Tag: Religion

Divorce in the Bible Belt

~ Evan Lenow

Data from the 2010 Census has been flowing steadily for the last few months. Much of it has been the typical stuff—total population, redistricting issues resulting from population shifts, etc. Some of it is encouraging, but some not so much. CNN.com ran a story on a report released yesterday by the U.S. Census Bureau about marriage and divorce statistics, and the numbers are ugly. Here are a few snippets:

While the Bible Belt is known for its devotion to traditional values, Southerners don’t do so well on one key family value: They are more likely to get divorced than people living in the Northeast.

Southern men and women had higher rates of divorce in 2009 than their counterparts in other parts of the country: 10.2 per 1,000 for men and 11.1 per 1,000 for women, according to a new report from the U.S. Census Bureau released Thursday.

By comparison, men and women in the Northeast had the lowest rates of divorce, 7.2 and 7.5 per 1,000, which is also lower than the national divorce rate of 9.2 for men and 9.7 for women.

For those of us who call the Bible Belt home and think all things Southern are superior (food, culture, people—can I get an “Amen”?!), these statistics probably seem shocking. In fact, I did not believe them, so I set out to disprove them. Unfortunately, they seem to be fairly accurate.

Of course, statistics can say what the researcher (or reporter) wants them to say, and there are a couple of key factors buried in these statistics that are glossed over in the article. First, Southerners marry at a much higher rate than those in the Northeast. When you have more people marrying, then you have more opportunity for divorce. Second, the South is not the overtly religious region it used to be. Places like Texas, Florida, and Tennessee have become the homes of transplants from other parts of the country that often do not share the “steeped-in-religiosity” tradition of the South. These people have come for the weather, jobs, or tax benefits, but they are not Southerners by birth (or as the bumper sticker reads: “American by birth, Southern by the grace of God!”). In fact, native-born Southerners often no longer hold the values their parents or grandparents did.

The other difficult part of reading these statistics as gospel truth is that they merely report a snapshot in time. They give the total number of divorces that occurred in 2009 per every 1,000 adults (age 15 and older) in the population at that time. What is not told in the initial numbers is how long those marriages lasted before divorce and the prospects of durability for new marriages in 2009 and forward. If you dig deeper into the Census Bureau report (and not reported in the news article), you see that the duration of current marriages for women in their first marriages is much higher across the South and Midwest than in the Northeast. Therefore, Southerners stay married longer despite the fact that they divorce at a higher rate.

So what does this say about the Bible Belt? First, I believe it demonstrates religion is oftentimes more of a cultural expectation than a personal conviction. While Southerners claim to be religious, it does not always translate into how they live their lives—especially their marriages. Second, we see that marriage is in a precarious state everywhere—not just the “liberal” Northeast and West Coast. While marriage is more of a social norm in the South, it does not make it any easier to have a good marriage that lasts. Finally, the churches in the Bible Belt must not rest on their laurels of cultural significance to influence marriage. Instead, the churches need to fight to protect the marriages of the people in their congregations. Marriage is a picture of the relationship between Christ and the church (Eph 5:22–33). How can we clearly communicate the love Christ has for the church if our marriages are falling apart?

_________________________

Katia Hetter, “What’s Fueling Bible Belt divorces,” CNN.com, August 25, 2011.

Diana B. Elliott and Tavia Simmons, “Marital Events of Americans: 2009,” United States Census Bureau, August 2011.

Image credit.

Should a Pastor Perform a Wedding for Unbelievers?

~ Evan Lenow

About six months ago, one of my students was actively pursuing a ministry position after graduating from seminary. During his search, a friend sent him a link to a new “ministry” that provided ministerial wedding services indiscriminately to anyone willing to pay the fee. They had a slick website and a pledge to “make your wedding personal” despite never meeting the minister until a few weeks before the nuptials. For me, this raised the question of whether or not a pastor should perform weddings with little or no concern for the spiritual lives of the couple.

For most ministers I know, the question of performing a wedding ceremony between a believer and an unbeliever is a non-starter. We quickly jump to 1 Cor 7:39 and 2 Cor 6:14–15. These verses make it clear that believers are instructed not to marry unbelievers. However, there are no biblical instructions regarding two unbelievers marrying. In fact, the assumption is that if believers are only marrying other believers, then unbelievers will be marrying unbelievers. That leaves us with the question of whether or not a Christian pastor should perform the wedding ceremony for two unbelievers.

Before we can answer that question, we first need to address the nature of marriage. While there are some (e.g., Catholics) who argue that marriage is a church ordinance (or sacrament), we must acknowledge that marriage was instituted prior to the church (Gen 2). There are also those who argue that marriage is a state ordinance (e.g., most secularists). However, there was no government in the Garden of Eden either. Instead, marriage is a creation ordinance given to all mankind as a gift. Russell Moore writes, “Marriage though, unlike baptism and the Lord’s table, is a creation ordinance, given to all people (Gen 2:23-24). It is good for unbelievers to marry rather than to live in immorality. It’s good for them, for their children, and for society as a whole.” There are a host of benefits to society that come from marriage—economic development from family-owned businesses, social stability through the family unit, and care for the young by parents.

If marriage is a creation ordinance and it is good for unbelievers to marry one another, then should a pastor perform a wedding between two unbelievers? My answer to that question is a resounding “No.” Let me explain.

First, a pastor is not a “lone ranger” exercising his ecclesiastical duties apart from the authority of the local church. When a pastor performs a wedding ceremony, he is placing his stamp of approval (and that of the church) on the marriage relationship. However, the church has no business giving its blessing to a marriage between unbelievers because there is no mechanism to hold them accountable. Moore states, “For unbelievers the church has no right to hold a couple to their vows through church discipline. They are not, after all, members of the church. A church that isn’t able to hold a couple to their vows (through discipleship and discipline) as witnesses to the covenant made (through discipleship and discipline) has no right to solemnize these vows in the first place. What would the church do if the unbelieving non-members were to break these vows?”

Second, Christian marriage is a depiction of the relationship between Christ and the church (Eph 5:22–33). A pastor’s intention in performing a ceremony should be to direct the couple and those witnessing the ceremony to understand that biblical picture. However, a marriage between two unbelievers lacks the key element to make that picture complete—a relationship with Christ. Without that relationship, a husband and wife have no desire to honor God with their marriage. Thus, the pastor should have no interest in blessing a marriage that sets out from the beginning with no intention to recognize God’s design for marriage.

Third, while proclaiming the gospel is appropriate (and necessary in my view) during a wedding ceremony, it should not be the goal of a ceremony to proclaim the gospel to the bride and groom. The best gospel proclamation in a wedding is the living testimony of the couple as they depict the Christ-church relationship. The pastor puts Scripture and words to that picture to explain it. Moore aptly describes the faulty view of performing weddings as evangelism:

Almost every pastor I’ve ever heard who performs weddings indiscriminately appeals to the evangelistic potential. Every community has the “wedding chaplain” pastor who will marry anyone. He is rarely the soul-winning firebrand of the community. As a matter of fact (though I’m sure there are exceptions), I’ve not once met an unbelieving couple who were won to Christ by a pastor who was willing to marry them regardless of their belief in Christ. I know of several couples, though, who came to Christ because a faithful pastor lovingly told them no, and told them why.

I believe that many pastors who perform such ceremonies are more concerned with not offending others than they are with seeing God’s design for marriage upheld. If two unbelievers want to get married, send them to a justice of the peace or someone else authorized to sanction a marriage. Moore concludes his admonition to ministers with the following:

For many young ministers, this question comes right down to a question of courage. If you’re not able, at the beginning of your ministry, to turn down family members and friends who expect you to act as a wedding chaplain for them, then how are you going to turn down unbelievers who want to [be] baptized? How are you going to defy the armies of antichrist, should it come to that? The gospel minister is made of sterner stuff than what many of us are accustomed to seeing. Refusing to place your ecclesial imprimatur on a Christless marriage is among the least dangerous things a minister will ever be called to do.

I agree with Russell Moore on this one. Let’s avoid performing such marriages, even when it is family members who ask. Placing our “blessing” on a marriage should be reserved for those marriages that will reflect the true nature of marriage and depict the Christ-church relationship. In fact, I would say there are even times when we should say “no” to believers who have the wrong intentions for marriage.

_________________________

Russell Moore, “Should a Minister Officiate at the Weddings of Unbelievers,” September 11, 2008. Moore’s article from three years ago helped to solidify my position on this question. I am greatly indebted to him for his brief, yet substantive thoughts on the issue.

Speaking “Christianese”

~ Evan Lenow

There is an interesting post at CNN’s Belief Blog about a phenomenon in American Christianity. The author, John Blake, addresses the ability of Americans to speak a second language of Christian lingo. Blake writes:

Many Americans are bilingual. They speak a secular language of sports talk, celebrity gossip and current events. But mention religion and some become armchair preachers who pepper their conversations with popular Christian words and trendy theological phrases.

He notes several interesting characteristics of this “Christianese,” including its use by politicians (especially George W. Bush) to signal subtly to evangelicals that they are one of them.

Part of the article is also devoted to exposing inaccuracies in commonly used terms and phrases.  Blake (and Marcus Borg in his book Speaking Christian) argue that Christians regularly misuse terms such as salvation, born again, and rapture. Citing Borg’s book, Blake notes:

“Speaking Christian is an umbrella term for not only knowing the words, but understanding them,” Borg says. “It’s knowing the basic vocabulary, knowing the basic stories.” When Christians forget what their words mean, they forget what their faith means, Borg says.

I don’t agree with all of the theological assumptions that Blake (and Borg) make in this article, but it is certainly an interesting take on religious life in America. I think they are correct to note that we often talk in code and assume that everyone else knows what we are saying. For that reason, it is essential that we define our terms and not take for granted that everyone knows what we mean. We live in a society today with little or no “Christian memory.” Churches in the southern US, especially, have typically approached the world with the assumption that everyone has a church background. That is no longer true in our culture. We need to speak clearly, define our terms, and proclaim the message of Christ with conviction and compassion.

Poll Measures God’s Approval Rating

~ Evan Lenow

I am a self-confessed talk radio junkie. I listen to talk radio 95% of the time I am in the car. My oldest daughter has even asked my wife why daddy always listens to people talking on the radio instead of music. I prefer local talk radio shows over the nationally-syndicated types, and I am an equal-opportunity listener to both news/politics and sports talk radio. Typically on my drive in to work each day, I listen to a local DFW talk radio show, and I get my fill of news, politics, and job approval ratings. By the time I read something online or in the paper, I’ve already heard about it on the radio. However, I came across something new yesterday that I had never seen—God’s job approval rating.

Yes, the North Carolina-based Public Policy Polling conducted a poll[1] to measure, among other things, God’s approval rating. Some of the questions included, “If God exists, do you approve or disapprove of its performance? If God exists, do you approve or disapprove of its handling of natural disasters? If God exists, do you approve or disapprove of its handling of animals? If God exists, do you approve or disapprove of its handling of creating the universe?”

What makes this poll even more interesting is that it was conducted as part of a national congressional poll. Therefore, we are able to see how God stacks up against leaders in the national government. God’s overall job approval was 52% approve, 9% disapprove (40% not sure). Compared to John Boehner (33% approve, 37% disapprove), Congressional Democrats (33% approve, 54% disapprove), and Congressional Republicans (33% approve, 55% disapprove), God fared pretty well in the poll. God’s highest rating came with a 71% approval of his handling of creating the universe. He even got a 50% approval rating (13% disapprove and 37% unsure) on natural disasters. In what is perhaps the most ridiculous statement of the entire poll, the authors of the polling results state, “Though not the most popular figure PPP has polled, if God exists, voters are prepared to give it good marks.”

It makes you wonder what possessed Public Policy Polling to include questions about God in its congressional poll. It is certainly interesting that God performed much better than our government officials (and Rupert Murdoch, who was also included in the poll), but what does a poll like this tell us?

First, we have to understand that God is not up for re-election. As Creator of the universe, God exercises sovereign rule over all aspects of creation (land, sea, animals, mankind, and the affairs of man). In Isaiah 40:21–26, the prophet writes:

Do you not know? Have you not heard? Has it not been declared to you from the beginning? Have you not understood from the foundations of the earth? It is He who sits above the circle of the earth, and its inhabitants are like grasshoppers, who stretches out the heavens like a curtain and spreads them out like a tent to dwell in. He it is who reduces rulers to nothing, who makes the judges of the earth meaningless. Scarcely have they been planted, scarcely have they been sown, scarcely has their stock taken root in the earth, but He merely blows on them, and they wither, and the storm carries them away like stubble. “To whom then will you liken Me that I would be his equal?” says the Holy One. Lift up your eyes on high and see who has created these stars, the One who leads forth their host by number, He calls them all by name; because of the greatness of His might and the strength of His power, not one of them is missing.

God is firmly in place as ruler of the universe. Though we may think he is absent at times, he is not. Though we may think he is silent at times, he still speaks. One of my favorite book titles (and favorite books) is Francis Scaheffer’s He Is There and He Is Not Silent. This is so true about God no matter what some polling firm states. Our failure to recognize God at work is not his fault—it is ours.

Second, we have to recognize that it is not our place to judge God. Who are we to approve or disapprove of God’s job performance? Job learned this lesson the hard way when God confronted him. In Job 38:1–11, we read:

Then the Lord answered Job out of the whirlwind and said, “Who is this that darkens counsel by words without knowledge? Now gird up your loins like a man, and I will ask you, and you instruct Me! Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth? Tell Me, if you have understanding, who set its measurements? Since you know. Or who stretched the line on it? On what were its bases sunk? Or who laid its cornerstone, when the morning stars sang together and all the sons of God shouted for joy? Or who enclosed the sea with doors when, bursting forth, it went out from the womb; when I made a cloud its garment and thick darkness its swaddling band, and I placed boundaries on it and set a bolt and doors, and I said, ‘Thus far you shall come, but no farther; and here shall your proud waves stop’?”

After God continued to question Job, we see Job’s humble response to God in Job 42:2–6,

I know that You can do all things, and that no purpose of Yours can be thwarted. ‘Who is this that hides counsel without knowledge?’ Therefore I have declared that which I did not understand, things too wonderful for me, which I did not know. ‘Hear, now, and I will speak; I will ask You, and You instruct me.’ I have heard of You by the hearing of the ear; but now my eye sees You; therefore I retract, and I repent in dust and ashes.

Just like Job, we have no standing to judge God or give our approval (or disapproval) to his job performance. God’s ways are higher than our ways, and his thoughts are higher than our thoughts (Isa 55:9). When we declare that we know how God could have done something better, or we give our disapproval of his performance, we naïvely declare that we know more than God. What an act of hubris!

Consider these things before answering the phone for a political poll (which for some reason call our house on a regular basis). We do not judge God because he is perfect and we are far from it. So what are we to think about this poll? I believe Dino Grandoni from the Atlantic Wire said it best when he wrote, “Believers or not, it seems ridiculous for the public to categorically grade God like this, until you realize that it’s pollsters who asked the questions in the first place.”[2]

[1] Public Policy Polling, “Americans’ perception of Congress improves, but still poor.” July 21, 2011. http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_National_721.pdf.

[2] Dino Grandoni, “Only 52% of Americans Approve of God’s Job Performance,” The Atlantic Wire, July 21, 2011. http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national/2011/07/only-half-americans-approve-gods-job-performance/40268/.

Polygamous Marriage: The Next Trend?

~ Evan Lenow ~ 2 Comments

On Wednesday, Kody Brown and his four wives—the stars of TLC’s reality show “Sister Wives”—filed suit in federal court in Utah against the state seeking the decriminalization of bigamy (and by default, polygamy). The case is built upon the 2003 US Supreme Court decision in Lawrence v. Texas that decriminalized sodomy on the grounds that the state cannot interfere with the private lives of consenting adults (a.k.a., right to privacy). This current lawsuit hopes to overturn an 1878 Supreme Court decision that declared polygamy unsuitable for American society.

The lawsuit claims:

By criminalizing religious-based plural families and intimate relationships under the criminal bigamy law, Utah officials prosecute private conduct between consenting adults.[1]

In Utah, polygamy is a third-degree felony that can carry a penalty of up to 15 years in prison if convicted.

The Browns have attained fame recently as the stars of “Sister Wives,” a reality television show that follows their lives as a polygamous family. The show airs on the cable/satellite network TLC. Their marriages are considered spiritual marriages because the state will not issue marriage licenses for multiple wives. The Browns claim to be Mormons and participate in polygamy because they believe that their faith rewards those in multiple marriages with a higher place in heaven. Even though the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (i.e., Mormons) disavowed polygamy in 1890, it is apparently still an issue in some sects of Mormonism, especially among fundamentalist groups.

Joanna Brooks, a Mormon scholar and author, notes that polygamy is still an open question to many Mormons. She states:

But the question of polygamy also remains wide open for millions of members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints worldwide. The mainstream LDS Church publicly disavowed the practice of polygamy in this life in 1890, but it has never officially disavowed the doctrine that plural marriage is required to enter the highest levels of heaven. Mainstream LDS men who are widowed and remarry continue to be “sealed” or married for the eternities to multiple wives, while mainstream LDS women may not be married or “sealed” for the eternities to more than one man. To this day, mainstream LDS communities are quietly (and sometimes not so quietly) divided on whether or not polygamy will be a fact of life in heaven.[2]

While the question of polygamy among Mormons is an interesting cultural question, there is a larger issue at play with this lawsuit. The real issue is whether or not the government will continue to redefine marriage. Even though the Browns’ attorney, Jonathan Turley, assured CNN’s John King (video available here) that the lawsuit was simply about right to privacy and not recognition of polygamous marriages, the clearly logical conclusion is that any case decriminalizing polygamy will also open the door to legalizing polygamous marriages. In fact, the lawsuit over polygamy is based upon the exact rationale that proponents of homosexual marriage are using in various states to seek recognition of their marriages.

With the recent action by the New York legislature and this lawsuit in Utah, the understanding of marriage as a union between one man and one woman is under full-scale attack from multiple fronts. If the Browns win their lawsuit, it will probably only be a matter of weeks before lawsuits seeking state recognition of polygamy hit the courts. They will use the same arguments that have won the day (at least in some states) for homosexual marriage. Then the next two logical steps—using the same argumentation—will be polyamorous marriages (multiple husbands AND wives) and incestuous marriages. The claim will merely be a right to privacy and marriage as a civil right. We have started down a slippery slope, and I fear the slide may be uncontrollable soon.

[1] “‘Sister Wives’ stars sue over Utah anti-polygamy law.” CNN. http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/07/13/sister-wives-stars-sue-over-utah-anti-polygamy-law/.

[2] Joanna Brooks, “Sister Wives Stars File Suit to Legalize Polygamy,” Religion Dispatches. http://www.religiondispatches.org/dispatches/joannabrooks/4852/sister_wives_stars_file_suit_to_legalize_polygamy/.