NFL Response

Posted on Jul 17 2007 | Tagged as: Christianity and Society

I just received this note from the NFL – responding to the one I sent them last Christmas:

————————-

Dear Mr. Parkinson,

The National Football League has absolutely no objection to churches and others hosting Super Bowl viewing parties as long as they do not charge admission and that the game is shown in a television of the type commonly used at home.

We are simply following copyright law and have done so consistently with regard to hotels, theaters, museums, schools, arenas and other such venues.

This is nothing new. It is a matter of longstanding policy and the law.

We have no rules that relate to viewing at home on any type of television.

Sincerely,

NFL Public Relations

————————

I appreciate them getting back to me. I also note that they did not address the substance of my comments to them, concerning the way their regulations were applied to churches during the last Super Bowl.

Share

A Culture of Crisis

Posted on Apr 18 2007 | Tagged as: Christianity and Society

I wonder if we are developing a culture of crisis – not a culture in crisis, but a culture of crisis?

Of course, this perspective may be personally skewed by a horrendous year of two family deaths, a difficult inheritance for me to arbitrate, and the depressing impact of Alzheimer’s. No, make that three difficult years of serious back operation and recovery for my beloved, Micki. No, better make that six difficult years, including the divorce and re-formation of my daughter. Anyway, you get the point. My perspective may be skewed by a whole heap of personal stress (and I haven’t begun to talk about my current stress points, which are doozies).

But watching the coverage of the Virginia Tech massacre, I began to wonder if “crisis mode” is becoming the mode of choice, or the common way to think about life. The first statement from the mouth of a major TV news anchor was, “In the future, we will all know where we were when we first heard about the massacre.” Hmm. I hadn’t thought to remember where I was when I first heard of it, and that made me feel that somehow I wasn’t taking it seriously enough. My point is not that the shootings were anything but horrific – I literally wept, thinking of the anguish of the parents involved, and imagining what such pain would be like. But if I had not already wept, the TV coverage was determined that I would – and more than once, if possible. And this horror will be drained of all possible emotional content until another arises to replace it.

The nature of modern media – not just TV, but now the internet and cell phones – assures that selected crises can and will draw the attention of the entire nation. In other words, our own personal trials are no longer enough. Now, we must enter into the personal torment of others – others we do not know, and whose agonies are chosen for us by the whims of the larger media.

I suppose this only seems natural to generations who have watched thousands and thousands of brief stories on TV and in the movies, from westerns to comedies to dramas. Every one of them, from Gunsmoke to CSI, to Mash, to Lord of the Rings, are designed to grip our souls and take us through a crisis to its resolution in one sitting. Before movies and TV, people would only be exposed to that kind of theatrical art on only a couple of occasions in a lifetime. Earlier, most drama had been in the form of reading, which invites the thoughtful, active participation of the reader, rather than the hotter medium of theater, which is much more passive for the participant.

Anyway, my point is that I wonder whether managed news-casting has added another dimension to modern theater, and that using theater to model our response to crisis has become our chief method for learning how to live. In other words, are we learning how to behave by imbibing scripted crises and watching how they are resolved?

If so, this is especially significant because in this country, Christian faith used to play a larger role in such a response, even in the media. This response included not only comfort and hope, but also humility before God’s judgment and supplication for his grace.

Now, however, secular institutions have largely taken over that priestly role. Alongside the traditional impact of TV and movies, the news media determines what emotionally stresses us, while the comments of institutional leaders and the reactions of the newscasters give us the cues that condition how to respond correctly.

Case in point: the memorial service at Virginia Tech. Representatives from four religious traditions, Islam, Buddhist, Jewish and Christian, all said essentially the same thing as the psychologist, which was that we simply had to hang in there and collectively cope with the insanity of life. No answers, no reason. Just the well meaning but ultimately empty encouragement to cling to others until you can once again get on with your own goals.

Presenting the gospel in such a setting would have been hard for most to hear. Not that it is hard to speak of God’s love, of course. But after a bit, we need more than that. We need to understand the issues that put God and mankind against each other and justly expose us to the horrible consequences of our own sin. Unfortunately, those who condition our collective response these days demand that religion – all religions – fall in line and contribute to the liturgy of we are wonderful; God is nice; too bad life is insane; lets help each other get through this sad-but-temporary blip so we can all get back to our personal dreams.

The Virginia Tech community and families deserve more than that. I deserve more than that. As a creature made in the image of God, I deserve to be faced with the real truth about sin, and the truth about real redemption.

But day after day, one horror after another works to emotionally tear us down and condition our response. An increasing number of these crises are forced upon us by the larger media and shepherded by a new priesthood of secular institutions who use community spirit to maintain the “sacredness” of personal aspirations in a world they insist makes no ultimate sense at all. In the long run, this will only cultivate more and more self-centeredness and despair.

Obviously, my intent is not to impugn or denigrate any the people who are trying their best to deal with an unimaginable horror. I appreciate their efforts, and my heart goes out to them. My point is that contemporary Christians live in a milieu in which the biblical worldview is desperately needed, while those who condition cultural behavior maintain a death grip on a philosophy that insists on personal meaning without any rational underpinnings. As a consequence, one of the most difficult challenges for those who love the biblical gospel is to find an effective way to speak in today’s public forum. There will be no way to avoid sounding “foolish,” as the Apostle Paul put it, but we must try to find a way to compellingly offer the gospel of rational hope as an alternative to brave despair.

Share

Public Prayer in the Public Square

Posted on Mar 20 2007 | Tagged as: Christianity and Society

Today, I had the privilege of offering the invocation to begin the day at the Maryland State Senate. When asked to participate several months ago, I was not sure how to respond. I knew that they want ecumenical prayers, by which they mean prayers that use generic names for God, and are crafted so as not to offend people of other faiths.

I share my experience because I know that many Christians struggle with what is appropriate in such situations.

One concern, of course, is the use of Jesus’ name in prayer. On the one hand, I realize that we are told to pray in Jesus’ name, not to say those exact words at the end of a prayer (no prayers in the New Testament end that way, yet I assume the apostles were praying in the name of Jesus). On the other hand, however you communicate it, prayer that is acceptable to God must be authorized by Jesus. As it turns out, the Senate assured me that their guidlines were only that, and I was free to pray as I wished, so I did, in fact, use Jesus’ name.

My greatest concern was leading a number of non-Christians in prayer. How could I lead in what would be idolatry for many? My solution was to inform the Senate that I would not lead in prayer, but would instead pray for the Senators. I would be especially mindful that there were many non-Christians present (a matter for my own conscience, not only the government’s sensitivities), but I would pray as I understood how to pray.

I think this distinction of praying for a mixed group instead of leading them in prayer may be a helpful avenue for Christians to explore. I would be offended if a Muslim tried to lead me in prayer to Allah. However, I would not be personally offended if a Muslim offered prayer for me. I do not recognize his god, but there would be no harm done to me, and I would appreciate any positive sentiments he expressed on my behalf. Similarly, it would be an offense to God for me to try to lead an atheist or idolater in prayer. But it would not offend God (and probably would offend no one) for me to offer Christian prayer invoking God’s common grace upon non-Christians.

I’ve included the prayer I actually prayed below. Others may come to different conclusions about what is appropriate; I share my journey in this matter to give food for thoght, and to encourage us to find good and helpful ways to serve Christ in a pluralistic society.

———————

Holy and compassionate Creator of all, I humbly bow before you this day, as these Senators and staff prepare to do the hard work of government. I lift them up to you. You have called them to this task; I ask you to help them accomplish much this day.
In every soul, stir up their best insight, courage and graciousness. Enable them to weigh each perspective appropriately, and make decisions that best conform to your common grace for mankind. For the sake of this State, guard them from the temptations that power brings. Grant them this day the mutual respect and good humor that can make sharp differences less abrasive. Help them to find wisdom from each other, and always heed the conscience you have given.
Lord God, I thank you for these men and women. I ask you to give them the health and strength they need to do their job. I ask you to mercifully lighten the personal burdens each one carries into this chamber, and be near to anyone who calls to you for help.
In all, enable them to do what is good, act justly and love mercy.
Almighty God, I know that each of us who prays does so the best we know how. For me, that means that I offer this prayer to you in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen.

Share

The Empty Tomb of Jesus – a pamphlet

Posted on Mar 08 2007 | Tagged as: Christianity and Society

I promised a pamphlet Christians could use to further discussion about Jesus’ resurrection as a follow-up to “Lost Tomb” interest. You can find a pdf file of “The Empty Tomb of Jesus” at our church web site. If you could use printed copies, contact the church office.

Share

Reactions to the Lost Tomb of Jesus

Posted on Mar 07 2007 | Tagged as: Christianity and Society

IÂ watched last Sunday night’s Discovery Channel presentation of “The Lost Tomb of Jesus” with some trepidation. I was truly concerned that I might be at least facing a major headache in future evangelism, and at worst something that would set up a tremendous emotional strain in me pitting my faith and science against each other.

The bad news is that the film is slick enough to be persuasive to someone without the resources to do critical thinking and explore professional reactions. The good news is that it is a shoddy piece of pseudo-science. The UK blog Strata-Sphere  (not a natural friend of evangelicals, apparently) summarized it well, speaking of Cameron:  “The man has no concept of what science is all about and sees everything through the Hollywood intellectual model of “it’s close, why can’t it be true?”

This seems to be the general reaction – evangelical responses are drowned out by secular voices either embarassed or outraged at a piece of nonsense dressed up by Simcha Jacobovici as science.

If you are interested in sampling some reactions, check out the Huffington Post, or this piece from Scientific American, documenting the outrage of a scientist quoted in the film.

The key assertion of the film involves identifying one of the names on an ossuary as Mary Magdelene. A scholar who was referenced has done further work and explains in a clear, though technical, explanation why the name should not be identified as Mary Magdelene, cf. Richard Bauckham’s post.

The upshot of all this is that Cameron and Jacobovici have given Christians a wonderful opportunity to talk about the resurrection of Christ. To stimulate discussion, I am writing a small pamphlet summarizing the significance of the resurrection and inviting the reader to study the issues. I’ll post a link soon.

Share

Love and Marriage

Posted on Mar 03 2007 | Tagged as: Christianity and Society

Just got back from officiating at a wedding. I always appreciate the kind remarks about a nice service. Today, I heard a number of comments about how nice it was to be at a Christian wedding, as if it had been ages since various folks had seen such a thing.

That got me to thinking about the uniqueness of a truly Christian wedding, not so much the format and music, but the concept of what is happening at a wedding. A Christian wedding is the creation, by God, of a new family. That is, God is authorizing a man and woman to help each other live well, bear children and build society. A Christian wedding does not center only on the Bride and Groom, but on two families who are being joined, the witnesses to the vows, and God himself. A Christian wedding is about private, social and religious obligations and privileges.

I think that what several people were telling me today was that the weddings they have experienced have been centered almost exclusively around the happy couple. Such weddings are usually a lot of fun, but they lack a great deal of substance, portraying life as something essentially all about us and our current desires.

I left, not angry at our society, but sad that it is becoming so shallow. And I am reminded how biblical religion can make great contributions to social stability through the shaping of fundamental institutions.

Share

Oscar Night

Posted on Feb 26 2007 | Tagged as: Christianity and Society

Last night I watched part of the Academy Awards. I make myself do that every couple of years. The spectacle touches my heart.

I always marvel at how this most secular of events tries so desperately hard to emulate the heavenly reception so few of the participants seem to anticipate. The wonderful clothes, the appreciative onlookers, the praise and often false modesty. I am particularly moved by the obvious deep need that many apparently have to win an Oscar before they die, as if it would justify their lives and affirm that their lives were worthwhile. I always leave the Oscars impressed with how I am aiming for a much, much higher prize.

I also leave with a renewed appreciation for how much it means to all of us to be recognized for a job well done. There are hard working, creative people all around us who deserve such recognition. An appropriate praise in private or in public can mean as much to many of us as an Oscar. It encourages us to press on in hope of the highest reward of all – our Lord’s greeting of a good and faithful steward.

Share

Superbowl Silliness

Posted on Feb 24 2007 | Tagged as: Christianity and Society

When the NFL intimidated an Indiannapolis church concerning its superbowl party, I sent them this response. I am rarely negative or confrontational, but I thought the NFL’s interpretation of copyright privileges was a threat to free speech and free exercise of religion.

———————-

An open letter to the NFL,

Our church just cancelled its participation in a Super Bowl party that 60 of our teens were looking forward to, having discovered your surprising objection to people viewing your telecast in a church context. Many young people are obviously quite disappointed.

I suggest that trying to police what people can and cannot think about when viewing a football game is ludicrous. Your policy to prevent “messages” that coincide with public TV broadcasts is offensive in a nation that is guaranteed freedom of speech by law. And then to specifically target people of faith. What are you thinking? Dispersing church groups to send young people to bars (which you have exempted from your rule) may be good for your sponsors, but it displays a shabby and tawdry NFL.

In years past, many viewers have been discouraged by lewd halftime exhibitionism and a Super Bowl engine that seems to be fueled by alcohol. But this year, it is the NFL itself that has left a bad taste in our mouths.

—————————-

You can read about the matter here: http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54081. The key issue continues to be the NFL’s implied restriction of coordinating any sort of “message” with its public broadcast.

Share

A Titanic Challenge

Posted on Feb 16 2007 | Tagged as: Christianity and Society

Titanic director James Cameron’s claim to have found Jesus’ tomb just could be the biggest challenge to Christianity since the Scopes trial.

This is because, if his material is genuine, it will be used to attack the very foundations of the Christian faith. Initial reports of his find make it clear that there is no way it can prove or disprove the claims of the Bible, but it will be hailed as an attack against the virgin birth and ascension of Christ. It also adds archaological fuel to DaVinci interest in Jesus’ supposed marriage to Mary Magdalene (with a child), and Mary’s status as an apostle. However, the greatest challenge by far is the attack on Christ’s resurrection.

A perusal of web thoughts already demonstrates how this could be a lightning rod for all the frustration and hatred people harbor – not only against the gospel, but against what is perceived as an arrogant church that has offended people for centuries. While I believe most everyone will continue to think and speak respectfully about Jesus himself, I expect that this debate will be desperately muddled by a mass of spiritual baggage, meaning that how the church responds to this will be important.

The challenge for Christians is three-fold …

First is the direct challenge to our personal faith . Speaking for myself, I could not follow Christ if I believed the biblical gospel were untrue. Cameron is therefore attacking everything that holds my life together. If I were to believe that Jesus never rose, not only would I quit my church, I would quit my job and think about quitting life. This issue is personal in the extreme. Do I think Cameron’s find will disprove the Bible? No. But the nature of my faith demands that I take this issue seriously, and I expect that will be uncomfortable. I am not ashamed of this; in fact, I find it exilerating to discover afresh how central faith is to my life. I do not believe in a pretend Jesus just to make me feel good. I am committed to the Risen Lord Jesus. There’s no getting around it: if he’s dead, then so am I (1 Corinthians 15:12-19).

Second, the personal intensity of this attack challenges the practice of our faith. I must take care how I conduct myself in this public debate. For us, Cameron’s allegations are not only intellectual arguements; whether intended or not, they are intensely personal attacks on our faith. The temptation will be huge to react in anger. Frustrations may also mount as every fault of the church is used (however illogically) to tear it down, using this “proof” that the gospel is a fabrication. Will I be able to face these attacks with spiritual integrity, enabling me to press on in grace, glorify God and love my enemies?

Third, Cameron has joined over-the-top Gibson and novelist Brown in providing golden opportunities to discuss the gospel. Past movies have highlighted the suffering of Christ and the validity of the biblical narrative, and now a very bright spotlight has been thrown upon the resurrection. We must not lose this opportunity. I expect to see some non-Christians rejoice, some in the church decide they really don’t believe in Jesus after all, and whole branches of the church exposed for the theological heresies they have embraced for some time. But I also expect to see many people come to Christ.

As a result, we who are Christians had better:

* face the evidence squarely and rediscover the centrality of the resurection for our own faith,
* prepare to engage what may be an ugly and hostile debate with a good will that is prepared to turn the other cheek many times,
* and gear up to explain the true gospel clearly, boldly, lovingly and often.

Share

« Previous Page