Many Churches Experiencing Decline

 © 2014 The Wired Word

www.thewiredword.com

Many churches in the United States, regardless of denomination, are in decline, facing a downturn in attendance and participation. As a means to facilitate conversation about this concern, we at The Wired Word suggest two media pieces.
One is an editorial by Tom Ehrich, first published by Religion News Service and then picked up by The Washington Post. Ehrich, a church consultant and Episcopal priest, was responding to a letter issued earlier this month by the Taskforce on Reimagining the Episcopal Church -- a group formed to consider how to restructure that denomination at the national level to stem the decline in membership and attendance at the local level. Ehrich's response was not limited to the Episcopal Church, but applies to mainline denominations in general.
The other is an interview with John S. Dickerson, senior pastor of Cornerstone Evangelical Free Church in Prescott, Arizona, who recently published a book called The Great Evangelical Recession, which, as the title suggests, is about a decline in evangelical Christianity.
In the United States, "mainline" usually refers to Protestant denominations that have supported a "social gospel" approach to ministry and mission and are often described as liberal or progressive in theology. "Evangelical" usually refers to Protestant denominations that have focused primarily on individual salvation through Jesus Christ and are often described as conservative in theology and in social matters. But there is much overlap in the understanding of the gospel and in the practices of mainline and evangelical Christians and congregations. (Some Christian groups define themselves more precisely and wouldn't put themselves in either the mainline or the evangelical category.)
Denominations of various ministry practices and theologies have some congregations that are either growing or holding their own, but the common thread of concern for many Protestant churches of all persuasions (a concern shared by the Roman Catholic Church) is declining participation.
In Ehrich's article, he noted that mainline denominations are these days considering how to reinvent themselves because of "50 years of decline." He points out that collectively, mainline denominations are down from their 1965 peak by more than 42 percent, and "two/thirds below the level they could have been if they had simply kept growing with the population."
Dickerson sees a similar downtrend in evangelical churches. He says that evangelicals have an inflated view of their numbers, influence and financial stability. The reality, said Dickerson, "is that we are a much smaller movement than many of us have believed -- certainly not a majority of the United States, and, I believe, a gradually declining minority. Many of us attend growing churches that are attracting folks from other churches, so we have the perception that 'the church' is growing, when she's really just shuffling. Meanwhile, as we play musical churches, the broader population is growing."
He further says that evangelical churches are "bleeding out young people," a problem common in mainline groups as well.
Dickerson cites four independent studies that separately conclude that evangelical Christians are between 7 and 8.9 percent of the U.S. population.
Among the reasons usually mentioned for the downward trend in churches is the growth in the number of younger people who now identify themselves as "nones" -- that is, having no religion -- or who say they are "spiritual but not religious." Another reason is public dislike of social positions some evangelical groups have taken. But mainline churches that have embraced different positions have also experienced decline. Other reasons include cultural changes, increased religious pluralism, growing secularity, a more aggressive atheism, more competition from other activities, the perception of many that the church is irrelevant to their lives, church splits and more.
In his article, Ehrich said, "Local congregations are still doing mission and ministry in ways that don't work but are difficult to change." Three specific "ways that don't work" he named are Sunday worship, facilities designed primarily for large-group worship and congregations that face inward instead of outward.
"Sunday worship," said Ehrich, "hasn't been a growth engine for decades and now isn't even a survival strategy." While acknowledging that Sunday worship is the thing mainline congregations usually do best, he said it "fails to reach younger populations and fails to retain the interest of older populations." He added, "Audience-style religion fails to transform lives."
Regarding facilities, Ehrich said they are not only expensive, but are often "designed for weekly worship" and thus fail to engage anyone outside of the shrinking group of Sunday attendees. "Even the idea of a central location for community life misfires in an age of fragmentation," Ehrich said. "People connect with peers in smaller settings or self-determining networks. Facilities built for en-masse-style gatherings are no longer relevant."
About the direction congregations "face," Ehrich said, "Congregations that could be facing outward and grappling with the mounting woes of a society in free fall do the opposite: They face inward, with occasional sorties into mission. They pick symbolic battles, but don't convincingly send members out to make the world better."
Yet even if churches were to innovate in the areas Ehrich indicated, there's no guarantee that such changes would bring people back.
Dickerson has a different diagnosis concerning problems in evangelical Christianity and offers different solutions. "My heart ... is not that we be liked by the culture. My heart is that we be faithful to Christ," he said. "Based on what Jesus said, I do expect us to be hated in this world, but that's sort of a footnote in the book. The real questions I ask in the book are: Are we fulfilling our purpose as Christ's presence in the United States? And, are we being the ambassadors of 'good news' that Christ calls us to be?"
Dickerson sees the main problem not merely as a decline in numbers so much as a decline in faithfulness to the church's mission of proclaiming the gospel. He does not look for structural change as a path to improvement, but a change of heart and an evangelical movement defined not by "whom we oppose" but by "grace and truth."
Dickerson has not lost hope. He says God's prescription for a church in conflict is found in 1 Peter 2:12: "Live such good lives among the pagans that, though they accuse you of doing wrong, they may see your good deeds and glorify God on the day he visits us."
More on this story can be found at these links:
Denominational Restructuring Won't Work; Local Churches Must Innovate. Washington Post
The Great Evangelical Recession? An Interview With John Dickerson. The Gospel Coalition
How to Shrink Your Church in One Easy Step. Juicy Ecumenism: Institute on Religion & Democracy's Blog
The Big Questions
1. Is survival of a local church a worthy goal for that church? Why or why not? If so, whose responsibility is it to ensure its survival? How do circumstances affect the worthiness of the goal?
2. Are we who are part of the church called to innovate on behalf of the church? Is part of our calling to be effective? If not, what is our calling?
3. Is declining attendance a sign that Christendom is doing something wrong or a sign that society has gone wrong or a sign of something else? To what degree, if any, should we be willing to reshape the church in response to the spirit of the age? Why?
4. If a congregation were to innovate in the three areas Ehrich recommends, do you think it would make a difference in how many people would attend that church? Why or why not? Is Ehrich even right in identifying these three areas as contributing to the downslide? If we knew for sure such changes would not affect how many people participated in our church, should we make those changes anyway?
5. Is it important to be part of both the church and a church? Explain your answer.
Confronting the News With Scripture and Hope
Here are some Bible verses to guide your discussion:
Micah 4:1-2
Peoples shall stream to [the Lord's house], and many nations shall come and say: "Come, let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, ... that he may teach us his ways and that we may walk in his paths." (For context, read 4:1-4.)
The "Lord's house" referred to in this prophecy was Israel's temple in Jerusalem. The prophet envisioned a time when people of "many nations" would "stream" to the temple eager to learn the Lord's ways.
Christians understand the church to be the spiritual successor to what the temple represented. There was a time when many people did stream to the church eager for its message, but that is less prevalent today.
Questions: What is the church's calling in an age when people are not streaming to it and some are leaving it? When in the church's history has the situation been similar?
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.)
Jesus told Peter that the "gates of Hades," a biblical expression that can mean the same as the "gates of death," would not prevail against the church. The meaning is that the realm of death, which no human can conquer, is nonetheless {ITALIC}not stronger than the church founded on the rock. But what seems to be prevailing against the church today is something less strong than death but perhaps more debilitating: the spirit of the age.
Question: What might Jesus say to us today about the future of the church and our role in it?
Zechariah 8:12
For there shall be a sowing of peace; the vine shall yield its fruit, the ground shall give its produce, and the skies shall give their dew; and I will cause the remnant of this people to possess all these things. (For context, read 8:1-13.)
Matthew 7:13-14
Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the road is easy that leads to destruction, and there are many who take it. For the gate is narrow and the road is hard that leads to life, and there are few who find it. (No context necessary.)
Zechariah was one of the prophets who spoke for God to the community of Jews that formed again in Judah after being permitted to return from exile in Babylon. They were not a free people, however, and they had hard going to get themselves re-established in their homeland. In that difficult environment, God told the people through the prophet that circumstances would someday improve greatly for those who had survived the exile.
Note that Zechariah calls his audience "the remnant." The Bible uses that word to refer to those people who remain to continue the life of a community after many have been lost through some traumatic event.
The Matthew verses are from Jesus, who, while not using the word "remnant," refers to such a reduced group nonetheless. Although Jesus called all to follow him, he knew that not everyone would want to "enter through the narrow gate." Thus, only a remnant -- the "few who find it" -- will take the road that leads to life eternal.
Questions: Is a remnant a positive or a negative metaphor? Is there a sense in which the church is called to be a remnant? If so, what might the ministry of the remnant look like? Is it easy to be the remnant? In what sense can the remnant be like the yeast Jesus spoke about in Luke 13:20-21?
Matthew 16:25
For those who want to save their life will lose it, and those who lose their life for my sake will find it. (For context, read 16:24-26.)
Questions: What might these words of Jesus teach us about our efforts to keep our church alive by accommodating the world around us? What is the difference between losing the essential life of the church due to accommodating or appeasing the spirit of the age and losing our life for Jesus' sake? What does service in a "lose your life" mode look like? Does this involve self-conscious awareness of your choices?
For Further Discussion
1. Comment on this, from an interview by Religious News Service (RNS) with theologian Barbara Brown Taylor (BBT). She recently wrote a book titled Learning to Walk in the Dark.
RNS: What's your working definition of darkness?
BBT: Darkness is everything I do not know, cannot control, and am often afraid of. But that's just the beginner's definition. If I am a believer in God, then darkness is also where God dwells. God may also be frightening and uncontrollable and largely unknown to me, yet I decide to trust God anyway.
RNS: You say "many old-time Christians are looking into the dark right now." How might your message help them?
BBT: I mean "mainline" Christians. It only takes about a minute in any news source to notice decline in everything from membership to budgets to congregations combining and buildings going up for sale. Sometimes when I visit these embattled churches, I feel almost like I'm working for hospice visiting churches that are just scared to death they're dying. You can almost smell the sweat in the room as they fret about what in the world they're going to do.
But if you really work for hospice you learn to work with what is left. The remaining time, resources, relationships. Even for mainline Christians who are looking into the dark, there is reconciliation and healing and intimacy and community that can take place in the dark. There's also a lot of humility in the dark, which might be a great curative for a religious tradition that's been on top for a long time. ...
There is a lot of what happens these days that I would call "spiritual bypassing," where one offers a religious formula to help you stay on top. But I cannot sell out the Christian message, which at its heart says that when the bottom drops out and you're screaming your guts out at God, there's more. It says that if you are willing to enter the cloud of unknowing and meet God in the dark -- maybe even the dark of a tomb -- you might be in for a surprise.
The great hope in the Christian message is not that you will be rescued from the dark but if you are able to trust God all the way into the dark, you may be surprised.
See full interview here.
2. Read the article "What the Church Can Learn from the U2/Apple Mistake"  and discuss anything from it that might apply to your church's outreach efforts.
3. Regarding the church, TWW team member Kim Coyle asks, "Will brick-and-mortar buildings with full-time staff continue? My daughter (20-something) finds meaning (and worship) in working with urban kids, and doesn't feel drawn to be part of the Sunday morning tradition that she grew up with." What should we do, if anything, about people who feel as that young woman does?
4. Comment on the following by C.S. Lewis (in God in the Dock): "[T]he 'decline of religion' becomes a very ambiguous phenomenon. One way of putting the truth would be that the religion which has declined was not Christianity. It was a vague Theism with a strong and virile ethical code, which, far from standing over against the 'World,' was absorbed into the whole fabric of ... institutions and sentiment and therefore demanded church-going as (at best) a part of loyalty and good manners or (at worst) a proof of respectability. Hence a social pressure, like the withdrawal of the compulsion, did not create a new situation. The new freedom first allowed accurate observations to be made. When no [one] goes to church except because he seeks Christ, the number of actual believers can at last be discovered. It should be added that this new freedom was partly caused by the very conditions which it revealed. If the various anti-clerical and anti-theistic forces at work in the nineteenth century had had to attack a solid phalanx of radical Christians the story might have been different. But mere 'religion' -- 'morality tinged with emotion,' 'what a man does with his solitude,' 'the religion of all good men' -- has little power of resistance. It is not good at saying No."
5. Respond to Ehrich's claim that "Audience-style religion fails to transform lives."
Responding to the News
This is a good time to consider Jesus' "Great Commission" in Matthew 28:19-20 -- "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything that I have commanded you. And remember, I am with you always, to the end of the age."
We believe the church of Jesus Christ survives the various incarnations of it in local communities. But when our own congregation is in survival mode, should our great commission tactics change in any way? Why or why not? When our congregation is in survival mode, are we even still responsible to fulfill this commission?
We should ask ourselves those things, and then take seriously what Jesus says to us in the final sentence of the commission.
Closing Prayer

Help us, O Lord, to know how to be your faithful church even when the spirit of the age seems to be prevailing against us. In Jesus' name. Amen.

Adrian Peterson Charged With Child Abuse in Disciplining Incident

© 2014 The Wired Word

www.thewiredword.com

Last Saturday, Minnesota Vikings star running back Adrian Peterson turned himself in to authorities in Montgomery, Texas, after being charged with child abuse in the disciplining of his 4-year-old son. Peterson was released after posting $15,000 bail.

The charges come from an incident in May of this year when Peterson used a small tree branch, commonly called a switch, to punish the child after the boy pushed another of Peterson's children while they were playing a video game. The punishment, which Peterson called a "whupping," left cuts and bruises on several areas of the child's body.

In explaining the charge, an assistant district attorney for Montgomery County said that while parents are entitled to discipline their children, the grand jury decided what Peterson did "was not reasonable and did not reflect community standards of what was reasonable discipline." The official also said that Peterson could face up to two years in jail and a $10,000 fine if convicted.

The report on the incident indicates that the boy received cuts and bruises on his back, buttocks, ankles, legs and scrotum, as well as defensive wounds on his hands. The report also says that Peterson texted the boy's mother and acknowledged what he had done and that she would be mad at him about the child's leg. "I got kinda good wit the tail end of the switch," Peterson's text said.

Peterson further texted the child's mother that he "felt bad after the fact when I notice the switch was wrapping around hitting I [sic] thigh. ... Got him in nuts once I noticed. But I felt so bad, n I'm all tearing that butt up when needed! I start putting them in timeout. N save the whooping for needed memories!"

The child's mother later took him to an already scheduled doctor visit, and the physician reported the injuries to police, saying they were consistent with child abuse.

In further text messages, Peterson allegedly said, "Never do I go overboard! But all my kids will know, hey daddy has the biggie heart but don't play no games when it comes to acting right."

In an interview with police, Peterson reportedly indicated that he believes his action was discipline, not abuse. He told police, "Anytime I spank my kids, I talk to them before, let them know what they did, and of course after." He acknowledged that the beating was administered directly to the child's skin and with the child's pants pulled down. He estimated that he struck the boy 10-15 times, but said he didn't count the blows.

Peterson expressed regret that his son did not cry, because then, he said, he would have realized that the switch was doing more damage than intended. He didn't know, he said, that the "tip of the switch and the ridges of the switch were wrapping around [the child's] legs."

The NFL star later posted comments about the incident on his Twitter feed. He wrote, "I want everyone to understand how sorry I feel about the hurt I have brought to my child." He also said that he was using a discipline method that was used on him as a child, and that such discipline helped him. "I have always believed I could have been one of those kids that was lost in the streets without the discipline instilled in me by my parents and other relatives," he said. "I have always believed that the way my parents disciplined me has a great deal to do with the success I have enjoyed as a man. I love my son and I will continue to become a better parent and learn from any mistakes I ever make."

He concluded by saying that while he isn't the perfect parent, he is not a child abuser. "My goal is always to teach my son right from wrong and that's what I tried to do that day," he wrote. "I accept the fact that people feel very strongly about this issue and what they think about my conduct. Regardless of what others think, however, I love my son very much and I will continue to try to become a better father and person."

While Peterson's remarks seem to indicate that he sees value in the type, if not the degree, of discipline he administered to his son, not everyone who grew up with physical discipline agrees. Commenting on the charges against Peterson, NFL Hall of Famer Cris Carter said, "People with any type of Christian background, they really believe in disciplining their children." Then, indicating that his mom used some form of corporal discipline on him, Carter added, "My mom did the best job she could do. Raising seven kids by herself. But there are thousands of things that I have learned since then that my mom was wrong. It's the 21st century. My mom was wrong. She did the best she could, but she was wrong about some of that stuff she taught me. And I promise my kids I won't teach that mess to them."

Following the charges, Peterson was kept out of last Sunday's game against the New England Patriots. However, as more information about the case came out, and after talking with Peterson, the team returned him to the active roster. That all changed again on Wednesday, when NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell put Peterson on the exempt list until his legal issues are resolved.

Wikipedia, citing interviews with Peterson by Black Christian News Network One and The 700 Club, described Peterson as a Christian and said, "Peterson has spoken about his faith in his life saying, 'Jesus Christ means the world to me. I've been through so many different situations through my childhood and now my adulthood ... God just helped me get through them and made me stronger at a young age. [Through] all the adversity and hard times I've been through, God has always been present. I've always prayed to Him and asked Him to give me the strength to endure and to help others and to better understand whatever situation I deal with in my personal life. And He has always showed up! It brings hope and peace of mind knowing that God gave His only begotten Son for us.'"

More on this story can be found at these links:

Vikings' Adrian Peterson Booked on Charge of Child Abuse. New York Times 
Peterson Admitted to 'Whooping' Son With a Switch. NBC Sports 
Details on Adrian Peterson Indictment Charges. CBS Houston 
Adrian Peterson: Not a Child Abuser, but Sorry About 'Hurt I Have Brought' to Son. CNN
Watch Cris Carter Take an Emotional Stand Against Child Abuse. Yahoo! Sports 
Adrian Peterson Case Brings Scrutiny to Child Spanking. ABC News 
Adrian Peterson. Wikipedia 

The Big Questions

1. What reasons have you heard or used to justify corporal punishment of children? Which, if any, of those reasons do you consider valid?

2. How were you disciplined as a child? How do you feel about that discipline now? Do you think you would have turned out differently if another form of discipline had been used instead? Have you followed the same practices with kids in your care? Why or why not?

3. In dealing with children, how do we know when we have crossed the line between discipline and abuse? Justice Stewart Potter once opined, regarding hard-core pornography, that although he couldn't define it, "I know it when I see it." How might this rule apply to a discussion of the difference between child discipline and child abuse?

4. To what degree is "learned behavior" an acceptable reason for carrying on disciplinary practices you grew up with? Why might you want to use different disciplinary practices?

5. What role does your commitment to Christ play in how you discipline your children (or, if they are now grown, how you disciplined them when they were young)?

Confronting the News With Scripture and Hope
Here are some Bible verses to guide your discussion:

Proverbs 13:24
Those who spare the rod hate their children, but those who love them are diligent to discipline them. (No context need.)
Proverbs 22:15 
Folly is bound up in the heart of a boy, but the rod of discipline drives it far away. (No context needed.)
Proverbs 23:13-14
Do not withhold discipline from your children; if you beat them with a rod, they will not die. If you beat them with the rod, you will save their lives from Sheol. (No context needed.)
Proverbs 29:15
The rod and reproof give wisdom, but a mother is disgraced by a neglected child. (No context needed.)
Proverbs 29:17
Discipline your children, and they will give you rest; they will give delight to your heart. (No context needed.)

These verses come from an ancient Near Eastern culture that viewed physical discipline as a means to keep older children, fools and wrongdoers from destructive paths (see, for example, Deuteronomy 25:1-3, where wrongdoers are to be flogged). In ancient Egypt, the word for "education" was accompanied by the hieroglyph of a striking man or arm.

Western societies don't use flogging today for adult wrongdoers, but we have not, as a society, abandoned spanking for children.

The goal of the verses from Proverbs is to instruct children in the proper ways. The Hebrew word translated above as "discipline" also means "correction," "instruction" and "reproof." TWW team member James Berger points out that to read these verses as justification for the brutal beating of a child is "a perverse reading of the Bible's intent." However, not all spanking is a brutal beating.

Note that Proverbs 29:17 affirms the importance of discipline, without specifying that it has to be in the form of a "rod."

Questions: How do you interpret the collection of proverbs above in relation to the use of a rod in parenting children? Does Proverbs 29:15 seem to suggest that spanking is preferable to neglecting a child? When religious principles or biblical interpretations are used to sanction abuse of children (and/or adults), does that mean the principles are wrong or that the interpretations are mistaken? Explain your answer.

One essential element of Hebrew wisdom is that one interacts with, or even wrestles with, the text. One may even disagree with the text. What is your response to the guidance in these verse? Is this something you wrestle with, agree with or disagree with? Why?

Ephesians 6:4
And, fathers, do not provoke your children to anger, but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord. (For context, read 6:1-4.)

This verse presents the view that the family unit should be a primary medium through which moral and religious values are passed on to the next generation. Here, "discipline" translates a Greek word that means not only "correction," but also "tutelage" and "training." Thus, the word means setting out the boundaries for proper living, and it links with another word in the verse, "instruction."

On the other hand, children like to push boundaries. Any sort of boundary-setting can cause them to get angry, so something else must be meant by "provoke." The New International Version uses the word "exasperate" for "provoke ... to anger," while the God's Word translation has "don't make your children bitter about life."

Questions: What different ways do you employ to help the children you influence to learn where the boundaries of proper living are? Which means seem to be most effective? What ways have been ineffective? Do different children require different disciplinary methods? Discuss your answer and the reasons behind it. Whom do/did you consult for advice about disciplining children?

Ecclesiastes 3:7
... a time to keep silence, and a time to speak. (For context, read 3:1-8.)

The well-known passage from Ecclesiastes 3:1-8 reminds us that many actions that are appropriate in one situation are not appropriate in another. In many contexts, as the verse above indicates, holding one's tongue is exactly the right thing to do. But, again, as the verse indicates, there are other contexts in which staying silent is wrong.

One such time silence is wrong is when we suspect that a child is being abused.

Questions: What should we do when we think a child might be being abused but when the evidence is not clear? Who would/should you consult with if you have suspicions but no real knowledge or proof? How can we distinguish actual abuse from disciplining methods that we simply don't like?

1 Thessalonians 2:11-12
As you know, we dealt with each one of you like a father with his children, urging and encouraging you and pleading that you lead a life worthy of God ... (For context, read 2:1-12.)

Paul is here referring to how he and his coworkers behaved when in Thessalonica sharing the gospel with people there. He compares their behavior to that of a good father, who encourages his children to "lead a life worthy of God."

Questions: If encouraging children to lead a worthy life is a goal of parenting, how encouraging are the disciplinary methods you use (or did use)?

Peterson said his intent was only to discipline his child. Should good intent be taken into account if a child is punished beyond what most people would consider reasonable?

For Further Discussion

1. Which of the following would you label as child abuse, and why?
          Burning a child with a lit cigarette
          Spanking a child for bullying another child
          Putting a child in a closet without food and water for several days
          Sending a child to bed with only bread and water for supper as a punishment for willful misbehavior

2. Given the many influences on children today from outside the home, what are the best ways to teach children good values and morals?

3. What advice does your church give regarding parent-child relationships? Have you heard any sermons about how to raise children? What limits do you maintain?

4. Is nonviolence a worthy goal in which to instruct your children? If so, what instructional means are you using to reach that goal with them?

5. What does your church do to ensure the safety of its children? Of children in your community? Of children around the world?

6. Comment on this: Psychiatrist and author Karl Menninger wrote, "What is done to children, they will do to society."

Responding to the News

This is a good time to discuss in church how to respond if you suspect a child is being abused, and how to respond in ways that don't put the child in a more vulnerable position.

Closing Prayer

Help us, O Lord, when it is necessary to discipline our children, to avoid abuse in any form. Likewise, may all our dealings with those in our household be respectful and loving. In Jesus' name. Amen.

Former Virginia Governor Convicted of Public Corruption

 © 2014 The Wired Word

www.thewiredword.com

Bob McDonnell appeared to be a straight arrow: former Army lieutenant colonel, loving husband, father of five, Christian-values conservative. As Virginia's governor from 2010 to 2014, he served state employees well and worked effectively with both Republicans and Democrats in the Virginia General Assembly. On the national stage, he served as chairman of the Republican Governors Association and was mentioned as a possible Republican vice presidential candidate for Mitt Romney.
But McDonnell, along with his wife Maureen, fell victim to greed. They did favors for Jonnie R. Williams, a Florida health supplement manufacturer, in exchange for $177,000 in cash, $25,000 in wedding presents for two of their daughters, vacations and the use of a boat and a Ferrari. Among the gifts they received from Williams were approximately $20,000 in designer clothing and accessories for Maureen and a $6,500 Rolex watch for Bob. The head of the Justice Department's criminal division said that the McDonnells "turned public service into a money-making enterprise."
Put on trial for public corruption, the McDonnells received guilty verdicts on September 4. A federal jury in Richmond convicted Bob of 11 of 13 counts, while Maureen was convicted of 9 of 13 counts. This marked the first time in Virginia history that a governor had ever been charged with or convicted of a crime. Sentencing is scheduled for January 6, and each could face up to 30 years in prison.
Bob McDonnell's attorney said that his client did not receive a fair trial, and that he will appeal the conviction. Lawyers are already debating whether the convictions were fair or not, and whether this case included an overly aggressive pursuit of a politician doing favors for a political supporter. But regardless of the outcome, the trial raises questions of personal morality, and how individuals can be undone by arrogance, self-delusion, selfishness, greed and blame.
Bob McDonnell apparently thought he could exploit loopholes in Virginia law to gain $177,000 in gifts and loans. He showed arrogance and self-delusion on the witness stand, testifying in his own defense that he provided nothing more than routine political courtesies for Jonnie Williams. But the evidence revealed that McDonnell sent emails to state officials asking them to talk to Williams about his product, and that McDonnell held two promotional events for Williams at the governor's mansion.
Most troubling, Bob McDonnell mounted a "broken marriage defense," blaming his wife for her relationship with Williams. His testimony exposed embarrassing details about her erratic behavior and their marital woes, implying that they could not have conspired because they had terrible communication. Defense attorneys said that Maureen McDonnell had a "crush" on Williams (although not a sexual relationship) and was vulnerable to his offers of assistance. But jurors were not convinced that the McDonnell marriage was broken, given the fact that they had separated only a week before the trial.
At one point, Bob McDonnell was offered a plea deal, which would have required him to plead guilty to just one crime and would have let his wife go unpunished. But he turned it down, hoping to win complete exoneration for himself. It appears now that he has destroyed their marriage in a desperate attempt to save himself.
Leaving the courthouse, Bob McDonnell commented that his "trust remains in the Lord." But he'll have to show the virtue of humility if he wants to rebuild his family and his professional life.
More on this story can be found at these links:
Ex-Va. Gov. McDonnell's Attorney Vows to Appeal Corruption Convictions. Fox News
Former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell Found Guilty in Corruption Trial. Los Angeles Times
Ex-Va. Governor Robert McDonnell Guilty of 11 Counts of Corruption. The Washington Post
Bob McDonnell's Self-Delusion and Arrogance Led to Downfall in Corruption Trial. The Washington Post
The Big Questions
1. What are the biggest temptations faced by those who enter public service? To the extent that you feel comfortable sharing, what do you find to be your greatest temptation in your line of work?
2. Politicians are meant to serve their constituents and supporters, just as businesspeople serve their customers and pastors serve their church members. But when does service cross the line into inappropriate favors?
3. How does arrogance affect our ability to make good decisions? Who helps keep you grounded and prevents you from arrogance? What is the positive effect of humility? Give examples.
4. Self-delusion prevents us from seeing ourselves and our personal situations clearly. How can family members, friends and fellow church members serve as accountability partners?
5. What causes selfishness and greed to grow within you, and how can these vices be controlled?
6. Where in your life are you tempted to blame others for your difficulties, and how can you take appropriate responsibility for the problems you cause?
Confronting the News With Scripture and Hope
Here are some Bible verses to guide your discussion:
Genesis 3:6
So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate; and she also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate. (For context, read 3:1-13.)
The serpent tempts Eve to eat the forbidden fruit in the Garden of Eden, saying that she will not die if she eats it. She wants to "be like God" (v. 5), as the serpent promises she will be. But when she and Adam eat the fruit of the tree which is "a delight to the eyes," their eyes are opened and they realize they are naked. For the first time, they feel ashamed, and then Adam blames Eve for his transgression, saying, "The women ... gave me fruit from the tree, and I ate" (v. 12).
Questions: What earthly treasures seem good but end up hurting us? When do we make bad choices, wanting to be like God? Why does Adam blame Eve for his failure? Is this fair? Explain.
Genesis 50:20 (ESV)
As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good, to bring it about that many people should be kept alive, as they are today. (For context, read 50:15-21.)
Bob McDonnell, like Rod Blagojevich and Ray Nagin before him, proclaimed himself innocent. McDonnell stated upon his conviction, "My trust remains in the Lord." Assume for a moment that each -- or only one -- of these three politicians were, like Joseph, wrongly convicted and wrongly sentenced to prison. After all, the courts are no more infallible than any other organization of human beings.
Questions: How might God use each of these for good, even for the the good of "many people"? If you were wrongly convicted and imprisoned, how could you demonstrate your trust in God? How easy was that for Joseph, and how easy would it be for you?
2 Samuel 12:5-7
[David] said to Nathan, "As the LORD lives, the man who has done this deserves to die; he shall restore the lamb fourfold, because he did this thing, and because he had no pity." Nathan said to David, "You are the man!" (For context, read 11:1--12:15.)
King David fails to lead his troops into battle, instead choosing to remain in Jerusalem. There he commits adultery with Bathsheba and conspires to have her husband Uriah killed in battle. God sends to David the prophet Nathan, who tells the story of a poor man who is abused by a rich man, with the rich man taking the poor man's only lamb and preparing it as food for a visitor. David is so angry at the rich man that he condemns him, and then Nathan reveals that David himself is the man.
Questions: Why does the rich man in this story feel entitled to take something that does not belong to him? In what ways are political leaders and administrators "rich" in comparison to other citizens? Who are the prophets who hold rich and powerful people accountable today?
Luke 12:15
And [Jesus] said to them, "Take care! Be on your guard against all kinds of greed; for one's life does not consist in the abundance of possessions." (For context, read 12:13-21.)
Jesus responds to a request for help in dividing a family inheritance by warning the crowd about the danger of greed. Then he tells the parable of the rich fool, a story which cautions us about people "who store up treasures for themselves but are not rich toward God" (v. 21).
Questions: What motivates greed in our lives? Why do we need to store up more and more treasures? What might it mean for us to be "rich toward God"?
1 Timothy 1:15
The saying is sure and worthy of full acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners -- of whom I am the foremost. (For context, read 1:12-17.)
Paul sees himself as a faithful servant of Christ, but also a former blasphemer, persecutor and man of violence. He encourages people to follow his model of leaning on God's grace, not some made-up model of human perfection.
Questions: How are we helped by admitting our sinfulness, instead of failing to admit our transgressions? In what ways are we strengthened by being honest and open about our failures and our need for forgiveness? Does your worship service include a time of confession? Why or why not, do you think?
James 4:16
As it is, you boast in your arrogance; all such boasting is evil. (For context, read 4:13-17.)
James observes that people confidently make plans for "doing business and making money" (v. 13), without being aware of "what tomorrow will bring" (v. 14). He recommends complete dependence on God, and warns against arrogance and failing to do the right thing.
Questions: What causes us to boast in arrogance and fail to show humility? How can a dependence on God and a focus on doing the right thing keep us out of trouble?
For Further Discussion
1. Bob McDonnell modeled his political platform on convictions about what makes for strong families across society. But then he apparently sold out his wife and marriage in an effort to protect himself. What would have helped him to hold together his words and his actions? How can the church promote the creation of strong families that stay together during tough times?
2. Paul warns Timothy that "the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil, and in their eagerness to be rich some have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many pains" (1 Timothy 6:10). How could the McDonnells have heeded this warning? In what ways is it a verse that we all need to take seriously?
3. Is it always right to put family first? Or is speaking the truth a higher priority, even if it causes the dissolution of a family? Give examples.
4. Where do you see arrogance and self-delusion in the Christian community? How can we approach the world with more humility and honesty?
5. How does selfishness and greed destroy families and careers? What can the church do to help people shift their focus from earthly treasures to heavenly treasures? How would such a shift make us happier and healthier?
Responding to the News
As the November elections approach, look beyond political positions to the character of the candidates. Look for evidence of humility and self-awareness in those who aspire to elected office, while watching for signs of selfishness and greed.
Closing Prayer
Great God, help us to be on guard against all kinds of greed, as we aspire to be rich toward you. In Jesus' name. Amen.

In Manila, Many of the Poor Live in Cemeteries

 © 2014 The Wired Word

www.thewiredword.com

The Philippine capital of Manila is so densely populated that some of the poorest people are now living in the city's cemeteries. They've set up residence as squatters on top of tombs, in makeshift shanties between graves and inside mausoleums, sometimes sleeping just a few feet from the dead.
Some of the people living in the graveyards have found work there -- maintaining the grounds, chiseling new grave stones, cleaning the mausoleums or emptying old above-ground crypts of bones when the relatives of the dead stop paying rent. That allows the slots to be reused to lay to rest newly deceased individuals (the removed remains are often transferred to bone warehouses within the cemeteries). With as many as 80 funerals a day taking place in some cemeteries, these "evictions" are deemed necessary.
But many more of the squatters either work elsewhere or have no work.
So many people are living in graveyards that some of the burial grounds have become, in effect, neighborhoods. "PBS Newshour," reporting this story last week, noted, "The Manila North Cemetery is currently bursting with life, home to more than 10,000 Filipinos who run businesses, raise families and live out their lives in between the headstones and crypts."
One family in the Manila North cemetery runs a stall selling noodles and earns enough to send their daughter to school. The family resides in a mausoleum in which they've installed a fan, refrigerator, rocking chair, microwave and mattresses. There are also six graves in their "home."
Those who first moved to the cemeteries -- some 30 years ago -- found them to be quiet, peaceful and much safer than the notorious slums of Manila. But now that many more people have moved in, robberies, muggings and gang activity have become common.
Still, one resident says his two-story mausoleum is the "best house" he's lived in: "the strongest, safest, with the best view."
Living people dwelling beside the dead brings to mind terminology used in some Christian denominations about "the church militant," composed of Christians currently living on earth who are fighting against sin and evil, and "the church triumphant," composed of believers from the beginning of the world who now rest from their labors. Those in the church triumphant are not fighting evil any longer, but now fully participate in the triumph Christ won for the whole church on the cross. This understanding views the church on earth as supported and surrounded by the church in heaven, but the church itself including both realities.
More on this story can be found at these links:
Dwelling Atop the Dead. PBS NewsHour
Philippines Cemetery Provides Manila's Poor a Place to Live Among the Dead. The Guardian 
Living in Tombs. National Geographic (video)
We Live With Ghosts in the Cemetery. YouTube (video)
The Big Questions
1. What do we mean theologically when we say of a Christian that he or she has been "called home"? Does this mean that our world is in some way not home? Is it more likely that those who have less, those who suffer and struggle, might look forward to "going home," as compared to those who are comfortable in this world, who might think of this world as home? Where do you fit in this continuum?
2. Summarize the Christian understanding of death, resurrection and the life to come. Do you find it convincing all the time, some of the time, or not convincing? Why? How is your belief about these matters evidenced in how you live?
3. In what ways would Christianity be different if it had no belief in life after death? Would you be willing to serve God or stand by a crucified Jesus if there were no resurrection?
4. When a person becomes stuck in grief, we might describe that person as "living with the dead" in a life-consuming way. How might the Christian teaching about death be helpful to that person? How might it not be helpful? What other sources of help might be needed? Are words helpful or less helpful in walking with a person in such a situation? What has helped you when you've struggled with grief and loss?
5. In what ways, if any, does the concept of the church existing both on earth and in heaven speak to you? In what ways, if any, are Christians alive today in communion with Christians who have died? Leaving aside any question of intercessory prayers offered to our saints, as some churches practice, do you speak to those who have departed who are dear to you? What do you say? Does it help you? Do you believe our departed loved ones are listening? Do you think the conversation is one-way or two-way?
Confronting the News With Scripture and Hope
Here are some Bible verses to guide your discussion:
Luke 8:26-27
Then they arrived at the country of the Gerasenes, which is opposite Galilee. As [Jesus] stepped out on land, a man of the city who had demons met him. For a long time he had worn no clothes, and he did not live in a house but in the tombs. (For context, read 8:26-39.)
This is the beginning of the account of Jesus healing a man "who had demons" and was too irrationally violent to live among the general populace. Thus he dwelt "in the tombs." In a land occupied by Jews, that was doubly significant -- in a negative way -- for not only was a graveyard a place most people of any religion would spend little time in, but for Jews, such places were associated with Gentile uncleanness. In fact, tombs were often whitewashed (see Matthew 23:27) so that one would not accidentally come into contact with them. Some people also considered tombs the dwelling place of demons (just as some people today do).
Read the whole story and you'll see that Jesus not only restored the man to sanity, but also brought him to such good mental health that he could return to his home in town (v. 39).
Questions: The man Jesus healed lived in a graveyard only because his behavior made him unwelcome around others. Many of the people living in cemeteries in Manila find it an improvement over the slums, but still far from ideal. How can the demons preventing their earning a better living be expelled?
Do you think of cemeteries as "unclean"? Spooky? As a young person, were you nervous about cutting corners and walking home if it meant going through a cemetery? If your church has a cemetery, is it a place where you go walking on occasion? Why or why not? Why might cemeteries elicit feelings of unease for some people and feelings of peace for others?
Romans 8:38-39
For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor rulers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord. (For context, read 8:31-39.)
These lines from the apostle Paul are a good summary of what Christianity teaches about death. And it's noteworthy that although burying martyred believers was a growth industry in the first century, there were always new Christians ready to risk everything for the sake of their faith. They believed that "neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor rulers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord." They viewed the grave as a connecting link to eternity.
Questions: In what ways do these words from Paul speak to you today? How do you express your love to those who have gone before you?
2 Corinthians 5:1 (Good News Translation)
For we know that when this tent we live in -- our body here on earth -- is torn down, God will have a house in heaven for us to live in, a home he himself has made, which will last forever. (For context, read 4:16--5:10.)
The verse above is another clear statement of Christian belief about death.
There is a story about John Quincy Adams that can be seen as illustrating this verse. At age 80, this mature Christian was hobbling down a street in Boston, leaning heavily on a cane. A friend slapped him on the shoulder and said, "Well, how's John Quincy Adams this morning?"
The old man turned slowly and replied, "Fine, sir, fine! But this old tenement that John Quincy lives in is not so good. The underpinning is about to fall away. The thatch is all gone off the roof, and the windows are so dim John Quincy can hardly see out anymore. As a matter of fact, it wouldn't surprise me if before the winter's over he had to move out. But as for John Quincy Adams, he never was better ... never was better!"
John Quincy Adams was a great one for talking about his death and often writing poems on the subject. This is probably what gave him the courage to stand up against slavery in the House of Representatives during the final years of his life when the subject was often forbidden on the floor of the House. It angered people that gentlemen were forced to hear about slavery.
Questions: If you were conducting John Quincy Adams' funeral, or advising the pastor who would conduct it, what might you say about the answer he gave about how he was? Do your beliefs about life hereafter give you courage to stand up for unpopular causes?
Hebrews 12:1-2
Therefore, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us also lay aside every weight and the sin that clings so closely, and let us run with perseverance the race that is set before us, looking to Jesus the pioneer and perfecter of our faith ... (For context, read 11:1--12:2.)
Hebrews 11, which precedes and leads into the verses above, contains an enumeration of many people from the Old Testament who lived and died in faith. Chapter 12 then, begins by referring to all those now-deceased faithful as "so great a cloud of witnesses." The imagery is of these departed faithful having run their race of life and now sitting in the bleachers to cheer us on as we run our race.
This is one of the biblical sources for the concept explained in the "In the News" section above of the "church militant" and the "church triumphant." Our more recent ancestors may have understood this better than we do, for up until a few generations ago, independent or community cemeteries were rare. Most graveyards were also churchyards, creating a community of the "quick [old word for "alive"] and the dead" -- the quick inside, the dead outside.
For believers it was important to be buried within the borders of sanctified ground from which rose both the church building -- the center of the living Christians' worship life -- and the communal cemetery -- the final resting place for all past generations who had lived and died as believers.
One TWW contributor says, "When I was a kid, we'd visit friends who lived in a parsonage next to a church with a cemetery. The cemetery was a common playground for us. The only scary thing that ever occurred was when my sister accidentally pulled a tombstone down on her leg and broke it (the leg)!"
Thanks in part to Halloween and horror movies, many people no longer think of graveyards as holy ground. By moving our burial grounds away from our worship centers, we have lost one of the representations of the fellowship of the faithful. And we forget, perhaps, that the majority of the church is under ground.
The old church graveyards were a kind of in-your-face reminder that death was a normal part of the human journey. You walked among the tombstones on your way into the building each Sunday.
Questions: What, if anything, represents for you the communion of saints today? Who is in your cloud of witnesses? Who influenced you for the good but is no longer living? Are you a member of the communion of saints, as you understand it?
For Further Discussion
1. Rev. Stan Purdum tells the following: "For several months before I went into the ministry, I worked as an assistant in a funeral home. I quickly learned that certain words were not to be used in that business. In the first week, a delivery of burial boxes arrived and while I was helping to move them to the storeroom, I referred to them as 'coffins.' The embalmer, who was helping me, immediately corrected me. 'We call them caskets,' he said. 'Coffin sounds too cold.' Soon after, I learned that the long, dark-colored Cadillac in the garage was not a 'hearse,' but a 'funeral coach.' There were no 'undertakers,' but only 'funeral directors.' We didn't hold 'wakes,' but did have 'calling hours.' The dead person could be referred to as the 'body,' the 'deceased' or the 'remains,' but never, never, never the 'corpse.'" Does this softening of the language surrounding death help those who grieve? What does it suggest something about how we view death?
2. John Wesley, the founder of Methodism, was born in Epworth, England. At the time, his father, Samuel, was the priest at the local Anglican church. As an adult, John, too, became an Anglican priest, and he had a heartwarming encounter with God that made him an ardent evangelist. He preached that people ought to embrace their Christianity with enthusiasm.
     All this enthusiasm was a little too much for some of the reserved clergy, including the priest who served the Epworth parish after Samuel's death. It happened that one of John's travels took him near his hometown on a Sunday, so he offered his services to the Epworth pastor to either preach or read the prayers of the day. That pastor not only spurned the offer, but proceeded to preach a sermon on the dangers of enthusiasm.
     John's father was buried in the graveyard that adjoined the church. His tomb was a stone vault that rose about three feet above the surface of the ground. So that evening, as people were coming to the church, John climbed up on his father's tombstone and preached to them about joy and peace through the Holy Spirit.
     Do you think John's father would have been pleased to help his son in this way? Do you have a sense that we who follow Jesus are one in faith with those who have gone before us? Why or why not?
3. Read together and discuss 2 Timothy 4:6-8.
4. Comment on this, from the apostle Paul in Philippians 1:21: "For to me, living is Christ and dying is gain."
5. Discuss this, from TWW team member Frank Ramirez: "Personally, I've always thought it odd that we take people out of the church directory when they die. The idea of the communion of saints is that there are people on both sides of the great divide who are part of one great fellowship. At one point in Revelation, we see those who have died in heaven and all is well with them. There is this great celebration going on. We are told that the prayers of the saints, those who are living, are part of the celebration, the smoke as I remember. This seems to me to mean that we are all part of some great heavenly worship and that what we're doing in our own Sunday service, no matter how humble or simple, is part of something greater and grander."
6. Respond to this, regarding our theology about death: There was a house that was plagued with rats in the garage. The father, after several unsuccessful attempts to eliminate them, put a bounty on the rats' heads. He promised his children $2 for every rat that they were able to kill. Thus, the next day, Johnny was in the garage, hunting rats. Unbeknownst to Johnny, the minister stopped by to visit his mom and dad, and was sitting in the living room. A few moments later, Johnny came running into the room shouting, "Dad! Dad! I got one! I saw a rat run into the corner of the garage. I sneaked up behind him and dropped a cement block on his head. It was great! His brains splattered all over the floor!" Just then, Johnny noticed the minister sitting there and quickly added, "And then the good Lord called him home."
Responding to the News
This is a good time to think about the question "To whom do you ultimately belong?" and about how your life today shows that allegiance.
Closing Prayer

Thank you, Lord, that nothing but our unwillingness to accept your grace can separate us from your love in Christ Jesus our Lord. Amen.