We Can See Where This Path Leads: Lessons From Other Denominations As the CRC Considers It's Own Human Sexuality Report

As I observe the ongoing interactions regarding the Christian Reformed Church's 2022 Human Sexuality Report,  I'm surprised how often I hear people in publications and social media, saying "the church is going to have to give on LGBTQ+ issues like gay marriage or we will loose all our young people."

No doubt, there is an observable generational difference regarding LGBTQ+ issues in the United States that gives this line of thought a certain common-sense sort of logic.  But looking at those who have taken this approach, I don't see evidence that this actually leads to the desired outcome.

Consider this succinct observation from Six Truth's About the Church's Future by Bob Thune.  

In 2005, the United Church of Christ (UCC) became the first mainline Protestant denomination to officially embrace gay marriage. They expected this progressive stance to result in a growth boom. In 2006, with great optimism, the UCC announced the ambition to plant more than 1,600 new congregations by 2021.

Over that 15-year period, however, the denomination’s membership declined by more than 40 percent; 60 percent of its congregations now have fewer than 50 people; and in 2021 it sold its national headquarters to pay bills.

This story shouldn’t surprise; it’s the story of mainline Protestantism over the past 60 years. In 1960, the seven mainline denominations boasted 30 million members. Now they have 13 million.  CLICK HERE for the full article

Likewise, in his post "UCC Shows Mainline Protestantism's Future: Unrelenting Decline," author John Lompris digs even further into the details and concludes "Whatever future the American church has, it’ll lie in the hands of those who embrace historic Christian orthodoxy."  CLICK HERE for full post.

The numbers and stories of this sort of decline are consistent and numerous in the United States.  They are playing out again even now with our United Methodist neighbors.  What leads people to think that the CRCNA would experience a different outcome?

It is my sense that the church of Jesus would do well to rethink what it means to do gospel-centered ministry both with and for our LGBTQ+ members and neighbors.  Faithfulness to Jesus and the Gospel of God's Grace has certainly altered my ministry in this regard.  Following Jesus more faithfully - especially when He calls me to repentance - is what discipleship is about.  Change over time is expected.  It should be change that better shows the world a reflection of Jesus.  (2 Corinthians 3:18)

But changing ministry and convictions as a strategy to avoid loosing loved members is not the path of faithfulness.  And seems be a proven path leading to decline.

Beware of "My Truth" Demands

When someone makes a demand to express “My Truth,” I have learned to BEWARE!  It has been my experience that when a person has a "My Truth" starting point to a conversation, several unhelpful things will follow:

• They will fight to protect “Their Truth.”  Both me and my perspective present a personal threat to them and “Their Truth” and indeed the very identity they have built on “Their Truth.”
• They will be unable to imagine any other “Truth” that is not theirs alone, even if I agree with them.
• They will be unable to even imagine a “Truth” that is big enough to speak both to their perspective and to mine.

And worst of all, those problems are "baked in" to their thinking.  The problems necessarily follow from the premise that "I have the truth" in my sole possesion.

A different starting point that leads to different conversations and better outcomes is realizing that everyone has their experience and/or perspective on "The Truth."

It is more helpful to say "I had this experience and it was true."  Great! is my response.  How does your experience connect with my own experience, even if different, and help us both get a clearer glimplse of "The Truth."

It is more helpful to say "This is my perspective on this matter."  Great! is my response.  Perhaps your persepective can enlarge or enlighten my perspective.  We are both better off to discover that.

It can be the case that your perspective might disagree with my perspective.  Fair enough.  But we can still be people who are pursuing "The Truth."  At this point, our perspectives simply disagree.  Neither of us need be a threat to the other person.

The "My Truth" orientation is exclusive and necessarily leads to conflict.  After all, if "My Truth" and is different that your "My Truth," then your "My Truth" is wrong and such a falsehood must be set right.  That is to say, surrendered to my "My Truth."

Better - and I would say closer to the reality of our world - to say that "The Truth" exists independently of me.  I certainly may have an experience of that "Truth" or a perspective on it.  But I do not own Truth.

When "The Truth" exists apart from either me or you, then it is easy for me to realize that I may have only a parital experience or perspective on "The Truth."  The next step is to realize that perhaps you have an experience or persepctive that would better inform my own.  Picture me moving from a 20% grasp of "The Truth" to a 22% of "The Truth" because of what I learn from your experience or perspective.

As you can see, such a starting point draws us to community and reconciliation rather than conflict.

In closing - and with a big grin as I type - if what I am saying is off base and and you need to let me hear "Your Truth" on this, give me a call through the church office and I will be happy to listen.  I am certain I can benefit from your perspective.

CS Lewis On The Dilema Of A "Christian" Political Party

I meet regularly with a friend to talk through a chapter from CS Lewis' book "God in the Dock."  Hmmmm.  Lewis was a citizen of England, and an Oxford University Professor of Medieval literature who died November 22, 1963, the same day that President John Kennedy was assinated here in the United States.  When the reading was "Meditation on the Third Commandment," (The one about not "Taking the LORD's Name in Vain")  I was sure the chapter would be a snoozer.  Boy, was I surprised!

First paragraph:

We learn of the growing desire for a Christian ‘party’, a Christian ‘front’, or a Christian ‘platform’ in politics. Nothing is so earnestly to be wished as a real assault by Christianity on the politics of the world: nothing, at first sight, so fitted to deliver this assault as a Christian Party.  .  .  .

The Christian Party must either confine itself to stating what ends are desirable and what means are lawful, or else it must go further and select from among the lawful means those which it deems possible and efficacious and give to these its practical support. If it chooses the first alternative, it will not be a political party. Nearly all parties agree in professing ends which we admit to be desirable—security, a living wage, and the best adjustment between the claims of order and freedom. What distinguishes one party from another is the championship of means. We do not dispute whether the citizens are to be made happy, but whether an egalitarian or a hierarchical State, whether capitalism or socialism, whether despotism or democracy is most likely to make them so.

Lewis nexts illustrates with three hypothetical believers who all prefer different means - think policies - in pursuit of similar ends - public safety and equal opportunity for all citizens for example.  Division will follow, not based on the ends that all three would agree on, but based instead on the different means to achieving those ends.  One group might win the day based on their policies, but in doing that, they become only a part of the believing church, and not the whole. 

Lewis again:

It will be not simply a part of Christendom, but a part claiming to be the whole. By the mere act of calling itself the Christian Party it implicitly accuses all Christians who do not join it of apostasy and betrayal. It will be exposed, in an aggravated degree, to that temptation which the Devil spares none of us at any time—the temptation of claiming for our favourite opinions that kind and degree of certainty and authority which really belongs only to our Faith.

All this comes from pretending that God has spoken when He has not spoken. He will not settle the two brothers’ inheritance: ‘Who made Me a judge or a divider over you?’ (Luke 12:14) By the natural light He has shown us what means are lawful: to find out which one is efficacious He has given us brains. The rest He has left to us.

Lewis closes with sage advice that avoids the problem altogether:

There is a third way (to influence the country with Christian Faith) — by becoming a majority. He who converts his neighbour has performed the most practical Christian-political act of all.

Whoa?!?  He was writing this in 1941, right in the middle of the Nazi "Blitz Bombing" of London in World War II.  It's all of 4 pages, and worth digging in to.  You can purchase  the book from Amazon by CLICKING HERE.  It will include more than 45 MORE fascinating chapters.  Or listen to it read on YouTube by CLICKING HERE.  You will love the British accident for the 8 minutes it takes.

What Do You Mean By That Term: "Christian Nationalism"

During a recent conversation, I had a local elected official say to me "I am a Christian, and I love my country.  That makes me a Christian Naitonalist, right?"  For them, it was a rhetorical question with a self-evident answer of "Certainly!"  I was silent.

In truth, it all depends on how that term - Christian Nationalism - is defined.  That is the challenge in any conversation when someone uses it.  When one term represents different things as different people use it, nothing but confusion and false assumptions can follow.  Since I couldn't ask for some more detail on their definition, I wasn't going to add to the confusion.

Frankly, I think the better term for what my representive may have wanted to express would have been "patriotic Christian."  Grammar Geeks will tell you that it matters which is the adjective and which is the object.

Personally, I am happy to stand with respect when the VFW marches by with the American flag at the Tulip Time parade.  I have performed a Memorial Service at Arlington National Cemetery and been stirred by the sights and history of that setting.  I'm glad to stand for the National Anthem at events, and do my best to sing it.  The people of Celebration-Harderwyk hear me pray for those who govern our nation.  Gold star families have been part of the congregations that I have served.

I am thankful to be a citizen of the United States.  It has afforded me unimaginable blessings and I recognize that many people have sacrificed in a variety of ways to make those possible.  I am disheartened when my country has not lived up to it's dream and want to help pursue that dream for everyone.  I understand why many people yearn to join me in the freedoms, responsibilities and abundance that citizenship affords.  I want to pass it all on to my children, neighbors and any others that want to join me.

But I also know that many Nigerians love their homeland, like I do mine.  The same could be said for many Chinese, Germans, Salvadoreans and on and on and on.  Love of homeland is a good thing.  I would even say a "God thing."

But loving our homeland - or any homeland - more than God Himself is a different matter.  Such disordered love is a form of idolatry.  It blinds us to the shortcomings, sin and brokenness of our own homeland and the people and culture that make it feel like home to us.  Every homeland falls short, to paraphrase Paul in Romans 3.  Every homeland, or better, all the people in it need the Savior: Jesus.

At the end, people from every homeland will gather around the throne of the Lamb of God and give Him praise.  The words of Revelation are "from every tribe and tongue and nation."  But it is Jesus the Lamb that they will worship, not their homeland.

It appears to me that the term "Christian Natonalism" is a slippery one right now.  People use it as a slur for others they disagree with.  Or a point of separation to differentiate themselves from "those people."  Or for virtue signaling.  Or without thinking.  When I hear someone use the term, my first question is always, "What do you mean by that?" long before I say "me too" or "no way."  How do you define the term?  That makes all the difference.

That said, there is an emerging movement of self-identified "Christian Nationalists" I must resist and reject.  Their definition of the term lays out an idolatrous order of love for God and Country.  I'm writing to warn you of this emerging force.

The Case for Christian Nationalism by Stephen Wolfe is the most serious effort I know to make the best case for both "Christian" as well as "Nationalism."  It is nearly 500 pages and scholarly in tone, so I have not read it.  But this review on TheGospelCoalition.org is enough to confirm my concerns.  CLICK HERE for that full review.  It is long and detailed.

Much more readable and helpful on this topic is Trevin Wax's reflections on the recent Rob Reiner "documentary" called "God & Country."  CLICK HERE for that post.  It would be good to read the review and watch the video together.

I've avoided my own definition of Christian Nationalism in this post. I am hoping to point out the existence of a line between patriotism and idolatry.  Getting specific about where to draw the actual line right now may need some conversation.  "What do you mean by that?"

Consider learning more and listening carefully in order to more clearly identify that line in your own life.  If you only take one thing away, may it be the encouragement to first ask, "What do you mean by that?" so you can pursue understanding.

As always, feel free to ask questions or pursue further conversations with me.  Stop me after a service and we can set up a time for conversation.  Call the Harderwyk office and they can help us connect.  Let's be aware and learning.

You Need To Know Brad Wilcox and His New Book: "Get Married"

I have followed the work of Dr. Brad Wilcox for many years.  Professor of Sociology and Director of the National Marriage Project at the University of Virginia, he is a prolific researcher and writer in the area of marriage and family who can write clearly - that is to say: real people can understand his findings, observations and applications. Don't let the PhD put you off.  Instead, check out any of several short posts on the Institute for Family Studies listed below.

But First: His New Book!

Get Married: Why Americans Must Defy the Elites, Forge Strong Families, and Save Civilization was released this week.  CLICK HERE for Amazon link.  I've not yet read the book, but it is on my stack, and I'll add to this post when I complete it.  

Here are three of his research findings that I have taken from his blog: Six Reasons to Get and Stay Married - CLICK HERE  Let them whet your interest.

• Nothing predicts happiness for Americans better than (a good) marriage.  Not money, education, work, or even sex.
• Boys raised apart from an intact family are more likely to go to jail than graduate from college.  By contrast, young men raised in an intact family are about 4 times more likely to graduate from college than land in jail or prison.  (This insight has PROFOUND insight and motivation for Youth Ministry and discipling/support of single-parent families. - Bill)
• Churchgoing.  Religious couples are happier, less divorce prone, and, surprisingly, even have more sex than secular couples.

Some Reviews of the Book

Christianity Today is a go-to source for me when I want thoughtful, honest and faithfully Christian perspectives on news and culture.  This review by Joseph Holmes - who is himself single - was helpful and would be a good first read.  CLICK HERE for "The Data-Backed Case for Marriage."

TheGospelCoalition.org featured a podcast conversation with Wilcox at the book's release entitled "Why Your Community Needs Healthy Marriages."  CLICK HERE for a link to their website, or search for "Gospel Coalition" wherever you get your podcasts.

Recent Brad Wilcox Posts With The Institute of Family Studies

• Why You Should Get Married - 2/14/24 - CLICK HERE

• 6 Reasons to Get and Stay Married - 2/13/24 - CLICK HERE

• The Awfulness of Elite Hypocrisy on Marriage - 2/13/24 - CLICK HERE

• Don't Buy the Soulmate Myth - 2/12/24 - CLICK HERE

• We Can Make Chicago Safer By Prioritizing Stronger Families - 1/2/24 - CLICK HERE

• How to Make Smartphones and Apps Safer for Kids - 12/21/23 - CLICK HERE

Each one of these has insight of their own worth pondering.  Consider reading one per day and letting them sink in.

Stopping to Breathe the Air of Eternity - An Excerpt From Emotionally Healthy Spirituality by Peter Scazzero

My wife Mary Lynn has been part of a group of pastor's wives meeting and talking through the book Emotionally Healthy Spirituality by Peter Scazzero.  She pointed out to me these opening paragraphs to the sixth chapter as a good picture of the need we are addressing in our current sermon series at Celebration-Harderwyk on Spiritual Practices.  I pass them along with recommendation of the book as well.

We live in a blizzard. And few of us have a rope.

In his book a Hidden Wholeness, Parker Palmer relates a story about farmers in the Midwest who would prepare for blizzards by tying a rope from the back door of their house out to the barn as a guide to ensure they would return safely home. These blizzards came quickly and fiercely and were highly dangerous.  When their full force was blowing, a farmer could not see the end of his or her hand. Many froze to death in those blizzards, disoriented by their inability to see. They wandered in circles, lost sometimes in their own backyards. If they lost their grip on the rope, it became impossible for them to find their way back home. Some froze within feet of their own front door, never realizing how close they were to safety.

To this day, in parts of Canada and the Great Plains, meteorologists counsel people that, to avoid getting lost in the blinding snow when they venture outside, they tie one end of a long rope to their house and grasp the other end firmly.

Many of us have lost our way, spiritually, in the white out of the Blizzard swirling around us. Blizzards begin when we say yes to too many things. Between demands from work and family, our lives fall somewhere between full and overflowing. We multitask, so much so that we are unaware we are doing three things at once. We admire people who are able to accomplish so much in so little time. They are our role models.

At the same time many of us are overscheduled, tense, addicted to hurry, frantic, preoccupied, fatigued, and starved for time. Cramming as much as possible into our to do lists, we battle life to make the best use of every spare minute we have.

Yet not much changes. Our productivity becomes counterproductive. We end our days exhausted from work and raising children. And then our “free time” on weekends becomes filled with more demands in an already overburdened life.

We listen to sermons and read books about slowing down and creating margin in our lives. We read about the need to rest and recharge our batteries. Our workplaces offer seminars on increased productivity through replenishing ourselves.

But we can't stop. And if we aren't busy, we feel guilty that we waste time and are not productive.

We go through the motions of doing so many things as if there is no alternative way of spending our days. It is like being addicted - only it is not to drugs or alcohol but to tasks, to work, to doing. Any sense of rhythm in our daily, weekly, and yearly lives has been swallowed up in the blizzard of our lives.

Add to this the storms and trials of life that blow into our lives unexpectedly and catch us off guard, and we wonder why so many of us are disoriented and confused.

We need a rope to lead us home.

God is offering us a rope to keep us from getting lost. This rope consistently leads us back home to him, to a place that is centered and rooted. This rope can be found in two ancient disciplines going back thousands of years - the Daily Office and Sabbath. When placed inside present-day Christianity, the Daily Office and Sabbath are groundbreaking, countercultural acts against western culture. They are powerful declarations about God, ourselves, our relationships, our beliefs, and our values.

Stopping for the Daily Office and Sabbath is not meant to add another to-do to our already busy schedules. It is the resetting of our entire lives toward a new destination- God. It is an entirely new way of being in the world.

The Daily Office and Sabbath are ropes that lead us back to God in the blizzards of life. They are anchors for living in the hurricane of demands. When done as a “want to” rather than a “have to,” they offer us a rhythm for our lives that binds us to the living God.

They are nothing short of revolutionary disciplines for Christians today.

Emotionally Healthy Spirituality by Peter Scazzero - Chapter 6 – pp. 139-141

CLICK HERE for Amazon Link.

Dr Leonard Sax Reviews NY Times Article on Gender Transition

I have followed pediatrician and researcher Dr. Leonard Sax for years now, and always find him informative, well resourced and helpful, often recommending him to others.  I'll do that again, as I reproduce below a major section from his email newsletter received a few days ago

The New York Times - surprise!

The New York Times has just published a major article profoundly critical of the transgender movement and of transgenderism. Pamela Paul, the journalist, builds the article around the story of young people who transitioned from female to male or from male to female as teenagers, only to realize a few years down the road that they had made a terrible mistake: “the process of transition didn’t make me feel better. It magnified what I found was wrong with myself.” But the hormones and the surgery did irreversible damage.

Ms. Paul casts a devastating light on how American doctors now push children and teens into transition, even when the children and teens themselves have reservations. She also interviews leaders in the transgender movement who are uneasy with what's happening now.

Ms. Paul debunks the notion that the failure to quickly transition a child to the other gender increases the risk of suicide. "Do you want a live son or a dead daughter?" - she correctly recognizes as emotional blackmail, with no support in the published research. (Her lengthy article includes more than 80 links to outside sources, including many scholarly peer-reviewed papers.)

Ms. Paul also interviews gay and lesbian individuals who illustrate how the transgender movement now promotes homophobia. One of the interviewees, Kasey Emerick, is a lesbian woman who was ashamed of her sexual orientation as a teenager. She met with a counselor who encouraged her to transition to the male role. At the counselor's recommendation, she began taking testosterone. Although her depression only worsened, she was encouraged to undergo bilateral mastectomy, which she did undergo at age 17. She has since detransitioned and resumed the female role, but her voice is permanently altered. People ask her when she is going to stop taking testosterone. She stopped more than one year ago.

Ms. Paul includes many links to European research showing that the United States is now an outlier. Many European countries now limit or prohibit male-to-female or female-to-male medications or surgery for children under 18. Only in the United States are such medications and surgery for children still endorsed and encouraged by all our leading professional groups such as the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Psychological Association.

None of this would be unusual if it were published in The Wall Street Journal or First Things or The New Atlantis. What's remarkable is that this piece was published in The New York Times. The article has already received more than 2,100 comments and the Times has shut down further comments. Scrolling through the 100 most popular comments, I found that every comment was supportive of the article, with most expressing a sentiment of "at last! somebody sees that the emperor has no clothes."

Back in 2019, I wrote an essay criticizing the American Academy of Pediatrics for their new guidelines in which they asserted that a 5-year-old boy knows better than the boy's parents what is best for the boy. If a 5-year-old boy says that he is a girl, then the parents' duty is to transition the boy to the female role immediately, regardless. "Watchful waiting" is bigotry. If the parents hesitate, then the pediatrician should make a referral to Child Protective Services to remove the child from the parents' custody. I noted that the AAP guidelines are psychotic, utterly detached from reality, and contradict the available evidence, which I link to.

Links to posts mentioned

• Politicizing Pediatrics: How the AAP’s Transgender Guidelines Undermine Trust in Medical Authority by Leonard Sax, March 2019 - CLICK HERE

• As Kids, They Thought They Were Trans. They No Longer Do. - NY Times, Pamela Paul, Feb 2, 2024  CLICK HERE

• LeonardSax.com - CLICK HERE for Dr Sax's personal website and to sign up for his email newsletter.

My Own Posts on Gender Transition

• What's A Pastor To Do?  Pastoral Care for Those Considering Gender Transition - CLICK HERE

• More Than A Question of Pronouns: Considering a Recent Lawsuit Against Rockford School District - CLICK HERE

What Do You Mean By "Evangelical?"

I have followed the career and writings of Dr Thomas Kidd for years and grown to trust and appreciate his thoughts.  As a result, I was delighted to see his recent article "How Evangelical are Iowa's Evangelicals?" in the Wall Street Journal.  CLICK HERE to read the full article.

As an ordained pastor in the Evangelical Presbyterian Church, I have observed the sudden redefinition and confusion around the term "Evangelical" with personal interest.

Dr. Kidd writes in his January 12 newsletter:

The 2024 presidential campaign begins in earnest on Monday, with the Iowa caucuses. On the religion front, this means a new round of reports by journalists, pollsters, and scholars about how “evangelicals” support the twice-divorced Donald Trump.

But who exactly are these evangelicals? It’s difficult to know. Some self-identified evangelical voters don’t even attend church. Many in the media seem to define “evangelicals” as white Republicans who consider themselves religious. Such a definition, in both a spiritual and a historical sense, is ludicrous…

For technical reasons related to sample sizes, most pollsters ask only white people if they are evangelicals. The result is that the news media’s label mostly refers to white Americans who respond to polls and identify as evangelicals. In a time when conservative churches are booming in Latin America, Africa, East Asia and elsewhere, this white Republican cohort is a thin slice of the world’s evangelical community. Globally, most born-again churchgoers aren’t white and they certainly aren’t Republican, because they aren’t American.

For those of you who have read my book Who Is an Evangelical? these may be familiar themes. That book was one of the reasons the Journal editors asked me to write this piece.  CLICK HERE for the Amazon Link.

(My) column was also prompted by Ruth Graham’s excellent story at the New York Times, which actually profiles some of the nonchurchgoing “evangelicals” in Iowa. This is one of the only attempts I have seen in the media to identify and understand nonchurchgoing voters who still call themselves evangelicals.  CLICK HERE to read that article.

I don’t expect that my column will “move the needle” much in terms of intelligent discussions about evangelicals and politics. Journalists and scholars who simply want to trash evangelicals will continue to do so. But I have actually seen some improvement since 2016 in the relative nuance of some reporting on evangelicals.

I talked to a writer for a major national magazine in 2016, for example, who had no idea that polls about “evangelicals” usually only ask white people if they are evangelicals. That level of basic unfamiliarity with the subject may be receding a bit. Still, we can expect that in certain quarters “evangelical” will continue to be used as an all-purpose slur, especially in an election year.

What does it tell us that in current survey polling only white people are given the option of identifying as "evangelical?"  What does it tell us that a significant percentage of those whites that choose to identify as evangelical in those polls never attend church? 

This is life where the "Church of Self-Definition" predominates.  Words loose meaning when self-expression takes over.  Journalism using those polls can no longer inform or clarify, but becomes instead an exercise in advocacy.

 Dr Kidd points out that aross the globe, churches that fit the historic and classical definition of the label "evangelical" are growing dramatically.  The Gospel of Jesus continues to move and transform lives.  Thank God for that.  Frankly, I'm no longer sure what term to use in order to best introduce myself if "evangelical" is redefined to become a political category for white people only but increasingly filled with non-church-going people.  But this I know, I'm doing my best to stay centered in the Gospel of Jesus.

Consider The National Association of Evangelicals

I find few people are aware of an organization called The National Association of Evangelicals.  CLICK HERE for their site.  Formed in 1942, it represents the movement with historical roots back to the 1500's.  CLICK HERE for their video What is an Evangelical? for their answer to the question.   And note how different that answer is than what you hear in the cultural conversation of the moment.

Hope For the Religious, The Revolutionaries and The Rest of Us

Perhaps you have heard from a friend or family member that "religious faith has caused more harm than good," and so religious faith of all kinds - but usually Christianity in particular - is to be rejected.

An oft-repeated example of the harm caused by religious faith is the Spanish Inquisition(1478-1834).  From wikipedia: According to modern estimates, around 150,000 people were prosecuted for various offences during the three-century duration of the Spanish Inquisition, of whom between 3,000 and 5,000 were executed, approximately 2.7 percent of all cases.  CLICK HERE  Surely, the Spanish Inquisition is a real and concrete example of a horrible abuse of power by the institutional religion.

But it would do us all well to put that human horror in a bit of context.

As it turns out, the ten-year French Revolution (1789-1799) occurred within the time frame of the Spanish Inquisition.  Within the decade of that events is a nine-month period of the Revolution referred to as The Reign of Terror.  Consider these paragraphs by John Dickson in his book Bullies and Saints: An Honest Look at the Good and Evil of Christian History

Some seventeen thousand men and women were “tried” and put to death during the Reign of Terror (September 1793 to July 1794), whether by gunshot, drowning, or the newly invented guillotine. The public drowning of about two thousand men and women in the Loire River near the town of Nantes was coldly dubbed by officials “the national bath” and “republic baptisms.” In any case, the numbers are hard to fathom. In just nine months, the newly enlightened revolutionaries executed three times as many people as the Spanish Inquisition had killed in over three centuries. 

Those in command of the Revolution—all of them Enlightenment rationalists—insisted that what they were doing was “virtuous” and that the result of this policy of terror would be a “virtuous France.” The great leader of the revolution at the time of the Terror, Maximilien Robespierre, famously argued that “Terror is nothing other than justice, prompt, severe, inflexible; it is therefore an emanation of virtue; it is not so much a special principle as it is a consequence of the general principle of democracy applied to our country’s most urgent needs.” The Terror is a disturbing reminder that neither religion nor rationalism is protective against the human propensity toward cruelty. 

Let me be clear. My point here is not that secular liberty is more dangerous than religious dogmatism. Nor am I offering a kind of whataboutism. I wish only to highlight a fascinating historical phenomenon, a paradox: while no one today rails against the “ferocity of secular liberty” or the “viciousness of the French,” a great many of us (me included) have grown up decrying the legendary brutality of the Inquisition, as if it epitomized all that is worst in humanity and all that is wrong with religion.

Dickson, John. Bullies and Saints: An Honest Look at the Good and Evil of Christian History (pp. 229-230). Zondervan. Kindle Edition.  CLICK HERE for Amazon Link

It would be my conviction that the problems that we see in both religion - including Christianity - AND revolutions is not so much about religion or revolution:  The problem rests within humans themselves, whether religious humans or revolutionary humans.  And the only real hope for the religious, the revolutionaries and the rest of us is a rescue that comes from outside humanity itself.

More Than A Question of Pronouns: Considering a Recent Lawsuit Against Rockford School District

I was winding down on a Tuesday afternoon when a headline in my Google News caught my attention:  Michigan Parents Sue School District for Allegedly Hiding Autistic Dauther's Gender Transition.  WHOA! CLICK HERE for full article.

I gave it a quick skim and learned:

• The student was a Rockford high school freshman on the autism spectrum.
• Parents, working with a school psychologist to help their daughter, received a report that referred to their daughter with a male name and pronouns.
• The parents pursued and began to realize that multiple people connected with the school had facilitated their daughter's "gender transition." This included books given to the student and doctored reports that went home to parents with name and pronouns altered to conceal what was being done at school.
• This had apparently been going on since 7th grade.
• Upon inquiry, the parents were told by the principle that the child's demands supersede parental rights under school policy.

I marked the post for future reference and went in to help with dinner.

To my surprise, while preparing dinner no more than an hour after reading the article, I saw this news segment on our local TV station with this headline: Parents Sue Rockford Shool District Over Pronouns.  CLICK HERE for the transcript and video in full.  Here is one paragraph: "In May of 2022, the student asked the counselor to tell teachers to use he/him pronouns and a masculine name when referring to the student. That fall, as the then-13-year-old entered 8th grade, teachers referred to the student with he/him pronouns and used the student’s preferred masculine name, but the school did not notify the parents."

Imagine the impact on everyone who heard the TV report without the benefit of reading the article I had an hour earlier.

I am certain of several things at this point:

• I do not have all the information about this situation.  For my part, I will continue to collect and consider information as I can find it. Listen, learn and pray for discernment.
• This situation is not likely to go quietly into the night.
• This situation is about FAR MORE than a grammar dispute.

It is the worst sort of trivializing to treat the many aspects of this situation as if it were no more than a matter of preferred pronouns.  Regardless of the options one chooses when considering gender transition, there are consequences, risks and unknowns that need to be openly and carefully considered.  Here are just a few in summary form:

• There is a young woman's life and future on the line here.
• Pro-transition folks will often say, "affirm the transition or risk suicide."  A growing body of research and the emerging stories of "De-transitioners" make me think the pro-folks have greatly oversimplified the potential problems.  This is a set of decisions fraught with difficulty and risk of all sorts.  My heart and prayers go out for teens and their parents who enter into these questions.
• Puberty blockers have known risks for brain development and bone development that last a life-time.
• Trust between parents and schools will be further strained.  Old folks - like me - tell stories about getting in trouble in school and facing consequences at home.  If I dis-respected my teacher, I was dis-respecting my dad was the reasoning at that time.  When I was later involved in leading a church-based school in the 2010's I saw how that perspective had changed!  This situation in Rockford - and others like it that are springing up - only aggrevate that problem.  
• Policies like the one in Rockford leave teachers especially in a real squeeze.  They become required by policy to withhold information from parents that may be more consequential than a class grade.

There are nuances, values, unknowns, misinformation and profound consequences permeating the wide-ranging collection of issues that surface in this young person's life and her parent's law suit.  I suspect that there are no one-sentence answers.

But treating this as no more than a dispute over pronouns as our local TV stations have, only makes a healthy outcome more difficult to reach.  And for my convictions, this young woman and her parents deserve more support, understanding, honesty and compassion than that.

As a pastor, I find myself in relationship with and serving people in my congregation who are facing these same questions with children, family, friends and nighbors.  The question of gender dysphoria is not a simply a concept to be understood or discussed.  It now has a face of someone we know and with whom we will interact.

For those who find themselves facing these new situations and questions, I am committed to providing:

• Godly counsel growing out of prayer, the Scriptures and the wisdom of other believers through history.
• Best understanding I can of the issues involved from reliable resources - medical and psycholgical research in particular
• Honest presence for as long as needed.  Along this journey, people will be welcome to call me or worship with my congregation whether you take my counsel or agree with me.  The gospel calls us "to love as we have been loved." (John 13:34)

As always, if you would like to talk more, let's find a way to connect in some way: over the phone, over coffee or whatever is appropriate.  Simply call the Harderwyk Ministries office and they can help make arrangements.

What's A Pastor To Do? Pastoral Care for Those Considering Gender Transition

Here's a real experience from my life as a pastor in these tumultous times.  I share it not so much that you know what I face, but that you might get a clearer sense of the significance of some of the changes that are happening all around us.  I'll keep a few of the names/situations obscured to protect specific people's private lives and decisions.

It was mid-June, 2022 and I was winding down the day skimming headlines.  I stopped and read the entire New York Times article entitled: The Battle Over Gender Therapy.  Posted June 15, 2022 by Emily Bazelon it is a 22-page pdf in my files.  CLICK HERE for the entire article.

The article is extensive and seems well-researched.  It felt like conversations with real people - medical researchers, young people considering gender transition and their families.  I came away with the impression that there is far more that is unsettled regarding the matter of gender transition with teens than is settled.  Research was thin and conclusions seemed all over the map.  European countries are backing away from what are called "gender-affirming therapies" because of lack of evidence on which to base policy.

There were interviews with young people who had considered gender transition and not gone on, those who had started and stopped as well as those who had completed.  There was a lot to ponder and think about.

The VERY NEXT MORNING, we received an unsolicited email from a distant acquaintance - more a commercial relationship than personal friendship - who laid out the story of their own child making the gender transition beginning - as I recall -  in middle school.  I was immediately taken by the difference in tone between the NY Times and this local acquaintance.  This person was exuberant about the change for their child, positive about the future, thankful to all who had helped and closing with what I have found common in listening to these stories: If I/you/we do not affirm and support a request for gender transition by anyone - regardless of age - we push them towards suicide.  Ouch!

Two thoughts:

This transition or suicide binary does not seem to be the case.  As best I can tell at this point: anyone considering gender transition will have a higher incidence of suicide across the next five years than the general population whether they transition or not.  This is a hard reality if this holds up over time.

If I had dared - or had the opportunity - to point this parent towards the NY Times article that I had read the night before, would I be seen as indifferent to their situation and putting their child at risk for suicide?

As always, if you would like to talk more, let's find a way to connect in some way: over the phone, over coffee or whatever is appropriate.  Simply call the Harderwyk Ministries office and they can help make arrangements.