Stackhouse lecture on harm-reduction sites

This is a controversial subject, but it is important. The video is John Stackhouse, Professor of Theology and Culture at Regent College, with Meera Bai discussing harm-reduction sites that provide a safe environment for drug addicts to receive counseling, medical care, rehabilitation, and clean needles.

If you don't have time to watch the video (it's about an hour long), you can read an article on the subject at ChristianWeek.org.

I have come to the opinion that I cannot support ideas or policies that cost lives. Similarly, I cannot oppose ideas or policies that would save lives. There is a grey area where an idea or policy will cost lives and also save lives. That's more nuanced. But if there is something that can be done that saves lives that doesn't cost lives, it seems pretty clear cut that action is appropriate or even necessary.

Watch live streaming video from regentcollege at livestream.com

The end result of Muscular Christianity

It's just too much. I don't really have words.

I've said it was dangerous theologically to prop up this alpha male masculinity as a model for Christian behavior, saying anything less means you're less godly. Yet it continues, and grows daily.

Stupid, idiotic pastors of questionable character keep using violence to sell their version of the Gospel of Peace, like somehow the message of the cross just wouldn't make it into the minds of young men unless someone was kicked in the balls first. As if the love of God to rescue all of creation from certain doom wasn't good enough, so we have to make somebody bleed first.

And now we have a story from a congregation in Tulsa, Oklahoma who stages boxing matches as part of their ministry. And now Muscular Christianity has taken a life.



Stop it. Just stop it.

Why we are adopting

I wrote this about a month ago for the local Christian news magazine to be distributed to all of the churches in the area. When I submitted it, I was informed of the serendipitous nature of things as the next issue was going to focus on foster care and adoption, so it fits in quite well. However, I had to shorten it down considerably. It's over 1400 words, and the normal article space is 500 words. The version that will be published should be just under 800 words. To this is the full version.

At the end of the movie Schindler’s List, Oskar Schindler breaks down in tears. “I could have got more out,” he cries, “I could have got more.” A few years ago I had the opportunity to visit the Schindler factory in Krakow, Poland. Schindler had saved the lives of over 1,100 Jews during World War II, yet here he is admonishing himself because he could have done more.

“Why did I keep the car? Ten people right there. Ten people. Ten more people.” He intimates this thought to his friend Itzhak Stern. He takes his lapel pin off and continues, “This pin. Two people. This is gold. Two more people. He would have given me two for it, at least one. One more person. A person, Stern. For this. I could have gotten one more person,” he’s sobbing at this point, “and I didn’t! And I … I didn’t!”

This is one of the most powerful scenes in any movie ever produced. It’s also a stark reminder of the eternal reality we as Christians must face. Do we honestly believe what we say we believe? Is the world facing real eternal peril?

Jesus was very serious about this. He brought it up multiple times. One young man came to him asking what he could do to inherit eternal life, and Jesus responded, “Go, sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven.” (Mark 10:21) In the same way, he told his disciples, “Those of you who do not give up everything you have cannot be my disciples.” (Luke 14:33)

And I’m reminded once again of Oskar Schindler lamenting his inaction, “I threw away so much money.” He wasted his money on the temporary pleasures of life when he could have saved lives with the money and resources he had at his disposal.

There are a lot of very strong verses in the Bible about rich people. They aren’t opposed to wealth, but they do warn about what comes with riches. Temptations, idolatry, murder, slander, all forms of evil. I’ve always thought these verses were for other people. I don’t have much money, much less than a lot of people around here. But I live in the United States of America, and even though I’m well below the median income level, I’m still in the top 5% of the wealthiest people in the world (according to globalrichlist.com).

I’m not alone in this regard. Earlier this year, Fidelity Investments released the results of a survey that found 46% of millionaires “didn’t feel wealthy in 2009.” In fact, 58% of them claimed they needed $1.75 million to feel wealthy. In survey after survey, the majority of people don’t believe they are rich even when they are millionaires.

And I am still in the richest 5%. Half of the world’s population lives on less than $2.50 per day. At least 80% of humanity lives on less than $10 a day. I can’t even buy lunch for $10.

Needless to say, I cannot ignore these verses, like in 1 Timothy 6, that commands those who are rich to not “put their hope in wealth, which is so uncertain, but to put their hope in God.” Or in James 1, which instructs the rich to “take pride in their humiliation.”

But what is the response to all of this? Should I just feel bad about myself for having so much while many are perishing in this world?

The Apostle Paul commands us, “to do good, to be rich in good deeds, and to be generous and willing to share.” (1 Timothy 6:18) It leaves me with one solution: If I am blessed with good things, I am to give to those in need. God has provided me with food, clothing and a home. Anything past this is luxury for much of humanity. Certainly I can look at what I have and make sacrifices to my comfort to even save one more person.

The Apostle John went even further saying, “If anyone has material possessions and sees a brother or sister in need but has no pity on them, how can the love of God be in that person? Dear children, let us not love with words or speech but with actions and in truth.” (1 John 3:17-18) Does this really mean that if I hold onto my possessions when another is in need that God’s love is not in me?

James teaches us that, “Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.” (James 1:27) This seems to be a very straight-forward verse, yet why is it so radical? This word “religion” means “worship,” or “ceremonial observance.” Why doesn’t the Church view caring for orphans and widows as a vital part of our worship?

So this is what my wife and I are doing: Last year we started the process of adopting children. We contacted our local Department of Public and Social Services, had our background checks, attended many hours of training, and now we’re on the list to receive children any day now. This is something just about everyone can do, and unlike the common perception it doesn’t cost a thing.

We took a look at our budget, and we’ve decided the needs of children are more important to us, and to God, than owning two cars, owning a home, frequent restaurant visits, cable television, etc. These things that seem so inconsequential to middle-class America were barriers to “pure and faultless” worship. They were (literally) a car we sold to buy beds for the children. I don’t have a gold lapel pin, but I would have been willing to sell that as well if I could have “gotten one more.”

These are meager sacrifices for what seems like nothing compared to what Oskar Schindler managed, but we’re a meager family doing what we can.

Schindler lived just miles from the Auschwitz-Birkenau concentration camps, a real and present evil. We also visited these camps, and it’s really a life-changing experience. But we live in a world where 22,000 children die each day due to poverty-related issues like hunger, and preventable diseases. These are things we don’t see on a daily basis because they live in South-East Asia, or Sub-Saharan Africa.

But it also happens closer to home, and we ignore it, and even pass laws to keep it out of our neighborhoods - someplace out of sight. Nearly 21% of American children are living in poverty, facing food insecurity, poor health, abuse and neglect. With our income, we cannot afford to adopt a child from overseas, but we can help a few here in the Coachella Valley who are in need. I can’t make excuses anymore.

Jesus expressed how much it takes to enter the Kingdom of Heaven in severe terms - over and over again. At one point he even said that, “If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters - yes even their own life - such a person cannot be my disciple.” (Luke 14:26) These are probably the harshest recorded saying of his. Yet I think I now understand somewhat what they mean. We are adopting children instead of having our own biological children. These aren’t children we will ever know, but we’re giving them up in order to “care for orphans in their distress.”

Jesus also taught us, “If you only greet your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.” (Matthew 5:46-48) It is (generally) easy to love your own family, and stick with your own kin, but it takes a work of God to love without expectation.

Of course these children will be ours. They will be loved, and they will love us. We aren’t walking away from anyone, but into a new kind of love. God is the author of love, and giver of good gifts. These children are great gifts from God, and we praise him for the wonderful opportunity to care for these little ones. In receiving them we receive God. As Jesus said, “Whoever welcomes one of these little children in my name welcomes me; and whoever welcomes me does not welcome me but the one who sent me.” (Mark 9:37)

You see, it is always pure joy to serve our Lord. What may seem like a sacrifice of time, money or possessions always ends up being worth 100-times that in the economy of the Kingdom of Heaven. (Matthew 19:29)

Putting the Kingdom first

When anyone addresses the words of Jesus concerning money, there is always the same answer given.

Jesus said:

• "Sell your possessions and give to the poor." (Luke 12:33)
• "You cannot serve God and Money." (Matthew 6:24)
• "Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal." (Matthew 6:19)
• "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God." (Luke 18:25)

And the answer is, "God wants us to put HIM first!" That is, Jesus only meant we cannot love money more than we love God.

Of course Jesus didn't say, "You can serve two masters, so long as you only work for one of them on the evenings." He said, "You cannot serve two masters."

But what exactly does that mean? How does one tell if they're serving God or money?

Maybe you can see how much time you spend at work earning money and compare it with the time you spend working for the Kingdom of God. Maybe you can compare how much money you spend on yourself with how much you spend on the poor.

They will use this answer to weasel out of what Jesus plainly says, and then still fail to live up to their own definition.

If you have money and you aren't supporting orphans and widows with it, you are serving money, not God. (James 1:27) If you own anything and do not use it to help those in need, you are serving money, not God. (1 John 3:17)

We live in a society that is the wealthiest society to ever exist throughout time. We don't need most of the stuff we have, yet we keep moving the goalposts to include our luxuries under what is acceptable to God. Having two cars is more important than having one, and providing for a family in need. Having a home office is more important than using the dining room table in a smaller home and using the excess to provide housing for the homeless. Having a cappuccino maker is more important than providing water for a village without it.

We pat ourselves on the back thinking we're good because we tithe to the local church (to pay the pastor's salary), even give extra to a few charities, and even help out at the shelter during the holidays, while the poor continue to struggle. The hungry continue to hunger. The thirsty continue to thirst. The homeless remain on the streets.

We tell ourselves we don't love money, but we spend thousands on fertilization treatments when there are thousands of orphans available for adoption.

We wish we could give more, yet we spend excessively on creature comforts and entertainment.

Quenching the Spirit in women

In 1 Thessalonians 5, Paul writes,

Do not quench the Spirit. Do not treat prophecies with contempt but test them all

Yet the Church has become expert at doing just this. In fact it's codified in many denominations, and held up as an important value for Christian ministry. I am, of course talking about the practice of excluding women from ministry.

In 1 Corinthians 12, Paul lists off a series of spiritual gifts. Each of these are given to those within the Body of Christ. These include both men and women. They include wisdom, knowledge, faith, healing, miracles, prophecy, discerning spirits, tongues, and interpretation of tongues. The rest of the chapter goes on to express how important each member of the body is, and over the next couple of chapters how the gifts should be expressed in worship.

For even as the body is one and yet has many members, and all the members of the body, though they are many, are one body, so also is Christ. For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one Spirit.

Yet women are excluded in our congregations today.

Even though Paul admonishes, "the members of the body which seem to be weaker are necessary; and those members of the body which we deem less honorable, on these we bestow more abundant honor, and our less presentable members become much more presentable," (emphasis mine) their spiritual gifts are relegated to support their husbands, or to minister to other women and children only.

Taking this last verse in tandem with 1 Peter 3:7, we've really got a crisis in hand.

You husbands in the same way, live with your wives in an understanding way, as with someone weaker, since she is a woman; and show her honor as a fellow heir of the grace of life, so that your prayers will not be hindered.

Yet women are excluded in our congregations today.

They're not excluded in the way that women are segregated in mosques, and for a completely different reason, but it's the fact that the spirit is quenched in women by disallowing their use in the greater congregation.

This is true of men too, as I have said before, but it's especially true of women. Our church structures disallow the use of gifts for everyone but the professional Christians. Yet women aren't allowed to be professional Christians. And even congregations that are more open to congregational involvement in worship tend to hold women back from full participation.

Stop it. Just stop it.

Blaming women

The Church has been struggling over the past few decades with the drop in male attendance at services. There have been many answers to why we have this phenomenon. But it's not unique to the Christian world. The secular world is also seeing a trend of fewer men seeking college degrees, and fewer men in the work force.

Unfortunately, too many people come up with the same answer: women.

Yes. They blame women for the failures of men.

Here are a few statistics:

• Women are more likely than men to graduate from high school
• Only 44% of undergraduates at community or four-year colleges are men
• Female college students have higher grade point averages than men, and are more likely to graduate
• Among young adults, 35% of women and 27% of men possessed bachelor degrees in 2009
• Women are 60% more likely than men to earn a bachelor's degree by the time they're 23
• More women than men are earning advanced degrees; 9% of women and 6% of men
• Nearly 6 out of 10 adults holding advanced degrees between the ages of 25 and 29 are women
• There are now more women than men in the workforce, with 3/4 of the jobs lost in the Great Recession by men
• A third of men aged 22-34 still live at home with their parents; in the ages 18-24, 56% of men and 48% of women still live with their parents

Looking at these statistics, we see that young men are checking out. They're choosing to be slackers while young women are being more disciplined.

Yet the blame falls on women? You have to be kidding me.

I've heard guys say it started with women's suffrage. Yeah, women voting has made men less inclined to make their own lives better.

Or they'll blame the feminist movement of the 1970s, saying women entered the work force and made everything worse for men.

This is completely and demonstrably false.

Woodoodles and Floopdeens

Let's do an object lesson:

There are 100 Woodoodles who work in a mine. They go to work every day and mine 20 kilos of diamonds. One day, the foreman says they need 40 kilos of diamonds, so he's going to bring in 100 Floopdeens, and expand the mine. Over time, as the mine grows, the Floopdeen workers grow as the mine grows to accommodate them. Now there are 100 Floopdeens mining 18 kilos of diamonds, but there are only 80 Woodoodles and they're only mining 14 kilos.

When there are openings for 100 Woodoodles and 100 Floopdeens, why are there only 80 Woodoodles when there were 100? Should the foreman hire a few more Floopdeens to cover the Woodoodle labor that isn't getting done?

It's possible that some Woodoodles are upset that Floopdeens are now working in their mines, but that's irrational behavior, and may even be racist. It's not the Floopdeens' fault the Woodoodles don't want to work any more. It's not their fault they're hated by some of the Woodoodles.

There is clearly a different answer for this problem, because laming women for the failings of men is ridiculous.Women don't keep men from going to college, or earning good grades. And women don't keep men from attending church services.

Belonging and purpose

I've been attending a lot of parenting classes recently as my wife and I are preparing to take foster children with the intention to adopt. In the last class, it was stressed over and over than children act out when they do not feel belonging or significance. These two things are the basic desires of everybody once food, shelter and security are met.

They explained that in the agrarian society, the children worked alongside their parents, so they had significance, and belonging. Now children are to be seen and not heard. They're to go to school where belonging is lacking, and pass tests where significance is lacking. At home, children aren't asked to carry much of the load either.

This is why I think men are failing - especially in the church communities. Our institutions don't provide belonging or significance for men. And this isn't because women are present, it's because they're treated as sheep or machines.

Over the past thirty years, when the churches began noticing the trend of male attendance reduction, we also saw a new type of church structure being formed. These congregations moved away from an elder-centered community, and more into a cult-of-personality around an individual man. It was this one man's vision, and it was this one man's authority that the congregation was asked to submit to. And I know many men who have become sick of this, and have left the typical church community because they weren't given a voice, and when they attempted to exercise their spiritual gifts, they were admonished and sometimes told to leave.

It's not because women took over, or the churches started catering to the needs of women than caused men to leave. It was because the alpha-male model of vertical authority took over, and pushed out the other men.

Bigger, stronger, faster

Recently, I watched a documentary called Bigger Stronger Faster, a discovery of the American infatuation with steroid use and bulging muscles. The host and narrator talked about how the 1980s introduced a new model of masculinity into American culture; a lone wolf with rippling muscles, and kickass attitude. One guest showed how the GI Joe action figure went from a normal-sized guy in the '60s to a muscular guy in the '80s to an inhuman size in the '90s.

Over these years, male culture has praised machismo over brains. Brawn over skills.

Since the 1980s, we’ve been inundated with a new image of man. It was no longer Sean Connery’s multi-skilled gentleman, Cary Grant’s casual elegance, or even John Wayne’s meek toughness. It was Arnold’s biceps, Jean Claude’s speed, Sly Stallone’s will, and Hulk Hogan’s anger.

Men have sloughed off the complete man in favor of the warrior.

Being smart isn’t manly. Being gentle is the price we pay to keep the company of women (but who needs them, right?). Manners are for sissies; ties are for idiots.

And along with this machismo comes homophobia. Having a nice hair cut is gay. Being fit is gay. Wearing nice clothes is gay. Cooking is gay. Reading books is gay. Doing well in school is gay.

It seems like the more we see how gay men are exactly the same as us, the less we want to be like ourselves. So we turn to being fat sloths to get away from the appearance of being gay.

The answer

I'm not really interested in the cultural aspects of masculinity as much as I am the Christian aspects. What can we do to help men in the church?

Look to Christ, of course.

The first chapter of Hebrews says that Jesus Christ is "the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being." (v.3) If we want to be perfect as the Father is perfect (Matthew 5:48), we should model our church communities and our lives after the Son. (1 Peter 2:21)

Church discipline should no longer follow the feudal system of vertical authority. This is not how Christ lead his disciples, nor is it how the Apostles taught the leaders to behave.

If Jesus is the "exact representation" of God, and he came not to be served but to serve (Matthew 20:28; Luke 12:37), than God's example for us is to serve one another. (Luke 22:26-27; Galatians 5:13) This is especially true of the leaders. Too often the leadership demands service to their needs, and they punish those who do not fall in line with their vision. This is contrary to the way Christ exemplified and taught.

Mark 10:42-45

Jesus called them together and said, "You know that those who are regarded as rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be slave of all. For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many."

Peter told the leaders the same thing, as Jesus taught him as he washed Peter's feet. (John 13:12-17)

1 Peter 5:2-3

Be shepherds of God’s flock that is under your care, watching over them—not because you must, but because you are willing, as God wants you to be; not pursuing dishonest gain, but eager to serve; not lording it over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock.

Leaders, provide significance in the congregation for all participants. Find the gifts of everyone and encourage them to use them. Don't hinder their use. You're purpose is not to guide the "sheep" but to provide a place for them to have belonging and significance. You encourage men to be leaders, yet won't let them lead within their church community because you're the leader. Let them lead. Let other men have visions.

This is the same for women. Women find significance in hearing others, so it's not difficult for women's ministries to grow by providing a place of belonging. But women have other gifts as well, and they need to be allowed to participate fully in the congregation as well. All members need to have belonging and significance, and all of their spiritual giftings need to be encouraged and allowed.

Hate America

This idea is a continuation of my previous post about this same topic, Undivided devotion to the Lord. Since it is the same argument but a different text of scripture, I will simply just copy that argument verbatim, with just a few modifications. This passage is Luke 14:26

Jesus says,

If anyone comes to me and does not hate his country, fellow-citizens, place of birth—yes, even their own life—such a person cannot be my disciple.

This is a powerful passage. This pericope isn't about patriotism and politics, but about discipleship. It is one of those passages that the American church has done away with completely, or at least largely marginalized. It's usually explained away by saying it's an order of magnitude. The strongest wording on it comes from David Platt in his book Radical: Taking Back Your Faith from the American Dream. He says it means our devotion to Christ should be so strong, our earthly relationships should look like hate in comparison. Most people just say it means you can't love man more than God, and should it come down to it, you should give up your relationships - for example - if your family were to expel you because of your beliefs.

Family is placed even above patriotism. The duty to your family is before the nation. (There are some ultra-nationalistic people who claim duty to country comes first, but in general, the family comes first.) This is why I even went back to talking about family before I went into patriotism.

If the family is the highest priority for Christians, even above our duty to the nation, how much more does this passage apply when you put it in context of politics? Or employment? Or any lesser thing?

Yet I assume phrasing this passage in this way may be even more scandalous for many.

Christ immediately follows this saying,

Suppose one of you wants to build a tower. Won’t you first sit down and estimate the cost to see if you have enough money to complete it? For if you lay the foundation and are not able to finish it, everyone who sees it will ridicule you, saying, ‘This person began to build and wasn’t able to finish.’

I added emphasis here. It's usually said, "count the cost." Christ is challenging us to really consider what earthly attachments we possess, and how they affect our place in the Kingdom of Heaven. He wants us to let go of our attachments to this world.

We're very much attached to our national politics. Our government. Our money ... Isn't that why we have protests against taxation? We want to hold onto our money. Some are calling for revolution, because they're willing to fight and kill to hold onto the treasures they've built up in this world.

If anyone comes to me and does not hate America, such a person cannot be my disciple. And whoever does not submit to government oppression while you carry out my work cannot be my disciple.