meant to be self-contained dynamos for everything that God desires to do in this world. He explores the way that humility is sometimes misunderstood as simply being willing to admit mistakes, showing that humility also means acknowledging our own inability to know or do everything. Kapic outlines the way our time-driven world increases our anxiety and saps us from the joy of now-absorbed existence. We are always late or waiting for something, it seems. This section also delves into reasons God may have for taking time to perfect us and grow us, rather than just zapping us to holiness. Kapic also explains why being part of the church (and not having to do everything within the church) is very important. The book concludes with a chapter on learning to live within our finitude, which is, in part, a reminder of our need to rest.

Discussion

The “always on” nature of our world is inhumane. Kapic recognizes this and he is hoping to help you recognize it, too. Historians like to point out that there is no era that is totally unlike others. They are certainly correct. Political polarizations, violence, abusive systems, and weird and ungodly social fads have existed throughout history. Each age may have its own favorite perversion, but there really is nothing new under the sun. And yet, we all have the sense that we are in a video game with tense music and someone turned the difficulty level to expert. I think that is because we really are trying to do too much that is too hard. That reality helps explain why You’re Only Human is so powerful.

Many people are struggling from burnout. Every moment of a child’s life is often filled with some sort of stimulus: television, playdates, school, quality time with the family. There is no time to sit and be bored. It’s a joke among middle aged parents to say that life is really just saying “maybe next week things will slow down” until you die. This sort of grim humor reveals the truth that we are all tired and stretched thin.

This is bad for us and it is not a good way to grow in godliness. Sanctification takes time. It can’t be programmed into a 20-minute morning blog of prayer and Bible reading, the verse of the day calendar, with a sermon playing during the commute home. Boredom is an important ingredient to sanctification, because it allows us to stop focusing on the things we have to do, or trying to get sufficiently recovered to chase our next challenge, and really consider what it makes to be holy. The problem is we never get bored.

You’re Only Human is a gentle reminder who we are. It is an encouragement that we are not enough for everything, and that is ok. It is a helpful book that points readers toward real solutions. They may be challenging to implement, but they may change the way we live as Christians in the world in a meaningful way.

This book would be a great gift to pastors during the month of October to let them know that it is okay not to be able to do everything. This book would be a powerful help to a recent graduate who is anxious about what is to come and worried about not being enough to rise to the top. This a book that is a balm to the aging saint who realizes what they didn’t do in life and wonders if what they accomplished is really enough. Take up this book and read it. It is good for what ails us in this over-scheduled century.

You're Only Human: How Your Limits Reflect God's Design and Why That's Good News

By Kapic, Kelly M.

Buy on Amazon

The Lynn White Thesis and American Christianity

Lynn Townsend White, Jr’s essay, “The Historical Roots of Our Ecological Crisis” is the essay that launched a thousand ships in the study of religious environmentalism. That essay, originally delivered as a conference talk and popularized because of its publication in Science magazine, has been a touchstone of discussions of the connection between Christianity and environmentalism in in the more than fifty years since it has been published.

The problem with the essay is that it is largely wrong.

White’s basic argument is that Western Christianity devalues creation, promoting a dualistic framework that treats the physical world as merely existing for human benefit. White puts the blame on Christianity for de-paganizing the world because, he argues, Christian missionaries chopped down the sacred groves, taught the barbarians that there was one true God in spirit form, and that the Nyads and Dryads of their mythologies were false gods. The solution, according to White, is to adapt a more pagan conception of reality, viewing the world as sacred and adapting Christianity to a more nature-centric worship.

This thesis should have been debunked simply because it relies on a basic misunderstanding of Christianity. While theologians like Augustine do argue that there are differences between spiritual things and physical things, they do not indicate that on that basis physical things may be abused. There are certainly dualistic Christians who devalue creation and view it as solely existing for humanity’s benefit, however, their perspective in not consistent with Scripture. The solution is not to modify Christianity, but to present a robust theological orthodoxy that points dualistic Christians back to Scripture, back to the creeds, and back to the proper worship of the creator.

In the same year that White’s infamous essay was published, there was another volume that also should have undermined his thesis. Clarence Glacken published his seminal work, Traces on the Rhodian Shore, in 1967. In roughly 700 pages, he shows from ancient literature through roughly the present that the common human condition has been an anthropocentric view of nature. That is, the view that White ascribes to Christianity is prevalent throughout Western culture from the ancient philosophers through the current ones. While Glacken does not absolve Christianity from all guilt related to environmental abuse, he does demonstrate the White’s simply cause and solution are off base. Glacken’s main failure was publishing the anecdote to an essay in a tome. White’s thesis has more power because it is concise and blames the right out-group. Glacken’s work is devastating to that thesis, but is dense, carefully researched, and lengthy. Thus it is often footnoted, but much less likely to have been read and digested.

More recently, a more direct rebuttal of White’s thesis has been published. In 2016, historian Evan Berry’s book, Devoted to Nature, was released into the wild. He argues that, “American environmentalism is related to religion, not out of serendipitous resemblance but by way of historically demonstrable genealogical affinity with Christian theological tradition.” (2) Moreover, “Theologically rooted notions of salvation, redemption, and spiritual progress provided a context for Americans enthusiastic about the outdoors and established the horizons of possibility for the national environmental imagination.” (5)

This, of course, does not take us directly to “orthodox Christianity is great for the environment” because a large piece of Berry’s account is how the bones of American environmentalism align to progressive ideas with a significantly middle-class flavor. Therefore, there is a Christian tinge to much of American environmentalism that is, to paraphrase Rauschenbusch, about as orthodox as the interests of the environmental movement will allow.

Still, Berry’s book is helpful in that it exposes the reality that Christian per se is not the problem with the environmental movement. While the versions of Christianity that have been most active in preserving the environment are not always particularly Christian, there is hope that with some focused attention and proper hermeneutics, we can see a robust pro-environment theology that is consistently orthodox. At least, as an orthodox Christian who believes caring for the environment is important, I hope that is true.

For those struggling with the Lynn White thesis, Evan Berry’s book, Devoted to Nature provides a strong anecdote. It is a helpful entry into the history of environmentalism in the US. It carefully debunks some of the strongest anti-Christian tropes of the environmental movement. It also points readers toward a hopeful engagement with Christianity that may lead to them finding the gospel. This isn’t a book for everyone, but it is a particularly important book for those doing scholarship on religion and the environmental.

Devoted to Nature: The Religious Roots of American Environmentalism

By Berry, Evan

Buy on Amazon

Attacking Justice in the Name of Justice

I was listening to one of John Piper’s biographical talks from the pastors’ conference that his ministry has put on for years and was struck by the way Piper described one of the most harmful means of attacking someone who is pursuing a cause that another dislikes. He describes it more fully in an aside in the actual audio [around the 44 minute point in the audio], but you can get the gist of it from the published text of the lecture.

Piper writes:

Probably the severest criticism he ever received was from a slavery-defending adversary named William Cobett, in August of 1823, who turned Wilberforce's commitment to abolition into a moral liability by claiming that Wilberforce pretended to care for slaves from Africa but cared nothing about the "wage slaves" – the wretched poor of England.

He then goes on to quote at length from the speech of William Cobett:

You seem to have a great affection for the fat and lazy and laughing and singing and dancing Negroes. . . . [But] Never have you done one single act in favor of the laborers of this country [a statement Cobett knew to be false]. . . . You make your appeal in Picadilly, London, amongst those who are wallowing in luxuries, proceeding from the labor of the people. You should have gone to the gravel-pits, and made your appeal to the wretched creatures with bits of sacks around their shoulders, and with hay-bands round their legs; you should have gone to the roadside, and made your appeal to the emaciated, half-dead things who are there cracking stones to make the roads as level as a die for the tax eaters to ride on. What an insult it is, and what an unfeeling, what a cold-blooded hypocrite must he be that can send it forth; what an insult to call upon people under the name of free British laborers; to appeal to them in behalf of Black slaves, when these free British laborers; these poor, mocked, degraded wretches, would be happy to lick the dishes and bowls, out of which the Black slaves have breakfasted, dined, or supped.

Of course, anyone who knows anything about Wilberforce knows that Cobett’s accusations are false. Wilberforce was a member of the Clapham Saints, who were known for their pro-social efforts throughout Britain. They supported protections for laborers, animal welfare, literacy programs for the poor, and many other forms of justice. Their most contentious work, however, was for the abolition of slavery and the slave trade, so it is this against which much of the criticism was leveraged.

 There is no question that Wilberforce was more invested in the abolition of the slave trade than in other causes. One person absolutely cannot be equally concerned with all forms of injustice. Those that try to be equally vocal about all injustice end up doing little to actually improve conditions. However, to be focused primarily on correcting one form of injustice leaves one open to all sorts of attacks, like the one that Cobett wages.

Do you care about the environment? Why do you not care equally for those dying without the gospel?

Do you care about racial reconciliation? Why have you not ended poverty in your own town?

Do you care about unjust economic systems? Why do you not care about those caught in unjust criminal justice system?

These are all a form of the tu quoque fallacy. When we read these sorts of pairings in typed letters, they look ridiculous. Where does the presumption come from that simply because good environmental stewardship is a concern that there is not also a deep love for the lost a desire to see people saved? It is possible that there is a lack on the one hand because of an overwhelming concern on the other. However, it is just as possible that someone sees certain ways in which they can uniquely contribute to the good of the world, while still supporting, caring about, and engaging in other goods.

 If you focus on everything, you can accomplish very little in this life. But if you focus on any sort of contentious action, then you will be open to being maligned in this way.

 Sometimes these criticisms land very strongly in the public mind, because it is readily apparent that the victim has not done everything he could have done for the cause in question. Therefore, the accusation is partially true—true in the sense that another concern may have been chief in the benefactor’s mind and efforts.

 These sorts of criticisms can also devastate those on the receiving end, because it undermines all of the good they intend to do. The reason why this sort of criticism is used is that it can dishearten those engaged in an effort for justice in a contentious sphere. If we are willing to listen, it can be devastating to see our hard work undermined by such half-truths. We ought not to let it be so.

 This talk was presented in February of 2002. It was a conference that had for a good portion of its meat a focus on racial reconciliation. Part of Piper’s emphasis was for pastors to continue in that work despite attacks of this sort.

 Several decades later, I can see this form of criticism being levied against men like Piper, Keller, and others. They have worked to create a sense of desire for justice in the world. And yet, they are often criticized for not caring enough about some other concern. The “Just Preach the Gospel” crowd does this an awful lot to men who have invested their lives into preaching the gospel and helping to show the gospel’s implications to the Christian life.

 The secular “Social Justice” crowd does this when we favor some causes—often those that align with a Christian view of the social order—but ignore or work contrary to them in others. It is impossible to post a pro-life argument in favor of ending elective abortion without hearing someone argue that real pro-life energy should include greater government control of the economy, the end of capital punishment, or whatever the other cause is. Most of the time it isn’t really that the person cares so much about the other thing, they just want to silence arguments against killing children in the womb.

 The secret to resisting the power of this form of criticism is to recognize that it is often levied as a means to guard some form of deep, self-interested sin. Cobett owned something like 1,300 slaves, so he was deeply interested in ending Wilberforce’s efficacy. When we hear criticisms like this levied against people, we should ask ourselves what self-interested sins are the critics seeking cover for as they publicly attack those pursuing justice in the world.

Some Recommended Introductions to Christian Ethics

Sometimes the variety and range of options of books makes it difficult to know where to begin in the study of any given topic. Whereas a few years ago we would have had to rely on the personal recommendations of a friend or acquaintance, and what was available in our local library or bookstore, now the entire catalog of human knowledge is, seemingly, open to us at all points. This is really great, if you have a starting place in mind or an existing framework from which to begin. For those simply trying to get a toehold in a new topic, the options can be paralyzing.

This post was written because I have had several people ask me what books I would recommend to begin the study of Christian ethics. The list is based on my own preferences and those that I would recommend to people who are reasonably well-read and who share at least some of my presuppositions about the nature of Scripture and the truthfulness of orthodox Christianity. In other words, I am going to make recommendations that are consistent with an orthodox, evangelical Christianity. There may be significant books on philosophical ethics, Roman Catholic ethics, or some sort of modernistic Christianity that others might see as invaluable. However, my point is to lead people deeper into the mystery of faith in Christ Jesus, not toward the apparent brilliance of writers in another faith. There are many books about particular topics within ethics that are useful, too. I have selected these as introductions, not endpoints.

Mere Christianity, by C. S. Lewis

This in not a textbook on Christian Ethics, per se. However, in his defense of a basic, orthodox Christianity, Lewis writes about ninety pages of his apologetic work—about a quarter of it—on what amounts to Christian Ethics. This is helpful, because it demonstrates the integration of Christian Ethics into the broader theological ideas of Christianity. The way we live is an apologetic and it is a demonstration of what we truly believe. For those new in the faith, Mere Christianity is an excellent place to start when trying to figure out how to live morally.

An Introduction to Biblical Ethics, by David W. Jones

Biblical Ethics is a subset of Christian Ethics, but this is the place that many evangelical Christians would do well to begin. Absent from the book are discussions of the categories of philosophical ethics, because the assumption behind this volume is that the reader believes Scripture to be trustworthy as a source of moral authority. This is a volume that teaches readers to reason well from Scripture to moral application. Jones writes with clarity and grace, with a fine balance between demonstrated research and transparency to make this useful for beginners who are primarily interested in how to read Scripture better. This is lean on particular application to current events, but long on methodology.

Invitation to Christian Ethics, by Ken Magnuson

This 2020 volume is a good, current survey of the field of Christian Ethics from an evangelical perspective. Magnuson introduces various philosophical and theological frameworks for moral reasoning, but the focus is on reasoning well from Scripture. This is a book that is helpful if a reader is trying to figure out why different systems of moral reasoning end up with different ideas. After laying out his basic framework, Magnuson then moves on to discuss various contemporary ethical issues, working through them from a scriptural foundation.

The Doctrine of the Christian Life, by John Frame

Frame’s book is a hefty volume, but it is a solid way to begin an ethical journey. I love John Frame’s approach and have been deeply influenced by it. However, his triperspectivalism is distinct from many other approaches and likely to be less common in future years. I have a deep attachment to DCL and all of Frame’s work, but his approach will retain popularity primarily among conservative Presbyterians in the years to come. At the same time, if a reader is looking for a different approach to complement their understanding of Christian Ethics, Frame provides a deeply theological, Scripture-saturated book written from a Reformed perspective.

Ethics as Worship, by Mark Liederbach and Evan Lenow

This book is a 2021 volume that combines some features that I really like. It is a full introduction to Christian Ethics textbook, with a survey of various philosophical approaches. It is primarily driven by Scripture as the source of morally authoritative guidance for our age. Ethics as Worship includes application to many of the major, contemporary moral issues. All of this puts it in the solidly introductory camp and makes it quite useful. In addition, Liederbach and Lenow also have an explicit focus of living the moral life as an act of worship. This is a subtext in most evangelical ethics texts, but this book makes it overt. I’ve read it once and enjoyed it. I need to read it and use it more to fully evaluate it, but it is a good, useful book that I commend for its faithfulness, readability, and doxological emphasis.

Reformed Ethics, by Herman Bavinck

Volume 2 just released a few months ago. I haven’t finished it. However, volume 1 is clearly a treasure and I anticipate that the final two volume will continue the legacy. Bavinck is one of my favorite theologians. He does ethics from a theological framework in the Reformed tradition. His approach will connect well to Jones, Frame, and, to a reasonable degree, with Liederbach and Lenow. Bavinck is not going to cover contemporary issues, since he wrote a century ago. However, what you see is non-performative reasoning from someone who was grappling with modernity, outside our specific culture, and dealing with the same source text—Scripture—that we are using. His application requires a little translation, but this is helpful. Bavinck’s Reformed Ethics are a good historical approach that can be used to encourage thoughtful application of orthodox theology and scriptural reasoning in our day.

Resurrection and Moral Order: An Outline for Evangelical Ethics, by Oliver O’Donovan

This is the last book on this list for a reason. It is a very difficult book to read, but it is also very important. O’Donovan’s work is essential for a full understanding of what it means to think morally as a gospel-focused, theologically orthodox believer. This is a book that demands slow reading and often repeated reading. It was not until the third time through the book that it made sense to me, but once it ‘clicked’ everything fell into place and it helped unlock a more complete process of moral reasoning through Scripture. This is the Brothers Karamazov of Christian ethics; it is very hard work, but it is very much worth the effort.

This is not an evaluation of all the ethics books on the market. There are certainly others that are good and helpful. This is where I think someone should start as they seek to understand Christian ethics better.

Living on the Edge - A Review

There is plenty that is not right in America right now. Political divisions are leading to violence and hatred among people with opposing views. The middle class is shrinking as more people move into upper tiers of income, leaving some members of society behind. Debates about race rage on, with insults hurled on every side, and little hope of resolution. There is a lack of respect for the struggling class and sometimes sheer hatred for those that have done better financially.

Sociologist Celine-Marie Pascale attempts to find the solution to these problems and present them in her book, Living on the Edge: When Hard Times Become a Way of Life.

There are several underlying premises in the book that shape her results. First, she believes that the economy is a fixed size, so that when some people have more it necessarily comes at the expense of those who have less. (xii) This, of course, sets the course for the necessary solution. The chief problem she finds is not access to economic on-ramps but distribution of resources. Second, that the existence of poverty “has not happened by accident,” but “It is the result of decades of collusion between business and government to maximize corporate profits at the expense of workers.” (x) As a result, as the author describes her project, “Ultimately, it is a book about power that has been leveraged by government and corporations at the expense of ordinary people.” (xi)

The book is a mix of quantitative analysis and personal interviews. It is to Pascale’s credit that she traveled to Appalachia and other economically disadvantaged areas to actually meet people and find out how they lived.  Along the way, Pascale uncovers a number of unfortunate structural problems in society. For example, as she notes, “in many communities it is impossible to hold a job if you don’t own a car.” (1) This, of course, puts those on the hairy edge of subsistence in constant jeopardy, because a deer crossing the road, a bad transmission, or a careless driver can jeopardize employment and financial stability. Pascale also attempts to discuss the issue of class prejudice, which is an often-neglected element in these discussions. But it is apparent to many on the bottom end of the economic latter that, whatever the rhetoric, the upper classes despise them. The book is to be commended for recognizing these challenges.

At the same time, Pascale’s attempt to make this a mix on anecdote and analysis ends up undermining her case and displaying her own prejudices against the people she is studying. A few examples:

To take a break from driving, I stop at a shop in a small town in Tennessee. The shop keeper greets me and proudly explains that her store belongs to God. ‘I just mind it for him,’ she says with a great smile. Before I could blink twice, we are in a conversation about faith and I am asking about her relationship to the Bible.

‘The Bible—start to finish—is the word of God.”

‘Old Testament and New?’

‘Yes, word for word.’

I’m a little unsettled by this, but not surprised.

Pascale—a Buddhist—then goes out of her way to ask highly speculative questions about the nature of a soul and then critiques the woman because “she seems less certain and her answers grow vague.” (64)

It’s not the account or making religion a part of the interview that is striking—that is certainly a part of good sociological research—but it is Pascale’s obvious bias. How does someone go into Appalachia with the intent to interview folks and not understand some of the basic beliefs of evangelical Christianity—for example, that the Bible is the word of God? And then to be willing to express that one is “unsettled” by this entirely ordinary belief? And then to follow this with an account of digging into a complex philosophical question about the soul to emphasize that the shop keeper was not was well educated in philosophy as the author seems odd. There is a patronizing tone to many of these anecdotes.

In another personal interjection into the analysis, Pascale records her observations while driving in the South, while driving near the site of several Civil War Battles, along the Blue-Gray Highway. She writes, “Although I don’t see mention of the battles, I count three Confederate flags on this stretch of road – fewer than I has expected. Even so, I find them unnerving. Carried today by white supremacists on their marches, the flag is an emblem of the Confederacy and feels like a warning.” (18)

In the context, this memory serves no purpose in advancing the author’s argument. It seems an honest reflection on her experience along her journey, but it also reflects why Pascale’s work does not result in truly helpful analysis along the methods she has chosen. One need not defend the flying of a Confederate flag to recognize that symbols may convey messages we may not understand and which may not be as nefarious as we would like to portray them. Pascale never explores that possibility or the social dynamics that might drive someone to rebel against the genteel classes by flying the Confederate battle flag considering race.

There are other examples that show Pascale is too disconnected from the people she seeks to help to be properly diagnostic, as when she gets into a tense, racial confrontation with a gas station attendant (who may have been its owner) because she does not understand how to pump her gasoline. (30-31) But toward the end of the confrontation, the man expressed distaste for Trump—his “white president” as she calls him—and frustration at the political class, so she expressed hope that she is “on his side of the fence now.” Unexplored in this account—and likely the really interesting question—is whether the man’s underlying frustration that led to a comment about the blackness of the “former Black president” was driven by poorly considered regulation by the Obama administration. Perhaps it was those regulations that cost the man a great deal of money by forcing him to get new pumps that were likely more complex and expensive than needed. The world will not know, because Pascale inserted herself into the story rather than doing the investigation.

Living on the Edge tackles a worthy topic. There are certainly a large number of people who are in economic strait jackets due to systemic injustices of various sorts. Pascale presents the conspiracy theory that “decades of collusion between business and government” have caused all of the problems of the poor. Her proposal is to expand government social programs, eliminate the Electoral College to increase the power of urban centers over Appalachia, and other proposals borrowed from the talking points from the populist Left. There is nothing innovative about her solutions.

The book ends where it began, which comes as little surprise to those that read the preface. There is little new ground covered—new stories, but very few new nuggets of thoughtful analysis—and mainly an attempt to embolden the already convinced.

Pascale concludes the book with the statement: “Regaining a democracy will mean ending the exploitation of the many by the few. With vision, effort, and some luck, it will be a win for the people of the country. It is past time that ‘liberty and justice for all’ actually means something.” (232)

To the reader who believes there is a significant problem with poverty and stagnation of classes, but who sees different solutions, this book offers very little helpful analysis. It’s hard to take someone seriously who claims to be speaking for a class of people who she so poorly understands and seems to respect so little.

Though Pascale tries to establish her poverty street cred with a brief story about her impoverished childhood (1-2), what comes through in this book is a naturalist trying to study a common species by stopping in their habitat to take a few notes, then rushing back to her office to slip the evidence back into the argument that had already been drawn up. This book reminds me of overhearing some well-dressed youngsters drinking Starbucks drinks discussing how “bougie” someone was for asking them not to break in line at the post office—there is a disconnect between reality and self-perception.

In the end, Pascale fails to explain how granting more centralized control to the entities that she claims are colluding against people helps the people being colluded against. She does not explain why removing political power from more rural states and concentrating it in densely populated areas—the areas that will be best served by concentrated government power—advances representative democracy and serves better the people she will effectively disempower. One may share Pascale’s concerns over “exploitation of the many by the few” and recognize that her solutions would simply make matters worse.

Living on the Edge: When Hard Times Become a Way of Life

By Pascale, Celine-Marie

Buy on Amazon

NOTE: I received a gratis copy of this volume with no expectation of a positive review.

Ethics as Worship - A Review

The very first question of the Westminster Shorter Catechism asks, “What is the chief end of man?”

The simple, but profound answer is, “Man’s chief end is to glorify God, and to enjoy him forever.”

In other words, the chief end of humankind is to worship God and delight in his goodness. But “to glorify God” or to worship means more than singing songs at the appointed time each week or having a daily quiet time. Rather, as Scripture makes clear, “Whatever you do, in word or in deed, do everything in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him.” (Col 3:17)

The sum of the life of the Christian should be to give God glory by living rightly unto him. This brings us to the place of ethics in the Christian life. Ethics is about worship—it’s about living rightly on earth according to God’s design and pointing others to his truth in righteousness.

Mark Liederbach and Evan Lenow bring the concept of worship through moral living to the forefront in their recent book, Ethics as Worship: The Pursuit of Moral Discipleship. The volume, which is a hefty tome of about 750 pages, presents the authors’ particular focus on the nature of ethics as well as providing much of the standard fare for an introductory ethics text.

This volume has some similarities to other ethics texts in that is explores particular ethical questions (especially those that are cultural pinch points) after surveying alternative approaches to ethics. This is a book that reflects significant research, taking into account the major voices in ethics in the past few decades, along with relevant technical data on questions like reproductive ethics. The arguments within the book are well-thought out, as they have been honed over combined decades of teaching by both authors.

The premise of ethics as worship is so basic that it seems obvious when it is introduced. As the authors explain, “Ethics is about God. It is about maximally adoring him and rendering to him all that he is due from all that he has made. And it is about our doing so both individually and corporately.” (xxi)

While this approach to ethics seems like it would go without saying, it is less often said in ethics texts (even those by orthodox, Christian authors) than is warranted. And, even among those purporting to do Christian ethics, there is often a failure to make God’s character and value the summum bonum.

Ethics as worship means that the Christian worldview is the beginning of the moral quest. The foundation of the Christian worldview is properly Scripture, which anchors the method and content in the reveal Word of God. But a purely “scriptural” ethic can lead to casuistry. After all, Scripture does not say that we cannot use cocaine or tell us precisely what to do about global warming. An alternative, which includes various forms of philosophical ethics attempts to get at truth apart from Scripture and then looks for passages that can illustrate. Still other forms of so-called Christian ethics are more like weather gauges that check the cultural climate and decide write and wrong to try to maintain respectability. Viewing ethics as worship puts God at the center, with Scripture as the foundation, and delight in God and holiness as primary signs of success.

Ethics as Worship is a thoroughly theological volume with a reformed outlook. Liederbach and Lenow see the call to worship beginning in the garden of Eden. Building on the somewhat esoteric work of John Sailhamer, they call for a retranslation of Genesis 2:15 as a call for humanity to “worship God and obey his commands” in paradise before the fall. This is a debatable claim, which has little support in common translations, but whether or not their translation option is correct, there is no question that obedience and worship were central to human purpose before sin came into the world. One need not to agree with this emphasis to see the value in the approach Lenow and Liederbach follow. After the fall, the priority of worship and obedience remained, but it was frustrated by the effects of sin. The authors continue to explore how worship is essential through the remaining phases of the universe: fall, redemption, and restoration.

This is a volume that adds to the field of ethics, especially among evangelicals, by effectively summarizing much of the literature of the field and offering a new emphasis for the moral task. It is not wholly foreign, but the emphasis being on worship rather than righteousness—the process of decision rather than the personal outcome—is refreshing and helpful in many ways.

Ethics as Worship could be used at the college or seminary level. It would be a useful pastoral reference, with up-to-date data on very important cultural debates. Thankfully, the authors tend to focus less on edge cases and so-called dilemmas than providing sound principles that can guide faithful moral decisions. There are several good ethics texts on the market, but this is another worthy one that deserves attention, adoption, and utilization.

Ethics as Worship: The Pursuit of Moral Discipleship

By Mark Daniel Liederbach, Evan Lenow

Buy on Amazon

NOTE: I was provided a gratis copy of this volume from the publisher with no expectation of a positive review.

SBC Politics, the Sexual Abuse Investigation, and Waiver of Attorney-Client Privilege

In June of 2021, nearly 15,000 messengers from Southern Baptist Churches from around the country voted overwhelmingly to commission an independent, 3rd party investigation into the handling of sexual abuse allegations by the Southern Baptist Executive Committee officers for the period of 2000 to the present.

It should be clear that the investigation was not into accusations of abuse by the SBC’s Executive Committee officers, but that members of the Executive Committee had handled accusations about local churches poorly and in some cases potentially bullied or manipulated those who claim to have been abused in a local church.

One particular accusation in the past few years turned into a lawsuit against the SBC with a former LifeWay (an SBC entity) employee who made a public accusation of abuse that was misrepresented as a consensual affair. The fallout of that misrepresentation was public abuse (with names hurled that should be unthinkable for confessing Christians) leading to her resignation from LifeWay. The misrepresentation was compounded by an unwillingness to correct the misrepresentation in the SBC-controlled newspaper long after the misrepresentation was identified, which contributed to the abuse hurled at the woman. After a change in leadership, the report was corrected and an apology issued, but a great deal of financial, emotional, and spiritual damage had already been done.

This case, a Houston Chronicle article detailing over 700 cases of sexual abuse in SBC churches over a period of 20 years, along with evidence of serial abuse by individuals who had bounced from local church to local church, often as paid staff, raised concerns that the SBC was doing too little to curb abuse. All of this came at a time when sexual harassment and abuse were a particular public concern in society, but there is little question that concern about abuse is more than a secular movement being imported into religious clothing. These sins should not be tolerated among Christians! (1 Cor 5:1–2)

The Polity Issue

Given the loose association between churches affiliated with the Southern Baptist Convention, there has been resistance to many movements of reform on the basis of our polity and local church autonomy. It is true that some actions are not possible for the SBC. However, as Keith Whitfield has argued:

“We’ve hidden behind false fronts and convenient excuses. Appeals to the autonomy of Southern Baptist churches have derailed various proposals, like creating a Southern Baptist offenders' registry. While our polity may render some proposals nearly impossible to carry out, the appeal to autonomy doesn't justify inaction. Rather, we must use our autonomy to covenant with one another, “to stir one another to love and good deeds” (Heb. 10:31). Our family of churches must find a meaningful and culture-shaping mechanism that leads us to commit to best practices as we strive to prevent abuse in our churches and entities.”

There is little doubt that many critics of the SBC will be dissatisfied with the efforts to curb abuse within the association of churches. This is largely because they misunderstand the nature of the SBC. However, the fact that the demands of some critics cannot be satisfied should not prevent the organization from taking what steps are appropriate within our context. After all, if the SBC can disfellowship a church for ordaining a female pastor or affirming ungodly forms of sexual practice, then the SBC can disfellowship churches for failing to deal with gross sin in their midst. There are likely additional steps that can be taken to prevent or, at least, minimize serial sexual abuse that can be facilitated at the national level without violating basic Baptist polity.

A Turning Point

The June 2021 meeting of the SBC seemed to be a turning point toward addressing concerns over sex abuse in our churches, given the overwhelming vote by the messengers, who are the sole members of the SBC and its entities.

Getting the independent investigation underway has proved difficult for the Executive Committee because of concerns over legal and financial exposure due to the investigation. One contentious aspect of that motion as approved by the messengers was the request that the Executive Committee waive attorney-client privilege for the investigation.

Waiving attorney-client privilege is, indeed, a big step. On the one hand, it provides unimpeded access to documents that may be legally damning, but which could have been kept out of the public eye because they were protected by the confidential relationship between an attorney and her client. There is legal and financial risk to waiving this privilege, which may include the Executive Committee’s insurance company refusing to pay out on settlements related to cases whose evidence is exposed by this waiver. Additionally, evidence may become publicly available (as through the investigator’s report) that would have otherwise have been hidden to litigants or prosecutors. If there has been wrongdoing, it may well be exposed and bring penalty that could have been prevented by non-disclosure.

On the other hand, waiving attorney-client privilege exposes issues to the light of day that would otherwise be left to fester and left unaddressed. It would leave the investigators without all the information needed to bring problems to light, uncover weaknesses in practices, which could lead to greater liability down the line. It would diminish the trustworthiness of the final, public report, because the world would be left wondering what secrets remained hidden behind the veil.

Contributing to the need to waive attorney-client privilege on this issue, the long-time general counsel for the SBC Executive Committee has been in the midst of many of the controversies within the SBC. He has, for example, been part of a plot to misappropriate money from one SBC seminary and has been subsequently banned by judicial order from serving non-profits within the state of Texas or any Southern Baptist entity. The same individual has been deeply involved with another major figure within SBC life who was eventually terminated for mishandling his stewardship of an SBC entity along with public accusations related to covering up abuse. Some of these accusations have not been corroborated, but the risk that communications related to the issue would be kept confidential due to one of the key individual’s role for the Executive Committee made this selective waiver of attorney-client privilege essential to having a transparent, independent investigation. Given that the same individual testified as a character witness for a convicted abuser using his SBC official title, and also called the concerns over abuse a “satanic plot,” there is a reasonable basis for assuming his correspondence may be important to the investigation into handling of sexual abuse.

The Will of the Messengers

In June of 2021, the messengers voted to have the Executive Committee waive attorney–client privilege and form a separate (not approved or appointed by the Executive Committee) task force of Southern Baptists, who would hire a firm to conduct the third-party investigation. This vote was a rare move for the Southern Baptist messengers. Unlike resolutions, which do not have normative force, the motion from the floor was a directive to the members elected to the Southern Baptist’s Executive Committee.

(For those unfamiliar with the polity, the Southern Baptist Convention exists for two days each year from the first gavel to the last gavel of the annual meeting. It is comprised of “messengers” who are sent by their local congregations to vote on issues raised at the meeting. The Executive Committee exists to oversee the budget of the Cooperative Program, improve cooperation between SBC entities, and make arrangements for the annual meeting. The Executive Committee is comprised of people nominated by the Committee on Committees and elected by the messengers of the convention.)

The expectation of many of the messengers was that at the first Executive Committee meeting after the SBC, which is normally conducted in September (~100 days after the SBC), they would vote to waive attorney-client privilege, approve the funds for the investigation, and empower the Task Force (appointed by the President of the SBC, elected by the messengers at the SBC, who is also a voting member of the Executive Committee) to do the investigation.

Many onlookers were disappointed when the Executive Committee failed to waive attorney-client privilege and approve the third-party investigation as directed, when they met in Nashville on the 21st of September. Although the Sex Abuse Task Force had been named, had identified a reputable group to do the investigation (whom the Executive Committee had tried to hire to do a private investigation without a public report prior to the annual meeting of the SBC), and had the contract prepared for approval, the investigation was stalled. A significant faction within the SBC had worked with some leaders within the Executive Committee to argue against waiving attorney-client privilege, which threatened to put the brakes on the contract and the investigative process.

Though the full reasons for the issue may never be known, much of the information the members of the Executive Committee needed to make their decision was not presented until shortly before the meeting, with insufficient time to review it. Additionally, members of the staff of the Executive Committee had contracted with legal firms to attempt to convince the Executive Committee members not to fulfill the direction of the messengers of the Southern Baptist Convention by refusing to waive attorney-client privilege. However, a motion was made and approved to meet again in seven days to discuss it again.

At the second meeting, on September 14, the motion to waive attorney-client privilege was again defeated. Another motion was made to allow another 7 days to negotiate. The key to the negotiation for the Executive Committee was maintaining control of the investigation, having veto power over the material made available to the investigation, and the ability to control the content of the final report.

The Real Risks of Waiving Attorney-Client Privilege

There are some significant risks associated with waiving attorney-client privilege, especially from a purely financial and legal angle. If the investigation uncovers illegal behavior by members of the Executive Committee in communications that were made regarding legal advice between those EC members and their attorney, then that information would be admissible as evidence in court. Legal advice and surrounding conversations involving an attorney acting in his or her legal capacity can generally be hidden behind attorney-client privilege. The individuals responsible would lose that protection with this waiver. Additionally, in civil lawsuits, potentially compromising communications would no longer be protected legally.

Compounding this legal and financial risk, institutions typically carry robust liability insurance policies to protect them from lawsuits. Waiving attorney-client privilege for a case can become grounds for the insurance company refusing to pay out for damages awarded, because the insured institution failed to defend against lawsuit with full vigor.

The biggest risks here are that the SBC Executive Committee could be open to lawsuits that, if the evidence supports, they will have pay for out of pocket. The current budget does not support those sorts of expenditures and it might bankrupt the Executive Committee or cause funds to be diverted from the Cooperative Program (i.e., away from actual missions and ministry) to keep the Executive Committee afloat.

We should note that these risks are conditional upon (a) there being evidence of wrongdoing, (b) victims of wrongdoing bringing civil suits, and (c) the insurance company electing not to cover the damages. Our best hope—and the one I really want to be true—is that there is no evidence of wrongdoing beyond what has already been settled.

Advantages of Waiving Attorney-Client Privilege

A 2019 Houston Chronicle article about widespread, serial abuse within SBC-affiliated church changed the perception of the SBC inside and out. Since that issue was revealed, I have had people who were otherwise unconcerned about Baptists (or Christianity) make the connection between the SBC and abuse when they found out my connections to the SBC. There have concerns raised by laypeople within local churches (mine included) about why we should remain affiliated with the SBC based on the perception that abuse is widespread and pervasive.

Until we begin to take steps that are appropriate within our context and polity to curb sexual abuse, we will never be able to shake the accusations. The fact is that the abuse happened, we have not taken action to mitigate it, and no complaints about political motivations of #metoo, social justice, or polity will ever change that. Failing to take action makes the offensiveness of being an SBC church something other than the gospel. It sets up barriers to evangelism. Especially outside of the Bible Belt, it makes ministering as an SBC-affiliated congregation more challenging.

The first step in addressing an issue is figuring out the extent of the issue. But we have to be willing to really explore. Waiving Attorney-Client Privilege and publishing a public report are important steps in determining the nature of the problem. “Ripping the Band-Aid off” is painful, but likely the best way to move beyond the issue.

We may also find evidence of ungodly behavior among some leaders in the SBC which, if not illegal, is disqualifying from leadership. In any large organization there will always be shenanigans and insider trading, but there is already public evidence of behavior that does not belong in an organization devoted to getting the good news of the gospel to the nations. This investigation may help reveal that problem, as well, as it relates to the handling of sexual abuse.

Another advantage of having an open investigation with clear access to privileged communications is that it will functionally close the door on spurious lawsuits. If an independent, respected firm has full access to all pertinent records are determines the bounds of the issue (if any exists), then other accusations and lawsuits that may not be defensible will be much harder for accuser to pursue. If we expose some wrong doing, but the process and the final report remain behind a veil, then people who may feel wronged (and may have been wronged, if not by the SBC Executive Committee) but who do not actually have standing (because, perhaps, they had never contacted anyone) would have opportunity to sue the SBC and the SBC would have to defend afresh each individual suit. The open investigation provides both a present vulnerability (if any wrong doing is discovered) and a future defense (we’ve ruled out evidence of certain claims). So, while it may make present lawsuits more damaging, it may reduce risks from future ones.

Finally, we need to remember the reason the SBC exists. It’s not to be a self-sustaining club of Baptists, kept sacred in perpetuity and handed down to future generations. The SBC is a funding mechanism for cooperative ministry—education, disaster relief, political engagement, international missions, and church planting. As such, if the SBC ceases to live up to its calling as a Christian organization, it’s time to disband and find another better way. I believe we will come through this, but it’s always good to remember that if the SBC does not exist after this, then God will raise up another means of getting the gospel to the nations. The SBC can be effective, but it is not essential to God’s mission.

The Waiver

As one of the thousands of messengers that affirmed the call for an open, independent investigation, including the directive to the Executive Committee to waive attorney-client privilege, I am grateful that on October 5th the Executive Committee voted to do so. The margin of the vote was narrower than it should have been, but it is a step in the right direction.

A note of caution is in order here, though. Obviously, I am in favor of having waived attorney-client privilege. There are some members of the Executive Committee who voted no, but did so because they honestly believed it was their duty to do so. There are risks associated with the waiver. The EC members are tasked with protecting the interests of the Southern Baptist Convention and the Executive Committee of the SBC in particular. There are good reasons for having voted no, though I believe the reasons to vote yes outweigh them. I fear that some supporters of the waiver will harass well-meaning, conscience-bound individuals for doing what they believed to be right. That should not be.

We will see how the investigation plays out. It is a sad thing that the investigation is necessary, but, in my view, it is a good thing that both the process and the final product will shine light in some dark places and help the SBC move forward into the future with better practices or reallocate resources to do the mission God has called all Christians to more effectively.

Removing the Stain of Racism from the Southern Baptist Convention - A Review

When people get nostalgic for their childhood, they are usually remembering a time when things seemed simpler. That does not mean life was actually less complex, typically just that they were shielded from some of the twists, confusions, and injustices in the world.

My life was simpler before I knew about the powerful impact racism has had in our nation. Even in my early years in the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) I was unaware of the racism that is at the very root of our denomination’s founding. I did not recognize that the racial homogeneity of my church was not simply a function of different preferences in music, but often because my denomination had not done enough to remove the stain of racism.

I previously attend a church that is dually affiliated with the SBC and the National Baptist Convention (NBC). The SBC is the largest Protestant denomination in the U.S. and is slowly becoming more racially diverse. The NBC is the largest predominantly African-American denomination in the U.S. My church has historically been predominantly African-American, but is becoming more diverse as we reflect more closely the demographics of our surrounding community. This is, in part, because my former pastor has made significant efforts toward encouraging racial reconciliation.

Being involved in a truly multi-racial congregation has caused me to develop a new perspective on race relations and racism. Hearing some of our oldest members tell stories, I can no longer argue that the Civil Rights struggles were “a long time ago” and ignore the legacy of racism in our nation. Listening to conversations around me, I can never again claim I don’t know that systemic biases exist.

A few months ago, my pastor asked me to teach church history to the congregation on Wednesday evenings. In four sessions, I skimmed the surface of the major themes of our Christian past. I spent more time talking about African-American church history in part because of my context and in part because I needed to learn more about it. One of the most painful parts of teaching that lesson was tracing through this history of race relations within the SBC; clearly, we’ve made progress, but it is also apparent we have much more to do.

Removing the Stain of Racism from the Southern Baptist Convention is a volume that tells the story of the SBC’s past, provides a theological basis for moving beyond it, and makes practical recommendations for future progress. This is a necessary next step in a conversation that the SBC has been having, but which needs to continue in earnest.

This volume is an outstanding resource for Southern Baptists and others to learn about racial reconciliation. The volume opens with a collection of SBC resolutions about race, which show the convention has been talking about race—sometimes using the right language—but making insufficient progress toward healing longstanding division. In the first chapter, Albert Mohler recounts the historic origins of the Southern Baptist Convention, which were grounded in the misguided beliefs of slave owners that they could participate in race-based chattel slavery and still be effective missionaries for Christ.

Chapter two is an essay by Matthew Hall, which follows the ongoing participation of some Southern Baptists in racist rhetoric and sometimes political activity. As much as we might wish otherwise, there were many “good Baptists” who argued for Jim Crow laws. The third chapter, by Jarvis Williams, provides a biblical argument for racial reconciliation.

The next six chapters outline suggestions from theologians, pastors, and editors at our denominational publishing house for removing the stain of racism from the Southern Baptist Convention. The body of the book ends with a summary of the state of racial reconciliation within the SBC: we have made progress, but have a long way yet to go. Dwight McKissic and Danny Akin offer epilogues explaining further why the stain of racism remains in the SBC. In a postscript, Vaughn Walker commends readers to continue the work and offers encouragement that the stain of racism can be removed from the SBC.

Although published by the academic arm of B&H, this volume is accessible to the average reader. The writers and editors worked together to create a book that can inform a wide swath of members of SBC churches. More importantly, the contributors to this volume constructed a compelling testimony that (a) racism still exists in our society and our organizations, and (b) there is something we can do about it.

The uniting metaphor of this volume is “removing the stain.” In the preface, the editors explain what that means and their definition is important. To some advocates in racial politics, the stain of racism is like the blood stains on Lady Macbeth’s hands: invisible to living eyes, but indelible to the psyche. The only solution for some is for organizations once complicit in racism to self-destruct. This volume offers a greater hope, recognizing that just as people are redeemable through the gospel, so are organizations.

The metaphor is apt because it also reflects the significant and often time-consuming effort required to remove a stain. Many of us have invested a great deal of time in stain treatments and washing garments by hand to save something treasured from a permanently embedded stain. Rarely are significant stains eradicated in the first attempt, but must be scrubbed repeatedly as by degrees the offending pigment is removed. That is the sort of effort required to continue the work of racial reconciliation in the SBC.

The formal apology for the racist origins of the SBC, affirmed as a resolution in 1995 is important. Electing Fred Luter as the first African-American president of the SBC in 2012 is significant. The resolution opposing the flying of the Confederate battle flag in 2016 takes another step forward. These are important efforts in removing the stain of racism, but they are not enough.

Removing the Stain of Racism reminds readers, with voices from both African-Americans and whites, that though the SBC has made great progress, there is a lot of work to be done. The memory of the racism in the SBC will never be erased, but the stain of racism can be removed. The challenge for the white majority of the SBC is not to attempt to declare victory on our stain-removal efforts too soon. As many have experienced, once you throw the stained garment into the dryer, the stain is often made permanent. We still have scrubbing to do.

Racial reconciliation takes work. While we may remember a time in our denomination’s history when efforts toward removing the stain of racism were not at the forefront, those days only seemed simpler because we were unaware of the problem. Talking about race and racial reconciliation is hard, not least because of the extreme rhetoric on the right and the left of us. The gospel demands we work toward racial reconciliation—no matter how nostalgic we are for simpler days, the work before us cannot be ignored.

NOTE: This article was previously published at B&H Academic Blog, which has since been archived due to a change in communications strategy. I have moved and am no longer a member of the same church that was referenced in this article, but I have left the references from the 2017 publication date.