Religious Liberty Vigilance – Governor’s COVID Lockdown Is Finally Over!

“I consider the government of the United States as interdicted by the Constitution from inter meddling with religious institutions, their doctrines, discipline, or exercises.”

– Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Miller, 1808

March 19 – 3rd Anniversary of California’s COVID Lock-down

Gov. Gavin Newsom issued his heavy-handed statewide “Stay At Home” order.

Business activities were divided into “Essential” and “Non-Essential.” (Liquor stores and marijuana dispensaries were “Essential”. Churches were “Non-Essential.”)
No government should have the right to make that kind of determination.

In conflict with his ban, Gov. Newsom enjoyed dining with lobbyists and friends at the exclusive French Laundry restaurant in Napa Valley (wine country)—appropriately named because the restaurant’s prices will take you to the cleaners.

The governor had the power to issue “no bid” contracts, which he did by the hundreds. Such contracts would be forbidden in more ordinary times.

Outdoor dining was first allowed, then forbidden. A judge would rule that the ban was “not grounded in science, evidence, or logic.”

Constitutional rights such as Freedom of Assembly and Religious Freedom “took it on the jaw” during the lock-down. Among others, Grace Community Church in Sun Valley (John MacArthur, pastor) defied the ban in spite of threats and actions by Los Angeles County. Religious freedom prevailed. The State of California and Los Angeles County paid the church’s legal costs of $800,000.

The lock-down experiences nationwide should give us grave concern about how quickly cherished rights, thought to be guaranteed, can be removed.

April is Indeed a Taxing Month!
For Preachers and Religious Organizations Too!

Church/State separation and the First Amendment allow for churches and religious organizations to be tax-exempt. Taxing religion would have a chilling effect on its free exercise. (See Walz v. Tax Commission of New York City, 1970.)

Like everyone else, clergy naturally search for ways to avoid paying unnecessary taxes. And religious organizations look for ways to minimize the impact of government on their enterprises. Nothing intrinsically wrong with such searches. But some solutions they choose are less than honorable.

Here are five examples of clergy, churches or religious organizations that cross a line that shouldn’t be crossed.

1. Religious organizations that avoid financial openness by reclassifying themselves as churches

The government recognizes the valuable social role played by non-profit organizations. These organizations are exempt from taxation and donations to them are tax deductible. But in return the government requires these groups to submit IRS Form 990, an ominous form the instructions for which will tax the mind of any reader who peruses them.

Form 990 is available to the public, except for Schedule B which lists major donors. Imagine the harassment that would take place if Schedule B were available, giving the names of donors to every critic!

[Form 990] includes important information about the organization, including
annual revenue, salaries of key employees, names of board members and large contractors, and the amount of money the organization spends on its core mission. Also highlighted are the amounts it spends on administrative and fundraising. This information is valuable to donors wanting to assess the effectiveness of a ministry. [Ministry Watch]
Churches are exempt from Form 990. The assumption is, donors to churches are “close at hand,” able to observe how well they operate or if they operate dishonorably. They do not need the disclosures Form 990 makes possible. (This assumption is mostly correct, in my opinion, but any church where it is not correct thereby gives members good reason to leave it.)

So guess what? Many tax-exempt charities are reclassifying themselves as churches. And this raises big problems in my mind. One is theological—these entities simply are not churches in any biblical sense. For one thing, people don’t enter their organization through baptism and don’t express unity in Christ with one another through frequent partaking of the Eucharist.

A second problem is the lack of disclosure that results, since a Form 990 will not exist and hence there are no contents open for inspection.

Bad practices thrive in darkness. This truism relates not only the individual organization, but to the marketplace in which it operates. Where there is a lack of information, trust goes down and disinformation can flourish. Donors lose confidence in individual organizations and society loses confidence in the value of the entire sector they represent. [Ministry Watch]

A third problem is that the absence of the “sunshine” given by Form 990 increases the influence of critics of religion who always look for ways to increase government scrutiny and, if possble, end tax exemption for religious organizations that hold, in their opinion, views that shouldn’t be tolerated.

[Resource: William Cole Smith, “When Is A Church Not A Church?” Ministry Watch, Dec. 19, 2019]

2. Pastors who don’t pay into Social Security

Many years ago pastors didn’t have to pay into Social Security—this was optional. Those days are long gone. But I guess the word hasn’t spread well, or we’ve turned off our hearing aids rather than having to hear it.

Pastors are required to pay into the Social Security system unless they file Form 4361, which declares they are opposed to government assistance programs like Social Security as a conviction of their faith (not just because they’d rather not pay it or think they’d do better having the money to invest elsewhere).

In Form 4361 the minister certifies to the IRS, “I am conscientiously opposed to, or because of my religious principles I am opposed to, the acceptance (for services I perform as a minister, member of a religious order not under a vow of poverty, or Christian Science practitioner) of any public insurance that makes payments in the event of death, disability, old age, or retirement…” And there is more, including giving notification to one’s ordination body of this conscientious opposition.

Very, very few pastors can claim this exemption in good conscience. Others who file Form 4361 either choose to lie about their convictions or else sign without reading the details and perhaps after getting bad advice, which is a lapse in due diligence.

I have known cases where pastors avoided paying into Social Security and also never got around to making comparable investments for their retirement years. To make matters worse, some lived in church-owned parsonages and therefore had no real property to sell or to live in during retirement years. This is sad and regretful and could have been avoided.

A word to church leaders: Please realize that a pastor is considered “self-employed” for purpose of Social Security and therefore pays “both halves” of Social Security and Medicare taxes. That currently totals 15.3%!
Enlightened congregations will want to offset some of a pastor’s Self-employment (Social Security) tax. Just as they pay half of regular employees’ Social Security taxes (7.65%), they equitably reimburse half of a pastor’s tax.

3. Pastors who don’t pay Social Security (Self-employment) tax on their Housing Allowances

There are real tax rules and then there are tax rules that don’t exist. One of the latter is the notion that the Housing Allowance a pastor receives (or the fair market rental value of a church-supplied parsonage) isn’t subject to Social Security taxes. I’ve talked to pastors who are adamant about this. They are adamantly wrong.
See IRS Publication 517, Social Security and Other Information for Members of the Clergy and Religious Workers, “Self-Employment Tax: Figuring Net Earnings,” #4 of “Amounts included in gross income.” Also page 9 – Exclusion of minister’s housing from Income Tax: “This exclusion applies only for income tax purposes. It doesn’t apply for SE tax purposes.“

4. Pastors who don’t report income from weddings, funerals, and the like

A pastor is pretty much on an “honor system” for reporting earnings from ministries such as weddings or funerals. Usually he is paid in cash. Most speaking engagements at churches are exceptions to this—the minister will probably be paid by check. But unless the compensation received in a year is $600 or more, a church is not required to report it to the IRS and supply the pastor with a #1099 for tax reporting purposes.

Pastors must keep good records and report (on Schedule C) all income for services rendered, whether in cash or not, along with expenses.

5. Churches that don’t take into account the taxes and expenses pastors commonly incur

When I was serving a church in Indiana I once had a conversation with a candidate for the state assembly, no less. He was amazed when I told him that ministers paid taxes! Assumptions like this are not rare. But we should never find them among those who set a pastor’s salary, benefits or expense account.

When providing services for weddings, funerals, speaking engagements, etc., ministers will pay about 50% in taxes and costs, once state and federal income taxes, Self-employment Tax (for Social Security) and expenses are factored in. This means a $100 honorarium is really a $50 honorarium.

Enlightened congregations will see to it that such realities are taken into account when setting wages and deciding honoraria, for example in their wedding policies or for guest speakers. Pastors will be given expense accounts to cover use of auto, books, continuing education and more.

In conclusion I hasten to say: most religious charities are conscientious and dedicated to their ministries. Likewise, pastors I know are dedicated and sacrificial to their callings. They believe they have a duty before God to pay taxes and respect the law.

At the same time, I acknowledge we have often been weak when it comes to tax issues. We listen to gurus and convince one another that we don’t have to report some income or pay some taxes. I attended a ministers meeting once where a tax expert spoke and then listened to comments. At one point he said, “I can’t believe some of the things I’m hearing here today!”

The Apostle Paul was greatly concerned that his handling of funds for the needy be above reproach. His word should echo with us all: “We are taking pains to do what is right, not only in the eyes of the Lord but also in the eyes of men” (2 Corinthians 8:21 NIV).

Our Unalienable Rights—All of Them

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America, When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed . . .

On January 22, the 50th anniversary of “Roe v. Wade,” Vice-president Kamala Harris gave a speech in Tallahassee, Florida supporting abortion rights and lamenting last year’s Supreme Court decision. Excerpt:

So we are here together because we collectively believe and know America is a promise. It is a promise of freedom and liberty — not for some, but for all.

A promise we made in the Declaration of Independence that we are each endowed with the right to liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Be clear. These rights were not bestowed upon us. They belong to us as Americans.

And it is that freedom and liberty that enabled generations of Americans to chart their own course and decide their own future with, yes, ambition and aspiration…

Source: “Remarks by Vice President Harris on the 50th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade,”
The White House/Briefing Room/Speeches and Remarks, January 22, 2023

Two comments:

First, the speech is memorable for what it left out. The vice-president omitted the words “by their Creator” and omitted the first “unalienable right” – the right to “LIFE”, followed by “liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” This demonstrates clearly how one can use the Declaration of Independence for whatever purpose, by simply altering it.

Second, I’m intrigued by the words, “Be clear. These rights were not bestowed upon us. They belong to us as Americans.”

This false distinction should not escape our notice. It’s as if the two statements about rights are “either/or” rather than “both/and.” Actually, “either/or,” (“bestowed” excludes “belong”) makes no sense.

In truth, our unalienable rights “belong to us” because they were “bestowed upon us” by none other than our Creator.

These rights don’t rise from the generosity of government, which might someday nefariously attempt to take away what it once gave (as is happening in many parts of the world under leftist rule). No, their “endowment” comes from a source infinitely higher than any government or people.

Government exists not to bestow our unalienable rights but to protect them, to “secure” them—keep them safe. If it does not, it loses its legitimacy, which the Declaration makes clear as it continues: “That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government…”

President John F. Kennedy spoke exactly right in his inaugural speech on January 21, 1961 – “…the same revolutionary beliefs for which our forebears fought are still at issue around the globe—the belief that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state but from the hand of God.”

Revival News – A “Revival” is a breakout, often unplanned, of renewed spiritual interest in God, the Lord Jesus, the ministry of the Holy Spirit, worship, evangelism and societal improvement. It brings commitments to Jesus and may lead to many conversions.

As I complete this newsletter word is spreading across the country of a revival at Asbury University in Kentucky. The revival itself is spreading as well. It’s a big story in major media.

I have not seen a genuine revival since the “Jesus Movement” of the late 60’s and early 70’. “Yes, God, do it again!”

A Lenten Thought: “True Fasting” that Pleases God

This is what the LORD says,
Is not this the kind of fasting I have chosen:
To loose the chains of injustice, to set the oppressed free.
Is it not to share your food with the hungry
and to provide the poor wanderer with shelter.
When you see the naked, to cloth them
and not to turn away from your own flesh and blood?
– Isaiah 58:6-7 NIV

First Amendment Liberty Vigilance –

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
– 1st Amendment

Tolerance, Diversity, Inclusion

Leftist Cancellations

• PEARLS BEFORE SWINE © Stephan Pastis. Reprinted by permission of ANDREWS MCMEEL SYNDICATION. All rights reserved.

The First Amendment limits the power of government. But it would be wrong to ignore the pedagogical effect of The First Amendment on the attitudes, conduct and policies of people and organizations in the United States. Below are two accounts of actions and attitudes (by government or businesses) that do not reflect the spirit of The First Amendment.

Will renowned neurosurgeon Ben Carson’s name be scrubbed from the Detroit school named after him?
Very possibly, if some school board members and activists have their way. Regardless of his medical accomplishments and public service and his role model for aspiring students, many resent his service in the Trump Administration, where he served as Secretary of Housing and Urban Development. Carson grew up in Detroit as a disadvantaged child.

The school’s website has glowingly stated why it was named after Dr. Carson:
The school is named in honor of the acclaimed Detroit-born, African-American pediatric neurosurgeon Dr. Benjamin Carson. As a pediatric neurosurgeon…
Dr. Carson was honored with the 2008 Presidential Medal of Freedom for his contributions. The school aims to honor the contributions Dr. Carson has made not only to the global medical community, but also as a role model for Detroit students with aspirations and interests in science and medical fields.
– The Benjamin Carson High School of Science and Medicine in Detroit

Former Surgeon General Jerome Adams, who served in that role during the Trump Administration, found that jobs can be hard to come by.
He explored jobs in academia but received rejection notices from university officials who worried that he would be badly received by their left-leaning student bodies. Some corporations decided he was too “tainted” to employ.
In September of 2021, Purdue University President Mitch Daniels hired him as executive director of health equity initiatives.

Back
The Badge
“Blessed are those who
maintain justice.” – Psalm 106:3

Line-of-Duty Deaths in 2022

Around 2 p.m. on December 29, 2022 Deputy Isaiah Cordero, 32, pulled William Shae McKay, 44, over for an unknown traffic violation in the city of Jurupa Valley, CA.

“As (Cordero) approached the vehicle, the suspect produced a (handgun) and shot the deputy,” Riverside (CA) Sheriff Chad Bianco told reporters Thursday night. Deputy Cordero died of his wound.

After an intense freeway pursuit McKay was shot and killed during a shootout between him and deputies.

Though McKay pulled the trigger, the sheriff pointed to the criminal justice system as the one that ultimately failed his department.

“This terrible tragedy should have been prevented by the legal system,” Bianco said at Thursday night’s news conference. “McKay has an extensive, violent past and was convicted of his third strike in November of 2021.”

McKay was a “violent felon” whose criminal acts began in the 1990s. Bianco said the shooter should have been locked away under California’s “three strikes” law. [December 30 News Account]

The killing of McKay was justifiable and righteous. The deputies did the will of God. The judicial system did not “seek justice” as it should (Roman 13:1-7; Micah 6:8).

Deputy Cordero was the last Line of Duty Death (LODD) in the U.S. recorded in 2022.* The total LODD in 2022 was 229. This number represents a decrease of 66% over 2021, when 669 LODD were recorded. The main reason for the decrease was a significant reduction in Covid-related deaths from 474 to 73.

Still, Covid was the leading cause of LODD in 2022 in spite of the dramatic drop. Other main causes of LODD in 2022 were:
• Gunfire (66)
• Automobile crashes (32)

These three causes led to 171 LODD, or 75% of the total deaths in 2022. Also important to notice is that 330 law enforcement officers were shot and there were 80 attempts at ambushing an officer last year.

The traffic stop is one of the most common enforcement exercises by observant, pro-active law enforcement officers. The “routine” traffic stop is anything but routine and cannot be treated as such. The approaching officer is at a tactical disadvantage. There is distraction and danger from oncoming traffic. Tinted vehicle windows obscure what the officer can see, especially dark front seat windows, which might be illegal.

Those in the vehicle need to comply with the officer’s orders. Officers must be firm and yet show appropriate courtesy. On top of all this, some of the public are always ready to pounce on officer conduct, at the slightest suspicion of rudeness or excessive force.

A Hancock County (Indiana) police officer pulled over murder suspect Bryan Kohberger and his father, Michael.** Traffic on the Interstate made it hard for the officer to hear occupants of the vehicle.

This traffic stop, following the fatal shooting of Deputy Cordero, underscores the inherent risk of traffic stops.

* The second LODD in 2023 was also a Riverside County Deputy Sheriff—Darnell Calhoun, killed by gunfire on January 13, 2023.
** Whether this and one other stop were done at the request of the FBI is now disputed.

Social Media and the Explosion of Anxiety

“Anxiety, we know, is felt by heavy users of social media. A 2019 report from the Berkeley Institute for the Future of Young Americans suggests that the rate of university students with anxiety disorders has doubled since 2008, from 10 percent to 20 percent. [The report] attributes this to increased time on digital devices, social media in particular, as well as financial stress.

“In particular, students who spent more than twenty hours of leisure time per week on digital devices were 53 percent more likely to have anxiety than young adults who spent fewer than five hours a week doing so.”

– Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, Morality—Restoring the Common Good in Divided times (Basic Books, 2020), from pages 272-73

Religious Liberty Vigilance –

“I consider the government of the United States as interdicted by the Constitution from inter meddling with religious institutions, their doctrines, discipline, or exercises.”
– Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Miller, 1808

UPDATE: Religious Freedom and The “Respect for Marriage Act”

With great fanfare President Biden signed the “Respect for Marriage” act on December 13, 2022.

Simply put, here’s what the “Respect for Marriage Act” [RMA] does:

• Repeals the “Defense of Marriage Act” (1996), which defined marriage as between a man and a woman. The Supreme Court had already nullified it.
• Requires states to recognize same-sex marriages that were solemnized in other states. (It does not require states to allow same-sex marriages.)
• Gives the Department of Justice the right to take civil action and give “harmed” individuals the right of private action when a violation of RMA is perceived to have occurred.
• Recognizes a marriage “between two individuals” if it is valid in the state where it occurred. Polygamous marriage is clearly not recognized.
• As amended by the Senate it specifies that RMA does not impact religious liberty or conscience. “Nothing in this Act, or any amendment made by this Act, shall be construed to diminish or abrogate a religious liberty or conscience protection otherwise available to an individual or organization under the Constitution of the United States or Federal law.”
• As amended it specifies that non-profit religious organizations [with a list of examples] including faith-based social agencies and educational institutions are not required to provide any services or goods for the purpose of solemnizing or celebrating a marriage and cannot be subject to any civil claim or cause of action.

My observations after December 13, when the bill was signed into law:

1. One who has followed the religious freedom assurances in this new law (as I have) would think something entirely different was signed on December 13 the way the news media reported on the signing ceremony.

News coverage and politicians either ignored the religious freedom protections (Section 6), or gave a token word about them. To say no clergy will be forced to perform a same-sex marriage is to convey a protection in search of a problem. Except for an extremist fringe (personified in Beto O’Rourke of Texas), no one has called for forcing clergy to perform a marriage. Such abuse of power would never stand the scrutiny of the First Amendment.

Likewise, the need to protect interracial marriage by this legislation is, in today’s America, another protection in search of a problem.

2. I heard comments about the need now to push for new legislation—specifically, the “Equality Act.” With its repudiation of religious liberty protection, the “Equality Act” would be a disaster for religious freedom.

3. Only the naïve would think RMA is the last word on polygamous marriage.

4. The Supreme Court’s “Obergefell v. Hodges” decision (2015) set up a potential conflict between LGBTQ+ rights and First Amendment religious freedom rights. Language in RMA somewhat removes this potential conflict.

Without the “Religious Liberty and Conscience” exemptions RMA would be flawed by its one-sidedness. I previously decided I would without great enthusiasm support RMA because of the religious liberty amendment which, though incomplete, preserves the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and is needed. (“Support without great enthusiasm” is a far cry from giving it an “endorsement.”)

5. Please note the position statement on RMA by the National Association of Evangelicals (an appendix at the end of this newsletter).

For comments of support of RMA by the Mormon Church see: https://www.deseret.com/2022/11/28/23482594/respect-for-marriage-act-religious-freedom-latter-day-saints

“Roe v. Wade” Would Have Been 50 This Month!

When “Roe v. Wade” reached its 25-year mark in January 1998 I wrote the following opinion piece. It was published as an op-ed in the Long Beach (CA) Press-Telegram on January 22, 1998, the 25th anniversary of the day the Supreme Court rendered its decision.

Of course, “Roe” didn’t survive to reach its 50th birthday. It was reversed by the court in its “Dobbs v. Jackson” decision of June 24, 2022. Decisions about abortion were returned to the several states where they belong. The court rejected the claim that abortion rights were rooted in a “right to privacy” to be discerned in the U.S. Constitution’s “penumbra.”

As you read this op-ed, think about how relevant its statements continue to be. Or are they outmoded and now replaced by—what?

Does not my comment about the continuing debate even today still resonate?
“Rather than resolving the great debate, Roe v. Wade fueled the most acrimonious polarization of our time which shows no signs of abating.”

Roe v. Wade at 25 – Abortion Debate Still Rages

By Donald P. Shoemaker
Senior Pastor, Grace Community Church of Seal Beach, California
Chairman, Social Concerns Committee, Fellowship of Grace Brethren Churches

My aunt and uncle live in a fine Southern California retirement community. During a recent visit I was taken by my uncle on a tour of the community’s nearly completed state-of-the-art facility for Alzheimer’s patients.

We looked inside one room that would soon house a patient. There was no mirror in the bathroom for there is no need for a mirror. The patient who would eventually stay there has no awareness of who he or she is.

Relatives of the patients will be able to visit with them in a comfortable sitting area. But there will be no depth of communication, for the Alzheimer’s patient no longer has a capacity for an “I-Thou” relationship.

As this disease takes its toll, connection with the past and present is lost. All sense of futurity is gone.

When my uncle and I tried to leave we had a problem. There was no way to open the facility’s door from the inside without knowing a special code. This is needed because Alzheimer’s patients no longer have a sense of “here” or “there” and must be protected in their movements lest they wander aimlessly and into danger. We located a worker who could let us out.

The best of care will be provided for these dependent patients. And so it should be, for the spark of human dignity remains in them. As Christian teaching would affirm, they yet retain, in spite of their physical brokenness, the Image of God.

Since my visit to that care facility I have often thought of the issue of “personhood” and how a debate on human personhood and abortion has raged for three decades since permissive abortion laws were first put on the books in the 1960’s. Originally designed for “those truly tough cases,” the laws triggered an abortion avalanche and were themselves swept away by the U.S. Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision 25 years ago today.

“Right to Life” advocates have argued for a genetic understanding of personhood. Human life, it is said, begins at conception and ought to be respected and protected from violent assault from then until natural death. Personhood is tied to the biological fact of being human, one of “us” rather than an “it” or one of “them.” Right to Life advocates have argued for the full person of unborn humans or at least that enough claim to personhood exists for the life of the unborn to be worthy of protection.

Others have seen personhood as a developing value throughout the prenatal state. In this case, our unborn have a greater and greater claim to life and protection and any termination of their existence requires increasing grounds for justification the longer they exist in utero. As a result, these people join with the “Right to Life” advocates in wanting to ban late-term abortions, especially the gruesome and barbaric “partial birth” (dilation and extraction) procedure.

Defenders of permissive abortion laws, of course, do not see matters that way. Personhood is connected to socializing capabilities, or perhaps to intellectual capacities.

Philosopher Mary Ann Warren has argued that there are five traits central to the concept of personhood which we can summarize as (1) consciousness, (2) reasoning, (3) self-motivated activity, (4) the capacity to communicate and (5) the presence of self-concepts and self-awareness. Not all of these need be present for a “person” to exist, but a measure of them must exist and a being that lacks all of them is certainly not a “person” in a moral sense.

The late medical ethicist Joseph Fletcher had a long list of personhood criteria, including self-awareness, time consciousness, a sense of futurity, a sense of the past, the capability of relating to others, communication and control of existence.

Criteria like these clearly exclude the unborn from the realm of “persons.” Abortion can be endorsed as an acceptable moral practice secured, as the Court saw it, by a “right to privacy” implicit in the U.S. Constitution.

What may surprise others but which certainly does not escape the notice of thinkers like these is that infants aren’t “persons” by this standard either. Nor are the comatose and others who lack self-awareness and self-control. Infants lack a moral claim to personhood and therefore are disposable, although we may value them for their potential and charm or for other utilitarian reasons.

As the issue of human cloning rises on the scientific and ethical horizon, a justification could be made for cloning human life and harvesting body parts to serve the rest of us who have successfully achieved our personhood, at least in the eyes of those who control things.

Which brings me full circle to the excellent care facility for Alzheimer’s patients. By the thinking that has prevailed to give us abortion, these patients are not persons. Unlike the unborn, their futurity and their social and intellectual potential are gone. As their disease has progressed, they have gradually but surely lost all claim to the care and love and protection personhood would afford.

In Roe v. Wade, the court threw up its hands and professed agnosticism on the issue of when personhood begins. Incredibly, it then proceeded to adopt a particular view of personhood (you have value at birth) and imposed a model of prenatal “trimesters” and a latitude which, in effect, have given us abortion on demand. The court never allowed the open public debate and legislative deliberation on this issue that is appropriate in a free and democratic society.

When the Supreme Court ruled on doctor-assisted suicide last summer, this practice did not receive the constitutional “green light” its advocates had hoped for. One might have expected the court to declare a right to assisted suicide on the same “right to privacy” grounds that gave us abortion on demand. But the court saw the need to guarantee “an earnest and profound debate about the morality, legality and practicality of physician-assisted suicide [that should take place] in a democratic society.”

That statement may be the closest thing we will hear from the court that sounds like an apology for Roe v. Wade. Rather than resolving the great debate, Roe v. Wade fueled the most acrimonious polarization of our time which shows no signs of abating.

My aunt passed away in October 1998 and my uncle passed in January 2006. They are interred in Arlington National Cemetery, where I was honored to officiate at his military funeral.

More from Rabbi Jonathan Sacks…
Campus Intolerance vs. the Collaborative Pursuit of Truth

“[My year at Oxford University] was a glorious experience, thrilling, bracing, mind-expanding. I discovered that university was a place where you listened respectfully to views radically opposed to your own, in the knowledge that others would listen respectfully to yours.”

“Since then, university campuses throughout the West have become places of swirling intolerance of a kind I never thought I would see in my lifetime.”

“A cluster of concepts that has invaded Western university campuses [his examples: micro-aggressions, safe spaces and banning of speakers] has had the cumulative effect of putting at risk academic freedom and the role of the university as the arena of intellectual diversity, reasoned argument, civil debate, respectful listening, and the collaborative pursuit of truth.”

– Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, Morality—Restoring the Common Good in Divided times (Basic Books, 2020), from pages 169-74

Religious Liberty Vigilance –

“I consider the government of the United States as interdicted by the Constitution from inter meddling with religious institutions, their doctrines, discipline, or exercises.”
– Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Miller, 1808

“Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must…undergo the fatigue of supporting it.” – Thomas Paine

Religious Freedom and
The “Respect for Marriage Act” (HR 8404, S 4556)

I’m passionate about religious liberty. But I need to remind myself from time to time: “I have to choose carefully which hills to fight on.”

The “Respect for Marriage Act” (RMA) with an amendment that addresses many concerns about religious liberty has passed the Senate. It now goes back to the House (because there was no amendment when the House first passed it). If passed, it goes to the President for his signature.

Simply put, here’s what the “Respect for Marriage Act” would do:
• Repeal the “Defense of Marriage Act” (1996), which defined marriage as between a man and a woman. The Supreme Court already nullified it.
• Require states to recognize same-sex marriages that were solemnized in other states. (It does not require states to allow same-sex marriages.)
• Give the Department of Justice the right to take civil action and give “harmed” individuals the right of private action when a violation of RMA is perceived to have occurred.
• Recognize a marriage “between two individuals” if it is valid in the state where it occurred. Polygamous marriage is clearly not recognized.
• As amended by the Senate it specifies that RMA does not impact religious liberty or conscience. “Nothing in this Act, or any amendment made by this Act, shall be construed to diminish or abrogate a religious liberty or conscience protection otherwise available to an individual or organization under the Constitution of the United States or Federal law.”
• As amended it would specify that non-profit religious organizations [with a list of examples] including faith-based social agencies and educational institutions are not required to provide any services or goods for the purpose of solemnizing or celebrating a marriage and cannot be subject to any civil claim or cause of action.

The above is a summary and obviously the bill is more detailed. My comments are based on the text and status of the bill as of November 29, 2022.

My observations:

1. Competent people and organizations that I respect have contrasting opinions on RMA. Some Christian legal scholars insist that the “Respect for Marriage Act” does not sufficiently protect religious faith and practice in addition to guaranteeing recognition of same-sex marriages. Others insist that religious protections, while not thorough, are quite broad in RMA.

I definitely note that RMA does not extend its protection of religion to people of faith who exercise their convictions in the secular workplace. No employee or business owner should be compelled to speak (such as through artistic work) words that support a marriage that violates his/her religion-formed conscience. If “Freedom of Speech” means anything, it means that.

However, the RMA does avoid perpetuating the error of the now-comatose “Equality Act” that would have taken away the right of people to assert the important Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) as a protection for their exercise of religious freedom in matters covered by the act. This is critical.

2. The “Respect for Marriage Act” likely represents (but didn’t create) the greatest cultural shift of my lifetime. In 1996 the U.S. Congress passed the “Defense of Marriage Act” by supermajorities (342-67 in the House, 85-14 in the Senate). It was supported and signed by President Clinton. At the time, American opposition to same-sex marriage was around 70%.

I understand that 70% of the American public now accepts same-sex marriage. In 2015 the U.S. Supreme Court (Obergefell v. Hodges) decided that same-sex marriage was a constitutionally guaranteed right. It is strongly supported by President Biden. These are simple facts, not opinions.

3. Yes, the church has a definite responsibility toward the wellbeing of society. Early Christianity did, after all, strongly oppose infanticide as practiced in its culture. But the church can be under no sense of illusion or compulsion that it must make society conform to all its moral positions. In other words, it must choose what hills to fight on. If we keep the tension between what we work to accomplish in this age versus what we hope for when Christ’s Kingdom is realized we will avoid the (phony) charge that we are “Christian nationalists” out to impose our religion on the reluctant. Keeping this tension also means we can settle for “half of a pie” at times. It recognizes that the process of legislation involves tradeoffs.

As a Christian social activist I have weighed these developments carefully and thought about what the role and responsibilities of Christian churches, faith communities and individuals are to be in our present cultural environment.

I ponder the words of the Apostle Paul: “What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside [answer: ‘Yes!’]? God will judge those outside” (1 Corinthians 5:12-13). And God’s judgments are fair and true.

My decision is to double-down on support for religious liberty. RMA does not establish the right to same-sex marriage. That has already been done. Without the “Religious Liberty and Conscience” exemptions RMA would be flawed by its onesidedness. I have decided I will without great enthusiasm support RMA because of the religious liberty amendment which, though incomplete, preserves RFRA and is needed.

How Essential Is Truth?

“A world of truth is a world of trust, and vice versa. In it, there is something larger than individuals seeking their own interest. Where there is honesty—truth and truthfulness—there tends to be law, order, and prosperity.
A respect for truth is essential for authority, collaborative endeavor, and human graciousness… Where truth dies, there trust dies.”

– Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, Morality—Restoring the Common Good in Divided times (Basic Books, 2020)

“Proposition One” – California’s Voters Will Decide

“The state shall not deny or interfere with an individual’s reproductive freedom in their most intimate decisions, which includes their fundamental right to choose to have an abortion and their fundamental right to choose or refuse contraceptives. This section is intended to further the constitutional right to privacy… and the constitutional right to not be denied equal protection… Nothing herein narrows or limits the right to privacy or equal protection.” – Text of Proposition One

“Proposition One” is the response of California’s governor and legislature to last summer’s “Dobbs” decision by the U.S. Supreme Court. “Dobbs” ruled that abortion was not a right secured in the U.S. Constitution. It returned the issue back to the states, which is where it was before “Roe v. Wade” (1973).

Please take a minute to note my observations on this proposition:

• Proposition One makes abortion an absolute right, whereas Roe v. Wade explicitly rejected the notion of “abortion on demand.”
• Roe v. Wade acknowledged (in its controversial “trimester” statements) a claim to life on the part of the viable fetus. Proposition One ignores any claim to life on the part of the human fetus, including after viability and up to birth.
• California’s abortion laws (going back to the 1960’s and considered “progressive” by abortion advocates at that time) allowed for abortion up to fetal viability (except in cases of fetal deformity). Abortion was also permitted at any time prior to the birth of the unborn child to protect the life or health (broadly understood) of the mother. The “Dobbs” decision does not change any of this.
• Through legislation and advertising, the State of California and its governor are promoting the state as a “welcoming destination” for anyone seeking abortion who lives outside the state, including through a website: www.abortion.ca.gov.
• Abortion, including the right of a minor child to have an abortion without parental notification or consent, is protected by California’s current privacy laws.

Before there was a national debate over abortion (late 1960’s+), the popular weekly publication LIFE Magazine had a pictorial issue titled “Life Before Birth.” It began,
“The birth of a human life really occurs at the moment the mother’s egg cell is fertilized by one of the father’s sperm cells” and “In the Western world a person’s life is reckoned from the day he comes out of the womb. But the Chinese, overestimating by three months, traditionally counted a child one year old at birth in recognition of the unceasingly active life that has already taken place.”

This reflected my own secular, non-religious understanding before I developed any religious convictions on the issue. A pregnancy decision involves two patients—the mother and the unborn child. In light of this, I cast my vote against “Prop. One.”

Back the Badge
“Blessed are those who maintain justice.” (Psalm 106:3)

Still touched and grieving
eleven years later

October 12, 2011 – Early in the afternoon an armed and angry man bent on evil entered a salon in Seal Beach, California and killed eight people including his ex-wife.

The case languished for almost six years, hindered by charges of prosecutorial misconduct. Be that as it may, the perpetrator pled guilty in 2014 and was sentence to eight consecutive life sentences without the possibility of parole for the worst mass murder in Orange County history.

First responding police officers were willing to put their lives on the line to engage the perpetrator however necessary(he was captured right away). Several officers then had to be involved in the traumatic crime scene investigation, offer care of arriving family members, coworkers and friends (we opened a family assistance center at a nearby library), and in one case an officer accompanied a wounded man to the hospital in an ambulance (he did not survive).

The families and the community will never be the same. The police department, dispatchers, fire and police first responders will never be the same. As a police chaplain who continues involvement in the aftermath of this event, now eleven years later, I can say I will never be the same.

Each year, a few minutes after 1:00 p.m., I gather with some family members at the memorial to this massacre located in a park near the ocean. We reminisce, we share words of comfort and purpose, we observe a minute of silence, and I offer a prayer. I did this again on October 12th.

“Justice delayed is justice denied,” said William Gladstone, 19th Century British politician. Whatever the reasons, valid or regrettable, for the great delays in (flawed) justice, I grieve at the additional stress and sorrow the delays put on the families of the victims. And I honor fire and police personnel who sacrificed so much to do their jobs that horrible day and thereafter.

Message of the Month –
“A Day to Reflect on Life”

Lord, thou hast been our dwelling place in all generations. Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God.

The days of our years are threescore years and ten; and if by reason of strength they be fourscore years, yet is their strength labor and sorrow; for it is soon cut off, and we fly away.

So teach us to number our days, that we may apply our hearts unto wisdom.

O satisfy us early with thy mercy; that we may rejoice and be glad all our days.

– Psalm 90 (verses 1, 2, 10, 12, 14) KJV

October 31 is a threshold day for me. In years and months and days I reach the age my mother was when she passed away. She died four months after being diagnosed with cancer, passing in our home as she desired. My wife provided marvelous loving care and we were assisted by fine hospice personnel.

Also sadly, I passed my father’s “too soon” date of death fourteen years ago.

I thank God for each day and its gift of life—its joys and opportunities and, yes, challenges.

The Bible is so very realistic:

• God is eternal; we are mortal. Best we live each day aware of this.
• We need to treat each day as significant. We should count them as we count the hairs on our head—the Bible’s way of speaking of the significance of even small things. This counting wouldn’t take me as long now.
• We have “today” – we should make the most of it. It is a day to offer God a heart of wisdom. It is a day to express love, make that phone call we’ve been putting off, enjoy that activity we’ve been thinking about, attend worship as we have opportunity, enjoy family, serve the Lord.

“God, thank you for the years of life with which you have blessed me.”

“Triumphant Worship: The Book of Revelation” – 9th Essay on Worship for 2022

Throughout much of my Christian life (age 9+) I looked on the Bible’s last book, the Book of Revelation, as a mysterious unfolding of the End Times, a puzzle to be pieced together. If we thought we had it figured out, my how dogmatic we could be!

A creative thought entered my mind a few years ago as I read and pondered this book anew. Is it possible to look at this book “Doxologically”? That is, can Revelation be seen as a Book of Worship? I viewed the whole book through that lens and marveled at the treasures waiting to be opened. As you move through the coming points, see how many songs you recognize!

1. I learned about the God I should Worship

In Revelation we immediately see incipient worship of God as a Trinity. True, it would be many years for the Christian church to articulate the doctrine of the Trinity as it still resonates with us. But it would be wrong to overlook the “seeds” of this teaching found in the New Testament.

“Grace and peace to you from him which is, and which was, and which is to come, and from the seven spirits which are before his throne, and from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth” (1:4-5, see through verse 8).

Our God is powerful Creator of All. So we sing, “Thou art worthy…to receive glory and honor and power, for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created…” (4:11 King James Version)

We worship “the Lamb of God” who was slain, his blood shed for our redemption, who now lives and rules (see 5:9-13). “Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honor, and glory, and blessing” (5:12). God the Father and Jesus the Lamb are worshiped together: “Blessing, and honor, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever” (5:13).

I use the King James Version throughout this essay because of its elegant poetic language. Painting by Raphael (1518): Michael the Archangel vanquishes Satan (Revelation 12:7-9).

2. I learned about the Worshipers too

The heavenly worship scene in chapters 4 and 5 has a fascinating sequence of worshipers. It starts (I am happy to say) with a quartet! “Four living creatures” repeat the praise: “Holy, holy, holy, Lord God Almighty, which was, and is, and is to come” (4:7).

Second, a choir of 24 elders breaks into praise (4:11 and 5:9-10). This is followed by a huge multitude of angels (5:11-12), then by the whole of creation (5:13). Lastly, the praise reverts back to the quartet, with their “Amen!” as they prostrate themselves in worship before God (5:14).

I challenge every worship leader to think creatively on how a version of this could be reflected in our worship services! Start small, crescendo greatly, decrescendo to how you began, end with demonstrable worship.

A special category of worshipers is highlighted in Revelation—persecuted saints. They have “come out of the great tribulation” (7:13-14) and cry out, “Salvation to our God which sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb.”

They are now in God’s presence, never to suffer again, their tears forever wiped away (7:15-17). Think of this scene when you think of all who are persecuted a lot or a little today for being faithful to Jesus. Think creatively on how the spirit of this heavenly scene could be expressed in today’s worship.

3. I learned about how Worship can be done

The Book of Revelation records many features of worship. Many Christians have never practiced them but some Christian traditions include them in worship. Being in the Book of Revelation, they are ipso facto forms of “New Testament” worship and can be incorporated into our worship accordingly.

We find honor and humility expressed in actions. The Elders fall down and lay their crowns before God’s throne (4:10). The writer John falls down before the glorious Christ (1:17). Prostrating oneself isn’t natural to many American Christians, but it certainly is an appropriate form of worship.

Symbolic clothing may be worn. A worshiping multitude is clothed in white robes (7:9), probably symbolizing purity. On occasion (commonly at weddings) I’ve worn a robe which (I think) befits the solemnity of the occasion. I conducted a funeral in South-Central Los Angeles once and, as the only “Anglo” present, I thought it befitting to show respect to the occasion and to all who attended by wearing a robe.

Worshipers celebrate by holding palm branches – we at least might do that on Palm Sunday (7:9). Incense and smoke accompany the rising of our prayers to God (8:3-4). Such prayers may include pleas for God to judge evil, given how the angel takes the censor containing the prayers and, before God, fills it with fire and hurls it to the earth. If this scene is found in “Revelation Worship” then such symbolism is certainly appropriate now.

Then we read about extremely loud praise (5:12; 7:10). In much of my background this kind of worship would be seen as hyper-emotionalism, except in my Pentecostal circles. We may frown on it and avoid it. Perhaps instead we ought to engage in it “when the Spirit moves us all.”

Then there is worship through silence—for half an hour (8:1). This seems to be the “silence of awe” prior to a great work of God. There can also be the silence of preparation, prayer, sorrow, patience and more. Whatever the silence expresses, it shows a place for “holy silence” in worship. But there is also boring silence, so we must be discernful. “Holy silence” rises as a challenge to some contemporary worship styles which always have to have something happening—fast movement, sound bites, quick images, etc.

The Lord is in his holy temple.
Let all the earth be silent before him. (Habakkuk 2:20)

I wouldn’t want to be legalistic either way—banning these forms of worship or demanding them, certainly not as proofs of spirituality. I do want to be open to them, whether they seem highly liturgical or highly emotional.

4. I learned about Worship that SHOULDN’T be done

In Leviticus 10:1-5 we read the chilling account of the deaths of Nadab and Abihu, priests and sons of the High Priest Aaron. What was their wrong? Offering “unauthorized fire” before the Lord contrary to his command.

The passage raises more questions than answers. We’re not told exactly what they did wrong. I think the key phrase is: “…contrary to [God’s] command.”

Our Christian liberty gives us lots of freedom to be creative in worship. We don’t have to have a command from God for everything we do. But we must not do anything contrary to his command. Are we guilty in this? Do we break worship rules such as in 1 Corinthians 14 (use of spiritual gifts) or 1 Timothy 2 (modest dress at worship)? Do we forsake the Lord’s Table? Do we fail to practice robust Spirit-filled singing in our services? Are our messages truly “preaching the Word” or have we wandered off track?

Here are three forms of worship forbidden in the Book of Revelation:

• Worship of Demons and Idols (9:20-21)
• Worship of the Devil and the Antichrist (13:4, 11-17; 14:9-10)
• Worship of Godless Commercialism (read the lament of chapter 18)

Finally, we must not worship God’s angels. Twice in this book John falls before God’s angel as the angel conveys God’s invitation to “the wedding supper of the Lamb” (19:10) and shows him The New Jerusalem (22:8). In both cases the angel says, “Do not do it! Worship God!” (verse 9). “Worship” here (the verb is proskuneō) is simply to “fall toward.” It is forbidden to “proskuneō” before an angel or before a spiritual leader (Acts 10:24-26).

When Jesus squared off with the Devil and his temptations, Jesus responded forcefully and clearly: “Worship [proskuneō] the Lord your God, and serve him only” – Matthew 4:10. Interesting that John observes the glorious presence of Jesus (1:12-16) and fell at his feet as though dead (1:17). Jesus accepted that worship and placed his right hand on John, saying, “Do not be afraid.”

Obedient worship of God is a matter of the highest urgency. The Book of Revelation gives us marvelous guidance through instruction and example and worship texts (see next page). Let’s hear and heed what God’s Spirit is saying to the churches about worship.

Next Issue: “ ‘O Come Let Us Adore Him!’ – Worship at the Birth of Jesus”
–10th and final Essay on Worship for 2022

Worship Songs given to the Church
from the Book of Revelation

George Frideric Handel’s “Messiah”

“Worthy Is The Lamb” (5:12)
“Amen” (5:14)
“Hallelujah!” (11:15; 19:1-4, 16)

Other Christian Hymnody and Choruses
Just a partial list I compiled! What songs would you suggest?

“Lo, He Comes in Clouds Descending” (1:7)
“There’s a New Name Written Down in Glory” (2:17)
“Round the Throne” (chapter 4)
“Behold Our God” (4:2)
“Holy, Holy, Holy” (4:8)
“Thou Art Worthy” (4:11)
“Is He Worthy?” (5:2-5)
“You Are Worthy” (5:9)
“O for a Thousand Tongues to Sing” (5:11)
“All Hail the Power of Jesus Name” (5:11-14; 19:11-16)
“To Him Who Sits on the Throne” (5:13)
“Agnus Dei” (5:23)
“I Wish We’d All Been Ready” (6:5-6)
“Blessing and Glory and Wisdom and Thanks…to our God forever” (7:12)
“Are You Washed in the Blood?” (7:14)
“We Shall Overcome” (12:11)
“Come, Ye Thankful People, Come” (14:14-16)
“Battle Hymn of the Republic” (14:19)
“Praise Our God, All Ye His Servants” (19:5)
“Crown Him with Many Crowns” (19:12)
“The Holy City” (21:1-3, 23; 22:4-5)
“Twelve Gates of the City” (21:12-13)
“Lily of the Valley” (22:16)
“All Who Are Thirsty” (22:17)
“Soon and Very Soon” (22:20)

Whether they’re the or the

“…there’s no joy in Mudville Cleveland.  Mighty Casey has struck out.”

I grew up in north-central Ohio, and only one baseball team really mattered there—the Cleveland Indians. If you went over the border into Pennsylvania, you might want to temper your enthusiasm for the Indians. That’s Pirates country and them folk won’t take kindly to you.

The Indians had a triumphant season in 1954, winning 111 games and going confidently to the World Series where the NY Giants restored their humility in four games. 111 wins! Can anyone say “2022 Dodgers,” knocked out dramatically in the division championship by the San Diego Padres? The Indians haven’t won a series since, losing this year in the division games.

But they did get a name change! First, let me stipulate that “Chief Wahoo” was bad for both the team and Native Americans. May he RIP.

But “Indians”? “Any use of Native American names and/or symbols by non-native sports teams is a harmful form of ethnic stereotyping that promotes misunderstanding and prejudice which contributes to other problems faced by Native Americans.” – so sez over 115 professional organizations, including scientific experts (as if the issue has anything to do with science).

I’m underwhelmed by the Words & Symbols Police. I lived in “Indiana” (will that change?) for eight years and saw native terms and titles everywhere. In sports, Indian names speak of prowess and valor and strength and resolve.

The new name comes from The Hope Memorial Bridge with its statuary “The Guardians of Traffic.” It’s right near the ball stadium. If it had to happen, it seems like a good change. Plus, it’s clever that only two letters had to be dropped: INDIANS became the GUARDIANS. And the lettering style stays.

Look out! BRAVES, WARRIORS, CHIEFS—you’re next. What about team names expressing barbarism and thievery: PIRATES and RAIDERS? Then we’ll move on to the Los Angeles ANGELS and the San Diego PADRES, with their religious names that may cause some to feel left out. Besides, the name PADRES is odious to some who resent the influence of the Catholic Church in California’s history.

“I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. The hired hand, who does now own the sheep, sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and flees, and the wolf snatches them and scatters them. He flees because he is a hired hand and cares nothing for the sheep.”
– Jesus (John 10:11-13)

Putting Human Faces on the Immigration Issue

After stripping on knee-high snake guards and bowing his head to invoke God’s protection, Tucson-based Pentecostal pastor Oscar Andrade marches off into a remote desert at dawn to look for a Honduran migrant missing since late July.

The pastor bushwhacked for three hours in 100-degree heat, detouring around a mountain lion, two rattlesnakes and a scorpion.

On the fourth search, the pastor and his Capellanes del Desierto [Desert Chaplains] rescue and recovery group found the man’s ID card and wallet 40 feet from a skull and other bones, picked clean by animals and the relentless sun.

Since March, Andrade has received over 400 calls from families in Mexico and Central America whose relatives—sick, injured, exhausted—were abandoned by smugglers in the borderlands.

Forensic experts estimate 80% of bodies in the desert are never found. The bodies found point to one of the deadliest seasons on record along the always-dangerous Southwest border.
– October 22, 2022 Long Beach Press-Telegram (edited excerpts)

www.donaldshoemakerministries.com

Don has been a member of the clergy in the Long Beach, California area since 1970. He now serves as Pastor Emeritus of Grace Community Church of Seal Beach (where he was senior pastor 1984-2012) and as Senior Chaplain of the Seal Beach Police Department (2001+). He previously was an assistant professor of Biblical Studies at Biola University (1976-84) and chaired the Social Concerns Committee in the Fellowship of Grace Brethren Churches from 1985 to 2019.

His graduate work includes a Master of Divinity from Grace Theological Seminary, a Master of Theology from Fuller Theological Seminary with a concentration in Christian ethics, and a Doctor of Ministry from American Baptist Seminary of the West (now Berkeley School of Theology) with a concentration on the Charismatic Movement. His law school studies included a course on the First Amendment. He and his wife Mary have been married for over 55 years. They have two children and six grandchildren.

© 2022 Donald P. Shoemaker

Important Word to Everyone,
Especially Pastors and Church Leaders

Churches and Political Action—
What Pastors and Churches Should and Should Not Do

The present election season is extremely important in American politics. So what’s a pastor or church to do? Or not do? From my 50+ years of activism and based on the law as it now stands, I offer these thoughts to assist you.

These guidelines have appeared here before. They were even distributed once to a list of pastors by Americans United for Separation of Church and State, an organization with which I rarely agree!

I challenge all churches to do all they can that is legal and ethical, but not to cross the line. Please share these three pages.

– Donald Shoemaker

1. I RECOMMEND these points of guidance:

• Always maintain a distinction between the ultimate issues of the Kingdom of God and the penultimate possibilities of the political process. The latter are worthwhile but not perfect. They are secondary and not primary. They need the church’s voice and attention but must not get top billing.
• Preach on morally laden issues and proposals like good or bad legislation or initiatives. But be sure that the biblical “connectedness” is made clear. Of course we preach sensitive to the congregation and visitors in such matters, but avoiding the topics should not be considered an option.
• Have the church’s official body (Elders, board, or congregation) take positions on issues subject to the above qualifications and when the issue is important.
• Do voter registration at the church before and after services. This is a non-partisan activity.
• Have a forum to educate church members on ballot initiatives. Have a table for people to sign initiatives the church has approved.
• Encourage members to write elected and appointed officials to express their opinions and to ask for a vote for or against a measure.
• Have your facility used for voting, subject to acceptable rules (for examples, I wouldn’t accept a demand to cover the cross but removing a literature table may be acceptable). This is a natural way of showing interest in the wellbeing of your community.
• DO NOT politicize your message. By “politicize” I mean stridently or subtly speaking for or against a particular party or political stratum.
• Remember, the spiritual upbuilding of the saints is always the goal in a worship service. This influences sermon style and content immensely.
• Politically activist Christians must remember that the unity of the church must transcend all political and secular unities.
• Remember the admonition (I’ve made it often and sometimes it’s been heard with much irritation, but at least the point wasn’t missed):

“The church is the one place where a liberal Democrat and a conservative Republican should be able to join hands and sing,
‘We Are One in the Bond of Love’.”

2. From a LEGAL STANDPOINT, here are the “Do’s and Don’ts”:

• Churches MUST NOT endorse or oppose a candidate.
• Pastors MAY as individuals support or oppose candidates, but MUST NOT convey that they speak for their churches. And they should not proclaim their “personal decision” in any church medium (like the pulpit or newsletter or on-line). No preaching, “I’m not telling you who to vote for and I’m not speaking for the church, but here are the people getting my support…”
• Churches MUST NOT use their resources (like facilities, property or equipment) in contexts that endorse or oppose a candidate.
• Churches MAY invite candidates to speak if done even-handedly and not selectively. Their presence in a service or in the pulpit MUST NOT convey the church’s support of any candidate.
• Churches MAY distribute voter guides, but I don’t recommend it because almost all have a “slant” to promote. I also would not allow members or outside groups to bring literature to the church or blitz cars in the church’s parking lot with flyers. If outsiders show up or blitz the parking lot, it may be wise for the pastor to disavow the activity.
• Churches MAY schedule a forum where the candidates for an office are invited to speak and answer questions. If only one shows up that’s not a legal problem, but it may not look the best and the church would need to be careful not to have the occasion appear to be an endorsement of the candidate who appeared.
• Churches MAY spend money and lobby and encourage members in support of or in opposition to an initiative, ballot measure, or a piece of legislation. The limitation is that the resources expended MUST NOT be “substantial”. This may be interpreted as “not more than 5% of resources”, which would almost never be exceeded in churches as reticent as evangelical churches traditionally are. The limit applies not just to money spent but also to factors such as paid staff time.

3. Topics to Proclaim:

Churches have a powerful communication instrument known as “The Pulpit” (even if “pulpit” is now a metaphor). Here are some topics, which could be sermons, sermon points, or discussion points:

• Immigration from a biblical perspective
• The Sovereignty of God over the governments constructed by human beings (“The Most High is sovereign over the kingdoms of men and gives them to anyone he wishes.” – Daniel 4:25)
• Religious Freedom and how it is eroding
• How healing can come to fractured race relations
• The duties of good Christian Citizenship (in light of our living now in a multi-religious and participatory republic rather than in the Roman society that disadvantaged and even persecuted believers and where few had citizenship rights)
• The need for fiscal wisdom and accountability in government
• Godly people of the Bible who served the secular state and society of their times (Joseph, Daniel, Esther, Nehemiah)
• How God works peace and justice through governments he establishes, be they ever so fragile and faulty
• What God expects of secular rulers and those who “bear the sword”
• The Issue that Won’t Go Away—Protecting Unborn Human Life

donaldshoemakerministries@verizon.net

♪“The Answer, My Friend,
Is Blowin’ in the Wind.”♪
– Or Is It???

This picture is of a younger “me”, taken around 1989. I am at the top of Mt. San Gorgonio after camping for a night along the 23-mile trail. At 11,503’,
Mt. San Gorgonio is the tallest mountain in Southern California. To the right of my left shoulder is 10,834’ Mt. San Jacinto, my favorite mountain to climb. Palm Springs is behind the ridge over my right shoulder.

Between the two mountains is the San Gorgonio Pass. It’s one of the deepest (9000’) passes in the U.S, where wind whips through at high speed day in and day out. It’s one of the most continually windy spots in the U.S.

One segment of the wind farm, with Mt. San Gorgonio in the background

So the San Gorgonio Pass is the most natural place I can think of to have wind turbines. And over the years I’ve looked down from San Jacinto Peak to see more and more and more, almost to the point of turbine blight. But I still understand why we would want to put them there.

There was an effort to construct turbines off the windy coast of Cape Cod, Massachusetts, but localists fought it off, including environmental guru John Kerry. Mr. Kerry, a “not in my backyard” man or a “do as I say, not as I do” man (or both), travels the world in a private jet to fight global warming. Private jets are proportionately the worst means of travel when it comes to global warming.

The problem with wind power and solar power is their lack of constancy. They are intermittent in many places. So if we’re going to light our cities and charge our cars dependably, we’re going to need other sources of energy.

One is cheap hydropower, but as our rivers and reservoirs get lower, that won’t be as dependable. Another is natural gas—clean and plentiful. But in a few short years natural gas has gone from trendy (remember signs on trucks like: “This Fleet is Powered by Clean Natural Gas”) to an obscenity. Those who love cooking with natural gas may not be able to do so soon (back to electric!).

Another source of dependable power is nuclear generation. But many have considered that obscene for years. California has only one nuclear plant left, which produces 8% of the state’s electrical demand. It’s slated to close, but Gov. Newsom signed legislation to extend its life to the dismay of some.

Nuclear power has its challenges, especially storage of “spent” fuel, but if we applied the same determination, resources and research to that power source as we do to other futuristic sources of power (which may not succeed), I think we could see a (literally) brighter future. Some opponents of possible power sources seem to leave environmental science behind to embrace ideology.

Today (September 3) as I write this first draft, it’s 104 degrees outside. We’ve got the A/C set at 79 degrees. Our electric bill is high (electric is up 25% over a year ago) and there are threats of rolling blackouts. People are now being told—listen to this!—not to charge their electric cars between 4:00 p.m. and 9:00 p.m. The main reason I can think of for charging one’s electric car at 4:00 p.m. is that you need to do so. Otherwise, you’d wait and charge it at night.

Where are we going to get the energy to produce the electric we’ll need when California’s ban on new gas-powered vehicles comes in 2035? How are we to protect our planet while serving the reasonable needs and enjoyments of all (including billions of disadvantaged people around the world, for whom strong environmentalism is a luxury and hindrance to a little prosperity)?

These are creative challenges to us who take the Bible’s creation mandate seriously. God created humans in his own likeness and told them to subdue the earth and rule over all other created life (Genesis 1:26-30). This rule is to be for human enjoyment and benefit, but it also must be a responsible, respectful and conservation-oriented caretaking, as many scriptures testify.

“Let the birds increase on the earth” – God’s creative word on creation’s “5th Day” (Genesis 1:22). Wind power has a special challenge: How to minimize the death of birds. I surveyed some literature and found wild disparity on how many birds are killed by windmills compared to other sources of energy (reflecting some bias, I’m sure). Since nobody is counting carcasses, estimates range from 140,000 to 328,000 annually. Some argue that taller, bigger windmills are more dangerous and others say they’re safer. Should we take comfort that only 19 birds die per megawatt of energy in California (but only 4/mg overall in the US!!)? Of real concern is the disproportionate death of larger and exotic birds, including some on the Endangered Species list. One report claimed that 75 golden eagles die each year due to the 5000 turbines at a single wind farm (of five) within the Alamont Pass Wind Resource Area in California.

T“Worship Beneath the Cross of Jesus”(Luke 23:26-56)

– 8th Essay on Worship for 2022

(“Crucified for us under Pontius Pilate,
He suffered death and was buried”

The Nicene Creed (325 AD)

For Christians, Jesus’ death on the cross is a powerful moment of history. “The message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing,
but to us who are being saved it is the power of God” (1 Corinthians 1:18 NIV).

The Apostle Paul opposed any softening of the Gospel. The Gospel was being diminished in the church at Corinth by the “wisdom of this age” to make it fashionable. Against this, he asserted, “We preach Christ crucified!”

Modern “wisdoms of this age” include religious liberalism, Americanism, “self-help” and therapeutic messages, religious-zeal environmentalism, political issues, “health and wealth” gospels, “wokeness” and adjustments in worship and message to draw crowds. Many can be found in evangelical churches.

If the cross of Jesus is central to our message and who we are as Christians, then surely it will be central in our worship. If it isn’t, something is very wrong. What are some themes of the cross that should affect our worship?

1. The Cross calls us to FOLLOW Jesus in SUFFERING and OBEDIENCE.

As Jesus was led away to be crucified, “They seized Simon from Cyrene…and put the cross on him and made him carry it behind Jesus” (Luke 23:26).

Perhaps Simon was in Jerusalem for the Passover celebration. Whatever his reason for being there, he happened to be in the right place at the right time. He felt the touch of a Roman sword on his shoulder and heard a voice of authority say, “You have just volunteered!”

So Simon carried the cross for Jesus, becoming a type of every follower of Jesus, modeling what our task should be. Jesus said (Luke 14:27), “Anyone who does not carry his cross and follow me cannot be my disciple.”

Not all suffering is cross-bearing, and not all cross-bearing is from obedience to Jesus (some Christians make their own crosses and carry them loudly!). But when loyalty to Jesus leads to suffering and sacrifice, you are taking up your cross and following Jesus. See 1 Peter 2:20-21 and 4:15-16.

Simon’s deed and our own calling to bear the cross should lead us to sing:

May I be willing, Lord, to bear daily my cross for Thee;
Even Thy cross of grief to share. Thou hast borne all for me.
– “Lead Me to Calvary” by Jennie Evelyn Hussey, 1921

2. The Cross sets forth Jesus as THE MAN FOR SINNERS.

Jesus offended the VSP’s— the Very Separated People. On the day of his baptism he identified with sinners. He feasted with sinners, and his accusers asked him, “Why do you eat and drink with tax collectors and sinners?” Jesus said, “I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance” (Luke 5:27-32).

Again and again, Jesus placed himself on the side of the sinner crowd rather than with the self-righteous crowd (read his encounter with the crooked tax collector Zacchaeus— Luke 19:1-10).

Now at Calvary, Jesus is once again with sinners. “Two other men, both criminals, were also led out with him to be executed. When they came to the place called the Skull, there they crucified him, along with the criminals, one on his right, one on his left” (Luke 23:32-33).

In worship we celebrate “the Man for sinners” and declare:

Man of sorrows! What a name for the Son of God who came.
Ruined sinners to reclaim. Hallelujah! What a Savior!
– P. P. Bliss (1875)

Jesus! What a friend for sinners. Jesus! Lover of my soul.
Friends may fail me; foes assail me. He, my savior, makes me whole.
Hallelujah! What a savior. Hallelujah! What a friend.
Saving, helping, keeping, loving—he is with me to the end.
– J. Wilber Chapman (1910)

3. The Cross teaches us FORGIVENESS – GOD forgives, WE should too.

Jesus prayed for his tormenters (Luke 23:34). “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.”

This prayer must have caught on with the first Christians because Stephen, the first Christian martyr, prayed the same way at his execution. Stephen fell to his knees and cried out, “Lord, do not hold this sin against them.” (Acts 7:60).

Paul knew what it was like to experience God’s forgiveness: “I was once a blasphemer, a persecutor and a violent man. I was shown mercy because I acted in ignorance and unbelief. The grace of our Lord was poured out on me abundantly” (I Timothy 1:13-14). He would teach the church: “Be kind and compassionate to one another, forgiving each other, just as in Christ God forgave you” (Ephesians 4:32). So in worship we bear witness to forgiveness:

Five bleeding wounds he bears, received on Calvary.
They pour effectual prayers, they strongly plead for me.
“Forgive him, O forgive,” they cry, “Nor let that ransomed sinner die!”
– “Arise, My Soul, Arise” by Charles Wesley (1742)

Upon that cross of Jesus mine eye at times can see
The very dying form of One Who suffered there for me;
And from my stricken heart with tears two wonders I confess;
The wonders of redeeming love and my unworthiness.
– “Beneath the Cross of Jesus” by Elizabeth Cecilia Clephane (1868)

4. The Cross brings us SALVATION because JESUS BORE OUR SINS.

He was pierced for our transgressions, He was crushed for our iniquities;
The punishment that brought us peace was upon him…
We all, like sheep, have gone astray, Each of us has turned to his own way;
And the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all. (Isaiah 53:5-6)

One of the two criminals crucified with Jesus said, “We are getting what our deeds deserve, but this man has done nothing wrong.” He turned to Jesus and pleaded, “Remember me when you come into your kingdom.” Jesus replied,
“I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in Paradise” (Luke 23:42-43).

Guilty vile and helpless we; spotless Lamb of God was he.
Full atonement—can it be? Hallelujah! What a Savior!

What Thou, my Lord, hast suffered was all for sinners’ gain.
Mine, mine was the transgression, but Thine the deadly pain.
– “O Sacred Head, Now Wounded” attr. to Bernard of Clairvaux (12th Century)

5. The Cross signals Jesus’ VICTORY over DEATH, EVIL and the DEVIL.

I have two problems with how evangelicals often observe Communion:
(1) We hurry through it. We have “fast food” McBread and McCup. “Here’s the Bread, here’s the Cup—We’re all done, time is up.”
(2) We are too somber. We make Communion like a “wake” for the dead.

Early Christians feasted and celebrated the Cross as a victory. This “victory celebration” has been lost in many church Communions today.

“Jesus cried out with a loud voice, ‘Father, into your hands I commit my spirit’” (Luke 23:46). Jesus thus declared: “My task is complete. The price has been paid. Salvation is secured. It is finished! Take me now, Father.”

Lifted up was he to die. “It is finished” was his cry.
Now in heaven exalted high. Hallelujah! What a Savior!

The Apostle Paul is clear that the cross is a great triumph. “Having disarmed the powers and authorities, he made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross” (Colossians 2:15). So in worship we proclaim the victory:

This is the feast of victory for our God. Alleluia, Alleluia, Alleluia
1 Worthy is Christ, the Lamb who was slain,
whose blood set us free to be people of God.
2 Power, riches, wisdom and strength, and honor, blessing and glory are his.
3 Sing with all the people of God and join in the hymn of all creation.
4 Blessing, honor, glory and might be to God and the Lamb forever. Amen.

For the Lamb who was slain has begun his reign. Alleluia
– John W. Arthur (1970)

Next Issue: “Triumphant Worship: The Book of Revelation”

Vin Scully leads the fans in singing “Take Me Out to the Ballgame”

“Goodnight, everybody!”

2016 – Dodger Baseball’s legendary announcer Vin Scully, 88, will sign off for the last time in a few days, after 67 seasons as “The Voice of the Dodgers.”

When Vinny turned 80 in 2007, sportswriter Paul Oberjuerge wrote of him. I was fascinated by how his characterizations of Scully could compare with ministers—my career. How do we preachers measure up to Vinny?

• Vinny has “relentless goodwill” and contagious love for the game. He makes every game seem important and convinces you of the same. How many times haven’t I heard him say late in the game, “Good ball game!” You actually don’t mind hearing him speak for three hours (no call here for three-hour sermons, but do we convey each sermon is important and worth a listen?).

• He is personable and free of pretense and ego. He is pleasant and reassuring. He is smart, but never comes across as a “know it all.”

• He makes his message personal. It’s as if you, the listener, are the important one and he has invited you to “pull up a chair” so he can tell you about the game. Do people feel such intimacy with our sermons?

• He doesn’t follow fads and never uses jargon. That’s a challenge to us preachers, in whose trade there’s always a new fad to talk about or new lingo to use to show others we know something they don’t.

• He can be critical without being irritating—like it really hurts him to report hooliganism at the park or a player’s excessive aggression.

• When you meet him you feel he likes you as much as you like him.

• He conveys a sincere feeling of gratitude to God while knowing that baseball’s good times won’t last forever. “If you want to make God smile, tell him your plans.”

The breadth of this snapshot of the Universe is likened to having a grain of sand at arm’s length.

‘The new Webb telescope, in orbit around the sun 1 million miles above Earth and four times the distance to the moon, is able to penetrate the universe as nothing before it could do—taking us toward the beginning of time. To look into the sky is to look into the past. When I glimpse the sun, I don’t see the sun that “is” but as it “was” eight minutes ago.

The Bible asks and answers the question, “How can God, the Creator of such vastness, have any interest in me?” (Psalm 8 from the King James Version)

O Lord, our Lord, how excellent is thy name in all the earth!
who hast set thy glory above the heavens…
When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers,
the moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained;
What is man, that thou art mindful of him?
and the son of man, that thou visitest him?
For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels,
and hast crowned him with glory and honour.
Thou madest him to have dominion over the works of thy hands;
thou hast put all things under his feet…
How excellent is thy name in all the earth!

Taking Our
Christian Baptism Seriously

“We were all baptized by one Spirit so as to form one body—whether Jews or Gentiles, slave or free—and we were all given the one Spirit to drink.” – 1 Corinthians 12:13 NIV

This baptismal service (“yours truly” officiating) dates back to 2011. After considering many baptismal options, Grace Community Church in Seal Beach, California uses one of these: (1) this portable baptistry or (2) the Pacific Ocean one block away!

Our church practices a mode of immersion baptism known as “Trine Immersion” (a triple immersion). This mode is easily traceable back to the post-apostolic church (early 2nd Century and later). Thus, we need this kind of baptistry (though on rare occasions we have baptized by pouring water over the head of the candidate—which also is historically based).

Baptisms in the baptistry take place during a Sunday morning service. Baptisms in the ocean take place when the water is nice and warm.

Our church’s Elder Board once received a request that we OK a baptismal service in a backyard swimming pool, because the candidates for baptism didn’t want their baptism to identify them with the church. The Board wisely and rightly said NO! Read James Packer’s lesson excerpt:

Baptism has social implications. Involvement in the “body life” of mutual sympathy and service for Christ must be the rule for all the baptized.

Isolationism in church—sitting apart, not getting acquainted, dodging responsibility, and so on—is often condemned as denying the meaning of the Lord’s Supper. We need to see that it denies the meaning of baptism too, and just as drastically. Is that clear to us now? Are we making it a matter of conscience that by active love of our fellow-Christians we should show that we know what our baptism means?

– James Packer, Growing in Christ

Message of the Month –

A Lesson from the Travails of “Hillsong”

My Jesus, my Savior
Lord, there is none like You
All of my days I want to praise
The wonders of your mighty love
My comfort, my shelter
Tower of refuge and strength
Let every breath, all that I am
Never cease to worship you.

– “Shout to the Lord” by Darlene Zschech
Hillsong Worship (1994)

This song instantly became a favorite of mine! And here are just a few more Hillsongs that have ministered to me and to many others in worship services:

What a Beautiful Name
Cornerstone
Mighty to Save
This I Believe
Here I Am to Worship
How Great Is Our God
Mighty to Save

“Hillsong blessed believers with wonderful songs and stood as an example of service to its community” – Stephen Strang. But alas, the ministry known as “Hillsong,” which exploded from its start in Australia and became a wide-spread church phenomenon, has fallen on hard times.

Details are not hard to find and won’t be put forth here. Flamboyant pastors, autocratic leadership, powerful positions, multiple megachurches—all have their perils. I personally wouldn’t join any church body that calls its leader “Global Senior Pastor” nor a church ruled by an autocratic pastor rather than led by a qualified group of elders. *

The question I raise for now is this:“Should the failings of a movement and/or its leaders call for rejection of its music—worship music that has had a worldwide impact even greater than Hillsong itself?”

Some Christians think so, and I understand. It’s a form of the “guilt by association” argument. To sing the music is to think of the movement that produced it. To those persons, the singing is at the very least unedifying.

The church in Corinth asked the Apostle Paul about “foods sacrificed to idols.” How is it possible for Christians to please God by eating foods dedicated to idols? Paul goes to the heart of the matter (1 Corinthians 8:7): “Some are still so accustomed to idols that when they eat such food they think of it as having been sacrificed to an idol, and since their conscience is weak, it is defiled.”

I might paraphrase, “Some people think of Hillsong’s flaws every time they sing one of Hillsong’s songs—they can’t separate the two in their minds. Thus, singing such songs does not benefit them spiritually.”

I can remember (yes, I’m old enough!) when electric (amplified) guitars were a big issue in churches. How can a church allow these guitars into worship when they remind us of acid rock and various debaucheries? Should we teach on this to mature people’s thinking or should we create prohibitions to protect those who judge until the last old-timer goes to Heaven?

So what’s a church to do? Here are four issues to think about:

First, Paul calls the consciences of these people “weak.” For at least three reasons, a Christian shouldn’t want to manifest a weak conscience:

(1) A linkage between idols and food (or between Hillsong’s wrongs and songs) isn’t really there objectively and shouldn’t be there subjectively in our minds (1 Corinthians 8:1-8).
(2) A perpetually “weak” Christian limits his capacity to enjoy things in God’s world that God is actually able to bless (1 Timothy 4:4-5).
(3) A “weak” Christian is unable to follow Paul’s ministry flexibility of “being all things to all people”—weak with the weak, without law to those without law, etc. (1 Corinthians 9:19-23).

But secondly, the church needs to be sensitive to those who can’t (yet!), in their own minds, separate the food from the idol (the music from its source).

Third, Christians shouldn’t be static in their minds. They should grow from “weak” thinking to “strong” thinking. The church that ministers to the “weak” only by protecting them and not by challenging them to grow in their thinking is failing its duty to them. If the people of a congregation have the same hang-ups year after year over issues where they should be free to decide rather than be bound by rules, that congregation is static in its thinking and not growing in the freedom of Christ.

Fourth, I don’t think Paul would tolerate having weak theology, with its condemnations and rules, control the church’s ministries and direction.

So my counsel to a congregation where some are troubled in conscience over Hillsong music might be (1) protect these people for a period of time, perhaps by temporarily not singing the songs in corporate worship (NOTE: a church with multiple worship services has an ideal situation for handling this—it can stop the use of certain songs in one service and continue them in others), (2) teach on Christian liberty and challenge people to follow the open thinking the Apostle Paul gives, and (3) set a goal on when singing the songs can resume.

For biblical instruction on the kind of issues raised, read Romans 14:1-15:13 and 1 Corinthians 8-10. Keep in mind that Romans and 1 Corinthians deal with very different issues but offer similar principles and solutions.

For helpful reading about the Hillsong controversies: “What’s behind the bad press about Hillsong?” (Chris Friend) and “Lessons from the Hillsong Controversy” (Stephen Strang) from the July-August 2022 issue of Charisma.

* A church can be led by a truly empowered (not a rubber stamp) elder board and at the same time have pastoral leadership with considerable authority. The key is that the authority is delegated by the board (usually in well-written job descriptions, but also in bylaws and board motions) and accountable to the board, which in turn fulfills its fiduciary duties to the church. The larger a church gets, the greater the need for delegated authority. Only very small churches can be governed by pure congregational government, and they will stay small if they insist on operating that way.

Even a quality elder board (which I think is more biblically supportable than other forms of church government) can’t do all the governing in a larger church. Its members will burn out if it does not delegate and allow qualified and accountable individuals to lead. The elders should decide major issues and big expenditures and pastors and other staff should decide week-to-week, month-to-month and even year-long matters. For an excellent study of church governance: Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology (2nd edition) pp. 1114-1175.