Letters to the Editor - July/August 2009

'Nicely Chosen Words'
(posted 8-25-09)
Brother Bill Hallsted uses nicely chosen words in his essay “Baptizing Grace” (August 23). There is one statement he made and used correctly that others have made and used incorrectly. I do not believe he would agree with those in error. I hope that those who are in error will not think he is supporting their conclusions.

The article said: “If we intend and endeavor to accept the gift, but someone says the wrong words, or says them with the wrong inflection, or burps in the middle of it all, or yawns, or countless other things . . . IT DOESN’T MATTER!”

The key comment about what he says is “if we intend.” It is the faith of the person being baptized that is doing the responding to the gospel, and not the person baptizing or, as he mentioned, the words spoken over them.
 
However, the other question becoming pertinent in churches today is: When the right words are spoken, but the recipient has been taught that baptism is merely an outward act toward men, what then? Clearly Peter says baptism is the appeal toward God and not men (1 Peter 3:21).
 
So many churches use a formula of asking Jesus into their heart, which is absolutely unfounded in Scripture, and then in turn, represent baptism as some kind of post-salvation work that proves to the world you really are saved.
 
His comment that is quoted above should not be intended as an endorsement of the wrong conclusion of many.
 
Thanks for printing this good article from Bill Hallstead.
—Bill Dinwiddie
Garner, North Carolina

There Has Been a Decline, Indeed
(posted 8-21-09)
I am writing in response to David Fiensy’s article “What Ever Happened to Pastoral Care?” (see the August 9 issue). In The Christian System, Alexander Campbell writes concerning the leadership structure within the church. He says, “As the Christian system is a perfect system, it wisely provides for its own perpetuity and prosperity by creating all necessary offices and filling them with suitable persons. We have said these offices are three, and of perpetual because of necessary . . . Bishops . . . Deacons . . . Evangelists.”
 
There is no doubt that pastoral leadership is necessary within the church. The question Fiensy asks needs to be answered from biblical precedent rather than the traditional understanding of the minister’s role. Campbell points out that in order for the church to last forever, all the functions of the leadership roles need to be present in the church. He calls this “a perfect system.” Bishops (elders) should “shepherd the flock, provide strong leadership, pastoral care, discipline and sound biblical teaching” (Alexander Strauch, Biblical Eldership: An Urgent Call to Restore Biblical Church Leadership, p. 9). Deacons, which translated “servant” or “minister,” are to provide ministry to those who have a specific need. Evangelists (preacher) are ”essential to the spread and prevalence to the gospel in the present state of the world” (Alexander Campbell, Millennial Harbinger, Vol. IV, p. 180).
 
When we take a look at the three leadership roles within the church we see all people’s spiritual and physical needs being met. The elder pastors believers and those who are already a part of the church. The deacons minister to people, meeting physical needs that may exist. And the preacher promotes a culture of evangelism within the church. All of these roles need to be fulfilled in order for the church to function as God intended for it to function.
 
So what has happened to pastoral care? I find it quite troubling that we use the words minister and pastor as a title for the preacher. It is symbolic of what has happened to the role of the preacher. The preacher is expected to pastor and minister to the body first. God’s Word teaches us the preacher’s role is to proclaim the gospel and promote a culture of evangelism. The real pastors are the elders and the real ministers are the deacons.
 
Fiensy points out three dangers of preachers focusing more on preaching than pastoral care.
 
Danger one: “Such an attitude ultimately harms the church’s witness.” The problem I have with this statement is the preacher is not the church. The preacher is a person who is gifted by God to fulfill a specific leadership role. I have noticed that new believers do not have the same expectations as longtime believers. I have gone to see new believers in the hospital on many occasions. Often they question my presence and are somewhat shocked I came. Then there are people who are longtime believers that get upset when I do not show up. They say, “The church did not come to see me.” Then I find out there were elders and other members who went to see them. Their perception is the church did not care. This is problematic because the church is not defined by one person. I ask this question: Which is a greater witness to an unbeliever, a preacher who comes to see someone (who is paid to do this) or 10 people from a small group, Sunday school class, or the church who come to visit.
 
Danger two: “Lack of pastoral care . . . can affect preaching.” First, not spending time preparing for Sunday morning has a greater affect on preaching than lack of pastoral care. Second, relevance in preaching is not stimulated through pastoral care; it comes from hanging with people, believers, and nonbelievers. I would say there is a greater lack of hanging out with those who are far from God within Christianity than those who are already a part of the church. Yet, we see Jesus hanging out with the outcast more frequently than those who were a part of the religious institution. Why do believers continue to miss this part of Jesus and fail to apply it to their own life?
 
Danger three: “Failure to do pastoral care . . . may decide how we understand our faith.” I partially agree with this section. When Fiensy talks about Luther’s understanding of the “Theology of the Cross” and how God speaks to us through brokenness, weakness, and grace, he is right on point. The problem is that it is not limited to just pastoral care. We see this in all the functions of the church leadership roles. When people act as a pastor to someone who is going through serious life issues, when people minister to someone who has a specific need or when a person shares his faith with someone who is far from God, doesn’t God speak from the cross? Don’t we see him speaking through brokenness, weakness, and grace in all these places? It is not limited to pastoral care.
 
The key is that we need a healthy balance of all three roles: the pastor, the minister, and the evangelist. When there is this balance the church moves from being defined by a single person and becomes defined by the people. This is why Paul wrote the following to the church at Ephesus: “It was he who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists (preachers), and some to be pastors and teachers (elders), to prepare God’s people for works of service (deacons) so that the body of Christ may be built up until we reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ” (Ephesians 4:11-13).
—Scott Baker
Tallmadge, Ohio

There Has Been a Decline, Indeed
(posted 8-7-09)
I loved the article “Whatever Happened to Pastoral Care?” by David Fiensy (August 9). I have been a Christian for more than 44 years and have noticed a decline in this area of ministry. Churches have put aside the pastoral care of person(s) within their congregation for numerous reasons, including that some folk are not financially well-off enough to attend their church. I have seen this numerous times over and over. Rather, some pastors spend their time reading or working on their messages all week long. I have even seen one who decided he would visit those if they met his financial criteria!

Am I judging those pastors? No, but their fruits are not shining through within their ministry. Instead, they would rather someone else do it in the name of growth of their church, citing they do not have the time for doing everything. One has said it is not the preacher’s job to do everything. He is right about that. The congregation also needs to take on the responsibility of being a Christian and reaching out to the community.

But that still does not give an excuse as to the pastor’s responsibility of leading and pastoring the flock! Many pastors never leave their office except to go to lunch with someone, and even that is chosen times and with whom. I have met several in my time and within our community who do not go to the hospitals to visit for some unknown reason, let alone going to their home. They might send and e-mail or possibly make a phone call if their schedule allows for it.

I love the pastor who said I want to get into the homes of every one of my congregation at least once a year, along with other duties of visiting the sick and afflicted! Praise God, I believe he was right on the path to pastoral care!

I could say more but I believe a thank you is in order to the writer for making this come to light. An article written awhile back said churches are not growing due to winning new souls; rather, they are growing because of a moving of congregations to other churches who tickle their fancy and give them what they want to hear—not what they need. Through the foolishness of preaching shall men be saved is a wonderful statement from the Bible that still holds true. But in these modern times, it seems pastors only want to preach and do nothing else! It makes me sad to see this. Is God still calling those into his ministry, or their own ministry? If it is God’s ministry, then rise up, pastors, and get into the full swing of a totality of working for the Lord!
—Paul Berry
Cape Girardeau, Missouri

Some Positives, But Major Negatives
(posted 8-7-09)
I am sure this will not be the only letter you receive in response to the August 2 edition concerning the Catholic church. I only had one relative in that church, and she was by marriage, so I may not be as familiar with their beliefs as the writers of the articles.

First, I do think we can learn a few things from them. Accountability is one, not necessarily going to a priest, but at least having an accountability partner to talk with about our shortcomings. We can appreciate their reverence for God, something the church has lost in some megacongregations, especially. They are diligent about being in the services of their church. We need to learn from that.

But, I cannot count somebody as my brother in Christ who has not been immersed for the remission of sins, into Christ, and put on Christ. Baptism follows repentance. An infant is incapable of doing that.

One article mentioned we owe them for handing down to us the Word of God. It is my understanding, that in earlier days, priests and other officials who have unscriptural titles didn’t want the common man to have a copy of the Word. They wanted to teach them themselves and leave no room for self-study and application. They include in their Scripture books we don’t believe necessary or inspired. This is adding to the Word.

I believe part of the book of Revelation speaks of the Catholic church and its persecution of Christians during early times of the church.

I don’t mean to “Catholic-bash,” but as far as my being a part of the holy Catholic church, I am not. As far as Peter being the first pope, I don’t endorse that. I don’t believe in praying to Mary, mother of Christ. I don’t believe the “Catholic” church was established on the Day of Pentecost.

I think we should judge strictly by what the Scripture teaches. If we think everybody is right, then we are wasting our time, money, and effort being in the Restoration Movement, and we need to all join up. After all, we can do a lot more good together than we can apart.

I do believe there are certain things that the Catholics do that are indeed good. So did Cornelius. But I also think there are certain things Scripture is very clear about that they don’t teach correctly.
—Rob Evans
Murfreesboro, Arkansas

'Timing of This Article . . . Must Be a God Thing'
(posted 7-16-09)
Sorry I am a little behind on my CHRISTIAN STANDARD reading, but I was fascinated with the June 28 issue [about adoption]. On June 24 I found out I have three half-sisters and that my birth mom died in 2001. The timing of this article in my life must be a God thing. What awesome stories of churches and families! I met two of my sisters on July 11, 2009, and they went with me to the church where I preach in Albany, Georgia. Our local Fox news station did a story about us and I have included the link (www.mysouthwestga.com/news/news_story.aspx?id=323521). Thanks for encouraging adoption in such a great way.
—Buddy Harris
Albany, Georgia

Fond Memories, Disappointing Article
(posted 7-13-09)
I was disappointed by David Fiensy’s article “That Old-Time Religion” (June 28). Unlike Mr. Fiensy, who grew up in southern Illinois, and who was critical of “the old Bible days” of his youth, I grew up in southwest Indiana and have great memories of church on Sunday nights, hymns composed by Fanny Crosby, and tent revivals at Red Hill State Park. I also like Bill and Gloria Gaither praise choruses and praise and worship music. My husband and I also enjoy hosting a small group Bible study in our home.

I also take issue with this statement that Christians appear mean-spirited. When there is a disaster, such as Hurricane Katrina, Christians flock to help. Many Christians are involved in prison ministry. Studies also show Christians are more generous in their charitable giving than non-Christians.

Fiensy’s most glaring inconsistency was that he rightly [praised] ancient Christians for their reverence for human life, but he demonized right-wing talk radio and Rush Limbaugh. Limbaugh, conservative talk radio, and Christians are known for their pro-life position. I would be surprised if Mr. Fiensy has actually listened to Limbaugh. Media Matters records Lishbaugh’s radio show and then take what they can out of context and distribute it to various liberal media outlets. Limbaugh’s show is also monitored for accuracy by the Sullivan Group, which gives it a very high rating for accuracy.

Is Mr. Fiensy not aware that it is the political left that is for abortion and infanticide? Many left-wing political groups, such as PETA, care more about the life of animals than the life of an unborn child. Right-wing Christians support Crisis Pregnancy Centers and Hannah Houses for unwed mothers and their babies.

The last study I read about journalists of the mainstream media showed that 95 percent are liberal and voted Democratic. There is a disconnect among Hollywood and the liberal media, because their core values are often different from the values of Christians. Many of the media agree, belong to the ACLU, and hate and make fun of Christians.
—Linda Knott
Bloomington, Indiana

Open Forum's Impact Felt in Minnesota
(posted 7-10-09)
I greatly appreciated the article in the July 5 CHRISTIAN STANDARD, “A History of Open Forum” by John Mills. Our congregation, Discovery Community Church in St. Paul Park, Minnesota, is a direct result of the efforts of the forum. Our congregation is now composed of a Christian Church and Church of God (Anderson, Indiana) congregations that were located a few blocks apart and serving the same community for Christ. We decided we would be better stewards of our resources and be a fulfillment of Christ’s prayer in John 17 if we demonstrated a greater degree of unity. As we started to share resources and ministry, we discovered the work of the forum and their published results in the book Coming Together in Christ.

We invited the authors, Barry Callen from the Church of God and James North from the Christian Church to come and visit with our congregations. They were instrumental in assisting us in forming the issues that needed to be explored and confirmed before we officially presented the thought of a merger to the two congregations.

It soon became apparent we needed to go beyond just sharing resources and ministry and we developed our statement of faith. The efforts of the forum in resolving some of the differences in practice of the two church groups were very helpful. When we finally presented the question of merger and a proposed set of bylaws to the congregations, they were unanimously approved. We just celebrated our fifth year in coming together and God continues to bless us and use us as his example that we can demonstrate to the world that his followers are indeed one in Christ.
—Rod Hale
Cottage Grove, Minnesota

The Picture Tells the Story
(posted 7-10-09)
With regard to your May 10 article “A Christian Civics Lesson” by Rod Roberts, the picture in the center of the article says it all. The more pressing question is not what should be the proper role of religion in government, nor is it even what place should personal faith have in those who serve in government, but instead, to whom does the Christian first and foremost owe allegiance to?

Perhaps it is the generation I grew up in, or perhaps because I came to faith in Christ later than most, but it seems to me that when the American flag is flown above the Christian flag it implies that the highest honor is due the American government. But shouldn’t it be the other way around? I suspect if Christians fully understood their duty is to God first; then to the local, state, or national government, perhaps then Christians serving in government would act in a more proper way.

And, so, at churches at least, the flags should be flown in the reverse order, with the Christian flag highest then the national flag below it.
—Bill Williams
Ontario, Oregon

Don't Forget Compassion, Love, and Forgiveness
(posted 7-10-09)
I applaud the article “That Old-Time Religion” by David Fiensy in the June 28 CHRISTIAN STANDARD. When I first moved to Texas, I began to think one had to be a Southern Baptist and a Republican to be a Christian. Many times the ultraconservatives seem to forget the teachings of Jesus regarding compassion, love, and forgiveness. Think about how much good could be done if the money spent on political infighting
was spent on feeding the poor and helping those in spiritual need.
—Mary Blanche Jungers
Katy, Texas

Why Not Face One Another?
(posted 7-10-09)
Tom Lawson’s Communion meditation “Crowded Tables” really got me to thinking. His “British pub meal” word picture helped me see Communion in a new way. (Thanks, Tom!) It made me wonder, though. Why do we take Communion in rows facing a common direction? That doesn’t even look like a fellowship meal! Any historians out there able to shed some light?
—Al Forthman
Gaithersburg, Maryland