Blogotional

Saturday morning I drive past church and there on the sign board, as usual, is the pending sermon title. We are having a guest preacher. The title "Climate Change: A Christian Call To Action". For those not in the know, not likley for readers of this blog, that is a slight variation on the official statement of the Evangelical Climate Initiative, the latest issue front for politically left-leaning evangelicals.

That a church might need to discuss this issue, I can fully understand - but could anyone explain to me how this is an appropriate topic for a sermon? I think it wholly inappropriate and here are my reasons.

One, the Book of Order, the consitutional document of the PC(USA) says the following about "Preaching the Word" (W-2.2007)

The preached Word or sermon is to be based upon the written Word. It is a proclamation of Scripture in the conviction that through the Holy Spirit Jesus Christ is present to the gathered people, offering grace and calling for obedience. Preaching requires diligence and discernment in the study of Scripture, the discipline of daily prayer, cultivated sensitivity to events and issues affecting the lives of the people, and a consistent and personal obedience to Jesus Christ. The sermon should present the gospel with simplicity and clarity, in language which can be understood by the people.

I have read "the written Word" completely on more than one occassion and have yet to encounter any material whatsoever that sheds any light on whether climate change is man-made or part of the natural processes of creation. I find no enlightment on whether the suffering that may or may not result from climate change is best ministered to by offering direct aid or combating potential man-made contribution to climate change. While scripture may make it plan we are to be good stewards to both creation and the impoverished, precisely what comprises such stewardship is a matter scripture leaves unsettled - forcing the preacher to base his/her sermon on largely extrabiblical materials

Now, such may often be the case, but when it comes to an issue in which the extra-biblical sources are highly divided and inconclusive, on what basis may a preacher decide on how to approach the subject given that sermonizing is reserved solely for the proclamation of God's revealed Word? Clearly it must be from that preacher's personal political perspective., and the preacher has overstepped the dictates of the occassion.

Secondly, that Same Book of Order describes the church's calling this way (G-3.0300)

G-3.0300 The Church's Calling

G-3.0300a. The Church is called to tell the good news of salvation by the grace of God through faith in Jesus Christ as the only Savior and Lord, proclaiming in Word and Sacrament that

G-3.0300a.(1) the new age has dawned.

G-3.0300a.(2) God who creates life, frees those in bondage, forgives sin, reconcile brokenness, makes all things new, is still at work in the world.

Present Claims of Christ

G-3.0300b. The Church is called to present the claims of Jesus Christ, leading persons to repentance, acceptance of him as Savior and Lord, and new life as his disciples.

Christ's Faithful Evangelist

G-3.0300c. The Church is called to be Christ's faithful evangelist

G-3.0300c.(1) going into the world, making disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all he has commanded;

G-3.0300c.(2) demonstrating by the love of its members for one another and by the quality of its common life the new reality in Christ; sharing in worship, fellowship, and nurture, practicing a deepened life of prayer and service under the guidance of the Holy Spirit;

G-3.0300c.(3) participating in God's activity in the world through its life for others by

G-3.0300c.(3)(a) healing and reconciling and binding up wounds,

G-3.0300c.(3)(b) ministering to the needs of the poor, the sick, the lonely, and the powerless,

G-3.0300c.(3)(c) engaging in the struggle to free people from sin, fear, oppression, hunger, and injustice,

G-3.0300c.(3)(d) giving itself and its substance to the service of those who suffer,

G-3.0300c.(3)(e) sharing with Christ in the establishing of his just, peaceable, and loving rule in the world.

It is in c.(3)(b) & (c) that any case can be made for the church concerning itself with the issue at all. However, as said above, how best to conduct those ministries is a matter of great dispute. The Interfaith Stewardship Alliance makes a strong case that

...the destructive impact on the poor of enormous mandatory reductions in fossil fuel use far exceeds the impact on them?negative or positive?of the moderate global warming that is most likely to occur. Indeed, the policy promoted by the ECI would be both economically devastating to the world?s poor and ineffective at reducing global warming.

Because energy is an essential component in almost all economic production, reducing its use and driving up its costs will slow economic development, reduce overall productivity, and increase costs of all goods, including the food, clothing, shelter, and other goods most essential to the poor.

The fact of the matter is that at a minimum there is a huge debate as to what constitutes the best way for the church to carry out its mission in this circumstance. Thus for a preacher to preach on this topic - to proclaim a viewpoint, any viewpoint as God's Word, which is what happens in a sermon, is something of an abuse of priviledge. In light of the immense amount of divided scholarship that has been and is being devoted to the subject, the preacher is granting to their personal viewpoint an authority that is not yet appropriate.

While not thoroughly convicted, I wonder even about the appropriate validity of this discussion in other church venues apart from the worship service and sermon. Should we be carrying on endless debate about hockey stick curves and prevailing economic theory when there is so much solid and important mission work currently undone that can be done without such discussion? Should we not worry more about the immediate and apparent suffering in need of relief than the potential and future? The devisiveness of examing this issue in this fashion brings me to my third point.

Thirdly, the Book of Order under a section entitled "Unity in Mission" (G-4.0201) reads:

The unity of the Church is a gift of its Lord and finds expression in its faithfulness to the mission to which Christ calls it. The Church is a fellowship of believers which seeks the enlargement of the circle of faith to include all people and is never content to enjoy the benefits of Christian community for itself alone.

Can their be unity in faithfulness to mission when there cannot possibly be agreement on how to execute that mission? No, as see it, in the face of the contentions surrounding this issue, such a sermon can serve only to increase divisiveness, to in fact work against unity in mission. Such a sermon serves to undo the gift of unity that the Lord has granted. In a time when the church is already deeply divided on other issues, facing possible schism, what benefit can be hoped to be gained by raising yet another controversial topic?

Summarily, I have argued consistently on this blog that the church has a very specific, very well-defined mission - to make disciples. It is then incumbent upon those disciples to work out the will of the Lord in the many diverse, specific, and technical avenues the world is faced with today. To use the resources of the church for other purposes is to is to divert it from that mission. With resources as scarce as they are, does not stewardship demand silence on an issue until those good and well-trained disciples can assuredly identify a proper course of action? Does not anything else build division where unity is demanded? How is God uplifted by carrying on such debate in a worship service?

Why did I stay away from church on Sunday? Simple - I did not wish to participate in, nor grant credence to through attendance, a discussion not suited for worship. I decided the only effective means of being true to my conviction about where and where not such discussion should take place was to not participate. To place this much emphasis and energy into an issue not directly related to worship, in the context of a worship service, is to say I place my trust more in man that in my God - and that dear friends is the last message I ever want to send.

UPDATE: (Set your sarcasm monitor to stun) Maybe I'll sue.

Related Tags: global warming, climate change, Evangelical Climate Initiative, Interfaith Stewardship Alliance, worship, Book of Order