Associated Baptist Press - 4/18/2008

Associated Baptist Press
April 18, 2008 (8-41)

IN THIS ISSUE:
Pope, in first visit to United States, praises freedom, dings secularism
Texas church, mired in controversy over gays in directory, loses pastor
ABP honors Texas convention, announces $100,000 challenge
Supreme Court decision means executions move forward
Opinion: Democrats and the abortion issue

Pope, in first visit to United States, praises freedom, dings secularism
By Robert Marus

WASHINGTON (ABP) -- In his first visit to the United States since ascending to the Throne of St. Peter, Pope Benedict XVI hailed America’s religious freedom and pluralism while simultaneously denouncing secularism’s influence.

The pontiff’s tour of the United States began officially April 16 with a sun-drenched ceremony on the South Lawn of the White House. With pomp normally reserved for heads of state, President Bush welcomed Benedict in front of more than 13,000 cheering guests.

“Here in America, you’ll find a nation that welcomes the role of faith in the public square,” Bush said to the beaming pontiff, who was also celebrating his 81st birthday. “When our founders declared our nation's independence, they rested their case on an appeal to ‘the laws of nature, and of nature’s God.’ We believe in religious liberty. We also believe that a love for freedom and a common moral law are written into every human heart, and that these constitute the firm foundation on which any successful free society must be built.”

Benedict responded with similar praise for America’s simultaneous religiosity and religious liberty.

“I come as a friend, a preacher of the gospel, and one with great respect for this vast pluralistic society,” the former German cardinal said, in Bavarian-accented English. “From the dawn of the republic, America's quest for freedom has been guided by the conviction that the principles governing political and social life are intimately linked to a moral order based on the dominion of God the Creator. The framers of this nation's founding documents drew upon this conviction when they proclaimed the self-evident truth that ‘all men are created equal’ and endowed with inalienable rights grounded in the ‘laws of nature, and of nature’s God.’”

Bush, in a nod to agreement between the two over such controversial issues as abortion rights, quoted words from the pope’s writings. “In a world where some treat life as something to be debased and discarded, we need your message that all human life is sacred, and that ‘each of us is willed, each of us is loved,’” Bush said, to applause from the invited audience, mainly comprised of Catholics.

But Benedict also alluded to differences with Bush on issues such as the Iraq war and the use of torture on terrorism suspects.

“America has traditionally shown herself generous in meeting immediate human needs, fostering development and offering relief to the victims of natural catastrophes. I am confident that this concern for the greater human family will continue to find expression in support for the patient efforts of international diplomacy to resolve conflicts and promote progress,” he said.

“In this way, coming generations will be able to live in a world where truth, freedom and justice can flourish -- a world where the God-given dignity and the rights of every man, woman and child are cherished, protected and effectively advanced.”

But the pontiff alluded to challenges faced by the United States -- and the Roman Catholic Church -- in a later speech to U.S. Catholic bishops as well as at an April 17 outdoor mass in Washington.

Benedict told an estimated 46,000 at the new Washington Nationals baseball stadium that the United States is at “a crossroads” that holds “great promise.” But he warned that, “at the same time, we see clear signs of a disturbing breakdown” in society’s foundations. He cautioned the cheering throngs against an “increasingly secular and materialistic culture” enveloping the nation’s youth.

On April 16, protesters scattered along Benedict’s motorcade route throughout Washington underlined the challenges he faces in leading the nation’s approximately 70 million Catholics. As the pope’s fans cheered during the White House ceremony, groups just across the street in Lafayette Park protested the Catholic hierarchy’s handling of the ongoing child-sexual-abuse scandal. They held up signs with slogans like: “Celibacy has failed!”

Elsewhere along the parade route from the White House to the Vatican Embassy and, later, to the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception, other groups of Catholics protested Vatican policies on an exclusively male priesthood and homosexuality.

Many progressive and liberal Catholics fear that Benedict will take the church in a retrograde direction. Prior to his elevation to the papacy, he was known as Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger and headed the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. He earned a reputation as a strict enforcer of theological and social orthodoxy, often reining in bishops and theologians who questioned official church teachings on a wide range of issues.

Benedict’s U.S. visit was his first since he succeeded the late John Paul II in 2005. His other scheduled activities included speaking to heads of Catholic colleges and universities in Washington April 17, an address to the United Nations and an ecumenical prayer service with other Christian clergy in New York April 18, and presiding over another outdoor mass at Yankee Stadium April 20.

-30-

Texas church, mired in controversy over gays in directory, loses pastor
By ABP staff

FORT WORTH, Texas (ABP) – Brett Younger, pastor of Broadway Baptist Church in Fort Worth, Texas, survived a vote to fire him last month but is leaving the church anyway – to become associate professor of preaching at Mercer University’s McAfee School of Theology in Atlanta.

The prominent Texas Baptist congregation has been embroiled for months in a public controversy over homosexuality and other issues.

The congregation approved a compromise Feb. 24 intended to end controversy over whether gay couples in the church should be pictured alongside other families in a new church directory. Some members objected to having those photos included, saying that would move from simply welcoming gay couples -- which Broadway has done quietly for years -- to actively affirming their homosexuality.

Although the membership approved the compromise – which eliminated family and individual photos – the controversy ballooned into a dispute over Younger’s overall leadership. A group of disgruntled Broadway members later submitted a petition to force a vote declaring the church’s pulpit vacant. Younger asked church leaders to schedule the vote, and members voted 499-237 against firing their pastor of nearly seven years.

The two-thirds favorable vote was not enough to quell the controversy, however. A significant number of members left the church and contributions are dangerously low, members reported.

McAfee announced Younger’s appointment April 17, effective July 1. He holds master’s and doctoral degrees from Southern Baptist Theological Seminary and has been an instructor or visiting professor at Southern Seminary, Midwestern Baptist Seminary, Manhattan Christian College, and McAfee. He has been a pastor in Texas, Kentucky, Indiana and Kansas.

“I am honored by the invitation to join the McAfee School of Theology and I’m delighted to join such an outstanding faculty,” Younger said in a news release. “I feel like the Spirit is leading me to this new ministry.

“I’m also sad at leaving Broadway, the church has taught me so much about following Christ, and it is one of my hopes in this new ministry I can teach young people to lead their congregations to be as faithful as Broadway has been.”

Broadway, founded in 1882, is one of the most prominent churches in the Dallas-Fort Worth area and in moderate Baptist life nationally. Prior to the 1980s, many students, professors and administrators at nearby Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary were active Broadway members. Among its previous pastors is Cecil Sherman, the founding coordinator of the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship. CBF’s current moderator, Harriet Harral, is a longtime Broadway member.

-30-

ABP honors Texas convention,announces $100,000 challenge
By Robert Marus

SAN ANTONIO (ABP) -- Directors of Associated Baptist Press honored the Baptist General Convention of Texas and announced a $100,000 matching-funds challenge from a Texas Baptist family during their semi-annual meeting, held April 14-15 in San Antonio.

“Every year, since almost the beginning, the Baptist General Convention of Texas has been an important part of ABP,” said Executive Editor Greg Warner at an April 14 banquet honoring the BGCT with the ABP Founders Award. The state convention has long been one of the major financial supporters of the independent Baptist news service.

In accepting the award, BGCT president Joy Fenner said the convention supports ABP as part of its wider mission of promoting religious freedom.

“Texas Baptists support ABP because we believe in the freedom of the press,” she said. “But freedom of the press is just one piece of the bigger picture of religious liberty…. [I]n a day when truth is handled so carelessly … it has reminded me that freedom does not give license to do anything or nothing. Instead, for the Christ-follower, it calls us to a standard far different than any court or convention could place upon us.”

Longtime Baptist leader Hardy Clemons, who currently serves as interim executive pastor at Trinity Baptist Church in San Antonio, said in a keynote address that such religious freedom is one of the reasons he’s still thankful and hopeful to be a Baptist.

“Baptists have stood for freedom; we have stood for liberty and justice for all. And sometimes we’ve talked the game a whole lot more than we’ve played the game,” he said. “But sometimes we’ve quit even talking the game of how important it is that religious freedom is one of the deepest values in biblical literature; it is one of the deepest values in the history of the Christian church.

“I’ve got a lot of hope for ABP and its mission …. It’s been a tough time to be Baptist, but it’s been a good time to be Baptist. And God is counting on us and our grandchildren’s children are counting on us to be people of freedom and people of integrity.”

Clemons has been prominent in moderate Baptist life and served lengthy pastorates at churches in Texas and South Carolina prior to retiring in 2005. His wife, Ardelle, was a longtime campus minister and a member of ABP’s founding board of directors when the service was established in 1990. They were surprised with an announcement at the banquet that longtime friends had named an ABP fund in their honor.

ABP board member Jimmy Nickell announced the establishment of the Hardy and Ardelle Clemons Endowment. Nickell and his wife, Kaye, have been friends of the Clemonses for decades and donated the seed money for the endowment. He and Warner said the goal for the fund is to attract other donations in the Clemonses’ honor, eventually growing large enough to endow an ABP staff position.

In addition, Warner announced a $100,000 matching-funds challenge from the Eula Mae and John Baugh Foundation. The foundation, which manages funds from a Texas family prominent in moderate Baptist philanthropy, has promised to match all individual donations to the news service, up to $100,000, until the end of 2008.

“No family in Baptist life is more committed to preserving Baptist freedoms than the Baugh family,” Warner said in a statement. “Now that family is challenging other Baptists to increase their commitment to freedom of the press, and we couldn’t be happier about that.”

John and Eula Mae Baugh’s granddaughter, Jackie Moore of San Antonio, serves as an ABP director and on the Baugh Foundation board.

The board also heard reports of a record year in ABP news production and the ongoing implementation of a strategic partnership with three other Baptist news organizations.

ABP produced 689 news stories in 2007 -- the most in the agency’s 17-year history, Warner noted in his report to the directors. He also highlighted the continuing implementation of a multimedia partnership, dubbed New Voice Media, with three historic statewide Baptist newspapers -- the Texas Baptist Standard, the Missouri Word & Way, and the Virginia Religious Herald. The agencies are already cooperating in the production of themed biweekly news-and-feature packages, and they plan to launch a joint New Voice Media website later this year.

In personnel actions, directors authorized the staff to move forward with replacing former assistant editor Hannah Elliott, who resigned in March to take a position with the Forbes news organization. They also approved a six-month contract extension with fundraising consultant Todd Heifner to direct ABP’s development work.

In other actions, the board gave final approval to a 2008 budget of $598,515, an increase over the previous year’s budget of $530,300. They also elected Virginia’s Jim White as a member of the board. White is editor of the Religious Herald and is appointed to the ABP board after nomination by the Baptist General Association of Virginia.

The directors’ next meeting is scheduled for Oct. 2-4 in Providence, R.I. It will coincide with an ABP-sponsored heritage tour of New England sites important in Baptist and American history, such as the First Baptist Church in America, founded by Roger Williams in Providence.

-30-

Supreme Court decision means executions move forward
By Robert Marus

WASHINGTON (ABP) -- The Supreme Court effectively enabled states to move forward with executions March 16, declaring constitutional a kind of lethal injection used in almost all of the nation’s 30-plus death chambers.

In its Baze v. Rees (No. 07-5439) decision, the court said a three-drug procedure that Kentucky uses to execute prisoners does not pose enough of a risk of unintentional pain or suffering to declare it a violation of the Constitution’s ban on “cruel and unusual punishments.”

In the widely splintered decision, the nine justices produced seven different opinions between them. While the court voted 7-2 to uphold Kentucky’s procedure, a plurality of only three justices fully supported the court’s official opinion.

“Simply because an execution method may result in pain, either by accident or as an inescapable consequence of death, does not establish the sort of 'objectively intolerable risk of harm' that qualifies as cruel and unusual” punishment, wrote Chief Justice John Roberts in the plurality opinion. It was joined in full only by Justice Samuel Alito and Justice Anthony Kennedy.

Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and David Souter voted in the minority, saying they could not be certain that Kentucky had taken all necessary steps to prevent the unnecessary infliction of pain and suffering. “[I]f readily available measures can materially increase the likelihood that the protocol will cause no pain, a state fails to adhere to contemporary standards of decency if it declines to employ those measures,” Ginsburg wrote in a dissenting opinion joined by Souter.

Kentucky’s procedure -- a form of which is used by virtually every state that enforces the death penalty -- first involves a general anesthetic. Then a second drug paralyzes the prisoner to prevent convulsions. The final drug induces a heart attack. Two inmates from the state’s death row sued, contending the method poses a risk that the condemned will suffer, consciously and silently, after being injected with a drug that paralyzes them.

The plaintiffs were Ralph Baze, who was convicted of murdering two police officers who tried to serve warrants on him, and Thomas Bowling, who shot a young couple to death and injured their 2-year-old son in a traffic dispute.

Kentucky law bans the three-drug procedure for euthanizing animals, favoring a single dose of barbiturates that anesthetizes and induces death simultaneously. A group of veterinarians joined the inmates’ side in the case, arguing that what is considered inhumane for animals should not be used on humans.

But Roberts, Alito and Kennedy noted that there was no evidence in the Kentucky case that such an alternative would be better. And, the plurality said, a condemned inmate must show that any alternative is “feasible, readily implemented and in fact significantly reduces a substantial risk of severe pain.”

Justice John Paul Stevens , who voted to support the court’s judgment but not its reasoning, wrote a separate opinion declaring that, while respect for court precedent required him to uphold the Kentucky law, his three decades on the court had led him to conclude that capital punishment is itself unconstitutional.

“[C]urrent decisions by state legislatures, by the Congress of the United States, and by this court to retain the death penalty as a part of our law are the product of habit and inattention rather than an acceptable deliberative process that weighs the costs and risks of administering that penalty against its identifiable benefits, and rest in part on a faulty assumption about the retributive force of the death penalty,” wrote Stevens , the court’s longest-serving member.

He continued, “The time for a dispassionate, impartial comparison of the enormous costs that death-penalty litigation imposes on society with the benefits that it produces has surely arrived.”

Stevens co-authored the 1976 Supreme Court decision that allowed states to reinstitute capital punishment.

-30-

Opinion: Democrats and the abortion issue
By David Gushee

At a policy level, I was generally pleased with the answers of the candidates to the policy questions they were asked. They expressed commitment to domestic-poverty reduction, creation care, the abolition of torture, and efforts to combat AIDS. The fact that they were asked such questions in the context of a discussion of faith and values was itself important. It shows that the moral-values agenda is broadening and that faith motivates passionate concern for human suffering wherever it occurs. The Christian Right no longer has a monopoly on moral-values issues, and it is not only Republicans who can discuss their faith in the public arena.

I have argued in my book on faith and politics that the great majority of evangelicals (including the “evangelical center”) care deeply about abortion and that the default Democratic stance on abortion remains the key obstacle for many evangelicals in pulling the Democratic lever on election day. In reflecting on the answers that Senators Clinton and Obama offered on abortion, I am even more convinced that this is the case. Of the two, Senator Clinton did better on this issue. But neither candidate sent the kind of signals on the abortion issue that demonstrate to me that they really get how important this issue is at the level of principle for evangelical Christians.

Both Clinton and Obama were asked directly whether life begins at conception. Clinton said that the potential for life begins at conception, and Obama said that he had not resolved the issue of when life begins, while then moving on to speak in terms of “potential life.”

The problem with “potential life” language is that no one who wants a child and then discovers they have conceived one describes the entity as a potential life. “Honey, guess what, the doctor tells me I have a potential life growing inside me!” The “entity” is a baby in its very first stages unless we do not want it; then we seek euphemisms like “potential life.” Whenever we see euphemisms in use we can know that something morally dubious is going on. Torture is not “torture,” it is “enhanced interrogation.” Genocide is not “murder” it is “special treatment” or “ethnic cleansing.” And a developing human being in its first stages is not a “baby” but a “potential life.”

American law as it currently stands is based on a painfully transparent euphemizing of the status of unwanted developing human life. Perhaps Democratic candidates cannot say this. Perhaps they do not believe this. But they could say this:

“I recognize that many millions of Americans believe that a pregnant woman is carrying not just a potential life but an actual human being in its earliest stages of development. Many millions of other Americans do not believe this. But we live together in one national community, and we must respect the heartfelt convictions of one another, especially on matters of such gravity. And even those who believe that we are dealing with ‘potential life’ must acknowledge the great tragedy of abortion for everyone involved, and the great failure represented by a nation in which one out of five pregnancies ends in abortion. This makes it even more important that we craft public policies that reduce the number of abortions as much as we can.”

Here the now standard Democratic line about the various ways in which abortion can be reduced would have more resonance and integrity: abstinence-based sex education, age-appropriate and parentally controlled education about contraception, improved prenatal care, enhanced adoption services, greatly improved foster care, and every other ground-level effort required to protect the life of both the pregnant woman and the child she is carrying. The Democratic candidate could say:

“In light of the great social tensions created over the past 35 years by our unresolved national conflict over abortion, if elected I promise to initiate a comprehensive national effort to reduce the rate of abortions by 50 percent over the next four years—even if there is no change in the basic structure of the law created by the Roe v. Wade decision. Because abortion is at best a necessary evil, everyone benefits if we can reduce the need for it. Everybody ought to be able to get behind this effort to reduce abortion. Imagine fewer unwanted pregnancies; but then imagine also the pregnant teenager getting the support and counseling and health care she needs, the impoverished couple receiving the services they need to care for mother and child, the childless couple experiencing the joy of adoption, and of course the child herself or himself getting a chance to live out his or her life in a safe and loving family environment. Imagine a society no longer divided over the issue of abortion. I promise X billion dollars over the next four years to achieve this goal, and I declare abortion reduction one of my most important domestic priorities.”

Notice that no Republican or Democratic candidate has ever made an effort like this on abortion. Thirty-five years of pro-life efforts to overturn Roe v. Wade have never yielded gains like those promised by such an initiative. The presidential candidate who takes this path will not only improve the national conversation about abortion, make our country a better place, and save the lives of thousands of developing human beings, he or she might just win both the Catholic and the evangelical vote and therefore the election. If a moral argument won’t persuade, maybe an electoral one will?

-30-

-- David Gushee is distinguished university professor of Christian ethics at Mercer University. His latest book, The Future of Faith in American Politics: The Public Witness of the Evangelical Center, debuts Feb. 15. www.davidpgushee.com