This Week
Intro: A reader shares his perspective on faith and farming
Hot Takes: Presidential statement on protests in Cuba; James Carville calls it as he sees it; MIT study on societal collapse; space “pioneers” or “pirates”?
Feature: “Is There Room to be Gay in the PCA?”
Special Video: “Truth in Advertising” by Rev. Russ Whitfield
Peaches’ Picks: The Last Green Valley by Mark Sullivan
Fresh & Random Linkage: World’s most expensive French Fries; skydiving fish
Dear Reader,
Just had to share this email from a friend of mine back home in Illinois. These are my people.
“Didn’t hear of any closer to your parents, but four small tornadoes touched down around Arenzville and Virginia this past Saturday afternoon. I fill you in about that just because I can’t believe how good everything looks. It was a cold April (after the weather guys said it would be warmer than normal), and everything was off to a slow start. And now it has more than caught up. Wind or hail aside, we at least have a crop, even if it turns off dry.
The miracle of it all never ceases to amaze me. I don’t see how a farmer can help but be a Christian. First of all, the faith you have to have just to go put the kind of money we do into the ground in the form of seed and fertilizer. Of course, we are doing everything we can to hedge our bets as far as timeliness and seed choices and whatever farming practices we use.
BUT, the gamble involved is way more than what some do in a slot machine or sporting event (which is probably why I do almost none of the first and have never bet on a game). Follow that up with the ability to leave it all at work and not keep you up at night. As I always say, ‘That’s why I go to church.’
Great oversimplification of the whole faith thing. But seriously, I don’t worry about what I have no control over.”
Plenty of other good content in this edition of Second Drafts. As always, thanks for reading.
Craig
P.S.: As a reminder, you’re welcome and encouraged to email me directly with feedback, ideas, links, etc. at cmdunham [at] gmail [dot] com. Just know that, unless you specifically tell me not to, I may quote you here (though it will always be anonymously).
Hot Takes
A little different format this week. See what you think.
“Statement by President Joseph R. Biden, Jr. on Protests in Cuba” - I thought this was a good statement by President Biden in response to the cries for freedom in Cuba. It’s interesting how those protesting (similar to those in Hong Kong) are making use of the American flag as their symbol to inspire others. Now if we could only get our Team USA athletes to do the same.
“James Carville Warns Democratic Party Letting ‘Wokeness,’ ‘Language Police’ Define It” - As crazy (or is it Southern?) as Democrat strategist James Carville comes across with regard to politics, one thing I’ve always appreciated about him is his tendency to shoot straight. In this article, Carville gets at the dangers of the woke seed that far left progressives are sowing. I think he makes a lot of sense.
“MIT Predicted in 1972 That Society Will Collapse This Century. New Research Shows We’re on Schedule.” - I don’t know if I quite buy this 49-year-old study’s conclusion that, “the current business-as-usual trajectory of global civilization is heading toward the terminal decline of economic growth within the coming decade—and at worst, could trigger societal collapse by around 2040.” Then again, when inflation jumps by 5.4% from this time a year ago due to our government’s money printing and spending, maybe there’s something to it.
“With Virgin Galactic's Launch of Richard Branson in the Books, All Eyes Are on Blue Origin and Jeff Bezos” - Writing as one who has no interest whatsoever in going into space (or “the Heavens,” as is the more biblical nomenclature), I’ve always been intrigued by the idea, and appreciative of those who put in the hard work and risked their lives to further space exploration. With that as criteria, I can’t put Richard Branson or Jeff Bezos in the category of space “pioneers” when I think of them mostly as “space pirates” attempting to buy their way into the cosmos in their quest for immortality. At least Elon Musk - for all his ego - makes space flight seem just a little more noble of an undertaking.
Is There Room to Be Gay in the PCA?
I wasn’t going to write about my denomination’s vote a few weeks ago at the Presbyterian Church in America’s General Assembly on the overture that prevents anyone who identifies as gay or same-sex-attracted from holding ordained office.
Three reasons (there are others) for my hesitation were: 1) I’m still thinking through the vote and potential implications; 2) While some of my readers are part of the PCA, many are not (though the issue is important for anyone who claims to care about the Bible’s teaching on the matter); and 3) I know I have some readers who already think me old-fashioned (at best) and homophobic (at worst) because of my traditional biblical views on sexuality and marriage. Why take a(nother) online beating if it can be helped?
However, for the sake of 1) trying to evaluate and process the discussion; 2) explain the crux of the decision; and 3) perhaps surprise my critics who think me a bigot, let me try to demonstrate that I care about the issue for more than only denominational reasons. My approach is meant to be as pastoral as theological (though I will always argue one cannot biblically minister without both), so allow me this as a starting caveat. Put simply: I’m trying to be careful here.
Assembling to Vote
As one might imagine in light of the increasing cultural castigation of traditional views on sexuality, it was only a matter of time before the discussion of whether same-sex attracted men (per Scripture and PCA church constitution, women cannot be ordained in the PCA) can serve as pastors in the pulpits of PCA churches.
I’m not aware of any discussion about whether men who are practicing homosexuals can be ordained; that one is pretty easy (or should be) for a church that claims to believe and follow the Bible’s teachings on the qualifications of a pastor. The question here has to do with those men who are same-sex attracted but who, because of the call of God on their lives, choose to live a celibate life in order to obey and serve.
Increasingly over the past 4-5 years, our denomination has wrestled with how ordained same-sex attracted, celibate pastors could and should identify themselves in light of their faith and their calling. Thus, in the aforementioned General Assembly vote (and as reported by the Washington Post the Sunday after),
“Pastors and church leaders in the Presbyterian Church in America passed an overture at its General Assembly this week saying those who identify as gay are not qualified for ordination in the conservative Presbyterian denomination.
The overture includes any identity Christians may profess ‘that undermines or contradicts their identity as new creations in Christ,’ though it singles out ‘gay Christian,’ ‘same sex attracted Christian’ and ‘homosexual Christian’ among those identities. The denomination already bars any ‘practicing homosexual’ from ordination.
Overture 23 was overwhelmingly approved 1,438-417 late Thursday night (July 1) at the Presbyterian Church in America’s annual business meeting in St. Louis…To take effect, Overture 23 still must be approved by two-thirds of the denomination’s regional presbyteries and then again by a majority at the next General Assembly, scheduled for 2022 in Birmingham, Alabama.”
The vote, of course, did not just come out of nowhere, nor was the PCA’s discussion of the matter new to the General Assembly. In case you missed it, one of the glories (most of the time) of Presbyterians is the “ready, aim, aim, aim…” approach to such debate and decision-making, and some more background is required to understand what led up to this vote about same-sex attracted (but celibate) pastors in the PCA.
Revoice, Studies & Overtures
Greg Johnson, my friend and former pastor from our time in St. Louis, is one of these same-sex attracted, celibate pastors. I first met Greg when he was the associate pastor at Memorial Presbyterian Church and I was a first-year student at Covenant Seminary. He and I became fast friends with a shared desire to see the church flourish in its ministry to St. Louis’ Central West End. Our (then young) girls enjoyed him, and Megan and I benefited from his preaching and pastoral gifts.
Our family had been away from St. Louis several years when Greg announced that he was same-sex attracted; with that confession, however, he also announced that he was called to live celibately in obedience to Christ. (If you’re interested, you can read his testimony here in Christianity Today.)
Following this announcement, Greg was allowed by his elders and the Missouri Presbytery - the regional governing PCA body that oversees Memorial - to remain in his role as pastor, as there did not seem a conflict with his perspective and behavior and the Presbytery’s study, “Homosexuality and the Gospel of Grace,” published in October of 2017.
Things got complicated, however, when Greg (then lead pastor at Memorial), along with Memorial itself, hosted the 2018 conference of Revoice, an evangelical organization whose mission is,
“To support and encourage gay, lesbian, bisexual, and other same-sex attracted Christians—as well as those who love them—so that all in the Church might be empowered to live in gospel unity while observing the historic Christian doctrine of marriage and sexuality.”
The conference made national news and offended folks of all persuasions; after all, a theologically and morally conservative church that’s part of a theologically and morally conservative denomination hosting a conference to come along LGTBQ folks wanting to say no to their homosexual attractions wasn’t a familiar headline.
Unfortunately, the press on the conference (as well as those who hosted it) took on a life of its own, and Memorial (and Greg) found themselves in the crosshairs of plenty of not-so-friendly “friendly fire.” To get help in dealing with the assumptions and accusations (several of them slanderous),
“…the Presbytery had received a request, by a letter dated October 10, 2018, from the Memorial Presbyterian Church Session, and from TE Greg Johnson, the senior pastor of Memorial Presbyterian, concerning allegations of wrongdoing made against them, or suspicions raised about their beliefs, by PCA teaching and ruling elders from other presbyteries for choosing to host the Revoice 18 Conference in July.”
In other words, in an attempt to deal with several negative statements following the conference, Greg and the elders of Memorial themselves humbly asked the Missouri Presbytery to conduct an investigation concerning their involvement in Revoice. The committee was formed and produced a report that, while commending Greg and Memorial for their heart to minister to the LGBTQ community (particularly those within the church), also requested that they respond to the judgments and recommendations in the report over the course of the next year.
In addition, and thinking more broadly than just Revoice and Memorial, the committee wrote that,
“We recommend that the Missouri Presbytery overture the 2019 PCA General Assembly for a study committee on the complex issues around which there is currently not consensus.”
This overture was made and approved at the 2019 General Assembly, resulting in the formation and eventual report of the Ad Interim Committee on Human Sexuality - one of the best theological and pastoral proclamations of the biblical view of human sexuality I’ve read, written by the likes of Dr. Bryan Chappell, Rev. Tim Keller, and others I hold pretty highly in the denomination. The document was to be presented at the 2020 General Assembly, but due to Covid cancelling last year’s GA, it was presented this June as a precursor to the discussion and vote on Overture 23, which again stated that,
“Men who self-identify as a ‘gay Christian,’ ‘same-sex attracted Christian,’ ‘homosexual Christian,’ or like term shall be deemed not qualified for ordination in the Presbyterian Church in America.”
As reported above, the overture overwhelmingly passed and now must pass two-thirds of the presbyteries before a final majority vote at next year’s GA would establish it as part of the PCA’s church constitution.
Some Considerations
If I haven’t bored you to death with my retelling of the PCA’s particular machinations, congratulations. You’ve made it to what I really want to discuss - the pastoral and ecclesiastical implications of our theological statements. Greg gets at this tension in his brief comments during the overture discussion (note the affirmation he rightly gives to all 12 of the declarations of the Ad Interim Committee on Human Sexuality):
Greg’s sentiments in the video, as well as those quoted in the Washington Post article, are representative of many of the pastors, elders, and friends I know within the PCA:
“‘We don’t need to amend our constitution to make a non-affirming denomination (hostile) to gay people who want to follow Jesus in celibacy.’
Obviously, however, there are plenty - roughly three-fourths of the leadership of the PCA by vote, as well as many others outside the denomination - who believe the clarification necessary. For instance, Dr. Carl R. Trueman, professor at Grove City College and a member of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church denomination, had a piece in First Things following the GA week affirming the decision, writing,
“The PCA voted to uphold the Christian sexual morality of the last two millennia, rather than that of merely the last two decades. The world will not thank them for it. But those of us in smaller sister denominations do.”
In thinking through my own response, here are various thoughts (in no particular order) that have come to mind in recent weeks:
Our sexuality is one of the most complex and nuanced aspects of who we are as humans, so we must resist the temptation to believe that we can easily understand it; that said, God clarifies much in the Scriptures about our sexuality that we cannot ignore or assume is outdated. As God is our Creator, we should have more wonder and respect for this aspect of his creation.
Same-sex attraction is a function not of nature nor nurture, but of both; thus (and with apologies to Lady Gaga), those who are same-sex attracted are not just “born this way,” but neither are they just “formed this way” by their choices. To say same-sex attraction comes from one or the other is too simplistic a view.
Christians are “sinners saved by grace” and “saints who sin.” Which do we think of ourselves first? Which should we? Do we need both? If so, in what ratio?
Paul never hesitated to lead with his sin in explaining his relationship with Christ (the chronological progression from Galatians 6:3-5 to 1 Corinthians 15:9 to Ephesians 3:7-8 to 1 Timothy 1:15 is a great study); however, he also never always led with his sin or made it his ever-verbalized main identity. If we’re honest, it takes work to ignore the balance, which might be a clue we shouldn’t.
Perhaps as good a summary as any of what the identity of righteousness looks like are Paul’s words in Philippians 3:4-6, in which he says,
“…Though I myself have reason for confidence in the flesh also. If anyone else thinks he has reason for confidence in the flesh, I have more: circumcised on the eighth day, of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; as to the law, a Pharisee; as to zeal, a persecutor of the church; as to righteousness under the law, blameless.
But whatever gain I had, I counted as loss for the sake of Christ. Indeed, I count everything as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things and count them as rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith—that I may know him and the power of his resurrection, and may share his sufferings, becoming like him in his death, that by any means possible I may attain the resurrection from the dead.”
Conclusion
In light of the thoughts and Scriptures above (as well as an attempt to conclude and land this plane), let me just say that, I don’t understand the argument made by same-sex attracted pastors (and others) for the need to repeatedly define themselves as “gay Christians,” but I also don’t understand the desire for a formal addition to the PCA constitution to ensure that it never happens. With regard to questions about language and identity, I’m quite satisfied with the analysis and recommendations found on page 32 of the report of the Ad Interim Committee on Human Sexuality:
“There is an understandable desire among some celibate Christians who identify as gay to utilize the common parlance of our culture as a missional or apologetic tool, hoping to redefine for our culture a way of being gay that in fact submits those desires to the lordship of Christ. However, there is a substantial corresponding risk of syncretism in such an approach. This potential danger toward syncretism can manifest as an over-identification with the LGBT community (over and against a primary identification with the church) or even the formation of an LGBT subculture within the church. In view of the twin dangers of misunderstanding and syncretism, we believe it is generally unwise to use the language of gay Christian.
Given this conclusion, how should we respond to fellow believers in our churches who may use such language? First, we ought not start from the assumption that they are being unfaithful or living in active rebellion to God. Rather, in the context of established relationships, pastors and leaders in the church ought to ask questions and seek to understand each individual’s story. Why do they use that language? Have they thought through the relative benefits and dangers? Noting the range of possible meanings of terms like gay and gay Christian, we would do well to seek understanding before imparting advice. In practical and plain terms, the issue of terminology is more likely a matter for shepherding in wisdom, and not in and of itself grounds for discipline.”
This counsel, of course, pertains to parishioners, but I see no reason why the principles do not apply to same-sex attracted pastors and members of their respective sessions and presbyteries through relationship and submitting to one another out of reference for Christ (Ephesians 5:21). “Gay” should not be a title used to qualify one’s Christianity; at the same time, neither should the word be prohibited from pastoral use in helping explain the gospel work done and being done in his own life.
Fellow Presbyterians, as followers of Christ, we have the Word of God, the Spirit of God, and each other. Let’s not replace polity with policy here, but instead trust God by faith in his promises to enable us to figure out and be the church in which,
“There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” (Galatians 3:28)
Soli Deo gloria.
Special Video: “Truth in Advertising”
Instead of a Post(erity) post this week, let me instead offer you a wonderful sermon from the Wednesday night worship at the recent PCA General Assembly. In this sermon titled, “Truth in Advertising,” Rev. Russ Whitfield critiques our sinful culture with the eye of Jonah, then critiques our judgmental selves in doing so with the eye of God. Watch to the end, as Rev. Whitfield can preach the bark off a tree.
Peaches’ Picks
Recommended to me by my former 3rd grade teacher, Peaches and I are only about 50 pages into this book by Bozeman author Mark Sullivan. So far, while the writing could use a little tighter editor, I’m enjoying the characters and the story, which already I have a feeling will end up somewhere in Montana. The official write-up on the book:
“In late March 1944, as Stalin’s forces push into Ukraine, young Emil and Adeline Martel must make a terrible decision: Do they wait for the Soviet bear’s intrusion and risk being sent to Siberia? Or do they reluctantly follow the wolves—murderous Nazi officers who have pledged to protect ‘pure-blood’ Germans?
The Martels are one of many families of German heritage whose ancestors have farmed in Ukraine for more than a century. But after already living under Stalin’s horrifying regime, Emil and Adeline decide they must run in retreat from their land with the wolves they despise to escape the Soviets and go in search of freedom.
Caught between two warring forces and overcoming horrific trials to pursue their hope of emigrating to the West, the Martels’ story is a brutal, complex, and ultimately triumphant tale that illuminates the extraordinary power of love, faith, and one family’s incredible will to survive and see their dreams realized.”
Fresh & Random Linkage
A few items that caught my eye this week:
“New York Restaurant's $200 Fries Certified as the World's Most Expensive” - There’s obscene, and there’s obscene. This is obscene.
“Who Says Fish Can’t Fly?: Aerial Stocking Places Fish in Lakes via Airplane Drop” - My favorite quote from the article: “They’ve been using airplanes to drop fish into the water since the 1950s, and it’s estimated that over 95% of the fish survive and thrive after their plunge from the air.” Here’s a stat I bet you’ll never have a need for: “5% of all fish who skydive never make it.”
Until next time.
Why Subscribe?
Why not? Second Drafts is a once-a-week newsletter delivered to your inbox (you can also read it online or through your RSS reader) and it’s totally free.
Keep Connected
You’re welcome to follow me on Twitter.