In the News
Picture this: A well-mannered and respectable man and woman have been attending your church for months. The man's 9-year-old daughter attends your Sunday school. The woman's father is a member of your church and her uncle is an employee of your church. The couple wants to be married at your church by your pastor, and they plan to join your congregation as members after the wedding.
In most congregations, this would be a welcome scenario. The couple would be gladly received and made to feel at home, and their pastor would be encouraged and even expected to officiate at the wedding.
In the particular congregation where Charles and Te'Andrea Wilson were attending and planning to join, they were told to move their wedding elsewhere and the pastor was threatened with being fired if he performed the ceremony in the church's building.
The reason? The Wilsons are African-American, and some members -- reportedly a vocal minority -- of the mostly white congregation of First Baptist Church in Crystal Springs, Mississippi, objected to the wedding because there had never been a marriage of a black couple in that church since its founding in 1883, and they didn't want to set a precedent.
Thus, just days before the scheduled July 20 wedding, the church's pastor, Stan Weatherford, who is white, told the couple he would still marry them, but the ceremony could not take place in the church where he was pastor. Weatherford did perform the ritual at a black church down the road a day after the originally planned date, but the change of venue and day forced the Wilsons to scrap months of planning.
Weatherford said he decided to ask the Wilsons to use a different location after being strong-armed with threats to his job by a small but powerful group of members. "I didn't want to have a controversy within the church," he said, "and I didn't want a controversy to affect the wedding of Charles and Te'Andrea. I wanted to make sure their wedding day was a special day."
The church's decision was picked up by a local news source and then went viral online. Some members of the congregation said they were surprised, indicating they hadn't known what happened to the Wilsons until the news broke, and they offered apologies. One member, Bob Mack, referring to the group within the church who had opposed the wedding and threatened the pastor, said, "We hope we can straighten them out, you know, get them to understand what Christianity is all about because they have some misconceptions about it."
Greg Duke, another First Baptist member, said that those who objected to the wedding don't represent the church. "It's not the majority of the church," he said. "Give us a second chance."
For Charles Wilson, these sentiments seem too late. He told one reporter that the time to "step up and be Christ-like" would have been before he and his wife were forced to move their wedding. "If it was such a minority of people, why didn't the majority stand up and say, 'in God's house we don't do this'?" he asked.
Another response came from leaders in the Southern Baptist denomination, who chastised the Crystal Springs church for turning the Wilsons away and urged the congregation to reject racial discrimination.
The community of Crystal Springs also rallied in support of the Wilsons and against intolerance, with city officials joining residents for a prayer walk through the downtown. Mayor Sally Garland told the crowd, "I hope that the eyes that have been focused on our unfortunate circumstances that we've been having will be as focused on our people and our unity that we have here today."
Charles Wilson said he has forgiven those who forced his wedding to a different location, but also says they should still be held accountable. In response to First Baptist members who have urged the couple to return to the congregation, he asked, regarding the people who turned them away, "How have they changed?"
Wilson praised the residents who came out to reject intolerance. "These people out here now are showing they are for something bigger and better than Satan could ever put out there," he said.
More on this story can be found at these links:
Church Refuses to Marry Black Couple in Mississippi. CNN
Black Couple Denied Wedding "Because of Race." 9 News
Mississippi Town Where Church Blocked Black Couple's Wedding Rallies.... NY Daily News
Mississippi Church That Refused to Wed Black Couple Criticized by Baptist Leaders. ABC News
The Big Questions
Picture this: A well-mannered and respectable man and woman have been attending your church for months. The man's 9-year-old daughter attends your Sunday school. The woman's father is a member of your church and her uncle is an employee of your church. The couple wants to be married at your church by your pastor, and they plan to join your congregation as members after the wedding.
In most congregations, this would be a welcome scenario. The couple would be gladly received and made to feel at home, and their pastor would be encouraged and even expected to officiate at the wedding.
In the particular congregation where Charles and Te'Andrea Wilson were attending and planning to join, they were told to move their wedding elsewhere and the pastor was threatened with being fired if he performed the ceremony in the church's building.
The reason? The Wilsons are African-American, and some members -- reportedly a vocal minority -- of the mostly white congregation of First Baptist Church in Crystal Springs, Mississippi, objected to the wedding because there had never been a marriage of a black couple in that church since its founding in 1883, and they didn't want to set a precedent.
Thus, just days before the scheduled July 20 wedding, the church's pastor, Stan Weatherford, who is white, told the couple he would still marry them, but the ceremony could not take place in the church where he was pastor. Weatherford did perform the ritual at a black church down the road a day after the originally planned date, but the change of venue and day forced the Wilsons to scrap months of planning.
Weatherford said he decided to ask the Wilsons to use a different location after being strong-armed with threats to his job by a small but powerful group of members. "I didn't want to have a controversy within the church," he said, "and I didn't want a controversy to affect the wedding of Charles and Te'Andrea. I wanted to make sure their wedding day was a special day."
The church's decision was picked up by a local news source and then went viral online. Some members of the congregation said they were surprised, indicating they hadn't known what happened to the Wilsons until the news broke, and they offered apologies. One member, Bob Mack, referring to the group within the church who had opposed the wedding and threatened the pastor, said, "We hope we can straighten them out, you know, get them to understand what Christianity is all about because they have some misconceptions about it."
Greg Duke, another First Baptist member, said that those who objected to the wedding don't represent the church. "It's not the majority of the church," he said. "Give us a second chance."
For Charles Wilson, these sentiments seem too late. He told one reporter that the time to "step up and be Christ-like" would have been before he and his wife were forced to move their wedding. "If it was such a minority of people, why didn't the majority stand up and say, 'in God's house we don't do this'?" he asked.
Another response came from leaders in the Southern Baptist denomination, who chastised the Crystal Springs church for turning the Wilsons away and urged the congregation to reject racial discrimination.
The community of Crystal Springs also rallied in support of the Wilsons and against intolerance, with city officials joining residents for a prayer walk through the downtown. Mayor Sally Garland told the crowd, "I hope that the eyes that have been focused on our unfortunate circumstances that we've been having will be as focused on our people and our unity that we have here today."
Charles Wilson said he has forgiven those who forced his wedding to a different location, but also says they should still be held accountable. In response to First Baptist members who have urged the couple to return to the congregation, he asked, regarding the people who turned them away, "How have they changed?"
Wilson praised the residents who came out to reject intolerance. "These people out here now are showing they are for something bigger and better than Satan could ever put out there," he said.
More on this story can be found at these links:
Church Refuses to Marry Black Couple in Mississippi. CNN
Black Couple Denied Wedding "Because of Race." 9 News
Mississippi Town Where Church Blocked Black Couple's Wedding Rallies.... NY Daily News
Mississippi Church That Refused to Wed Black Couple Criticized by Baptist Leaders. ABC News
The Big Questions
1. Does an
existing church ever cease to be a church? Can the actions of a powerful
minority cause a congregation to become a church in name only? That is, at what
point is a church no longer part of the Body of Christ?
2. In what
ways do you "cherry pick" which part of the Christian faith you wish
to live by, while discounting others? Is this right? Why or why not? Is racial
non-discrimination an essential part of Christian dogma, a major doctrine or a
consequence of a better understanding of God's law?
3. How does
this news story fit with the idea that the church is not an institution or a
building, but a group of people? Is a church congregation formed by people or
by God?
4. To what
degree should a pastor be answerable to his or her congregation? To what degree
should a pastor be expected to model Christianity at its best? What about when
a pastor's view of what is the right thing differs from that of a vocal
minority in the church? Should the pastor have acted and spoken prophetically
regardless of any consequences? What would you have done in this position?
(Bear in mind that doing "the right thing" might mean you would lose
your job and have no easy prospects for another.)
5. Assuming
you agree that the members of the Crystal Springs church who opposed the
wedding in their building have some "misconceptions" about
Christianity, how ought the rest of the congregation deal with them?
Confronting the News with Scripture
Here are some Bible verses to guide your discussion:
Matthew 16:18
"And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it." (For context, read 16:13-20.)
The Greek word rendered as "church" in this statement by Jesus is ekklesia, the word underlying almost every instance of "church" in the New Testament. It is also occasionally translated as "assembly," but its primary meaning is "the called-out ones." As used in the New Testament, the ekklesia are those called out from the rest of the world to tell of God's salvation and do his will. Thus, a church is never a building, but an assembly or congregation of people who follow Jesus. Any building they might meet in, no matter how grand, is the house of the church, not the church itself.
Some New Testament terms that parallel ekklesia are "little flock" (Luke 12:32), "my sheep" (John 10:26-27) and "my brothers and sisters" (Mark 3:35).
Questions: In what ways does your congregation live
up to the meaning of ekklesia? Do you act as a flock -- that is, do you
tend not only to support and protect each other, but also to conform to the
opinions of others in your fellowship? Who functions as shepherd? Is your
tendency to follow the shepherd or, more often, to resist the shepherd's
leading? Have you ever been shepherded in a direction that turned out to be a
wrong one?
1 Corinthians 11:20
"When you come together, it is not really to eat the Lord's supper." (For context, read 11:17-22.)
Though the Greek word ekklesia is often rendered in English as "church," the word "church," like its counterparts in other modern languages (Scottish kirk, German kirche, Dutch kerk) actually derives from the Greek word kyriakos, translated "Lord's" in the verse above. It means "belonging to the Lord," and "Lord" in this verse refers to the risen Christ.
In the Corinthian congregation, some Christians were behaving badly during their gatherings when Communion was served, and Paul argues in 1 Corinthians 11:17-22 that their actions made what should have been the supper belonging to the Lord, to which Christ invites all, become instead something contemptible -- a ritual which the Lord would disown.
So ultimately, what makes our Christian gatherings churches rather than social clubs, interest groups or service organizations is that they belong to Christ.
Questions:
So what does it mean when
a church tolerates or supports actions that Christ would spurn? Is it even
possible for a congregation always not to tolerate actions that Christ
would spurn? Is a congregation an assembly of forgiven sinners or of
near-perfect people? To whom or to what body is your kyriakos
accountable? Do actions that God would not condone on the part of a
congregation disqualify members as Christians?
1 Corinthians 12:12-13
"For just as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though many, are one body, so it is with Christ. For in the one Spirit we were all baptized into one body -- Jews or Greeks, slaves or free -- and we were all made to drink of one Spirit." (For context, read 12:12-27.)
In more than one place in the New Testament, the apostle Paul used the human body as a metaphor for the church. And here, the Greek word translated as body, soma, means exactly the same thing as the English word. Soma was a common word in biblical Greek, but what makes it a specialized term for the church is that in using it as a metaphor, Paul identifies Christ as the body's "head" (see Ephesians 4:15-16 -- "But ... we must grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ, from whom the whole body, joined and knit together by every ligament with which it is equipped, as each part is working properly, promotes the body's growth in building itself up in love").
Questions: Together, what do the three terms kyriakos,
ekklesia and soma reveal about how a church ought to treat those
within its walls? Those outside its walls? If each member of the church
corresponds to a part of a body, as Paul suggests, what is the result to a
congregation when it loses individuals and families because of non-Christian
actions? How much of the "body" can a church lose before it is no
longer able to function? Are there times when part of the body must be
"amputated" in order for the body to survive?
Matthew 7:21
"Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven." (For context, read 7:21-23.)
The meaning of these words of Jesus is easy to understand, but the wording of this verse in The Message perhaps expands how we think about it: "Knowing the correct password -- saying 'Master, Master,' for instance -- isn't going to get you anywhere with me. What is required is serious obedience -- doing what my Father wills."
Questions: In what ways is "serious
obedience" another term for "following Jesus"? How do we keep
from treating church attendance and other religious activities as "the
correct password"? What might serious obedience look like now in the
church that turned the Wilson wedding away?
Galatians 3:28-29
"There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus. And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's offspring, heirs according to the promise." (For context, read 3:23-29.)
Here's a biblical standard for how to think of the racial, ethnic, economic and gender differences among us who "belong to Christ": We are all heirs of the divine promises and one in Christ.
Questions: With what diversity issues does your
congregation struggle? Which diversity issues, as represented in this text, are
you successfully navigating? Where have you had to work at making this verse a
reality in your own walk with Christ?
For Further Discussion
1. Given that
some members of the church in the news have apologized for the actions of the
minority and asked for a second chance, should the Wilsons return there for
worship? Why or why not?
2. Are a
small home-based group that worships Christ and a large megachurch both equally
the church? Why or why not? Does a group need to have a pastor to be a church?
3. When has
an action of your own congregation caused you to question whether you were in
the right church? When have you spoken up against a position held by members of
your congregation? What was the result? Were you ever confronted with a
prophetic statement by your pastor or others at your church that caused you to
question some of your assumptions about the faith?
4. Read the
messages to the seven churches in Revelation 2-3. What might God's message to
your church be today?
Responding to the News
This is not a time to focus on the shortcomings of the congregation in the news, but rather to use the news as an opportunity to consider how well our own congregation does in "being the church."
Other News This Week
Chick-fil-A Under Fire
for Uncompromising Stance
Note to Teachers: We recognize that Christians are divided on the matter of same-sex marriage, and we suggest you not use this lesson as a forum on that topic. (TWW has had previous installments on that topic, most recently our lesson for May 20, 2012, which is available on the TWW website: www.TheWiredWord.com). This lesson is better used to talk about religious freedom and the right to speak and practice one's religious convictions regardless of how those matters might be viewed in the culture.
Recent comments made by Chick-fil-A President Dan Cathy supporting the traditional view of marriage as between a man and a woman have set off a firestorm of criticism from officials in Boston, San Francisco, Chicago and New York who pledged to block the restaurant chain from opening franchises in their jurisdictions. Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel declared that "Chick-fil-A's values are not Chicago's values."
Rev. Charles Lyons of the Armitage Baptist Church responded in a sermon: "Do not disrespect us ... We, too, are Chicago. If the thought police come to Armitage Baptist Church, we will meet them at the door respectfully, unflinchingly, willing to die on this hill, holding a copy of the Sacred Scriptures in one hand and a copy of the U.S. Constitution in the other."
Cardinal Francis George of the Archdiocese of Chicago asked in the Catholic Chicago Blog if everyone who did not agree with Emanuel faced a similar fate. "Must those whose personal values do not conform to those of the government of the day move from the city?" George wondered. "Is the City Council going to set up a 'Council Committee on Un-Chicagoan Activities' and call those of us who are suspect to appear before it?"
Public pressure is mounting against the company for its uncompromising stand. At least seven petitions have been launched on Change.org, a social activism site, demanding that universities across the country remove existing Chick-fil-A restaurants or prevent new ones from opening on their campuses. The Atlanta-based chain's brand approval ratings have plummeted in the wake of Cathy's controversial remarks.
"We are very much supportive of the family -- the biblical definition of the family unit," Cathy said in an interview in July. "We are a family-owned business, a family-led business, and we are married to our first wives. We give God thanks for that ... we know that it might not be popular with everyone, but thank the Lord, we live in a country where we can share our values and operate on biblical principles."
The company issued a press release over the weekend, stating: "The Chick-fil-A culture and service tradition in our restaurants is to treat every person with honor, dignity and respect -- regardless of their belief, race, creed, sexual orientation or gender. ... our intent is to leave the policy debate over same-sex marriage to the government and political arena."
In a related story, Jack Phillips, the owner of Lakewood's Masterpiece Cakeshop in Colorado, told local CBS affiliate KCNC-TV that he has no problem with lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender (LGBT) customers or staff members. He is willing to make any kind of cake for homosexuals except wedding cakes because he does not support gay marriage. "We would close down the bakery before we would compromise our beliefs," Phillips said. Local LGBT rights advocates and allies reportedly protested the bakery, and a Facebook group called "Boycott Masterpiece Cakeshop" is gaining momentum.
Victoria Childress, another baker who shares Phillips' beliefs, also refused to bake a wedding cake for a lesbian couple, citing her Christian faith as incentive. "I didn't do the cake because of my convictions for their lifestyle," she said in a November 2011 TV interview. "It is my right, and it's not to discriminate against them. It's not so much to do with them, it's to do with me and my walk with God and what I will answer [to] him for."
More on this story can be found at these links:
Chick-fil-A Gay Flap A "Wakeup Call" For Companies. NPR
Chicago Church Leaders Roast Rahm Emanuel Over Chick-fil-A Stance. Fox News
Chick-fil-A's Brand Approval Rating Plummets After Anti-Gay Controversy. Huffington Post
Jack Phillips, Denver Baker Who Refused Wedding Cake To Gay Couple ... Huffington Post
Chick-fil-A Food Fight Rages On. Washington Post
The Big Questions
1. Throughout
the history of the church, Christians have faced opposition to their beliefs
and practices and have either stood their ground or capitulated. What were some
of the issues, practices or beliefs for which Christians were willing to suffer
in the past? What are Christians willing to suffer for today? What tenets of
your faith are so important to you that you would be unwilling to compromise on
them?
2. Legal
experts told FoxNews.com that it is disturbing that elected officials would
threaten to use their power to block a company from doing business in their
community because of a difference of opinion with people who work for the
company. What is the role of government in shaping community values and
practices? Would you feel the same way if, because of their understanding of
scripture, a CEO, restaurant chain or bakery refused to serve an interracial
couple? Which forms of discrimination would cause you to stand in opposition?
Do you agree or disagree with the saying attributed to Voltaire: "I
disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"?
3. Rather
than arguing the merits or demerits of same-sex marriage, talk about how your
faith impacts your business decisions or the stands you take in your personal
life. Are you willing to go against what is politically correct or culturally
popular, to risk losing friends, your job or income, respect and status, in
order to stand up for what you believe? What price are you willing to pay for
your beliefs? What cost would be too high to pay to maintain your position?
4. What does
the phrase "in the world but not of the world" mean in
relation to business or workplace activities?
5. A Wired
Word contributor wrote: "Business owners have to please both their
desired customers and the government. Employees have the boss to please. Any of
the three can make demands contrary to one's faith." Have you ever
compromised your faith to please your customers, your boss, your friends, or
the government?
Confronting the News with Scripture
Here are some Bible verses to guide your discussion:
Daniel 3:8, 15-18
"Accordingly, at this time certain Chaldeans came forward and denounced the Jews. ... Nebuchadnezzar said to them, ... 'Now if you are ready ... to fall down and worship the statue that I have made, well and good. But if you do not worship, you shall immediately be thrown into a furnace of blazing fire, and who is the god that will deliver you out of my hands?' Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego answered the king, '... If our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the furnace of blazing fire and out of your hand, O king, let him deliver us. But if not, be it known to you, O king, that we will not serve your gods and we will not worship the golden statue that you have set up.'" (For context, read 3:1-30.)
Questions: Have you ever engaged in civil
disobedience in protest of a law or system you considered unjust, immoral or
contrary to your conscience or the Scriptures? What would justify your taking
such dramatic action? When would you be willing to compromise your beliefs?
Would the threat of torture, grave bodily harm or death cause you to back down?
What about an economic boycott against your business?
Daniel 6:4-5
"So the presidents and the satraps tried to find grounds for complaint against Daniel in connection with the kingdom. But they could find no grounds for complaint or any corruption, because he was faithful, and no negligence or corruption could be found in him. The men said, 'We shall not find any ground for complaint against this Daniel unless we find it in connection with the law of his God.'" (For context, read 6:1-9.)
Questions: There is a saying, "If you were
arrested for being a Christian, would there be enough evidence to convict
you?" What evidence could a prosecutor produce that would convince a jury
of your peers that you really are a Christian? When Daniel's enemies wanted to
eliminate him, they could not find cause unless they attacked him in the area
of his faith. Is your own faith so vibrant that enemies want to snuff it out?
If not, how can you strengthen your relationship with God?
Daniel 6:10-11
"Although Daniel knew that the document had been signed, he continued to go to his house, which had windows in its upper room open toward Jerusalem, and to get down on his knees three times a day to pray to his God and praise him, just as he had done previously. The conspirators came and found Daniel praying and seeking mercy before his God." (For context, read 6:10-28.)
Although Daniel knew there would be severe consequences for practicing his faith, he did not change his behavior to suit the laws or the times. He could have argued that the law was only for 30 days, and that God would understand if he suspended his daily prayers for a month. Instead, he maintained his regular practice of meeting with God three times a day, knowing that he was risking his life.
Questions: How is it that the practice of faith can
be both a risk and a resource for us? How can we, like Daniel, find strength as
we praise God and seek his mercy in the face of opposition?
Matthew 5:10-12
"Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness' sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are you when people revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account. Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you." (For context, read 5:1-12.)
Questions: When disciples of Christ are persecuted
or reviled, is it always "for righteousness' sake" and "on
account of Christ"? For what other reasons might followers of Jesus be
maligned? How can you know whether the abuse you are encountering is due to
your stand for Christ, or because of some other reason?
Acts 4:18-20
"So they called them and ordered them not to speak or teach at all in the name of Jesus. But Peter and John answered them, 'Whether it is right in God's sight to listen to you rather than to God, you must judge; for we cannot keep from speaking about what we have seen and heard.'" (For context, read 4:13-22.)
Acts 5:40-42
" ... and when they had called in the apostles, they had them flogged. Then they ordered them not to speak in the name of Jesus, and let them go. As they left the council, they rejoiced that they were considered worthy to suffer dishonor for the sake of the name. And every day in the temple and at home they did not cease to teach and proclaim Jesus as the Messiah." (For context, read 5:27-42.)
Questions: What does it mean "to speak or teach
in the name of Jesus"? Do positions about social issues such as civil
rights, same-sex marriage, abortion, etc. fit this description? Why or why not?
The apostles were willing to be whipped rather than compromise, and continued
to teach and proclaim Jesus as the Messiah. Are you that committed to that
message? Would you be willing to suffer dishonor for the sake of the name of
Jesus? What is the content of the message you are declaring to the world by
your life and words?
Closing Prayer
Help us, O Lord, to grasp clearly what you ask of us, and to do it faithfully. In Jesus' name. Amen.
Copyright 2012
Communication Resources
No comments:
Post a Comment