Today my heart is overcome with joy for my African-American brothers and sisters. Whether or not you agree with the policies of President-elect Barack Obama, one thing is for sure–yesterday’s election was a monumental moment in our nation’s history. It brought us one step closer to healing the wounds our nation has inflicted upon African-Americans throughout our history. And for that, I am deeply grateful. 

Having said that, there is a language about Presidential elections that I find a bit worrying: this language of “hope.” We’ve heard it a lot in reference to both McCain and Obama, but I was particularly struck by it last night when I heard Oprah make the following statement during an interview,

“With Obama’s election, we can finally have hope in this country.”

(Interestingly, she then proceeded to cite some Scripture. It would seem that her theology and her politics are getting a bit conflated.)

Now as theologically problematic as I found her comments to be, I have to admit that I sympathize with Oprah’s position. There have been many moments in America’s history when we (Christians included) have stolen away hope from our nation’s minorities. And given that history, Obama’s election signals the beginning of a new era for African-Americans, an era that seems far less hopeless and impossible than it did before.

However, we must also be cautious about such language. Why? Because there is a temptation to speak about our political leaders using words that mirror Scriptural language about Christ.

If a person does not know Christ, then such language of promise, expectation and everlasting hope is to be expected, but it is not the kind of language or ideology that disciples of Christ should be espousing.

It is for that reason that we must continually ask ourselves the following crucial question, a question which quickly diagnoses the state of our hearts:

“Who is your king?”

Like the Israelites in 1 Samuel 8, we are constantly faced with choosing between an earthly king or a heavenly One. That is why the language we use for Christ is so frequently co-opted to describe worldly leaders. There is a very real temptation there. What’s more, there are many, many kings to choose from…some not as obvious as you may think.

The way we talk about our politicians and our pastors can reveal the identity of our true king. Yet the king of your heart will not always necessarily be a person. When we are enslaved to popularity, success, body image–these can just as easily set up monarchies in our hearts.

The way you live, what drives you, what you center your life around–all these things reveal the identity of your true king. And that is why you must constantly ask yourself “Who is my king?” When someone looks at your life and listens to your words, which king would they suppose you follow?

We must ask ourselves that question every day, not simply this week. The Presidential election may highlight this spiritual issue more clearly, but the reality is that we submit ourselves to earthly rulers every single day.

Live the kind of daily life that would lend an obvious answer if someone were to ask: “Who is your king?” Not only are your freedom and joy at stake, but the reputation of the True King as well.

I really debated over whether or not to write this blog.

In general, I don’t like to weigh in on political issues. It’s such a distraction from the things that really matter–namely, the Gospel. Government, politicians, and even policies that reflect Christian values–all these things can quickly become idols that supplant Christ.

Even so, I decided to throw in my two cents because there is an important tension within the Christian life that warrants some acknowledgment. While Scripture does push the Church to take on the burdens of the world instead of depending on the government to do our work for us, Scripture ALSO sets a precedent in which Christians are permitted to use worldly means to accomplish social and spiritual change.

For example, in the book of Acts we see Paul use the Roman political system for his own personal gain. Throughout his life, Paul spoke before government officials and appealed to the Roman justice system to protect himself when threatened with imprisonment.

Given this precedent, we learn that there are times when it is permissible to use the government to further the Gospel and the good of humankind. God created government as a means for maintaining justice in this world, so it is important that we hold the government accountable for its God-given role.

That said, we do not betray our calling or the Church’s mission when we vote. By voting, we aren’t simply handing our dirty work over to the government (though we sometimes want to), but instead offering an important perspective to a system that could use direction.

But having said that, PROCEED WITH CAUTION. It is easy to get caught up in the division that defines the political arena. And Republicans are not the only ones who create this division with faith–Christian Democrats and Republicans alike have a tendency to be excessively judgmental, painting pictures in vast generalizations and vilifying the opposing side.

This is unacceptable behavior of brothers and sisters in Christ. Do not allow yourself to succumb to this temptation.

As Christians, there is one thing, and one thing alone, that we can be sure of, and that is the Gospel. You could be wrong about McCain, and you could be wrong about Obama, but you are not wrong about Christ. And having said that, there is only one man in this world who deserves the unflinching devotion and trust that we so willingly give to mere men.

So while you listen to the candidates preach about change, remember that there’s only One who can affect real change in this world. We can vote for laws and regulations every single year, but our country will not change its direction until Americans experience a change of the heart. Get behind the man who can do that.

So yes, vote. Definitely vote. But you won’t find the man who fits the above job description on the ticket this Tuesday.

With the recent nomination of Sarah Palin for Republican VP, the feminist movement has taken a very unexpected turn. 

On the one hand, she’s taking a giant step forward for women. She speaks of breaking the glass ceiling and she’s aspiring to hold a political position that no women has ever before attained.  

And in an even more shocking turn of events, we are now hearing Conservatives use language that has traditionally been attributed to feminists. They argue that anyone who questions Palin’s candidacy in light of her family responsibilities is a blatant sexist. Conservatives also point out that no one ever asks Barack Obama that question, so they firmly defend Palin’s equal right to political opportunity.  

Yet traditional feminists are befuddled, if not frustrated by Palin. Why? Because she is a new breed of feminist, opposing many of the views that feminism has typically held. She is not pro-choice, and she does not support same-sex marriage. She is a Conservative, and she promotes an ideology that feminists have historically assumed to be inherently anti-woman.  

Such a development is fascinating, as well as enlightening. It reveals that the feminist movement has not represented women nearly as holistically as they have claimed. Rather, it has represented a particular brand of women, a brand that excludes a large portion of women in America today. 

But how did this come to be? In their quest to further the cause of women, how have feminists divided women? The answer is quite simple–they have done so by committing the same crime that they sought to amend. In response to a brand of womanhood that was seen as narrow and oppressive to women, they sought to redefine womanhood, but they redefined it in just as narrow a category as their predecessors.  

Feminism reacted against a  school of thought that placed women solely in the home raising the children. Women were not allowed to vote or hold positions of leadership, so they were also discouraged from pursuing higher education. The feminist movement felt that women had more to offer the world, and that the female voice needed to be heard.

As a result, feminists sought equal status and opportunity with men.  Yet in this process, some feminists have over-reacted, belittling motherhood and bashing men. Not all feminists have done this, but the movement has digressed enough that it has developed specific, narrow standards by which true feminism is measured. If you do not conform to these standards, then you are, by definition, opposed to the movement itself.  

The problem with this development is that it does not account for the diversity of women that we find in the world. Yes, some women are ambitious and aspire to be doctors, lawyers, investment bankers, etc. But some women desire to be stay-at-home moms and that is all they’ve ever wanted to be. Is it somehow less noble that these women want to spend their time pouring into the children who will one day be the leaders of our country? By no means, but it is not a role that has been touted as furthering the cause of women.  

In seeking to correct the culture’s understanding of womanhood, feminism has committed the error it sought to correct. Both ends of the spectrum, extreme conservatives and extreme liberals, define womanhood far too narrowly, and thereby exclude other women as somehow being less feminine. 

And that is a dangerous game to play. When you make that move, you no longer encourage women to pursue their inherently female strengths, and a woman’s femininity is no longer defined by God. Women are instead pressured to conform to a mold, which will ironically limit them instead of giving them greater freedom.  

That is why this new development in feminism is so exciting. The feminist movement is taking on a new texture as more and more voices contribute to its direction. And as Christian women, we shouldn’t miss out. Rather than bite the hand that fed us by condemning the feminist movement which gave us the rights that we have today, we should rise up and add our voices to the conversation. Women constitute a powerful force in our society, so we need to take responsibility for helping to direct it.  

We must, however, avoid the pitfalls inherent in the feminist movement. Namely, we must be wary of becoming too woman-centric either. Ultimately, that is where feminism has gone awry, as well any movement that does not have Christ at the center. Feminism has the tendency to focus solely on women (as the name implies), thus leading feminists to occasionally trample other causes that interfere with their own. 

That is exactly what has transpired in the pro-life debate–the life of a child becomes an obstacle in the life of a woman, so the child is eliminated.

But we must be Christ-centered feminists. What does such a feminism look like? It is a feminism that values women as being equal to men, just as Genesis describes. It fights for the image of God in woman, defending their role in the Body of Christ, acknowledging that women add a crucial dynamic to the Kingdom of God.  

HOWEVER, Christ-centered feminism is a feminism that never subjugates the Gospel to the cause of women. Yes, God can be glorified through women and we should do everything in our power to protect that glory, but sometimes God is glorified in our sacrifice and humility as well.  When our cause threatens to override the good and pleasing will of God, then we must cease and desist. But you know, that’s what’s best for women anyway. When we think that the two agendas are at odds, we deceive ourselves. What is good for the Gospel is always good for women. It may not appear to be so at the time, but if God is faithful, and He is, we can trust this to be true. Be a strong woman, but be a strong Christ-centered woman.

This is a scary time. That is for sure.

But how we respond to the current state of our nation says a lot about our faith. How do you react in the face of fear?

This is a question I’ve been asking myself a lot lately, but not just because of the Presidential race, and not just because of the economy.

This afternoon I listened to yet another student tell me about her family’s exile from a church due to a power struggle. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard some version of this story–either a pastor strong-arms a congregation and ruins his opponents’ reputations in the process, or a congregation does the same to a pastor. And it always boils down to one thing–a power struggle. While some of the participants may have good intentions, their actions reveal that it’s more an issue of control. They are afraid to lose control of the Church, so they commit un-Christlike acts to keep it.

But this dynamic, this power struggle that we find in churches, is no different than the struggle we witness in the current political mud-slinging. They have the exact same root–a fear of losing control. We struggle for power because we want to be the ones calling the shots. Only when we have control will we feel safe, so we fight tooth and nail for it.

And lest you think that power struggles only transpire on bureaucratic scales, think again. They play out in every part of our lives. For instance, if you’re married or dating, how do you handle things when your significant other makes a decision you don’t agree with? What do you do when they work on a project that you secretly think you could do better? How do you respond? Do you always have to lend your two cents?

Or how about at work? Do you micro-manage the people under you? Are you afraid to let anyone do a job without giving your own important input?

Or if you have kids, are you a helicopter mom who feels the urge to protect your child from EVERYTHING? I recently heard that some day care centers won’t allow their workers to color with the kids. Why? Because the adult might draw a rainbow that’s better than the child’s rainbow, which will result in the child having low self-esteem. Seriously?? That, right there, is a fear or losing control if I’ve ever seen it!

Every day we face various fears–our future, the future of our families, the future of our jobs, the future of our economy and the future of our nation. We are afraid of the unexpected, and we fear losing control.

But at the heart of these fears we find something much darker and far more sinister–we find a deeply rooted idolatry. Our fears reveal our true saviors–what we are really trusting in for security and peace. 

Most of the time, that idol is us.

We trust in our own ability to make things happen, to get things done, and to keep us safe. Which is why we are terrified at the thought of losing control, and why we will do almost anything to keep it. All of the greatest atrocities in human history have been done in the name of maintaining power. 

That’s why President Franklin Roosevelt was so wise in warning us that “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.” When our security is threatened and when our power is contested, we LASH OUT! Churches divide, spouses battle, bosses berate their employees, friends step on other friends to maintain their status in the in-crowd, and Christians fight with other Christians over secular politics. Even just this week, a man in Caifornia committed suicide and then killed his whole family because of the recent economic crisis.

That is the power of fear. It can destroy you, and everyone around you.

So in the face of these fears, we need to stop and take a deep breath before it escalates to a fever pitch. At times like these fear is dangerous, if not fatal, but fear is not found in national crises alone. In addition to keeping fear at bay in the face of extreme societal swings, we must rein in our fears daily. Every single day of our lives, our fears impact the decisions we make and the way that we treat people.

If we let it, fear will be our guiding compass.

If you don’t fight fear daily, then you will most certainly succumb to fear when the economy falters or your Presidential favorite doesn’t win. It can get much uglier if you don’t guard your fear now, so fight your fears!

God is not the author of fear, so resolve to do NOTHING based on fear. Christ died on a cross so that we have to be afraid no more. Don’t crawl back into the cage from which you’ve been set free! Don’t feed into the political and economic frenzies, and don’t allow fear to dictate your daily decisions and relationships with people.

So the question is, what are you afraid of, and how does it impact your life? Remember that people are watching you, and what you fear reveals a lot about your true savior, regardless of how much you tell people otherwise. When we feed into fear, we negate the Gospel we profess. And when it comes to fear and Christ, the two simply aren’t compatible.

Let me begin by saying that I recognize the irony and potential for hypocrisy in what I am about to write. Nevertheless, I think this needs to be said, so hopefully I won’t disprove my own point. Here goes…

Yesterday I was listening to one of Mark Driscoll’s sermons, and in the course of preaching he made a hyperbolic statement for the sake of demonstrating a point. He immediately followed up the statement by adding, “That was a joke! I didn’t really mean that, so all you bloggers can go ahead and shut your laptops now.”

What struck me about his disclaimer is that it’s not the first one I’ve heard lately. Frequently my own pastor will try to stave off the mean e-mails and angry blogs that might ensue a controversial point by anticipating their possible misinterpretations. I’ve heard other pastors and podcasters do the same.

Clearly, they’ve all learned to beware the wrath of the blogosphere.

It is here that I must question whether such a trend is godly. When our pastors are constantly worried that their words might be lifted from their context, twisted, and publicly berated by other Christians (not even non-Christians!) then I think we’ve come to a place that is fundamentally opposed to the spirit of the Gospel.

This point hit me as I read over Paul’s words in 1 Corinthians 4. Paul was facing a similar climate of criticism from the Corinthian church. Even though they had Paul to thank for their very existence, they didn’t hesitate to bite the hand that fed them. As a result, Paul had to defend his credibility before his own church, in much the same way that pastors are forced to defend themselves today.

But what exactly is going on here? Why are Christians back-biting one another, and why have blogs facilitated this all the more?

The reason for this trend is twofold, the first being our own prideful hearts. Paul makes this point when he establishes a distinction between types of judgment. Some judgment is warranted, but some stems only from our own selfish motives. In chapter 5, for example, a man was sleeping with his father’s wife, so Paul called the Christians to exercise judgment. In this case, such judgment was permissible due to the man’s blatant disobedience of Scripture.

Paul, on the other hand, was fulfilling his God-given call to preach the Gospel. Even so, he received criticism and judgment from his brothers and sisters, and it is within this context that Paul forbids judgment. Why? Because they were trying to judge his heart. Judging a person’s actions are one thing, but it is difficult to know another person’s heart, so we must be VERY wary of making such a move.

So often we will criticize Christians, preachers, or churches who are out doing the Lord’s work, but not the exact way we think they should be doing it. As a result, we get up on our high horse and make assumptions about the state of their heart, nit-picking every single mistake and highlighting those mistakes for all to see. We forget Paul’s words, “Whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is proclaimed, and in that I rejoice.” (Phil. 4:18) We refuse to rejoice in the preaching of the Gospel, and instead undermine those who do.

Only very rarely is such criticism actually warranted, so speaking from my own sin and my own temptation to engage in this type of unholy judgment, I feel confident in asserting that it comes from prideful arrogance. We are doing little more than reverting back to the childish strategy of tearing others down so as to build ourselves up.

But the second reason blogs have become such a popular tool for harsh criticism is the anonymity of the form. We post a blog and then send it hurdling into cyberspace, never really witnessing its effects. We don’t really know who is reading it or how seriously they are believing our words. Because of this, we underestimate the power of our writing. In reality, we are engaging in the public slander of a fellow laborer in Christ.

And in case you don’t blog, don’t think you’re off the hook. Gossiping about someone you don’t know or slandering a pastor you’ll never meet does not justify your comments or somehow make them less sinful. Slander is slander no matter how you spin it. When it comes to matters of the heart we must “judge nothing before the appointed time; wait till the Lord comes.” (1 Cor. 4:5)

So in defense of the many preachers, pastors, writers and teachers who are out there leading, praying, and suffering for the sake of the Gospel, guard your tongue. Not only do they deserve more respect than we bloggers often give them, but God’s precious Bride, the Church, demands it.

Last night I saw the new Tina Fey movie “Baby Mama” about a 37 year-old, single career woman who wants to have a baby. Unfortunately her doctor claims that her uterus is poorly shaped and therefore unlikely to conceive, so she hires a surrogate. The movie itself is a comedy, but the plot line is pretty fascinating as it tackles the ethical dilemmas involved in this increasingly popular practice.

Personally, this is an issue I have struggled to categorize–is it right or wrong? On the one hand, there seems to be something inherently wrong with “renting” another person’s womb and using it to grow a baby. On the other hand, women grow babies in their wombs all the time–why does it matter if the baby is genetically linked to the surrogate or not?

Given the moral ambiguities of this issue, as well as the rising number of cases (The Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology (SART) has tracked a 30% increase over the past three years. That number is likely an undercount, since many clinics do not report births to SART; industry experts estimate that there are as many as 1,000 surrogate births a year.) it is important that Christians think through it. What does our faith have to say about this? I would like to take a moment to examine some of those questions now…

Before delving into the murkier moral waters of this debate, there is one clear abuse that has sparked a great deal of controversy, and that is the socioeconomic background of the surrogates. Both the New York Times and the Boston Globe have reported on the practice of “outsourcing” wombs to poor Indian women. Sadly, there is a trend in the surrogacy movement in which wealthy families are using the bodies of poor, needy women to bear their children. This practice is worrying because it echoes a time in our nation’s history when the poor and marginalized were treated as property to be used, their bodies serving the wealthy as nothing more than a machine or an animal.

So while these women may, in fact, benefit from the deal financially, we should be extremely wary of any mindset that enables us to use the bodies of the poor in such a way. That is not a direction in which our society should head. But what about the cases in which the surrogates are socioeconomically “equal” to the families they help? What should Christians consider in these instances?

Even in a relationship of relative equality, the surrogate-parent relationship is frequently messy. Even if the surrogate is a close friend of the parents, it is tough to avoid treating the surrogate as some sort of incubator for your baby. In “Baby Mama,” the protagonist monitors her surrogate’s eating habits and lifestyle, forcing her to only consume those foods that will improve her health and the health of the baby. And this aspect of the film is not far from the truth–a mother interviewed in Newsweek requested that her surrogate not pump gas during the pregnancy. She also sent the surrogate green cleaning products that were safer for the child, all this to ensure that the incubator’s quality was maximized.

So regardless of the socioeconomic standing of the surrogate, the reality is that you are using another person’s body to get the life that you want. This stark reality may be softened if you have a relationship with the surrogate, or if the surrogate remains a part of the family’s life following the child’s birth, but in a very real sense parents are “renting” another woman’s womb.

That leads me to the final question–what is the difference between parents who use a surrogate’s womb to have a child, versus parents who use their own womb to have a child? Well if you’re speaking from a purely functional basis, reducing the woman’s body to her ability to conceive, then there’s no problem at all. If you can get pregnant while another woman cannot, then why not share the wealth?

But in my opinion, there is more to it than that. While the rampant cases of unwed mothers and the growing number of abortions in America have subsequently devalued the sacred miracle that is the creation of life, human life is about far more than the biological fertilization of an egg. There is more to this process than splitting cells in the uterus’ biologically hospitable environment.

On the contrary, the creation of life and subsequent nurturing of that life is to be a reflection of the Father’s relationship with us. After all, Scripture refers to us as God’s children, which means there is an aspect to parenting that reflects the essence of our relationship with God. With that in mind, the topic of surrogacy quickly becomes a question of theology.

What, then, are we to draw from such an analogy? How does the traditional pregnancy process reflect our relationship with God? Well in the same way that we get life from the loving intimacy and sacrifice of the Trinity, especially as evidenced at the cross, children are born of the loving intimacy and sacrifice that a man and wife have in marriage. And not only does a married couple love one another this way, but they love their children with that degree of sacrifice as well.

Parents essentially lay themselves down for their children, surrendering their schedules, their free time, their sleep, their finances, and even their bodies–all for the sake of their child. In fact, the physical surrendering of one’s own body that we see in pregnancy, surrendering for the sake of another, echoes the surrender and sacrifice of Christ’s own body on the cross. In this way, pregnancy can reflect a love so profound that it echoes the intimacy and sacrifice of Christ’s love for us.

Surrogacy, on the other hand, has a slightly different approach. The mother is not laying down her own body to care for and nurture the child–she is using someone else’s body. And the woman who DOES care for the child so intimately during pregnancy will then leave the child once he or she is born.

That said, surrogacy reflects the God-child analogy less fully because the parent relies on another person to sacrifice her body for their child. It would be like God saying, “I love you so much that I’m going to ask some other person to sacrifice for you.” It is this concept of using someone else for your own ends, as opposed to giving of yourself for the sake of another, that conflicts with the relationship between God and His children.

Granted, the scenario isn’t quite so black and white given that many women CAN’T have children, which means they aren’t given the option to care for a child in this way. It would be one thing if a woman used a surrogate because she is unable to have a child herself, and quite another if a woman used a surrogate solely because she didn’t want to lose her figure.

What’s more, we must be careful that my above logic isn’t taken so far as to undermine the legitimacy of adoption. Just because a woman does not bear a child does not mean she cannot have a relationship with her child that reflects the love of God. Plus, Scripture itself uses the language of adoption, so in adopting children that do not belong to us, we are mimicking God’s adoption of humanity.

What I am saying is that we must be very, VERY wary of the mindset into which surrogacy can tempt us. It not only tempts us to view other women’s bodies as objects to be used for bearing children, but it distorts the pregnancy process in a way that views children more as a biological process that simply needs an incubator, as opposed to a miracle of life that echoes our very identity in God.

All in all, I find it hard to take one definitive stance on surrogacy. I tried to think of Scripture that might apply, but I was only able to come up with overarching themes that could speak truth into the discussion, so if you know of any verses please post them. But while I am hesitant to take a hard-line stance, I will admit that I have serious concerns. While feining a value for human life by going to extremes to produce it, surrogacy can actually devalue human life, as well as undermining the centrality of marriage in beginning a family. As the movie errantly taught, “You don’t have to be married to have a baby.” That teaching might be true from a technical standpoint–I could go out and get pregnant tomorrow with some random guy off the street–but is it God’s best? No.

So before we embrace the scientific advances of surrogacy, let’s look down the road to where this trend is taking us. We may find ourselves in a place we did not intend to go. But in addition to all of that, let me remind you of how many children are orphaned in this world. The numbers are astronomical, so perhaps we should reconsider spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to reproduce ourselves through surrogacy, when there are already so many living, breathing children that need families of their own.

What do you think of this isse??

About a year after I graduated from college, someone asked me whether or not I had endured religious persecution at my school. After all, it was a secular university with a reputation for being liberal, so the assumption was that it must be hostile toward Christians.

Well I responded to the inquirer with an emphatic “yes.” I then proceeded to tell them the story of one Easter morning when all the Christians on campus decided to wake up extra early and write “He is Risen” on the campus sidewalks in chalk. It seemed like a fairly benign gesture, but when the rest of the campus awoke that morning, there was a public outcry. Students wrote to the school newspaper complaining that the Christians were imposing their religion on them, and as a result, all the Christians were forced to wash off the sidewalks.

The reason that this story really irked me at the time is that other students would use chalk to write on our sidewalks all the time. What’s more, the writing was often extremely political, and extremely liberal. I had to walk past countless statements with which I not only disagreed, but also found offensive. Why was it ok for the other students to write those kinds of things, but Christians couldn’t write a non-confrontational phrase like “He is Risen?”

So that is the tale I told in reflecting on the “persecution” I endured as a college student. That was the “cross we had to bear.” I’m sure I also enhanced the story with some woe-is-me dramatic flair.

Well since that time, I have come to realize that that incident was not, in fact, persecution. Were my toes stepped on? Yes. Was that a frustrating double standard? Yes. But persecution? Really? I’m not so sure. The fact that I would classify such an experience as persecution probably reveals that I don’t really know what true persecution is.

My own ignorance on the topic became clear last week when I learned what some Christians endure in the prisons here in our country. After speaking with a number of the inmates, I am now convinced that our prisons contain one of the last true frontiers of religious persecution in America. Compared to them, my “persecution” is revealed to be a mere inconvenience.

Because devout faith is perceived to be a kind of weakness or attempt at sucking up to the authorities, Christian prisoners are actively targeted and harassed by the other inmates. Their Bibles are often torn up, and they suffer physical and verbal abuse because of their faith, so attending a weekly worship meeting is no small commitment.

When they come to worship, they are there against many, many odds. And they take their worship very seriously. For instance, the prison I visited also had a choir, and the members would not allow an inmate to join the choir if his witness was not consistent. If he was even caught doing something as small as using foul language, they would recommend to the pastor that he be removed. These men knew what it was to follow Christ, and they wanted everyone around them to know it as well, so they worked hard to guard their witness.

What a remarkable paradigm shift! Our country’s criminals, our country’s convicts, the individuals who we have locked up and turned our backs on–they are the ones who are standing for Christ with what is perhaps the most courage and ferocity in America. To me, that is both surprising and convicting. But then again, maybe I shouldn’t be so surprised. After all, that is often the pattern we see in Scripture–God has a knack for working through those whom the rest of the world has shunned. He picks the most unlikely candidates to fight His good fight. And fighting, these inmates are.

This post concludes my reflections on the week I spent in West Virginia, and I hope it has challenged you as much as it has challenged me. But if nothing else, my greatest desire is that you would pray for our brothers and sisters in prison. They are in a very dark place, but because of that darkness their lights can shine all the brighter. Pray that they would be strong and persevere, as they have a ministry opportunity unlike any other. They truly need our prayers, so when you pray for the persecuted in China and the Middle East, do no forget the persecuted in America.

In the past couple days, the Durham-Chapel Hill area received some more sobering news. One of the men accused of murdering Eve Carson had actually shot and killed another area student several months ago. He had been arrested and detained for the crime, but due to some sort of paperwork error, he was inadvertently released back into the community.

Upon learning this news, I was outraged. Of all the mistakes to be made, this one is inexcusable, and now a family must suffer an irreplaceable loss because of it. It’s also frightening to wonder if this kind of error has been made before. Are there other murderers wandering our city unchecked?

Now to some extent, the anger I feel toward the murderers, and the Durham justice system, is warranted. A horrible thing has happened, and we are grieving a loss. BUT, my pastor said something this morning that really put my self-righteousness in check.

In his sermon, my pastor mentioned a local elementary school in which 64 students are currently homeless. He then proceeded to explain that those homeless children are at the highest risk for turning to crime and getting involved with gangs. And I can understand why–when you don’t have a home, your life becomes a matter of survival, and you do whatever you can to get by.

But upon hearing these statistics, I had a startling realization–the blood of Eve Carson is on my hands. There are 64 homeless students at one school alone, 64 students who are much more vulnerable to gangs and criminal activity, and I am doing nothing about it. All that those children need is for Christians like me to intervene in their lives and provide them with other options, but because we are failing to act, our city remains the same.

Similarly, these men who are accused of Eve’s murder came out of that broken system. They fell through the cracks, and now they are facing a life in prison. But I hesitate to point my finger at them. I also hesitate to point my finger at the Durham justice system. Why? Because the blame does not lie with them alone. We, as a community, have failed those young men. When they needed help, and when they needed direction, we were not there.

You see at the end of the day, sin is never individual–it is corporate. This theme is particularly salient in 1 Corinthians. Paul indicts the Corinthian church as a whole when one of their brothers is sleeping with his father’s wife. Rather than place all the blame on the single adulterer, he holds the entire community responsible–Where were they when this man first began to feel tempted? And where were they when he needed accountability? Nowhere. And for that reason, the man’s sin was not merely his own, but the entire church’s.

We need to take this same approach to sin. Whenever something heinous occurs in our community, we need to pause and ask, “What was my role in this?” Rather than climb up on our high horses and separate ourselves out from the sinners, these incidents should remind us all the more of our own sin. What are we doing about the gangs in our cities? What are we doing about the children who go to school hungry? What are we doing for the children who don’t have a home to live in? Scripture does not tell us to rely on the government to provide these things, or to sit around stewing about how sinful other people are. On the contrary, it is OUR call to act, and to act now. When we fail to act, then we lose the right to be angry when our community falters.

I don’t know about you, but that reminder is supremely humbling for me. Looking back on the inmates with whom I worked this week, there was no “us” and “them,” and there was no “guilty” or “innocent.” We were all profound sinners. Some are forced to wear their guilt on their bodies, but apart from Christ our souls look just the same.

That, I believe, is a a healthy reminder in the face of such a loss. Not only did I fail to act when our community needed it, but without Christ I might have been the very one committing that crime. Praise be to God that I did not, but let me now show the same grace to others that God has shown to me.

Yesterday afternoon the Durham-Chapel Hill region was shocked by the horrible news that UNC’s Student Body President, Eve Carson, had been brutally murdered. No details have been released concerning her death, but it appears to have been a random crime. All day I felt as if I’d been punched in the stomach–we are all reeling from the loss of such a prominent member of our community.

After I first heard the announcement, I went onto CNN.com to see if the story had made it into the national news, and I was surprised by what I found. I saw a headline reading something like, “College student fatally shot,” but when I clicked on the link I discovered that it was not about Eve. Instead, the story was about a freshman girl at Auburn University, and the details were oddly similar to that of Eve’s death–a young, beautiful college student was found lying on the side of the road, having been shot and left for dead. I couldn’t believe that such comparable violence had occurred at two different college campuses at roughly the same time.

But the more I think about it, the less surprise I feel. Violence on college campuses is becoming the norm. No, these two crimes are not in the same vein as Virginia Tech or Northern Illinois, but the fact remains that violence in universities is escalating. More and more colleges are instituting emergency systems in the event that a gunman is on campus. As a college minister who works on a campus, my school has quite literally trained us to expect just such a catastrophe. It feels as if it is only a matter of time.

What is interesting to me about this phenomenon is that it echoes a trend we saw in high schools, a trend that took full effect about 10 years ago. The shootings at Columbine initiated a new era for teenagers. As a result of that and similar tragedies, students now have to attend school in fear, walking through metal detectors to enter the school doors, and running practice drills in the event that a shooter is on school grounds. For many high schoolers, violence has become a reality.

And now it would seem that the violence of high school has graduated to the university. Instead of targeting their teenage classmates, individuals are targeting their roommates and hallmates. Granted, not all violence on college campuses is caused by a psychopathic student, but universities are simply not as safe as they used to be.

The question is why?

In all honesty, I don’t have an answer. On the one hand, I can somewhat discern the source of teenage violence–high school can be a true pressure cooker! You are trying to figure out who you are, but your peers can be brutally judgmental and cruel, tearing down any shred of self-confidence that you might have had. The race to be cool and accepted is cut-throat, and on top of all of that, you have the stress of making good grades so you can get into a good college. That is a lot for a teenager to handle, so it’s not surprising that some people crack under the pressure, venting their frustration on the students who spurned them.

But college is supposed to be the best 4 years of your life! Yes, you have to work hard, but you also play hard. Even if you’re not out drinking and partying, there are the midnight runs to Krispy Kreme, and staying up all night talking to your friends about the questions of life. It is a wonderful season in which you have lots of freedom without the responsibility of being in the real world. It is the one time in which you can be virtually carefree.

So why are college campuses becoming less and less safe? I am not entirely sure, though I suspect there are many reasons–on a large campus, more students can fall through the cracks; universities are becoming increasingly liberal and hesitate to provide their students with any sort of moral compass; the hedonism that pervades college life is corroding the moral fabric of these young adults; students develop a false sense of security and make bad decisions under the influence of drugs and alcohol–and the list goes on.

But regardless of the reason, this rising violence impresses upon me an even greater sense of urgency in the work that I do. I see more and more students feeling hopeless and fearful, and it is at these moments, when the darkness is greatest, that we Christians can shine the brightest. While this violence is certainly evil, God may be able to use it for good, but it is up to us whether we will take part in that redemption.

So while I may not have an answer as to the true source of all these troubles, I do know this: We can feel hopeless and fearful like the rest of the world, or we can see it as a challenge, an opportunity even, to share the Good News. In which of these two categories do you fall?

In a couple weeks I will be turning 27, but you should know that I am a 70 year old living in the body of a twenty-something. For instance, I am a huge fan of the radio show “A Prairie Home Companion.” It comes on every Saturday night at 6pm, and it’s done in the style of old-timey radio programs. There are musical guests, comical skits, fake commercials, and I think it’s hilarious. I also think the average listener is 62.

My favorite part of “A Prairie Home Companion” is the segment called “The News from Lake Wobegon.” In this segment, the host tells stories from his fictional hometown, Lake Wobegon. The stories are always entertaining and clever, so I often find myself laughing out loud at his tales. But perhaps the best part about these stories is how well the teller captures the reality of human nature. I love his stories because they illustrate the true human experience, and I often see myself reflected in the characters he describes.

Well today I was listening to an old segment of “The News from Lake Wobegon,” and I was struck by how applicable it was to the present political race. This particular show aired the month before the 2004 Presidential election, and what follows is an excerpt from it. Keep in mind, the tone is largely tongue in cheek…

It’s been getting cool as Halloween comes along, and people are in a cautious mood, not because of Halloween but because of the election. People have to be careful about who they talk to and about what. Some people feel very strongly that the future of Western civilization is at stake on Tuesday, and you never know to whom you may be one of the infidels, so you have to walk lightly.

Val Tollefson went up to talk to Pastor Inkqvist about the sermon for Sunday. He was a little concerned because it was Reformation Sunday, and some of the conservatives in the congregation were a little leary that the pastor might use the occasion to talk about “reform” or “over-throwing the regime” or something of the sort. Val said, “Why don’t you just talk about homeland security. That’s what’s on everyone’s mind.” Pastor said, “I thought I would talk about salvation by grace…if that’s ok with you. I mean, we’ll sing ‘A Mighty Fortress is Our God,’ and that should pretty much take care of our security, no?”

The reason I have high-lighted this excerpt today is that it serves as a healthy reminder to Christians, especially as the presidential race escalates. I don’t know about you, but I have never been so enthralled by the election developments. It’s almost like a soap opera: “Stay tuned for tomorrow when the Ohio and Texas primaries may determine the future candidates of the election!” or “Tune in next time when Hillary and Barack debate for the 20th time!”

Unfortunately, it’s easy to get sucked into the excitement, and we soon forget our primary identities. It’s not that voting is unimportant, or that we shouldn’t be invested in the well-being of our country, but there is a time at which we need to kick ourselves in the pants and remember, “This world is not my home. My allegiance lies elsewhere. And with that in mind, I need to chill out!”

Along those lines, there is a fascinating book called “The Politics of Jesus,” written by theologian John Howard Yoder. In it, he does not make the move that I anticipated him making; he does not delineate the ways in which Jesus would or would not have voted. Instead, he reminds Christians that Jesus came to create an entirely new polis, one that constitutes our primariy citizenship. First and foremost, we belong to the city of God, not the city of Man, and that should instill in us a peace that cannot be shaken by the uncertainty of the Presidential race.

Again, that is not to say that we should be apathetic to the future of our nation. There is a degree to which we are called to make the world a better place, and one of the ways we can work this betterment is through the government. BUT, our first mode of change should be through the polis of Christ, which is the Church.

Scripture does not instruct Christians to rely on the government to care for the poor or love the oppressed–Scripture instead commands the Body of Christ to do these things. That said, the degree to which we become aggressive or panicked when discussing the election will reveal the primary source of our trust–we are either counting on the government to enact change, or we are counting on the Holy Spirit to enact change through the Church. You see regardless of our President, the Church will still be the Church, which means God is still moving in the world, and hope endures. In fact, a bad President may even enable the Church to shine all the brighter.

So no matter how the election ends, God will still be God. What’s more, God will use the next President to glorify Himself, regardless of who he or she might be. In the mean time, our task is to continue being the Church, and living as resident aliens in a foreign land. We must shine our light in the darkness, at times using the government to change systemic oppression when the occasion warrants, but our peace and security rest in Christ alone. A mighty fortress is our God, indeed.