Author Archives: admin

“Contemporary Worship”–Contemporary Yes, But Is It Worship?

Posted on by

“God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth.” (John 4:24, a text that, among other things, should make us cautious about external show in worship)

1 Corinthians 14:26 is a foundational scripture for worship: “When you come together [‘sunerchomai’ – a technical term for the church gathering), …all [including singing] must be done for the strengthening of the church.”

“Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly, in all wisdom teaching and admonishing each other with psalms, hymns and spiritual songs…” (Colossians 3:16—my rather literal translation of it)

First, let’s agree and admit: “God’s worship tastes are broader than yours or mine.” So what I like or what I prefer is not the issue. The issues are:
• Is our worship acceptable to God—the kind of worship he seeks?
• Is it spiritually strengthening to the congregation?
• If the occasion is evangelistic, is the music the best for the occasion?
• Does it make the church truly an engaged, worshipping body?
• Does it fulfill biblical teaching and commands? And (in matters not addressed in the Bible) does it fulfill biblical principles?

Here are five problems I have with some of the “contemporary worship” I observe (and I do benefit from much of it):

1. Platform Performance and a Spectator Audience rather than a Participating Congregation led by the Worship Team [* see addendum]

Does the team in front truly lead the people in worshipping God in spirit and in truth (John 4:24)? Or does it perform before them? (Does the show go right on even if watchers are not participating?) Perhaps the volume or style of the song makes participatory singing difficult.

A 20-something couple attended a contemporary worship service and found the audience standing for a long song time but most were noticeably not singing. Worse, this couple had taken a young, non-Christian friend to this service, and she was quite puzzled. “Why do they stand so long? Why aren’t they singing?” (The couple wrote me about their experience.)

This may be “contemporary”, but “worship” it ain’t! Likewise, “leading worship” is more than coaxing the audience to clap their hands, etc., along the lines of some older worship styles. Good worship leading is an art. It creates a “symbiotic” situation, where leaders and congregation are ushered freely and together into the spirituality of the worship experience.

2. Use of Technology and Special Effects that attract attention to themselves rather than to Jesus (or even hinder attraction to Jesus)

I tried to worship last year at a gathering that displayed, in my opinion, many distracting special effects—especially some little spotlight nuisances that sent their beams wandering through the audience during songs. How does this build the spirituality of the song time? What are we trying to prove?

Technology (lighting, amplification, projections, special effects) is “neutral”, neither commanded nor forbidden in the Bible. The use of technology therefore must be judged by its positive or negative effect.

The reformer John Calvin’s advice is helpful when considering things added to the worship of God that are not specified in the Bible. He speaks against “useless elegance and fruitless extravagance” and favors a decorum that fits “the sacred mysteries” and is “appropriate adornment” for the exercise of devotion. “Ceremonies…ought to lead us straight to Christ” (Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book 4, Chapter 10, Section 29, emphasis mine). So we ask, “Does this particular use of technology lead us straight to Christ or not? Or does it even distract us from Christ?”

3. Selection of Songs and Style that doesn’t fit the context (the people who are there and the purpose of the gathering) [* see addendum]

As a pastor for 44 years, I’ve learned the art of accepting people “where they are” and leading them from there to “where they ought to be”. In music, this includes broadening their tastes and appreciation, and doing so with a sensitive spirit.

This requires “gradualism”, building upon the ground they stand on, slowly expanding their grasp of music that will then build them up spiritually. You know how a cat acts when you take him suddenly from familiar surroundings to a strange place? You better be wearing gloves! We wouldn’t expect old-time gospel songs to be effective at a gathering of unchurched youth. Likewise, if a praise team is before an older crowd or a generationally mixed crowd and hits them with a style that narrowly fits a particular youthful stratum, then broader musical appreciation and spiritual growth are aborted.

And remember, the elderly folk aren’t into standing for 20+ minutes! Also, please pick songs so most of the people know most of the songs.

4. “Sloppy Agape” and the “Slurpization of God”

Some contemporary songs convey an erotic (romantic, but not in the negative sense of “eroticism”) rather than an agapic view of love (1 Corinthians 13). The agape love of God reaches down to us in our distress and does what is needed (John 3:16). It motivates us to agapic love for others (1 John 4:11). It’s not about getting the feeling that God has feelings of love for us.

I attended a church’s song service last year where the lyrics of one popular song said Heaven will come “like a sloppy wet kiss”! No wonder some talk of men (males) not caring for modern worship. Women either.

All worship leaders should study the transcendence, holiness and majesty of God and ponder their practical application to worship.

5. Weak or Wrong Teaching in the Song Lyrics

Singing is a time to teach and admonish with the truth (Colossians 3:16).

I’m delighted to see more contemporary songs focusing on our social duties as Christians. This has been a blind spot in contemporary music. “God of The City” is a top example of this development (O that it were more singable!).

But some songs go beyond this with themes and lyrics that are “post-millennial” (Jesus will return after the church establishes his kingdom on earth). Few Christians I know really believe this, but the songs they sometimes sing convey it anyhow. (Let it be said that the old “gospel songs” were sometimes doctrinally weak or wrong as well.)

I close with the powerful words of the still-relevant song, “Sing Praise to God Who Reigns Above” by Johann J. Schutz (1675):

Thus all my toilsome way along I sing aloud Thy praises,
That men may hear the grateful song my voice unwearied raises.
Be joyful in the Lord, my heart. Both soul and body bear your part.
To God all praise and glory!

Addendum:

* Note: Since first writing the above, I’ve thought a lot about these points and how we can avoid error and at the same time appropriately accommodate some of the practices I’d rather not see in worship gatherings.

When I was a teen, “Youth For Christ” was the place to take your non-Christian friends (perhaps more than taking them to your church for their first “Gospel” experience). YFC rallies were “platform performances” where the audience was more in an observance mode than participation. Everything (including technology good for the times) was geared to the teens and prayerfully intended to lead to some conversions. (Read Billy Graham’s autobiography and see how this was the vision of YFC.)

We didn’t look on YFC as primarily a place for worship or spiritual growth, though those did take place. We looked for evangelism, through song, drama, message and just a really good program. I was trained as an evangelism counselor.

I suggest that some, if not many, “contemporary worship” experiences are like YFC during my teen years. They are striving to reach a generation for Christ, and many are doing a pretty good job of it.

I think we can make a New Testament distinction between a gathering geared for conversion and a gathering for worship and growth. Isn’t this distinction found at the very beginning of the Christian Church? “Those who accepted his message were baptized” [the evangelistic gathering], and “they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to the fellowship, to the breaking of bread [likely the incipient Eucharist] and to prayer” [the worship/growth gatherings]” (Acts 2:41-42 NIV).

That said, and if correct, two results should take place:

1. The Christian and convert attending the evangelistic occasion should not view that occasion as “church” (the gathering of believers for worship, doctrinal instruction and growth) or as a substitute for “church”. We who were so zealous for YFC and its evangelism potential—never would we have thought that the YFC rally was a substitute for our faithful participation in worship at our various local churches. The evangelistic gathering needs to be supplemented by a gathering of believers for doctrinal instruction, prayer, mutual ministry and celebration of the Eucharist.
2. In the observance of the ordinances (sacraments), baptism can be a vital part of the evangelism experience (I would prefer, in this case, that baptisms be connected to a local church). Communion (the Eucharist) on the other hand should NOT be part of this experience as it is an observance intended for the gathered community of worshipping believers. Baptism is tied to evangelism; Communion is tied to spiritual growth. (This may sound like I am making too sharp a distinction between the two kinds of gatherings—not my desire. Growth will take place in an evangelism context, evangelism in a worship context. But the two gatherings have distinct and different intentions.)

May 2013 Newsletter

Posted on by

“A Piece of My Mind”

May 2013 Newsletter from Donald Shoemaker

Advancing Christian Faith and Values, Defending Religious Liberty for All, Supporting Civility and the Common Good through Preaching, Teaching, Writing, Activism and Reasoned Conversations

www.donaldshoemakerministries.com

 

“We can build so many things, but if we don’t confess Jesus Christ, then something is wrong. We will become a pitiful NGO [non-governmental organization], but not the Church, spouse of Christ.”

Referring to Simon Peter’s attempt to distract Jesus from the cross: “This is the same Peter who confesses to Christ, who says, ‘You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God. I will follow you, but let’s not speak of crosses. I will follow you with other possibilities, without the cross.'”

“If we walk without the cross, how much do we build without the cross? And, when we confess Christ without the cross, then we are not disciples of the Lord.”

– Pope Francis the day after his election

 

Religious Liberty Vigilance—The Key Role of Prayer

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…”

– 1st Amendment (Our “First Freedom” in the Bill of Rights)

 

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

Thomas Paine for sure didn’t have prayer in mind as a way of supporting freedom. But prayer is an important means to pursue and preserve our precious freedoms. Each year the first Thursday in May (May 2 this year) is designated the National Day of Prayer. I’ve compiled a short list of prayer values for supporting our leaders, securing our liberties, and furthering wholesome values.

  • In the spirit of 1 Timothy 2:1-2, pray for the president, members of Congress, the Supreme Court, governors and local officials, that they might lead us wisely as God would want them to lead.
  • Pray for the victims of terrorism, in Boston and around the world.
  • Give thanks for the freedoms we enjoy in America, especially religious freedom. May we use these freedoms to further the work of God as well as to enjoy living in America.
  • Pray for challenges to religious freedom in America, especially the power of government to coerce consciences.
  • Pray for the persecuted church around the world.
  • The issue of undocumented immigration is large right now. Pray that the members of Congress will open their hearts and minds to policies that do justice and love mercy.
  • Pray that government at all levels will be responsible in handling the people’s money (tax revenues) and in avoiding deficits that hurt future generations.
  • Pray that an ethic that cherishes the God-given right to life will spread throughout the land.
  • Pray that churches everywhere will strive to bring shalom (peace) to their communities through seeking justice, showing mercy, and walking humbly before God.
  • Pray that the evangelical churches of America will refine our messages and activism so we will be the “salt and light” Jesus calls us to be.
 

“Prophets are Good for Business”
(Applying Biblical Principles to Work Situations)

Needed: Accessible, Responsive Government

Jesus told the story of a widow who pled with a judge, “Grant me justice!” The judge refused her many times but eventually relented, not because he cared for her but because she pestered him so much.

The judge thought, “Even though I don’t fear God or care about men, yet because this widow keeps bothering me, I will see that she gets justice.”*

Governmental agencies sometimes share this judge’s attributes: they don’t fear God and they don’t care about people.

Over the past year I’ve had about half a dozen detailed contacts with government agencies, federal and state (starting with Social Security and Medicare). While I would say that the “human encounters” were usually courteous and helpful, the overall experiences were frustrations big-time. (There are “micro situations” of person-to-person encounters and “macro situations” of policy, inaccessibility, rigidity, institutional culture, etc.)

My experience? Confusing letters, letters of denial when you know you’ve been approved, trips to the Social Security Administration office only to be told I should ignore the letter I received, lost submittals, letters that demand action, letters that warn of action. A “herd treatment” of those who must come to the government office. Phone calls never answered.

My commentary:

1) No business that treated customers this way would stay in business for long (unless some monopolistic practice existed). 2) No customer would put up with treatment like this from a private enterprise. He or she would go elsewhere (but with government there is no “elsewhere”). 3) Government by nature is regulative and “by the book” in how it handles people. That may often be necessary. Good businesses are listeners and flexible within reason. That IS necessary. 4) Government has power to demand and punish; businesses usually don’t and must persuade. 5) Citizens should strongly ponder, “Do we want to see government expand more and more so we can be treated like this all the more?”

The Bible teaches that all men and women are made in the image and likeness of God. This teaching needs to permeate micro practices and macro policies on how we treat one another and must serve as a key motivator of person-centered encounters with business and government and a corrective of all that degrades and dehumanizes. See relevant Scriptures: Genesis 1:27; Matthew 5:21-26; James 3:9-10.

The public must realize the agent you talk to has been listening to people all day, many being unpleasant. The agent must realize that, though you have said it a dozen times already today, the person before you hasn’t heard it yet and is unique, to be valued, and someone you need to help. Both need to see the “image of God” in the other. Hard sometimes.

I once went to Sacramento to support a bill** when it had its first hearing before an Assembly committee. Reps from a state agency spoke against the bill and certainly didn’t expect the rebuke they got from the chairman of the committee: “You are supposed to be a responsive agency!”

Let all government agencies hear that!

* Luke 18:1-8. Jesus told the story to encourage prayer. God is not like that judge!
**A bill supporting foster parents’ rights. In this case, my assemblyman responded to my concern and submitted this bill, unlike that uncaring judge. The bill became law.

 

Bible Insight – The Meaning of Pentecost

When the day of Pentecost arrived, they were all together in one place. And suddenly there came from heaven a sound like a mighty rushing wind, and it filled the entire house where they were sitting. …And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance.

Now there were dwelling in Jerusalem Jews, devout men from every nation under heaven. And at this sound the multitude came together, and they were bewildered, because each one was hearing them speak in his own language. And they were amazed and astonished, saying,

“Are not all these who are speaking Galileans? And how is it that we hear, each of us in his own native language? …We hear them telling in our own tongues the mighty works of God.”

– Taken from the Book of Acts, chapter 2:1-11

 

“Pentecost” was the day it all began! Many Christians observe “Pentecost Sunday” to remember this drama. This year Pentecost Sunday is May 19.

The Bible identifies three great feast times for the Jewish People: Passover, First Fruits (“Feast of Weeks”), and the Festival of Booths (“Feast of Harvest”). See Exodus 23:14-17 and Deuteronomy 16.

“First Fruits” (Pentecost) was seven weeks after Passover. The earliest harvests were celebrated. For Christians, Pentecost (fifty days after Jesus’ death) was the day of the “first harvest” that kick-started the Christian Church. Three thousand people were baptized into the Christian faith on that day. Read of it in the Book of Acts, chapter two.

But the great kick-off day was not marked primarily by this result. It was marked by God’s gift to his followers that made the result possible—the presence and power of God’s Spirit, the Holy Spirit. The Spirit of God empowered Jesus’ followers so that they miraculously proclaimed “the wonders of God” in the native languages of the many pilgrims who were gathered in Jerusalem for the Feast of Pentecost (Acts 2:4-12).

So when we think of Pentecost, we think of the power of God’s Spirit and the worldwide spread of the Christian faith by that power. From day one, the Christian faith has been spread by imperfect humans (as it has often displayed), being influenced and empowered by God’s presence.

So it continues today, and will do so until Jesus returns.

 

Upcoming Ministries

5 Sundays in June—Speak at 1st United Methodist Church of Seal Beach on “The Lord’s Prayer” (9:30 a.m.)

July 26-31 – Participate in “Vision 2020 South”, Leadership Conference of the Fellowship of Grace Brethren Churches. Present resolutions to the Conference as chairman of the Social Concerns Committee.

Good News from Grace
www.gracesealbeach.org
 

Vacation Bible School at Grace Community Church of Seal Beach is July 8-12 (8:45-noon).

This is one outstanding program! Register your child (age 4 through grade 5) now to be sure to reserve a space. Perhaps 300 children will find themselves in “King Arthur’s Court” in search of the “one true king.”

This is not only one of the highlights on the church’s calendar, it is a highlight in the community. Call (562) 596-1605 with any questions. Get the registration form from the Website (click ministries, children).

 

Message of the Month – Immigration Reform is Now!

Last year I wrote a resolution supporting immigration reform. It was approved by my denomination’s annual meeting.

This resolution* asks for federal legislation that:

  • Respects the God-given dignity of every person,
  • Rejects the nativism that ignores the love of God for all and our country’s history of immigration and openness to the foreigner, as captured in the words enshrined on the Statue of Liberty,
  • Protects the unity of the immediate family and seeks the best interests of native-born children of undocumented immigrants,
  • Respects the rule of law,
  • Holds employers accountable for ensuring the legal status of workers,
  • Creates secure national borders,
  • Ensures fairness to taxpayers,
  • Develops a generous and fair “guest worker” program,
  • Protects all immigrants from exploitation and violence, and
  • Establishes a pathway toward legal status and/or citizenship for those who qualify and who wish to become permanent residents or citizens—a pathway that both achieves justice and loves mercy.

It concludes, “We recognize that meaningful solutions to this problem are not easily reached. We also recognize the solutions must come through a determined will to reach them and cannot be ignored time after time, year after year.”

Has the time now come for meaningful legislation? I say yes.

Senate Bill #744, sponsored by eight Democratic and Republican senators, goes a long way to accomplish what needs to be done. Is it perfect? No. Should it be tweaked? Probably yes. Does the Kingdom of God come with its passage? Not at all.

Legislation is incremental, often flawed, often selfishly focused. I sometimes say, “If you believe in the rule of law, and if you enjoy eating good sausage, then you don’t want to ask how either is made!”

Legislation is temporal, not ultimate (as God’s Kingdom is). Legislation is a give-and-take effort, seldom a “winner takes all” thing. Absolutists who want “all or nothing” will likely get the latter. Christians should not expect to get “God’s way” done in Congress. But we shouldn’t be cynical or wash our hands of the process either. We must work for the “better”**.

I urge us all to follow S744 closely and call on our elected officials to support it, so long as this bill achieves most of the needed goals and doesn’t take on any lethal amendments.

* You may read the whole resolution from a blog at my Website. http://donaldshoemakerministries.com/blog/?p=61
** Please read my published opinion, “Politics and God’s Kingdom” on the Website.

www.donaldshoemakerministries.com

Refreshing blessings of springtime to all!

Dr. M. L. King’s Religious Legacy

Posted on by

(This essay was republished on the 45th anniversary of Dr. King’s death. It first appeared as an op-ed in the Long Beach (CA) Press-Telegram on Sunday, April 6, 2008)

Dr. King’s Religious Legacy
By Donald P. Shoemaker
Senior Pastor
Grace Community Church of Seal Beach
Chairman, Social Concerns Committee
Fellowship of Grace Brethren Churches

April 4, 1968. Those old enough will remember right where they were when they heard the news. I was working at a hotel front desk in my college town when the story broke. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. had been assassinated. I passed a note to a group of educators attending a lecture in the hotel. As quickly as the meeting ended, they flocked to hear the TV reports.

I heard Dr. King in person once. In 1966 he preached in my hometown of Mansfield, Ohio at the church his uncle pastored. My fiancé and I heard him deliver a hypothetical epistle of St. Paul to American Christians (a chapter in his book Strength to Love). He spoke of how our moral progress lags behind our scientific progress and our mentality outdistances our morality.

From Montgomery to Memphis on into our future, his legacy grew and remains. Arguably his greatest work was “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” written in April, 1963, when he was arrested and placed in the city jail for a non-violent protest against segregation. He responded to a “Call to Unity” issued by some local clergy who opposed his civil disobedience and called instead for peaceful obedience while racial issues could be pursued in the courts.

The God-grounded, faith-based, scripture-laced nature of the movement he led is obvious from any fair reading of his letter or his autobiography. Putting specific issues aside and looking at the foundations of the movement, we wonder if his message would be in sync with today’s secularized thinking.

With a religious foundation like his, how could those who didn’t share it join in his cause? Because the struggle he led was rooted in a moral reality that transcended his religion.

“There are two types of laws: just and unjust,” Dr. King said. “A just law is a man-made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law. To put it in the terms of St. Thomas Aquinas: An unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law.”

We must obey just laws. An unjust law—a law that degrades human personality, that creates a false superiority and inferiority, that turns a person into an “it” (as segregation laws do) is really no law at all and should be disobeyed. Such laws are not only sociologically unsound, they are morally wrong and sinful.

To the mainstream clergy who issued the “Call to Unity” Dr. King confessed, “I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate.” These words likewise chastise much of the Protestant evangelicalism of that time, which is my own heritage.

Evangelicals had been “burnt” by the modernist/fundamentalist controversies of the early Twentieth Century and had retreated into quietism and social isolation. While opposing segregation in principle, they would not do so in action. “This world is not my home; I’m just a-passin’ through. My treasures are laid up somewhere beyond the blue” was our attitude.

True as that gospel song is, it is half-truth. It must be balanced by the drive for justice in the Prophet Jeremiah’s word from God to the Jews exiled in Babylon (Jeremiah 29:7): “Seek the welfare (shalom) of the city to which I have carried you into exile. Pray to the Lord for it, because in its welfare (shalom) is your welfare.”

A second reason for our failure was our emphasis on evangelizing individuals to the neglect of social transformation. “Save souls one by one. When we’ve saved enough individuals,” we told ourselves, “we’ll see society change and evils like segregation will pass away.”

How naïve and bad theology to boot! Winning souls doesn’t guarantee the end of social evil—not even in the hearts of the “saved.” And it may be 100 years before enough segregationists are “born again” and rightly motivated to make a dent in this injustice. Dr. King’s letter reminds us of the inadequacy of this thinking and how institutionalized evil can be worse than individual evil. “Lamentably, it is an historical fact that privileged groups seldom give up their privileges voluntarily. Individuals may see the moral light and voluntarily give up their unjust posture; but, as [theologian and social critic] Reinhold Niebuhr has reminded us, groups tend to be more immoral than individuals.”

Against our passivity back then and sometimes now, Dr. King still speaks, “We will have to repent in this generation not merely for the hateful words and actions of the bad people but for the appalling silence of the good people. Human progress never rolls in on wheels of inevitability; it comes through the tireless efforts of men willing to be co-workers with God.”

© 2008 Donald Shoemaker

April 2013 Newsletter

Posted on by

“A Piece of My Mind”

April 2013 Newsletter from Donald Shoemaker


Advancing Christian Faith and Values, Defending Religious Liberty for All, Supporting Civility and the Common Good through Preaching, Teaching, Writing, Activism and Reasoned Conversations

Easter’s Theme—the Core of Christian Faith

…of first importance: Christ died for our sins…he was buried…he was raised on the third day…

If Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith…your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost…we are to be pitied more than all men.

– 1 Corinthians 15:3-4, 14-19 New Int’l Version

 

 

“Prophets are Good for Business”

Saying “No” to Work – God Took a Day Off and You Should Too! (Part 1)

I’ve spent considerable time thinking on Sabbath-­‐keeping in studies I’ve done on the Ten Commandments, biblical values in the workplace and other topics. What is this idea and how does it fit into patterns of life?

In this newsletter I’ll give the first installment of my thoughts on this issue.

Pastors like myself (who are in the “church business”) tend to think of ourselves more highly than we ought. One way we do this is to work and work and work. During the first year of my pastoral career I thought I could do this. Seven days a week, morning and afternoon and evening, all year—I did “God’s work.” Who could criticize that? God could!

One particularly famous pastor was held up as a role model for pastors for many years. He built one of America’s great mega-churches. He never took a day off, never took a vacation, demanded the maximum from his staff. And the rest of us should be like him so we can be successful, too! He’s dead now.

I’ve come to the conclusion that such a pattern of work does not honor God, ourselves, or the people before whom we set examples.

What’s the biblical position on a break from work? It’s found originally in the first two chapters of Genesis. God spent six days making all that is. Then God took a day off. And in the Law of Moses we learn: We should take a day off too, following God’s example. (Since this is a creation story, we argue that the Sabbath is a “creation ordinance”—something good for all humanity, not something only intended for those who are “religious”.) God took a day off and we should too!

Christian understandings on keeping the Sabbath differ. I won’t go into those differences but I’ll share thoughts that all of these understandings could embrace. The great Protestant reformer John Calvin saw three values of the Sabbath:

  1. We are reminded that we have salvation not by our own works but by God’s work and provisions for us
  2. We need an agreed-to day when we can gather to worship God and hear his Word.
  3. We need a weekly rest from our vocation. And we must extent that right to all who labor for us.

How are you doing on these three values? We’ll develop the Sabbath principle more in later newsletters.

Bible Insight – Putting Legs on Our Prayers

A young man told me this month he had left his church in Bellflower, CA. I suggested another church in that city he might try. His answer? “I’m waiting on the Lord.” Read on…

“We prayed to our God and posted a guard day and night to meet this threat” (Nehemiah 4:9 NIV). One of my favorite verses!

Governor Nehemiah responded to threats and opposition the way we all should face our challenges—make it a matter of prayer and then do something about it. None of this pious “I’ll just trust the Lord.”

Sometimes I’ve heard the advice, “You need to put legs on your prayers.” Or there’s the German phrase: “Beten und Arbeiten” (pray and work). Good thinking!

The Apostle Peter was in jail and Christians prayed intensely. God’s angel came to Peter and said, “Get up!” And the chains fell off. “Put on your clothes and sandals. Wrap your cloak around you and follow me” (Acts 12:7-­‐8). Put legs on your prayers. The angel did what Peter couldn’t do. In your prayers don’t expect God to do for you what you should do for yourself.

Trust in God doesn’t minimize personal responsibility. It enhances it. Forget “I’ll just wait on the Lord.” That’s spiritual laziness, justified passivity, religious fatalism, with perhaps a little pride thrown in.

Religious Liberty Vigilance

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…”

– 1st Amendment (Our “First Freedom” in the Bill of Rights)

 

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

Whether you are “pro” or “con” on same-­‐sex marriage, reality requires that you recognize the trend as a challenge to religious liberty. While some legislative efforts attempt to soften this challenge, it remains.

For example, in California a new law (Senate Bill 1140, passed September 30, 2012 and in effect on January 1, 2013) amends the California Family Code, in part, as follows:

SECTION 1. Section 400 of the Family Code is amended to read:
400. Although marriage is a personal relation arising out of a civil, and not a religious, contract, a marriage may be solemnized by any of the following who is 18 years of age or older:
(a) A priest, minister, rabbi, or authorized person of any religious denomination. A person authorized by this subdivision shall not be required to solemnize a marriage that is contrary to the tenets of his or her faith. Any refusal to solemnize a marriage under this subdivision, either by an individual or by a religious denomination, shall not affect the tax-­‐exempt status of any entity.

My commentary:

  1. “…marriage is a personal relation arising out of a civil, and not a religious, contract…”

    This is a theological definition more than a legal statement. How can the law rightly state that marriage is not a “religious” contract? Certainly, marriage is a civil contract. But more fundamentally marriage is a religious covenant. Marriage is fundamentally, irrevocably religious. Secular law is really not competent to speak on such matters.

  2. This code exempts “clergy” from being required to perform any marriage contrary to the religious tenets of their faith. It further says that no tax exemption status will be affected by any such refusal.

    This is almost an empty gesture—a protection in search of a danger. It’s unthinkable that the state would punish clergy or “houses of worship” on the issue of marriage. Only the most radical secularists would promote such an invasion into the realm of religious liberty and the separation of church and state.

  3. The Family Code lists four other categories of persons qualified to perform marriage ceremonies (such as retired judges). It does not give the right of “conscientious objection” to people in these categories as it does to clergy. Nor do I see that a chaplain clearly has a protected exemption.

  4. The code does not protect individuals who, in the course of their vocations, find their religion-formed consciences at variance with a marriage practice (for examples, a county clerk, a DJ, a photographer, a wedding consultant, a singer or musician). “Free exercise of religion” should apply to church members as well as clergy. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.

  5. The code should remind all the self-anointed, “free lance” clergy out there of the potential difficulties that can come when one is not under what’s called “ecclesiastical cover.” Chaplain endorsing programs require this “cover” to show that one is under some kind of religious authority other than himself (don’t bring pious “God is my cover” talk into this discussion, either!). The Family Code seems to expect it as well.

    My usual approach in social debates like this one is to look for common ground among differing sides and try to work toward a resolution from there. In this case there are formidable challenges to my approach.

    You should read Section 400 of the Family Code—it is interesting. For example, officials of non-­‐profit religious organizations may be licensed to perform marriages for members of that organization. But the licensee must possess the doctor of philosophy degree!!! Hey, not a problem—I know how you can get one of those for as little as $50!

Upcoming Ministries

5 Sundays in June—Speak at 1st United Methodist Church of Seal Beach on “The Lord’s Prayer” (9:30 a.m.)

Good News from Grace
www.gracesealbeach.org
 

Welcome to outstanding Easter services (March 31) at Grace Community Church, corner of 8th & Central in “Old Town” Seal Beach. Services are at 8:00, 9:30 & 11:00 in our Fellowship Hall and at 9:30 & 11:00 in our Surfside Room.

Message of the Month – The Legacy of Dr. C. Everett Koop

Long-time right-to-life spokesman, pediatric surgery specialist, and former surgeon general Dr. C. Everett Koop passed away on February 25.

Here is an opinion piece I wrote in 1989 on Dr. Koop’s influence as a dedicated Christian public figure.

“Dr. Koop: A Christian Who Makes a Difference”
By Donald P. Shoemaker
Long Beach Press-Telegram
January 21, 1989

Later this year the term of Surgeon General C. Everett Koop will end. Since Sunday is the 16th anniversary of the tragic and infamous U.S. Supreme Court Roe v. Wade abortion decision, it is appropriate to recall the service Dr. Koop has rendered as a Christian servant to society.

Prior to becoming surgeon general, Dr. Koop had already established himself as a national figure. He was well known for his skills in corrective surgery for birth defects. He was also well known for his strong viewpoints against abortion, infanticide and euthanasia. These were expressed in his book The Right to Live, The Right to Die. Dr. Koop believed that the ethical climate of permissive abortion would lead to a climate diminishing the value of the medically dependent newborn and elderly.

By the late 1970s, Dr. Koop was working increasingly with the “Right to Life” movement. He accepted my invitation for him to serve on the Board of Reference for the Christian right-to-life ministry “Crusade for Life.” In 1979 I had the privilege of dining with him and his wife when he delivered a keynote address to the National Right to life Convention.

Also in 1979 Dr. Koop co-authored, with the late Christian apologist Dr. Francis A. Schaeffer, the pro-life Christian book Whatever Happened to the Human Race? Drs. Koop and Schaeffer produced a film series on the book’s themes and lectured nationwide.

When President Reagan nominated Dr. Koop to be surgeon general, the doctor’s anti-abortion views led to a stormy confirmation struggle with the Senate which dragged on for months. Once confirmed, Dr. Koop worked for regulations to provide lifesaving treatment for severely handicapped infants and launched a strong anti-smoking campaign.

Then came the AIDS crisis and Dr. Koop sailed into the center of controversy once again. He called for early sex education and for condom use as a means (though less desirous than abstinence or monogamous relationships) to stem the spread of the AIDS virus. Suddenly, Dr. Koop found himself appreciated by former enemies and deplored by former supporters among the “religious right.”

His critics saw his actions, typified in his AIDS report mailed nationwide, as moral compromise or even capitulation. In my opinion, the critics failed to grapple adequately with the problem of communicating values into a world that often rejects the better solutions. An “all or nothing” attitude toward ethical engagement will probably result in “nothing” and will have little social impact.

Dr. Koop saw himself as the nation’s chief health officer, not as a “chaplain,” and said, “My message is a perfectly moral one. But everybody isn’t moral and everybody isn’t Christian. I cannot let those people go down the drain because they do not agree with me.”

As this term of service enters its final year, he has started a new crusade against domestic violence.

I look back over his years of service in and out of government and see Dr. Koop as an outstanding model of Christian commitment to public life. He reflects on his public service this way: “My thrust has been…that you really can’t separate your practice from your faith. And I’m serving the Lord for these eight years as the surgeon general. I do it with personal honesty and integrity to the best of my ability. And my personal honesty and integrity are based upon my Christian beliefs.”

The world needs thousand more like Dr. Koop.

“Easter” reminds us God gives us “new beginnings”…

“Just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.” – Romans 6:4

www.donaldshoemakerministries.com

March 2013 Newsletter

Posted on by

“A Piece of My Mind”

March
2013 Newsletter from Donald Shoemaker

Advancing Christian Faith and Values, Defending Religious Liberty for All, Supporting Civility and the Common Good through Preaching, Teaching, Writing, Activism and Reasoned Conversations

www.donaldshoemakerministries.com

 

Deputy MacKay Honored

I was privileged to attend the funeral for San Bernardino Sheriff’s Deputy Jeremiah MacKay on February 21. Deputy MacKay was killed in a gun battle with Christopher Dorner on February 12. The service, attended by thousands, was very moving and quite centered on our Lord. We pray for the family and the department.

As I drove in the processional, seeing all the people, signs and flags on bridges and along the road to the Glen Helen Amphitheater was an emotional sight.

 

Five Good Resolutions for Lent (ABCDE)

  • Avoid all gluttony and drunkenness
  • Become a person of sincere prayer
  • Control your time on social media
  • Devote more time to reading the Bible
  • Examine your finances so they are responsible and sacrificial (as well as bringing you enjoyments)

 

“Prophets are Good for Business”

How Moral Values Influence Economic Systems

“‘When you reap the harvest of your land, do not reap to the very edges of your field or gather the gleanings of your harvest. Leave them for the poor and the alien. I am the LORD your God.'” – Leviticus 23:33 ESV

“When you reap your harvest in your field and forget a sheaf in the field, you shall not go back to get it. It shall be for the sojourner, the fatherless, and the widow, that the Lord your God may bless you in all the work of your hands. When you beat your olive trees, you shall not go over them again. It shall be for the sojourner, the fatherless, and the widow. When you gather the grapes of your vineyard, you shall not strip it afterward. It shall be for the sojourner, the fatherless, and the widow.” – Deuteronomy 24:19-­‐21 ESV

We need to keep two principles in mind:

1) The Bible doesn’t set forth any specific economic system as “God’s way”. Rather, it addresses the world’s economic systems and situations as it finds them.
2) No economic system has intrinsic moral values—these values have to be imported into the system from something outside it (that “something” is ultimately “religion”, but that’s a separate topic).

Take Capitalism for example. Probably no economic system has done a better job at producing more goods for more people than Capitalism. But Capitalism doesn’t teach as a value intrinsic to its system, for example, that those who produce should provide for the poor and do so by not maximizing profits to the detriment of others.

Even a system as broadly beneficial as Capitalism needs moral guidance to leaven it as a system and, at the very least, soften its “rough edges”. Drawing practical moral lessons from the Law of Moses (such as from Leviticus 23 and Deuteronomy 24) and applying them to capitalistic practices would be a strong example of good ethical thinking.

 

Bible Insight – Ash Wednesday and Lent: “To keep or not to keep?”

“Then I turned my face to the Lord God, seeking him by prayer and pleas for mercy with fasting and sackcloth and ashes.” – Daniel 9:3

“The word [Jonah’s message of judgment] reached the king of Nineveh, and he arose from his throne, removed his robe, covered himself with sackcloth, and sat in ashes.” – Jonah 3:6

Evangelical Christians often shy away from symbolism, but in recent years I’ve trended back to my childhood’s Christian roots where symbols had value in marking features of our spiritual journey and underscoring key spiritual concepts.

This year, for the first time in my 45-­‐year career as a minister, I planned and observed an Ash Wednesday service, ashes and all. What’s the symbolism of ashes?

  • Our mortality (Genesis 18:27; Job 30:19)
  • Our sorrow over the horrible events in life that may come our way (Esther 4:1,3; Jeremiah 6:26)
  • Our sense of sin and repentance of it before God (Job 42:6, Matthew 11:21 and the scriptures above—Daniel 9:3 and Jonah 3:6)

Ash Wednesday and the Lenten Season is a time to examine our own lives and make amends and fresh commitments before God. It’s also a time for prayer for the broader failures of humanity and our own nation. And we should also pray for the failures within the company of people of our own faith—never hard to find. This was Daniel’s beautiful prayer (chapter 9).

Wearing ashes on our foreheads can be a form of spiritual show-­‐off, but can also be a genuine sign of our hearts humbly open before God. Lent can be a time of “going through the motions” of a religious tradition, or a dedicated time of renewal.

Lent anticipates Easter, resurrection reality. So there is a hope that something will rise from our ashes. The ministry of Jesus is:

  • to grant to those who mourn in Zion—
  • to give them a beautiful headdress instead of ashes,
  • the oil of gladness instead of mourning,
  • the garment of praise instead of a faint spirit;
  • (Isaiah 61:3)

 

Religious Liberty Vigilance

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…”
        – 1st Amendment (Our “First Freedom” in the Bill of Rights)

Thank God that our nation’s founders (along with court decisions) never felt the government was competent to require that we must believe this or that. The right to choose or change one’s religion, or have none at all, is deeply imbedded in our liberal tradition.

Contrast Spain: The governments of Spain and Morocco have agreed that Moroccan children adopted by Spanish families must be raised as Muslims. The agreement obliges the Spanish government to establish a “control mechanism” that would enable Moroccan religious authorities to monitor the children until they reach the age of 18 to ensure they have not converted to Christianity. (Source: Catholic World News, Feb. 22)

 

Upcoming Ministries

5 Sundays in June—Speak at 1st United Methodist Church of Seal Beach on “The Lord’s Prayer” (9:30 a.m.)

Note: The February 7 presentation on professional responses to the Salon Meritage incident (Oct. 12, 2011) for the Chaplain Corp of the Los Angeles Police Department was cancelled due to the search for fugitive Christopher Dorner. I hope this can be rescheduled soon.

 

Good News from Grace

www.gracesealbeach.org

At Grace Community Church of Seal Beach, Good Friday Services are at Noon and 7:00 p.m. The Noon service is in cooperation with 1st United Methodist Church.

Easter Sunday Services – 8:00, 9:30 and 11:00 in the Fellowship Hall; 9:30 and 11:00 in the Surfside Room. Truly the high point of the year.

 

Message of the Month – A Successor to Pope Benedict XVI

The sudden word from Pope Benedict XVI that he will relinquish his papal role on February 28 hit the world on February 11.

In pondering this, I’ve decided to re-­‐release the Guest Editorial that I wrote in 2005 following the death of John Paul II (Long Beach CA Press-­‐ Telegram, April 9, 2005). Ironically, in this editorial I mention Joseph Ratzinger (in a point of disagreement), who would become Benedict XVI. I still affirm my thoughts on a successor (although my phone didn’t ring seeking my opinion last time and I doubt it will this time either).

 

“One Evangelical’s Gratitude for John Paul II”

In the conservative Protestant environment of my upbringing just about anything that came from Rome was suspicious.

The Roman Catholic Church was, so we were taught, the “scarlet harlot” of the Book of Revelation, chapter 17—clearly identified by her vestments of purple and scarlet, her gold, silver and jewels, and the golden chalice in her hand. She was destined to align herself with the Antichrist, the Devil’s ruler of the End Times,.

To us Catholicism was as Winston Churchill characterized the Kremlin, “a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma.” Church rituals with their beads and vestments and Latin were a world away from our simple message and revivalist enthusiasm.

A more historically informed approach to biblical interpretation has led to a better look at the Book of Revelation. But what really affected our thought was a courageous and humble man who came out of nowhere to become John Paul II.

John Paul was a human face with which we could easily connect, not a lofty anachronism from the Middle Ages. Coming through the crucible of suffering under two totalitarian systems and being willing to return to Poland to suffer with his people if events so summoned him, he personified the call of Jesus to take up the cross and follow Him.

We saw him as a powerful spiritual leader who in God’s providence, though not single-­‐handedly, brought on the collapse of the Communist evil in Eastern Europe. Though Joseph Stalin mocked the pope in 1935 with “How many divisions has he?” we saw in John Paul the spiritual power of the cross and the Gospel at work emancipating human souls from misery.

We appreciated the unabashed orthodoxy that John Paul represented. His resolute support of pro-­‐life issues resonated with us (opposition to abortion on demand is the one moral position that unites Evangelical Protestants whether their politics are right, left or center).

Significant issues remain on both sides. Some conservative denominations still pronounce that the papacy is the Antichrist. Obsolete attitudes and teachings are readily found amongst Evangelicals, as if the Second Vatican Council never happened.

Pragmatists that we are, Evangelicals cannot see any compelling reason to withhold the option of marriage from priests and we can give many reasons for this option. We are solidly in the Reformation commitment to the authority of Scripture alone, not Scripture and Tradition. We don’t like to hear Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger say that our communities of the faithful are not truly “the Church.”

We see true “apostolic succession” as fidelity to apostolic doctrine more than as a continuity of bishops. We are not comfortable with the veneration rendered to the Virgin Mary, though we are chastened that we have not honored the spirit of her words in the Magnificat, “All generations shall call me blessed,” for she should indeed be our model of devotion and discipleship.

What would many Evangelical Protestants hope to see emerge from the upcoming Conclave? I speak for myself, but I think I have the pulse of much of our movement.

We want to see a pope emerge who would forge a strong confessional relationship with theologically conservative Protestants. We are one in heart with Catholics who can confess the Ecumenical Creeds without crossing their fingers behind their backs.

We would delight in a pope who comes from the Southern Hemisphere, where Christianity is vibrant and growing and orthodox. We want this to be the wave of the future.

Finally, we want to see a pope who continues John Paul’s ministries of being a shepherd to his people and a prophetic voice to the world. News analysis presently abounds with bobbing heads complaining that John Paul did not bring strong administrative skills to the Vatican and they hope the new pope will.

God forbid! In the earliest days of Christian history the infant church carefully and wisely separated the apostolic role of teaching and prayer from the administrative role that others should do (chapter six of the Book of Acts).

I dread to ponder the outcome had John Paul devoted himself to management instead of pastoral and prophetic ministry. We might have the Vatican well oiled and Eastern Europe still in chains.

 

Finally, One of Those “Now We Know You’re Human” Moments

I have a nice new watch. Its contemporary style has no numbers, only a raised mark to indicate each hour.

Recently I noticed the “hour hand” was lagging. For example, at 3:00 it would be halfway between the marks indicating 2:00 and 3:00 when it should have been right over the 3:00 mark.

So I took it to the jewelry store. The jeweler looked at it and found it was working just fine. I had been wearing it upside down!

A Joyous Easter, everyone!
Jesus has died; Jesus has risen; Jesus is coming again!

 

Download

“The Legacy of Dr. C. Everett Koop”

Posted on by

Dr. C. Everett Koop, surgeon general under President Reagan, passed away on February 25. In 1989 I wrote an opinion piece on Dr. Koop’s influence as a Christian public figure.

Dr. Koop: A Christian Who Makes a Difference
By Donald P. Shoemaker
Long Beach Press-Telegram
January 21, 1989

Later this year the term of Surgeon General C. Everett Koop will end. Since Sunday is the 16th anniversary of the tragic and infamous U.S. Supreme Court Roe v. Wade abortion decision, it is appropriate to recall the service Dr. Koop has rendered as a Christian servant to society.

Prior to becoming surgeon general, Dr. Koop had already established himself as a national figure. He was well known for his skills in corrective surgery for birth defects. He was also well known for his strong viewpoints against abortion, infanticide and euthanasia. These were expressed in his book The Right to Live, The Right to Die. Dr. Koop believed that the ethical climate of permissive abortion would lead to a climate diminishing the value of the medically dependent newborn and elderly.

By the late 1970s, Dr. Koop was working increasingly with the “Right to Life” movement. He accepted my invitation for him to serve on the Board of Reference for the Christian right-to-life ministry “Crusade for Life.” In 1979 I had the privilege of dining with him and his wife when he delivered a keynote address to the National Right to life Convention.

Also in 1979 Dr. Koop co-authored, with the late Christian apologist Dr. Francis A. Schaeffer, the pro-life Christian book Whatever Happened to the Human Race? Drs. Koop and Schaeffer produced a film series on the book’s themes and lectured nationwide.

When President Reagan nominated Dr. Koop to be surgeon general, the doctor’s anti-abortion views led to a stormy confirmation struggle with the Senate which dragged on for months. Once confirmed, Dr. Koop worked for regulations to provide lifesaving treatment for severely handicapped infants and launched a strong anti-smoking campaign.

Then came the AIDS crisis and Dr. Koop sailed into the center of controversy once again. He called for early sex education and for condom use as a means (though less desirous than abstinence or monogamous relationships) to stem the spread of the AIDS virus. Suddenly, Dr. Koop found himself appreciated by former enemies and deplored by former supporters among the “religious right.”

His critics saw his actions, typified in his AIDS report mailed nationwide, as moral compromise or even capitulation. In my opinion, the critics failed to grapple adequately with the problem of communicating values into a world that often rejects the better solutions. An “all or nothing” attitude toward ethical engagement will probably result in “nothing” and will have little social impact.

Dr. Koop saw himself as the nation’s chief health officer, not as a “chaplain,” and said, “My message is a perfectly moral one. But everybody isn’t moral and everybody isn’t Christian. I cannot let those people go down the drain because they do not agree with me.”

As this term of service enters its final year, he has started a new crusade against domestic violence.

I look back over his years of service in and out of government and see Dr. Koop as an outstanding model of Christian commitment to public life. He reflects on his public service this way: “My thrust has been…that you really can’t separate your practice from your faith. And I’m serving the Lord for these eight years as the surgeon general. I do it with personal honesty and integrity to the best of my ability. And my personal honesty and integrity are based upon my Christian beliefs.”

The world needs thousand more like Dr. Koop.

February 2013 Newsletter

Posted on by

“A Piece of My Mind”

February 2013 Newsletter from Donald Shoemaker

Advancing Christian Faith and Values,
Defending Religious Liberty for All,
Supporting Civility and the Common Good
through Preaching, Teaching, Writing, Activism and
Reasoned Conversations

Bible Insight: “Contemporary Worship” – “Contemporary”, yes, but is it “Worship”?

“God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth.”
(John 4:24, a text that, among other things, should make us cautious about external show in worship)

1 Corinthians 14:26 is a foundational scripture for worship: “When you come together [‘sunerchomai’ – a technical term for the church gathering), …all [including singing] must be done for the strengthening of the church.”

“Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly, in all wisdom teaching and admonishing each other with psalms, hymns and spiritual songs…” (Colossians 3:16—my rather literal translation of it)

First, let’s agree and admit: “God’s worship tastes are broader than yours or mine.” So what I like or what I prefer is not the issue. The issues are:

  • Is our worship acceptable to God—the kind of worship he seeks?
  • Is it spiritually strengthening to the congregation?
  • If the occasion is evangelistic, is the music the best for the occasion?
  • Does it make the church truly an engaged, worshipping body?
  • Does it fulfill biblical teaching and commands? And (in matters not addressed in the Bible) does it fulfill biblical principles?

Here are five problems I have with some of the “contemporary worship” I observe (and I do benefit from much of it):

  1. Platform Performance and a Spectator Audience rather than a Participating Congregation led by the Worship Team

    2. Does the team in front truly lead the people in worshipping God in spirit and in truth (John 4:24)? Or does it perform before them? (Does the show go right on even if watchers are not participating?)

    A 20-something couple attended a contemporary worship service and found the audience standing for a long song time but most were noticeably not singing. Worse, this couple had taken a young, non-Christian friend to this service, and she was quite puzzled. “Why do they stand so long? Why aren’t they singing?” (The couple wrote me about their experience.)

    This may be “contemporary”, but “worship” it ain’t! Likewise, “leading worship” is more than coaxing the audience to clap their hands, etc., along the lines of some older worship styles. Good worship leading is an art. It creates a “symbiotic” situation, where leaders and congregation are ushered freely and together into the spirituality of the worship experience.

  2. Use of Technology and Special Effects that attract attention to themselves rather than to Jesus (or even hinder attraction to Jesus)

    3. I tried to worship last year at a gathering that displayed, in my opinion, many distracting special effects—especially some little spotlight nuisances that sent their beams wandering through the audience during songs. How does this build the spirituality of the song time? What are we trying to prove?

    Technology (lighting, amplification, projections, special effects) is “neutral”, neither commanded nor forbidden in the Bible. The use of technology therefore must be judged by its positive or negative effect.

    The reformer John Calvin’s advice is helpful when considering things added to the worship of God that are not specified in the Bible. He speaks against “useless elegance and fruitless extravagance” and favors a decorum that fits “the sacred mysteries” and is “appropriate adornment” for the exercise of devotion. “Ceremonies…ought to lead us straight to Christ” (Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book 4, Chapter 10, Section 29). So we ask, “Does this particular use of technology lead us straight to Christ or not? Or does it even distract us from Christ?”

  3. Selection of Songs and Style that doesn’t fit the context (the people who are there and the purpose of the gathering)

    4. As a pastor for 44 years, I’ve learned the art of accepting people “where they are” and leading them from there to “where they ought to be”. In music, this includes broadening their tastes and appreciation, and doing so with a sensitive spirit.

    This requires “gradualism”, building upon the ground they stand on, slowly expanding their grasp of music that will then build them up spiritually. You know how a cat acts when you take him suddenly from familiar surroundings to a strange place? You better be wearing gloves! We wouldn’t expect old-time gospel songs to be effective at a gathering of unchurched youth. Likewise, if a praise team is before an older crowd or a generationally mixed crowd and hits them with a style that narrowly fits a particular youthful stratum, then broader musical appreciation and spiritual growth are aborted.

    And remember, the elderly folk aren’t into standing for 20+ minutes!

  4. “Sloppy Agape” and the “Slurpization of God”

    5. Some contemporary songs convey an erotic (romantic, but not in the negative sense of “eroticism”) rather than an agapic view of love (1 Corinthians 13). The agape love of God reaches down to us in our distress and does what is needed (John 3:16). It motivates us to agapic love for others (1 John 4:11). It’s not about getting the feeling that God has feelings of love for us.

    I attended a church’s song service last year where the lyrics of one popular song said Heaven will come “like a sloppy wet kiss”! No wonder some talk of men (males) not caring for modern worship. Women either.

    All worship leaders should study the transcendence, holiness and majesty of God and ponder their practical application to worship.

  5. Weak or Wrong Teaching in the Song Lyrics

    6. Singing is a time to teach and admonish with the truth (Colossians 3:16).

    I’m delighted to see more contemporary songs focusing on our social duties as Christians. This has been a blind spot in contemporary music. “God of The City” is a top example of this development (O that it were more singable!).

    But some songs go beyond this with themes and lyrics that are “post-millennial” (Jesus will return after the church establishes his kingdom on earth). Few Christians I know really believe this, but the songs they sometimes sing convey it anyhow. (Let it be said that the old “gospel songs” were sometimes doctrinally weak or wrong as well.)

    I close with the powerful words of the relevant song, “Sing Praise to God Who Reigns Above” by Johann J. Schutz (1675):

    Thus all my toilsome way along I sing aloud Thy praises,
    That men may hear the grateful song my voice unwearied raises.
    Be joyful in the Lord, my heart. Both soul and body bear your part.
    To God all praise and glory!

Religious Liberty Vigilance

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…”
– 1st Amendment (Our “First Freedom” in the Bill of Rights)

PROCLAMATION
honoring
Religious Freedom Day 2013

WHEREAS our nation’s founders recognized the importance of religious freedom and secured this liberty in the words of the First Amendment, declaring that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;” and

WHEREAS the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom, our country’s first legal safeguard for religious liberty, was adopted on January 16, 1786, and each year since 1994, the President of the United States has issued a proclamation on the importance of religious liberty recognizing, “our government did not create this liberty, but it cannot be too vigilant in securing its blessings;” and

WHEREAS the free exercise of religion has undergirded the social efforts of many Americans, notably Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., whose birthday on January 15th we commemorate each year; and

WHEREAS the United Nation’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights states, “Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion” including the right “to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance”; and

WHEREAS our country has embraced a tradition of religious liberty that has prevented religious domination, conflict and persecution and nurtured an environment where religion has flourished and where people have been left free to choose which faith they shall follow or none at all;

NOW, THEREFORE, I, Bob Foster, Mayor of Long Beach along with Gerrie Schipske, Councilwoman of the 5th District, on behalf of the City of Long Beach do hereby declare January 16, 2013 to be “Religious Freedom Day” in our community. We encourage city government, community groups, schools and places of worship to reaffirm their devotion to the principles of religious freedom and educate and reflect on the importance of religious liberty so it may continue secure as part of our nation’s fabric. We also encourage citizens and government to be mindful of the principles of religious liberty in their decisions, attitudes, and actions.

Dated: January 16, 2013

[Adapted from a text prepared by Donald Shoemaker]

Upcoming Ministries

February 7 – Participate in a presentation on professional responses to the Salon Meritage incident (Oct. 12, 2011) for the Chaplain Corp of the Los Angeles Police Department

February 13 – Lead Ash Wednesday service of prayer, song, message and Communion at Grace Community Church of Seal Beach (7:00 p.m.)

Good News from Grace
www.gracesealbeach.org

Steve Williams was installed as the new senior pastor of Grace Community Church of Seal Beach on January 13.

An Ash Wednesday service, devoted to song, repentant prayer, and Communion, will be held at the church February 13 at 7:00 p.m.

Message of the Month – “Roe v. Wade at 40”
[slightly expanded from the Seal Beach/Los Alamitos Patch, Jan. 22, 2013]

“You created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb” (Psalm 139:13). For this scripture and other reasons I joined the “Right to Life” movement on January 22, 1973, the day “Roe v. Wade” was decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. As Roe v. Wade reaches its 40-year mark, I want to make three observations about this landmark decision.

First, the court’s Roe v. Wade decision was far more expansive than necessary to decide the case before it. It gave unlimited right to an abortion during the first trimester of pregnancy and allowed limits during the second trimester only as were “reasonably related to maternal health”. For the third trimester, the court noted “the potentiality of human life” (the unborn) and said states could regulate or ban abortion at this stage except if maternal “health” (broadly understood) was at risk.

Roe v. Wade grounded abortion rights on a right to privacy that it found in the “penumbra” (we might say, “surrounding glow”) of the Constitution rather than in the words of the Constitution itself.

Thus the activist court “legislated” (made law) rather than “judged” law. Justice Rehnquist in dissent reminded the court it should never “formulate a rule of constitutional law broader than is required by the precise facts to which it is to be applied”
(www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0410_0113_ZD.html).

Second, public opinion has never been in accord with Roe v. Wade and is even less so now than in 1973. It also should fairly be said that public opinion doesn’t support the “Right to Life” side in all details either. Here are some samples of recent Gallup opinion polls
(www.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspx).

  • Today 50% say they are “pro-life” compared to 33% in 1996. In 1996, 56% claimed to be “pro-choice” and today that number is 41%.
  • 71% support requiring parental notification if the woman is under 18.
  • 62% support legal abortion during the first three months of pregnancy, but 71% oppose it during second three months and 86% in the last three months.
  • Still, 52% do not want to see the U.S. Supreme Court overturn Roe v. Wade.

If we survey all the questions in the polls, we see most Americans are against most abortions and do not favor either an outright ban on abortions nor unqualified access to abortions.

Third, a new wrinkle has been added by the “contraception mandate” in what is popularly called “Obamacare”. Now the issue of religious liberty (the “free exercise” of religion guaranteed in the First Amendment) has been raised. In other words, the debate moves from what people should be free to do to what people and institutions with religion-based convictions can be forced to do.

“Obamacare” provides a very narrow and inadequate exemption for “houses of worship” but plans to force religious institutions (such as Christian colleges) to cover free access to contraception including, as feared by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, “drugs which can attack a developing unborn child before and after implantation in the mother’s womb”
(www.usccb.org/news/2011/11-154.cfm). This major debate will certainly go to the Supreme Court.

The current administration is no friend of religious liberty in my opinion. Ironically, President Obama’s 2013 “Religious Freedom Day” proclamation said, “As we observe [on January 16] Religious Freedom Day…let us honor it by forever upholding our right to exercise our beliefs free from prejudice or persecution”
(www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/01/16/presidential-proclamation-religious-freedom-day).

Yes, Mr. President, let’s do that even if exercising religious liberty conflicts with your plans for expansive government control in matters previously thought to be better left to the consciences of individuals and the convictions of religious institutions.

Donald P. Shoemaker is Pastor Emeritus of Grace Community Church of Seal Beach. In 1980 he served as General Chairman of the National Right to Life Convention at the Anaheim Convention Center.

www.donaldshoemakerministries.com

January 2013 Newsletter

Posted on by

“A Piece of My Mind”
February 2013 Newsletter from Donald Shoemaker
Advancing Christian Faith and Values,
Defending Religious Liberty for All,

Supporting Civility and the Common Good

through Preaching, Teaching, Writing, Activism and
Reasoned Conversations

www.donaldshoemakerministries.com

Bible Insight: “Contemporary Worship” – “Contemporary”, yes, but is it “Worship”?

“God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth.” (John 4:24, a text that, among other things, should make us cautious about external show in worship)

1 Corinthians 14:26 is a foundational scripture for worship: “When you come together [‘sunerchomai’ – a technical term for the church gathering), …all [including singing] must be done for the strengthening of the church.”

“Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly, in all wisdom teaching and admonishing each other with psalms, hymns and spiritual songs…” (Colossians 3:16—my rather literal translation of it)

First, let’s agree and admit: “God’s worship tastes are broader than yours or mine.” So what I like or what I prefer is not the issue. The issues are:
• Is our worship acceptable to God—the kind of worship he seeks?
• Is it spiritually strengthening to the congregation?
• If the occasion is evangelistic, is the music the best for the occasion?
• Does it make the church truly an engaged, worshipping body?
• Does it fulfill biblical teaching and commands? And (in matters not addressed in the Bible) does it fulfill biblical principles?

Here are five problems I have with some of the “contemporary worship” I observe (and I do benefit from much of it):

1. Platform Performance and a Spectator Audience rather than a Participating Congregation led by the Worship Team

Does the team in front truly lead the people in worshipping God in spirit and in truth (John 4:24)? Or does it perform before them? (Does the show go right on even if watchers are not participating?)

A 20-something couple attended a contemporary worship service and found the audience standing for a long song time but most were noticeably not singing. Worse, this couple had taken a young, non-Christian friend to this service, and she was quite puzzled. “Why do they stand so long? Why aren’t they singing?” (The couple wrote me about their experience.)

This may be “contemporary”, but “worship” it ain’t! Likewise, “leading worship” is more than coaxing the audience to clap their hands, etc., along the lines of some older worship styles. Good worship leading is an art. It creates a “symbiotic” situation, where leaders and congregation are ushered freely and together into the spirituality of the worship experience.

 
2. Use of Technology and Special Effects that attract attention to themselves rather than to Jesus (or even hinder attraction to Jesus)

I tried to worship last year at a gathering that displayed, in my opinion, many distracting special effects—especially some little spotlight nuisances that sent their beams wandering through the audience during songs. How does this build the spirituality of the song time? What are we trying to prove?

Technology (lighting, amplification, projections, special effects) is “neutral”, neither commanded nor forbidden in the Bible. The use of technology therefore must be judged by its positive or negative effect.

The reformer John Calvin’s advice is helpful when considering things added to the worship of God that are not specified in the Bible. He speaks against “useless elegance and fruitless extravagance” and favors a decorum that fits “the sacred mysteries” and is “appropriate adornment” for the exercise of devotion. “Ceremonies…ought to lead us straight to Christ” (Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book 4, Chapter 10, Section 29). So we ask, “Does this particular use of technology lead us straight to Christ or not? Or does it even distract us from Christ?”

3. Selection of Songs and Style that doesn’t fit the context (the people who are there and the purpose of the gathering)

As a pastor for 44 years, I’ve learned the art of accepting people “where they are” and leading them from there to “where they ought to be”. In music, this includes broadening their tastes and appreciation, and doing so with a sensitive spirit.

This requires “gradualism”, building upon the ground they stand on, slowly expanding their grasp of music that will then build them up spiritually. You know how a cat acts when you take him suddenly from familiar surroundings to a strange place? You better be wearing gloves! We wouldn’t expect old-time gospel songs to be effective at a gathering of unchurched youth. Likewise, if a praise team is before an older crowd or a generationally mixed crowd and hits them with a style that narrowly fits a particular youthful stratum, then broader musical appreciation and spiritual growth are aborted.

And remember, the elderly folk aren’t into standing for 20+ minutes!

4. “Sloppy Agape” and the “Slurpization of God”

Some contemporary songs convey an erotic (romantic, but not in the negative sense of “eroticism”) rather than an agapic view of love (1 Corinthians 13). The agape love of God reaches down to us in our distress and does what is needed (John 3:16). It motivates us to agapic love for others (1 John 4:11). It’s not about getting the feeling that God has feelings of love for us.

I attended a church’s song service last year where the lyrics of one popular song said Heaven will come “like a sloppy wet kiss”! No wonder some talk of men (males) not caring for modern worship. Women either.

All worship leaders should study the transcendence, holiness and majesty of God and ponder their practical application to worship.

5. Weak or Wrong Teaching in the Song Lyrics

Singing is a time to teach and admonish with the truth (Colossians 3:16).

I’m delighted to see more contemporary songs focusing on our social duties as Christians. This has been a blind spot in contemporary music. “God of The City” is a top example of this development (O that it were more singable!).

But some songs go beyond this with themes and lyrics that are “post-millennial” (Jesus will return after the church establishes his kingdom on earth). Few Christians I know really believe this, but the songs they sometimes sing convey it anyhow. (Let it be said that the old “gospel songs” were sometimes doctrinally weak or wrong as well.)

I close with the powerful words of the relevant song, “Sing Praise to God Who Reigns Above” by Johann J. Schutz (1675):

Thus all my toilsome way along I sing aloud Thy praises,
That men may hear the grateful song my voice unwearied raises.
Be joyful in the Lord, my heart. Both soul and body bear your part.
To God all praise and glory!

Religious Liberty Vigilance

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,
or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…”
– 1st Amendment (Our “First Freedom” in the Bill of Rights)

PROCLAMATION
honoring
Religious Freedom Day 2013

WHEREAS our nation’s founders recognized the importance of religious freedom and secured this liberty in the words of the First Amendment, declaring that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;” and

WHEREAS the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom, our country’s first legal safeguard for religious liberty, was adopted on January 16, 1786, and each year since 1994, the President of the United States has issued a proclamation on the importance of religious liberty recognizing, “our government did not create this liberty, but it cannot be too vigilant in securing its blessings;” and

WHEREAS the free exercise of religion has undergirded the social efforts of many Americans, notably Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., whose birthday on January 15th we commemorate each year; and

WHEREAS the United Nation’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights states, “Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion” including the right “to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance”; and

WHEREAS our country has embraced a tradition of religious liberty that has prevented religious domination, conflict and persecution and nurtured an environment where religion has flourished and where people have been left free to choose which faith they shall follow or none at all;

NOW, THEREFORE, I, Bob Foster, Mayor of Long Beach along with Gerrie Schipske, Councilwoman of the 5th District, on behalf of the City of Long Beach do hereby declare January 16, 2013 to be “Religious Freedom Day” in our community. We encourage city government, community groups, schools and places of worship to reaffirm their devotion to the principles of religious freedom and educate and reflect on the importance of religious liberty so it may continue secure as part of our nation’s fabric. We also encourage citizens and government to be mindful of the principles of religious liberty in their decisions, attitudes, and actions.

Dated: January 16, 2013

[Adapted from a text prepared by Donald Shoemaker]

Upcoming Ministries

February 7 – Participate in a presentation on professional responses to the Salon Meritage incident (Oct. 12, 2011) for the Chaplain Corp of the Los Angeles Police Department

February 13 – Lead Ash Wednesday service of prayer, song, message and Communion at Grace Community Church of Seal Beach (7:00 p.m.)

Good News from Grace
www.gracesealbeach.org

Steve Williams was installed as the new senior pastor of Grace Community Church of Seal Beach on January 13.

An Ash Wednesday service, devoted to song, repentant prayer, and Communion, will be held at the church February 13 at 7:00 p.m.

Message of the Month – “Roe v. Wade at 40”
[slightly expanded from the Seal Beach/Los Alamitos Patch, Jan. 22, 2013]

“You created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb” (Psalm 139:13). For this scripture and other reasons I joined the “Right to Life” movement on January 22, 1973, the day “Roe v. Wade” was decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. As Roe v. Wade reaches its 40-year mark, I want to make three observations about this landmark decision.

First, the court’s Roe v. Wade decision was far more expansive than necessary to decide the case before it. It gave unlimited right to an abortion during the first trimester of pregnancy and allowed limits during the second trimester only as were “reasonably related to maternal health”. For the third trimester, the court noted “the potentiality of human life” (the unborn) and said states could regulate or ban abortion at this stage except if maternal “health” (broadly understood) was at risk.

Roe v. Wade grounded abortion rights on a right to privacy that it found in the “penumbra” (we might say, “surrounding glow”) of the Constitution rather than in the words of the Constitution itself.

Thus the activist court “legislated” (made law) rather than “judged” law. Justice Rehnquist in dissent reminded the court it should never “formulate a rule of constitutional law broader than is required by the precise facts to which it is to be applied” (www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0410_0113_ZD.html).

Second, public opinion has never been in accord with Roe v. Wade and is even less so now than in 1973. It also should fairly be said that public opinion doesn’t support the “Right to Life” side in all details either. Here are some samples of recent Gallup opinion polls (www.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspx).

• Today 50% say they are “pro-life” compared to 33% in 1996. In 1996, 56% claimed to be “pro-choice” and today that number is 41%.
• 71% support requiring parental notification if the woman is under 18.
• 62% support legal abortion during the first three months of pregnancy, but 71% oppose it during second three months and 86% in the last three months.
• Still, 52% do not want to see the U.S. Supreme Court overturn Roe v. Wade.

If we survey all the questions in the polls, we see most Americans are against most abortions and do not favor either an outright ban on abortions nor unqualified access to abortions.

Third, a new wrinkle has been added by the “contraception mandate” in what is popularly called “Obamacare”. Now the issue of religious liberty (the “free exercise” of religion guaranteed in the First Amendment) has been raised. In other words, the debate moves from what people should be free to do to what people and institutions with religion-based convictions can be forced to do.

“Obamacare” provides a very narrow and inadequate exemption for “houses of worship” but plans to force religious institutions (such as Christian colleges) to cover free access to contraception including, as feared by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, “drugs which can attack a developing unborn child before and after implantation in the mother’s womb” (www.usccb.org/news/2011/11-154.cfm). This major debate will certainly go to the Supreme Court.

The current administration is no friend of religious liberty in my opinion. Ironically, President Obama’s 2013 “Religious Freedom Day” proclamation said, “As we observe [on January 16] Religious Freedom Day…let us honor it by forever upholding our right to exercise our beliefs free from prejudice or persecution” (www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/01/16/presidential-proclamation-religious-freedom-day).

Yes, Mr. President, let’s do that even if exercising religious liberty conflicts with your plans for expansive government control in matters previously thought to be better left to the consciences of individuals and the convictions of religious institutions.

Donald P. Shoemaker is Pastor Emeritus of Grace Community Church of Seal Beach. In 1980 he served as General Chairman of the National Right to Life Convention at the Anaheim Convention Center.

The Resignation of Pope Benedict XVI

Posted on by

The sudden word from Pope Benedict XVI was that he will relinquish his papal role on February 28.

In pondering this, I’ve decided to re-release (below) the Guest Editorial that I wrote in 2005 following the death of John Paul II. Ironically, in this editorial I mention Joseph Ratzinger (in a point of disagreement), who would become Benedict XVI. I still affirm my thoughts on a successor (although my phone didn’t ring seeking my opinion last time and I doubt it will this time either).

Don

One Evangelical’s Gratitude for John Paul II
Guest Editorial by Donald P. Shoemaker
Senior Pastor [now Pastor Emeritus]
Grace Community Church of Seal Beach

Long Beach, CA, Press-Telegram, April 9, 2005

In the conservative Protestant environment of my upbringing just about anything that came from Rome was suspicious.

The Roman Catholic Church was, so we were taught, the “scarlet harlot” of the Book of Revelation, chapter 17—clearly identified by her vestments of purple and scarlet, her gold, silver and jewels, and the golden chalice in her hand. She was destined to align herself with the Antichrist, the Devil’s ruler of the End Times, until he tired of her domination and tossed her aside and ruled supreme until his defeat by the King of kings.

To us Catholicism was as Winston Churchill characterized the Kremlin, “a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma.” Church rituals with their beads and vestments and Latin were a world away from our simple message and revivalist enthusiasm.

A more historically informed approach to biblical interpretation has led to a better look at the Book of Revelation. But what really affected our thought was a courageous and humble man who came out of nowhere to become John Paul II.

John Paul was a human face with which we could easily connect, not a lofty anachronism from the Middle Ages. Coming through the crucible of suffering under two totalitarian systems and being willing to return to Poland to suffer with his people if events so summoned him, he personified the call of Jesus to take up the cross and follow Him.

We saw him as a powerful spiritual leader who in God’s providence, though not single-handedly, brought on the collapse of the Communist evil in Eastern Europe. Though Joseph Stalin mocked the pope in 1935 with “How many divisions has he?” we saw in John Paul the spiritual power of the cross and the Gospel at work emancipating human souls from misery.

We appreciated the unabashed orthodoxy that John Paul represented. His resolute support of pro-life issues resonated with us (opposition to abortion on demand is the one moral position that unites Evangelical Protestants whether their politics are right, left or center).

Significant issues remain on both sides. Some conservative denominations still pronounce that the papacy is the Antichrist. Obsolete attitudes and teachings are readily found amongst Evangelicals, as if the Second Vatican Council never happened.

Pragmatists that we are, Evangelicals cannot see any compelling reason to withhold the option of marriage from priests and we can give many reasons for this option. We are solidly in the Reformation commitment to the authority of Scripture alone, not Scripture and Tradition. We don’t like to hear Cardinal Joseph Ratsinger say that our communities of the faithful are not truly “the Church.”

We see true “apostolic succession” as fidelity to apostolic doctrine more than as a continuity of bishops. We are not comfortable with the veneration rendered to the Virgin Mary, though we are chastened that we have not honored the spirit of her words in the Magnificat, “All generations shall call me blessed,” for she should indeed be our model of devotion and discipleship.

What would many Evangelical Protestants hope to see emerge from the upcoming Conclave? I speak for myself, but I think I have the pulse of much of our movement.

We want to see a pope emerge who would forge a strong confessional relationship with theologically conservative Protestants. We are one in heart with Catholics who can confess the Ecumenical Creeds without crossing their fingers behind their backs.

We would delight in a pope who comes from the Southern Hemisphere, where Christianity is vibrant and growing and orthodox. We want this to be the wave of the future.

Finally, we want to see a pope who continues John Paul’s ministries of being a shepherd to his people and a prophetic voice to the world. News analysis presently abounds with bobbing heads complaining that John Paul did not bring strong administrative skills to the Vatican and they hope the new pope will.

God forbid! In the earliest days of Christian history the infant church carefully and wisely separated the apostolic role of teaching and prayer from the administrative role that others should do (chapter six of the Book of Acts).

I dread to ponder the outcome had John Paul devoted himself to management instead of pastoral and prophetic ministry. We might have the Vatican well oiled and Eastern Europe still in chains.

Roe v. Wade at 40

Posted on by

Roe v. Wade at 40
By Donald P. Shoemaker
[published with slight edits in the Los Alamitos-Seal Beach Patch, Jan. 22, 2013]

“You created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb” (Psalm 139:13). For this scripture and other reasons I joined the “Right to Life” movement on January 22, 1973, the day “Roe v. Wade” was decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. As Roe v. Wade reaches its 40-year mark, I want to make three observations about this landmark decision.

First, the court’s Roe v. Wade decision was far more expansive than necessary to decide the case before it. It gave unlimited right to an abortion during the first trimester of pregnancy and allowed limits during the second trimester only as were “reasonably related to maternal health”. For the third trimester, the court noted “the potentiality of human life” (the unborn) and said states could regulate or ban abortion at this stage except if maternal “health” (broadly understood) was at risk.

Roe v. Wade grounded abortion rights on a right to privacy that it found in the “penumbra” (we might say, “surrounding glow”) of the Constitution rather than in the words of the Constitution itself.

Thus the court “legislated” (made law) rather than “judged” law. Justice Rehnquist in dissent reminded the court it should never “formulate a rule of constitutional law broader than is required by the precise facts to which it is to be applied” (www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0410_0113_ZD.html).

Second, public opinion has never been in accord with Roe v. Wade and is even less so now than in 1973. It also should fairly be said that public opinion doesn’t support the “Right to Life” side in all details either. Here are some samples of recent Gallup opinion polls (www.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspx).

• Today 50% say they are “pro-life” compared to 33% in 1996. In 1996, 56% claimed to be “pro-choice” and today that number is 41%.
• 71% support requiring parental notification if the woman is under 18.
• 62% support legal abortion during the first three months of pregnancy, but 71% oppose it during second three months and 86% in the last three months.
• Still, 52% do not want to see the U.S. Supreme Court overturn Roe v. Wade.

If we survey all the questions in the polls, we see most Americans are against most abortions and do not favor either an outright ban on abortions nor unqualified access to abortions.

Third, a new wrinkle has been added by the “contraception mandate” in what is popularly called “Obamacare”. Now the issue of religious liberty (the “free exercise” of religion guaranteed in the First Amendment) has been raised. In other words, the debate moves from what people should be free to do to what people and institutions with religion-based convictions can be forced to do.

“Obamacare” provides a very narrow and inadequate exemption for “houses of worship” but plans to force religious institutions (such as Christian colleges) to cover free access to contraception including, as feared by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, “drugs which can attack a developing unborn child before and after implantation in the mother’s womb” (www.usccb.org/news/2011/11-154.cfm). This major debate will certainly go to the Supreme Court.

The current administration is no friend of religious liberty in my opinion. Ironically, President Obama’s 2013 “Religious Freedom Day” proclamation said, “As we observe [on January 16] Religious Freedom Day…let us honor it by forever upholding our right to exercise our beliefs free from prejudice or persecution” (www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/01/16/presidential-proclamation-religious-freedom-day).

Yes, Mr. President, let’s do that even if exercising religious liberty conflicts with your plans for expansive government control in matters previously thought to be better left to the consciences of individuals and the convictions of religious institutions.

Donald P. Shoemaker is Pastor Emeritus of Grace Community Church of Seal Beach. In 1980 he served as General Chairman of the National Right to Life Convention at the Anaheim Convention Center.