.
The tea party movement isn't just a political movement--the tea party has come to church.
So what do you think?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This blog is here to notify readers of a new post--though the discussion of the Tuesday Column is on Facebook (simply friend me there to participate) To subscribe to the feed paste this: http://keithdrury.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default
Tuesday Column Followers
My other blogs
Labels
- abortion (1)
- alcohol (3)
- boomers (2)
- camp meeting (1)
- christmas (3)
- Denominations (4)
- developmental (1)
- doctrine (1)
- economics (3)
- education (3)
- emerging church (6)
- ethics (2)
- evangelicals (1)
- evangelism; discipleship (1)
- family (2)
- future (1)
- gamblling (1)
- General topics (1)
- generations (2)
- holiness movement (5)
- holy spirit (1)
- homosexuality (2)
- humor (4)
- indiana (1)
- Internet (2)
- IWU (1)
- Leadership (5)
- Marion (1)
- Marriage (1)
- Membership (5)
- Movie Reviews (1)
- music (1)
- Nazarene (1)
- Ordination (2)
- Outdoor (3)
- pastor's wife (1)
- Pastors (11)
- Pilgrim Holiness Church (11)
- Politics (9)
- seminary (1)
- sermon notes (1)
- Sex (3)
- sin (2)
- small church (1)
- State-of-church (1)
- Students (14)
- summers (1)
- sunday school (1)
- taxes (1)
- Theology (10)
- Trends (4)
- Wesleyan (6)
- Women (4)
9 comments:
nope, no tea party in our church or denomination, but I'm sure there are people who have that view towards any bureaucracy in the denomination.
I don't have time at this moment to respond how I would like to but I would say this, that would be a liberals point of view of the tea party I believe.
True that they would want smaller government. True that they would want less regulations. True that they would want lower taxes. But the reason you give for those points of view would be off. Yes, there are those few who would hold a such a extreme view.
1. Have you seen any evidence of “tea party thinking” in your church? YES - MANY BUT AGAIN THEY DO NOT HOLD TO THAT POINT OF VIEW YOU MENTIONED.
2. How does libertarian thinking on moral issues (homosexuality, drugs, abortion etc.) square with Christian values? I'LL ANSWER LATER IF I HAVE TIME.
3. When it comes to local tithing is anyone yet arguing their money should stay even closer to home—in their own pockets? THIS IS NOT TRUE OF A CONSERVATIVE POINT OF VIEW. OUR SUNDAY MORNING GIVING IS UP AND OUR MISSION GIVING IS UP. OUR MISSION GIVING TO OVERSEAS AND LOCAL ARE BOTH UP AND BEYOND.
AT LEAST THIS IS TRUE FOR ARE AREA. I SEE CONSERVATIVES AND THOSE IN THE TEA PARTY MOVEMENT OUT GIVE WHEN IT COMES TO MISSIONS AND NEEDS. SORRY BUT I SEE LIBERALS TELLING ME WHY DO I NEED TO GIVE. THAT IS WHY I PAY TAXES SO I DO NOT HAVE TO WORRY. IT IS TAKEN OUT OF MY CHECK EACH WEEK.
CONSERVATIVES AND TEA PARTY PEOPLE ARE SOME OF THE MOST GENEROUS WHEN IT COMES TO GIVING. WHY - THEY HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO SO. THEY LEARNED NOT TO SPEND OVER THEIR MEANS AND HAVE FISCAL DISCIPLINE. THEY ARE EMPOWERED TO GIVE.
WHY THEY MIGHT NOT GIVE TO CERTAIN THINGS IS BECAUSE THEY SEE THE WASTE, BUREAUCRACY, AND RED TAPE THAT WOULD LIMIT THE FULL POTENTIAL OF THEIR GIFT. WHICH GOVERNMENT DOES MUCH OF THE TIME.
4. Is this a good movement for the church or not? Why? YES. IF UNLEASHED TO THEIR FULL POTENTIAL THEY WILL DO MORE FOR THE NEEDY, THE POOR, THE UNINSURED, MISSIONS, AND ETC... MORE THAN A GOVERNMENT COULD EVER HOPE TO DO. THEY WOULDN'T SAY THAT GOVERNMENT DOES NOT HAVE ROLE TO PLAY BUT THAT ROLE SHOULD BE EMPOWERING PEOPLE THAN GIVING UNNEEDED TAXES THAT ONLY LIMITS THE ABILITY TO TRULY GIVE.
Thanks for the input Chap & Brad... I'm not speaking of the political tea party movement so much as the similar movement in the church.... You are seeing none of it--so keep paying your full budget cheerful--God loves a cheerful giver!
Some denominations are however, experiencing a similar kind of thinking applied to denominational and Educational "taxes" but as one who is at IWU who benefits greatly from more than a million dollars from such money I'm hopeful it never catches on... ;-)
kd
Sorry Keith. I was over reacting to the political scene. My bad.
no problem Brad... this is a hot week politically... it i possible what I hear from time to time large church pastors and from educational institutions, and from district and denominational officals is inaccurate-- many seem to think there is a movement to lessen centralizd "regulations" and rules. Beyond that pastors say their laity are increasinglly asking "what do we got out of" district payments.... but of special interest to me are reports that an increasing number of local folk want to reduce so-called "taxes" that going to educational institutions... but nobody has confirmed this trend yet here..and it is Wednesday..so maybe it isn't that widespread--which as I say above is good for us educators. ;-)
I'll try to answer each or the questions as posed by Keith at the end of his article. Because I am "font limited" in this forum, I will pit my comments in ALL CAPS, so please know that I am NOT trying to "SHOUT" at anyone--merely setting my remarks apart from the questions! :-)
1. Have you seen any evidence of “tea party thinking” in your church?
I HAVE YET TO EXPERIENCE A CONGREGATION OF BASICALLY ANY DENOMINATION THAT DOES NOT HAVE SOME EVIDENCE OF THIS. USUALLY IT REARS ITS HEAD WHEN THE PASTOR AND/OR THE CHURCH BOARD MAKE A DECISION THAT RUFFLES SOMEONE'S FEATHERS THE WRONG WAY. RUFFLE THE WRONG PERSON'S FEATHERS THE WRONG WAY, AND THAT PERSON WILL DO HIS/HER BEST TO ORGANIZE OPPOSITION TO THE PASTOR AND/OR BOARD AND/OR ISSUE. BUT THIS ISN'T REALLY ANYTHING NEW; IT HAS BEEN HAPPENING FOR GENERATIONS. PERHAPS IT HAS TO DO WITH THE AMERICAN FORM OF GOVERNMENT (I.E., DEMOCRATIC-REPUBLIC) WHERE CITIZENS BELIEVE THAT THEY HAVE NOT ONLY THE RIGHT, BUT THE RESPONSIBILITY TO SPEAK THEIR MINDS. SO IN MY OPINION, THIS GOES WAY DEEPER THAN THE TEA PARTY MOVEMENT WHERE THE CHURCH IS CONCERNED.
2. How does libertarian thinking on moral issues (homosexuality, drugs, abortion etc.) square with Christian values?
I COULD GO ON AND ON HERE, BUT LET ME JUST BE SIMPLE AND ASK IF AS CHRISTIANS, WE SHOULD STRIVE TO FOLLOW GOD BY BEING SLAVES TO FOLLOWING THE WRITTEN CODE OF THE OLD COVENANT LAW OR BY FOLLOWING THE LEADING OF THE HOLY SPIRIT WHO LIVES WITHIN US?
3. When it comes to local tithing is anyone yet arguing their money should stay even closer to home—in their own pockets?
I HAVEN'T HEARD THIS ONE YET (APART FROM THIS ARTICLE).
4. Is this a good movement for the church or not? Why?
IN SOME WAYS YES, SOME WAYS NO, AND PROBABLY TO DIFFERENT DEGREES DEPENDING ON THE INDIVIDUAL CONGREGATIONS INVOLVED. THERE GENERALLY NEEDS TO BE A DELICATE BALANCE BETWEEN DENOMINATIONAL VS. LOCAL AUTHORITY, AND THE SAME HOLDS TRUE WITHIN LOCAL CONGREGATIONS AS FAR AS PASTORAL VS. BOARD AUTHORITY, PASTORAL VS. CONGREGATIONAL AUTHORITY, PASTOR AND BOARD VS. CONGREGATIONAL AUTHORITY, ETC...
IT SEEMS TO ME THAT SOME CONGREGATIONS HAVE STRONGER PASTORAL LEADERSHIP THAN BOARDS, AND SOME HAVE STRONGER BOARDS THAN PASTORAL LEADERSHIP. THEN THERE ARE OFTEN ALSO PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT PASTORS OR BOARD MEMBERS WHO WANT THEIR VOICES TO BE HEARD AS WELL. THE DIFFERENCE IS THAT IN REALITY, PEOPLE WHO AREN'T HAPPY WITH THEIR CONGREGATIONS ARE MORE LIKELY TO SIMPLY LEAVE THAN CITIZENS OF A NATION WOULD BE TO SIMPLY LEAVE FOR ANOTHER COUNTRY.
SO, IS IT A GOOD MOVEMENT FOR THE CHURCH OR NOT? I SUPPOSE THAT IT IS FOR A CONGREGATION (OR DENOMINATION) WHERE THERE IS TOO MUCH TOP-DOWN AUTHORITY, BUT PROBABLY NOT WHERE THE SITUATION IS REVERSED.
Hope its ok that I comment. My wife (Theresa Delnegro) was your student and turned me on to the article.
There are some "tea party" people in our church.
It does seem that many Christians, myself in particular, just don't see a need for the excessive church bureaucracy that exists. We have too much in our organization that sends us to China (ELIC) as it is.
I really wanted to comment on the libertarian question since I'm a libertarian myself. There are a few things libertarians would be ok with - gay marriage, abortion, legal prostitution, legal drug use, homosexuals in the military, etc - that the average conservative would not be in favor of. While conservatives would agree on the smaller government, no taxes, less control and regulation, conservatives in the church, and perhaps just moral people in society, would be turned off by the social issues libertarians are indifferent about.
I don't support these activities (like prostitution and drug use) and don't wish to engage in them; however, I don't have a problem with them being legal. Here is why:
It seems to me that the fundamental issue with man (from a Christian perspective) is his broken relationship with God, not his "moral" (or lack thereof) activity. I am not concerned with the things people do but with whether or not they love Jesus. Prostitution isn't the prostitutes problem, their non-existent relationship with Christ is. My sin, even though I am not gay, a prostitute or drug user, disqualifies me in the eyes of God just as everyone else's does. My belief in Christ justifies me before God. As a result, I am not concerned with other's sin or "moral legislation" in society. I'm concerned with whether or not they have a relationship with Christ. If they have a relationship with Christ, then there are things we can look to the Bible for rules to govern ourselves. The Bible doesn't say to force morality on people.
Here is another way to think about laws: is an illegal activity sin or bad, like giving money to NCAA Div. I athletes just because the government says it is? What is immoral about it? It's illegal for Drs to treat people on their own time, outside of the hospital. What is immoral about that? Why create all these rules that aren't in the Bible? Even if they are in the Bible, why would we try and force everyone to obey as long as they weren't hurting anyone other than themselves? Do we make twinkies illegal because they aren't good for you? Do we outlaw soda and high-fructose corn syrup?
Naturally, there must be consequences for actions, so we need some government to a) keep the government out of our lives and b) to have a court system to protect people and c) an army to defend us from the outside world. But that's pretty much it, as far as I'm concerned.
And taxes = theft.
I don't think that was Dave Ramsey who said that. Thanks for another thoughtful article.
Post a Comment