I’ve posted again at craigobrien.ca

rain

 

I’ve uploaded a new post, If Jesus doesn’t show up, at craigobrien.ca

I hope you will join the conversation at my new site and sign up to receive updates there by email.

 

A reminder

img_0413

On a Saturday after a week like this one, its good to remind myself that some in my family of churches still ascribe and have committed themselves to the delicate but hopeful vision of a secular society in which all people no matter their religious affiliations or even lack thereof are treated equally well by the officers of the State.

Baptist Faith and Message — Religious Liberty

God alone is Lord of the conscience, and He has left it free from the doctrines and commandments of men which are contrary to His Word or not contained in it. Church and state should be separate. The state owes to every church protection and full freedom in the pursuit of its spiritual ends. In providing for such freedom no ecclesiastical group or denomination should be favored by the state more than others. Civil government being ordained of God, it is the duty of Christians to render loyal obedience thereto in all things not contrary to the revealed will of God. The church should not resort to the civil power to carry on its work. The gospel of Christ contemplates spiritual means alone for the pursuit of its ends. The state has no right to impose penalties for religious opinions of any kind. The state has no right to impose taxes for the support of any form of religion. A free church in a free state is the Christian ideal, and this implies the right of free and unhindered access to God on the part of all men, and the right to form and propagate opinions in the sphere of religion without interference by the civil power.

Genesis 1:27; 2:7; Matthew 6:6-7,24; 16:26; 22:21; John 8:36; Acts 4:19-20; Romans 6:1-2; 13:1-7; Galatians 5:1,13; Philippians 3:20; 1 Timothy 2:1-2; James 4:12; 1 Peter 2:12-17; 3:11-17; 4:12-19.

The wisdom of weakness when it comes to winning hearts to Jesus.

photo - Version 2

1When I first came to you, dear brothers and sisters, I didn’t use lofty words and impressive wisdom to tell you God’s secret plan. 2For I decided that while I was with you I would forget everything except Jesus Christ, the one who was crucified. 3I came to you in weakness—timid and trembling. 4And my message and my preaching were very plain. Rather than using clever and persuasive speeches, I relied only on the power of the Holy Spirit. 5I did this so you would trust not in human wisdom but in the power of God.  1 Corinthians 2:1-5

To be sure the Apostle Paul was not a pushover. Nor was he easily swayed from the King’s mission. Paul was trained in the rhetorical conventions of his day and he was capable of entering into the fray without paralyzing fear regarding the emotional discomfort of others. So why did Paul intentionally enter the arenas of Corinth’s intellectual and social conversation with weakness?

The Gospel of Jesus creates a counter-cultural impulse. While the best and most noble virtues of a society may bend people toward the Gospel, there are also prized postures toward life that run counter to the Gospel, create a false gospel, and might be confused with the Gospel. I think Paul choose weakness because he was responding to to the counter-cultural impulse of Jesus as he brought the Gospel to the people of Corinth.

They valued strength. They valued flowery speech. They loved their big personalities and the opportunity to take sides. Those were the trappings of their human wisdom. Paul was capable of delivering all three… and it would not have honoured Christ and the Gospel.

So Paul made himself smaller that Christ could be greater. He came with weakness — timid and trembling. He talked with them plainly. He was very conscious of relying on the power of the Holy Spirit to move the hearts of people. He was looking for the power of God to inspire trust in God. He would not use fear or a form of personalized competition with other voices or logisticians to bring people to “his side.” Instead,  Paul chose dependency on God trusting that He would show up through the grace, truth, and power of the Gospel. This choice shaped his attitude and posture toward the people of Corinth.

Would the Lord have you choose weakness as the pathway to people’s hearts in your community?

If so, what does that look like for you? What adjustments in demeanour are required?

 

If the state believes it can… it will.

IMG_1195

In case you were wondering here’s what I hope for in civil authority when it comes to people who subscribe to religious communities and beliefs.

When civil authorities make it their intent to seriously limit the rights and freedoms of people based on their religious opinions or views, it means they can seriously limit you if you happen to hold a religious view or sentiment. Civil authority in the oppression of people of faith, even if it is a faith you do not agree with or subscribe to, may or may not act in combination with or in response to societal outrage or pressure, prejudice, or violence against those with “minority” views. When civil authority losses the capacity to differentiate between those who have an intent to harm and those who do not, we all lose.

It is my hope that civil authorities would maintain a degree of sophistication when it comes to faith, ideologies, and religions. Acting to protect religious liberty as a posture toward minority groups will indeed promote liberty for all. We must continue to build up the fragile and always eroding posture of respect for all people by insisting on an environment of trust and civility. Violence inshrined in a “blood thirsty” darkness of heart and mind does not come solely wrapped up in one  particular ethnicity or people group. When we start to believe that violence is simply owned by one group above any others, we will fail to recognize hate speech when it comes pouring across our media outlets.

Some baptists know about this. Or perhaps they used to know about it. This is the tribe of Jesus followers of which I am a part.

Here’s the Baptist Faith and Message, 1963, statement on religious liberty, that is part of the Statement of Faith for the Canadian National Baptist Convention.

XVII. RELIGIOUS LIBERTY

God alone is Lord of the conscience, and He has left it free from the doctrines and commandments of men which are contrary to His Word or not contained in it. Church and state should be separate. The state owes to every church protection and full freedom in the pursuit of its spiritual ends. In providing for such freedom no ecclesiastical group or denomination should be favored by the state more than others. Civil government being ordained of God, it is the duty of Christians to render loyal obedience thereto in all things not contrary to the revealed will of God. The church should not resort to the civil power to carry on its work. The gospel of Christ contemplates spiritual means alone for the pursuit of its ends. The state has no right to impose penalties for religious opinions of any kind. The state has no right to impose taxes for the support of any form of religion. A free church in a free state is the Christian ideal, and this implies the right of free and unhindered access to God on the part of all men, and the right to form and propagate opinions in the sphere of religion without interference by the civil power.

Gen 1:27; 2:7; Mat 6:6-7, 24; 16:26; 22:21
John 8:36; Acts 4:19-20; Rom 6:1-2; 13:1-7
Gal 5:1, 13; Php 3:20; 1Ti 2:1-2; Jas 4:12
1Pe 2:12-17; 3:11-17; 4:12-19

Here’s some highlights to draw out as we consider leadership and the civil society:

“The state owes to every church protection and full freedom in the pursuit of its spiritual ends. In providing for such freedom no ecclesiastical group or denomination should be favored by the state more than others.”

“The state has no right to impose penalties for religious opinions of any kind.”

Actively protecting religious liberty I believe is a desired posture for a “secular society.” Of course I’m biased.

So to my fellows baptists we would have to ask: Does this hope for civil society apply to only to us? What obligation do we have to ask for this hope to extended to people who subscribe to other faith positions? How do we want our leaders to think about this issue when it comes to working out any of the forms of democratic governance we enjoy today?

If the state believes it can discriminate on the basis of religious belief or community connection it will discriminate without prejudice.