Abstinence Only Sex Ed and African Americans

 At the Vital Signs segment of the bet.com Lifestyle page, there is a May 30 posting entitled, “Why Abstinence-Only Sex Ed Doesn’t Work.” The author suggests that abstinence-only programs are not beneficial to the African American community. I have printed the text of the article below, and my responses to the author’s statements are in the red paragraphs. The line of reasoning is similar to that of those who are for acceptance of homosexual lifestyles within the African American church, to which I have responded in the last chapter of Where Are All the Brothers?   Abstinence will work for those with the power of Christ, for abstinence is really possessing our bodies in holiness and honor (I Thess. 4:4), having been cleansed by the power of Christ:

 

 

Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God, (I Cor. 6:9-11, ESV).

 

 

Here is the text and the response:

 

 

                                                               

 

 

There’s a sex crisis in our community and the government doesn’t want us to talk about it.

 

 

Blaming the Government will not solve the problem. The Government is only responsible for 1) equal governing of all, 2) defense from enemies within and without, and 3) equal justice to all. Not one of these items has been breached by reminding us that sexual relationships are reserved for heterosexual, monogamous married couples.

 

 

Abstinence-only conversations have ruled sex ed classes at federally sponsored programs and health clinics for nearly a decade. But, Black teens ARE having sex and getting sick from it. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Infection recently reported that its first of its kind study of 14-to 19-year-olds found that Black teen girls had the highest overall prevalence of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs). Nearly half of the Black teen girls they surveyed had at least one STD, and they didn’t get them from being abstinent. What other proof do we need that abstinence-only programs don’t work?

 

 

The presence of STD among 14-19 year old girls does not necessarily mean that abstinence-only programs do not work. It could mean that no one takes them seriously, but if taken seriously by the user they would work. Or it could mean that teens are not gaining enough support from the social institutions outside of school and health clinics – the location of sex ed classes – to be faithful to abstinence—institutions like boys’ and girls’ clubs, or houses of worship. Or it could be an indicator of the effect of the breakdown of the family upon teen sexual patterns – that no one at home is giving attention to teen sexual habits. (As you say below, parents are the first line of defense. Is it right to assume parents are defending?) Or maybe there are sufficient flaws in the educational content of such programs that they are not truly abstinence-only programs, for some abstinence-only programs are showing success.

 

 

 

 

Let’s face it. Our girls are having sex and they don’t know how to protect themselves. Parents, you are the first line of defense. If you don’t know what to say to keep your daughter safe, talk to somebody, or have your daughter talk with someone who does – a doctor, health counselor or other adult your daughter trusts. We also need to stop being so righteous about sex. With all the mixed messages teens are getting from music, videos and their friends, we can’t afford to keep burying our heads in the sand. They’re not getting what they need to stay safe and it’s our fault.

 

 

Teaching abstinence is not the same as ignoring a threat. It is an alternative to giving away the responsible teaching on the proper place for a sexual relationship. It is an attempt by a minority segment of American society to counter the messages from the majority culture that come through music, videos, and ignorantly- or ill-informed and irresponsible peers. In fact, what is needed is a righteous approach to sexual relationships—one that puts the breaks on the sexual messages coming from the alternative outlets. If the music industry made a 180-degree turn to sing of abstinence and make videos of the same, what might the effect be? Of course I am being facetious, but you get the point: abstinence programs themselves cannot be faulted for the statistics on teen sex or teen STDs.

 

Get off your high horse. Get teens girls information, not just about sex, but about living with dignity. Check out actor Hill Harper’s latest book next week called “Letters To A Young Sister.” It stresses that one the most important sex talks you can have with a teen girl may be about respecting herself. It also tells teen girls to ”define your destiny,” shaping your future to whatever you want it to be. Talk with teen girls about her goals and dreams and about rising above her circumstances, and about delaying sex.

 

 

You are right: we need to teach our daughters about dignity! We need to teach them that it is indignant to give away their virginity and deepest emotional desires prior to marriage. We need to teach them that the way to gain respect is to hold young men at bay sexually so that they can stand out among their peers rather than be one of the girls known to be loose, free, easy, or available. Respect comes by uniqueness in high standards rather than by commonality in low standards. This is the part of one’s “destiny” that must be defined – that must be made into a conviction, not simple a goal. Might I suggest that Vicki Courtney has a book that every mother of a young daughter should read?

 

 

But also talk with her about how love doesn’t mean going to bed with someone she THINKS loves her just because he says so, or having sex just to keep a boy. And, most importantly, talk with her about using a condom every time she has sex. Let her know that if the young man she’s interested in doesn’t care enough about her to use a condom, kick him to the curb.

 

 

Is it necessary to have a “don’t, but if you do” conversation? If this is the alternative to abstinence, then how will you curb STDs based on your line of argumentation? You only have made a lesser form of abstinence: “Abstain from those who will not use condoms. Other guys are OK.” Does this prevent things transmitted through oral sex? Does this deal with the emotional desires and confusion brought on by having sex while young and unmarried? What will make this lesser-abstinence program more successful? Aren’t you being “righteous” about condom-use-only sex? Isn’t your head in the sand about young girls participating in sex without a condom? Is “don’t, but if you do” defining one’s destiny, or is it not saying, “do not strive for the highest goals?” Will this solution increase conversations about (responsible) sexual behavior or feelings of “love” toward young men? Once moms and dads OK condom use, why have any more talks with their girls? Isn’t the problem solved? Also, if we give the “don’t, but if you do” talk, will this be enough to say we have talked with our daughters? If so, then we will not need thereafter to talk with a doctor or a health care professional, for they should not be able to say any more than this, right? Or maybe, just maybe, a doctor or health care professional might go one step further and say, “young lady, the safest thing you can do to prevent contracting a Sexually Transmitted Disease is to refrain from participating in sexual acts until you have married someone who is committed to sexually enjoying you only, and then maintaining your mutual sexual fidelity.” I think this is better than saying abstinence, in either form, doesn’t work.

Elders in Baptist Life

I am stepping out of my hiatus for one post because I have been provoked by thoughts on elders in Baptist life. In the most recent issue of Deacon magazine, Greg Pouncey, Pastor of First Baptist Church Tillman’s Corner, Mobile, Alabama, contributes an article entitled, “The Reemergence of Elders in Baptist Life” 38:4 (Summer 2008): 28-31. I found a fair and balanced discussion in the article for the most part, although I wish the article could have given more space to the analysis of the Scriptures; (but I know that editors place limitations or word count on these types of articles). Yet I took issue with the section on “potential weaknesses of the elder system” (31).

        As one who is pastor of a congregation that has recently transitioned to an elder-led congregationalism, I am quite excited about the men Hillcrest has affirmed as “Acting Elders” from April through October, 2008. I hope many other Baptist churches will experience the joy of having men leading who have the highest composite of Christian character, who are skilled to teach the whole counsel of God, who hold a clear vision of the relationship between Christ, his work, and the kingdom of God, and who serve alongside of their senior pastor in shepherding the people of God through meek, Christlike service.

 

 

I am printing my response here because I doubt whether a response this long would be printed in “letters to the editor.”  I have written it as a letter to the author of the article.

 

 

                                               

 

 

 

May 27, 2008

 

 

Dear Brother Greg:

 

 

I appreciate your article, “The Reemergence of Elders in Baptist Life.” The article was most irenic and very gracious toward those who have come to embrace a model of pastor, elders, and deacons within congregational life. You were very careful to avoid inflammatory terms and words of accusation. I felt that your brotherly tone was a mark of Christian character being carried over to the written page. Thank you for demonstrating grace.

 

 

While reading your article I noted several items to which a response seems important. My concern is that some omissions, along with the selected “potential weaknesses” given, might give those skeptical about elder leadership the wrong idea about what Biblical elderships means for a local congregation. Armed with your article as the approach to this issue, members of congregations might find good reasons to dismiss altogether what Scripture has to say about elders.

 

 

Here are some of the concerns I see, along with some responses and suggestions:

 

 

1.    It is true that “today, most leaders of the church carry the title of pastor,” and the term used for pastor “signifies a shepherd who tends herds or flocks and renders care and superintendence over his flocks” (29). It is equally true that “pastor,” as a title, only occurs once in the New Testament in Eph. 4:11, a passage you recognize in relationship to the charge of pastors. Might I suggest you remind people that we recognize a distinct office of pastor based on this one reference in Scripture primarily, although elder or elders appear at least 15 times in the context of church leadership (and overseer/overseers 6 times)? Might I also suggest that it we be good if we inform our audiences that there seems to be more written about elders having a duty to shepherd (Acts 20:28; I Pet 5:2) than there is about pastors having a duty to lead the church?

 

 

2.    You write that the terms shepherd and overseer(s) “seem interchangeable, as seen in I Peter 5:2, where the overseers are commanded to ‘shepherd God’s flock among you’” (29). You are correct in noting that these terms show some polysemy (but not ambiguity). However, it is elders, not overseers, who are commanded by Peter to “shepherd God’s flock… overseeing” the people of God. Might I suggest this correction so that your audience hears more accurately what the Scriptures say about these offices? This will help congregationalists to see that elders are to “render care and superintendence over” their flocks, just like the one given to the church as a gift-office—the pastor.

 

 

3.    In your brief discussion of the work of elders in the early church in Acts, you rightly discuss how they closely worked with the Apostles. But in this brief narrative, you left out a handful of very important appearances of elders in the early church. First, you did not mention the appointment of elders in every city in Acts 14:23. (You did mention the appointment passage in Tit. 1:5). This passage is important as it seems to support the idea of the appointment of elders being part of a “Pauline Cycle” in the establishment of a “Pauline Cycle” in the establishment of new churches.¹

 

        Second, the charge by the Apostle Paul to the elders at Ephesus is not mentioned. Of great significance in this passage is that Paul can declare himself innocent of accountability for the lives of the members of the church in Ephesus because he has taught the elders the whole counsel of God, modeled before the elders a life conformed to the whole counsel of God, and commended the elders to carry out their tasks by the whole counsel of God—“the word of His grace” (20:32). The accountability for the “blood” of the membership now rested in the hands of men called “elders.” If wolves among them would spill the sheep’s blood, it would be elders who would stand before God for the slaughter. Might I suggest you mention the weightiness of the charge to the Ephesian elders, so that even if people still conclude that there should be a pastor-deacons model, they must hold deacons to this standard of accountability for their souls?

 

Third, the approach of James and the elders to challenge Paul’s teaching on the Law in the Diaspora is worth mentioning (Acts 21:17-26). It is clear that James is distinguished among the elders, but the elders have authority within the Jerusalem congregation to approach Paul for the sake of the believers in Jerusalem. Might I suggest that you include the fact that Paul submitted himself to the suggestion of James and the elders? Providing this information will allow your audiences to consider the significance of this for the elders’ discussion.

 

 

4.    Related to the comments about the early church, there is no mention of the role of elders in responding to the sick-bed confession of a repentant church member (Ja. 5:14-15). James is one of the earliest NT epistles, reflecting some of the earliest established ecclesiology within the church. It would seem that the elders in the churches in the Diaspora had authority in discipline, for restorative purposes—that is, for the good of the church. Might I suggest you include this most positive aspect of the responsibility of elders so that elder leadership might be seen for the good that it is? For your readers and listeners this will help round out a picture of the elder in the early church.

 

 

5.    You have recognized a Biblical distinction between deacons and overseers (29). Might I suggest that you go one step further and indicate that nowhere in Scripture are deacons ever given the authority to lead or rule, but only to serve? This is so, in spite of the fact that The Baptist Faith and Message uses language that is ambiguous about the distinction in the roles of the two offices.

 

 

6.    When considering the reasons for reemergence of elders within congregationalism today, you conclude that “though churches who have elders appeal to Scripture as their authority, practical issues in the church seem to be the driving force for the reemergence of elders in some churches” (30). This is your opinion, which is to be respected as such. However, it is given without support. I would be concerned that someone prejudiced against the concept of Biblical eldership could use this to suggest Scripture is not the driving force behind the reemergence of elders. Scripture drives me, for one, in looking at God’s plan for his Bride. I think many of our Baptist brothers would say the same. Further, may I suggest that the existence of the perception of a pragmatic motive behind the reemergence is really admittance that our churches are weak in their care and governance in the current models (which you also seem to suggest)? May I go even further than this and say that the congregational men I know who have recovered an elder model have done so in the vein of the Conservative resurgence, i.e., a return to inerrancy and its implications for the life of the church? Also please note that a return to a Biblical model is intended to solve the problem of immature or erring membership (Acts 20:28; Tit. 1:9), which, as a “practical [issue],” is common to much of congregational life? I believe your discussion would achieve greater balance with these inclusions.

 

 

7.    You express concern about the unfortunate scenario “when one elder gains more influence than necessary and dictates or intimidates the board to do as he wishes” (31). I share this concern. However, please know that if this danger exists, it exists inherently in the teaching of the New Testament, for it is there that elders are given “rule” and “oversight” (cf. Act 20:17ff, I Tim. 5:17; Tit 1:9-10; I Pet. 5:1-2). Authority – that is, godly, God-given, stewardship authority, but authority nonetheless – is given to elders by their responsibility. It is a lead-by-the-whole-counsel-of-God-and-Godly-example-authority, but it is still authority. I am not suggesting that the Lord should not have prescribed such rule to men, for his will is perfect, bringing him glory and fulfilling our joy. I am suggesting that a corruption of power is a risk we take when we choose to live by grace in a world yet to experience the fullness of redemption. This is why it is extremely important that churches give earnest care to making sure the men they nominate and affirm as elders meet all of the qualifications of elders. Such men would be devoid of a power-mongering trait. Might I suggest that you make it clear that damning the alternative is not a proper means of reasoning for one’s preferred position? May I say further that if the concern you expressed is reasonable for elders in rule, it is equally reasonable for any who are in rule? I have been a member and leader in four Baptist churches in my life. In my experience it is common for one or more deacons to exhibit exactly the type of despotism that you depict in your caution about elder rule. Congregations in the pastor-and-deacons model should be concerned about deacons who exhibit ungodly rule and a lack of humility even as much as they are concerned about this on the part of their singular elder known as the pastor.

 

 

8.    Your last suggested potential weakness of the elder model, “the congregation might become detached from the workings of the church since they have little to say in anything other than the major decisions of the church,” suffers from two flaws. First, elder led churches are intended to be congregational. The intent of changing or transitioning to elders is not to hide information from the congregation or remove them from the decision-making process. This is a common misnomer about elder-led churches.

    Second, there is more to church workings than the “vote” (or “say”) of its members. If voting on financial matters, property acquisitions and disbursements, and leadership change is the crux of what keeps congregational saints feeling connected to the (workings of) church, then we are primarily (only?) connected by our feeling able to be in control of the direction of the church. Subtly this is saying that we are connected as long as we have power. However, connectedness does not require power, just as service does not require a title. If members are serving one another and are serving the lost, enjoying Christ-centered fellowship, demonstrating Biblical hospitality, meeting the needs of the saints in love, and praying together, they cannot become divorced from the life of the church—the real workings of the church.

    What is needed to maintain connectedness to the working of the church is a recovery of the communion of the saints. Whether elder-lead or otherwise, the members must take up the responsibility to exercise this aspect of meaningful membership. If the concern is about the display of the Gospel among the congregation, then members will find themselves involved in church life as “members of one another” (Rom. 12:5). A church with this sort of maturing membership, guided by men who meet the qualifications of elders and who are carrying out their duties faithfully, would be a great force for the proclamation of the Gospel to places where Christ’s name is not yet known.

 

 

Greg, thank you for a good start at approaching an important issue in Baptist life. May the Lord’s grace be upon you as you lead his people by means of the whole counsel of God, including all that it teaches about elders. I hope to see you at the Annual Meeting in Indy in two weeks. If you will be there, let’s make plans to greet one another. I’ll set aside a copy of my book to give to you, my brother in the Lord.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

 

Rev. Eric C. Redmond

Pastor, Hillcrest Baptist Church

Second Vice President, Southern Baptist Convention

 

 

1. David J. Hesslegrave, Planting Churches Cross-Culturally, 2^nd ed. [Grand

 

 Rapids: Baker, 2000]). Elders, as this view argues, were a normal part of

 

establishing each church; (see “every church” in 14:23).

 

 

Nathan Finn’s Domestic Slavery and Baptists

Church historian Nathan Finn at The Fullness of Time Blog has a new book coming out with colleague Keith Harper, entitled, Domestic Slavery Considered as a Scriptural Institution. From the blog, here is the post:

 Lord willing, my first book will be hitting bookshelves in about eight weeks. Domestic Slavery Considered as a Scriptural Institution was first published in 1845, about a month before the formation of the Southern Baptist Convention. The book was based upon a series of point-counterpoint articles originally published in The Baptist Repository, a paper in Boston. The authors were Francis Wayland and Richard Fuller, two denominational leaders among Baptists in mid-19th century America.  Several historians have argued that the book was the most important work of its kind. It has not been in print since the 1850s.

My colleague Keith Harper and I have annotated the work, added a brief introduction, and included an appendix that reprints several articles from The Baptist Repository related to slavery and the formation of the SBC. The book will be published by Mercer University Press in its The Baptists series, edited by notable Baptist historian Walter Shurden. I hope to author several posts in the next few weeks about the two authors and the book itself.

I am looking forward to Nathan’s observations. Nathan also recently made a good post on the concept of ”Reformed Baptist.“

Tom Ascol on Liberty Seminary’s Name Change and Caner’s Revisionism

Tom Ascol at Founders Ministries asks, “What’s in a (Baptist) name?” The gaffes Tom points out brought me some roaring laughter. A long excerpt is especially worth posting here:

Timothy George has noted that each of the 293 delegates who met in Augusta, Georgia in 1845 to establish the Southern Baptist Convention came from churches or associations that embraced the Chaleston/Philadephia/Second London Baptist Confession of Faith. Caner may not like this fact, but it will take more than gratuitous assertions to make it go away.

The final excerpt from Caner’s interview illustrates the cautions that one ought to have in following his historical assessments. When asked about whether Calvin would approve the so-called 5 points of Calvinism, Caner made the following historical gaffes while trying to distinguish Calvin from the Calvinists.

During the life of Calvin a guy named Amyraut…Moise Amyraut said Calvin believed in general atonement. And his fiercest opponent was Theodore Beza, the guy who took over for Calvin.

So historian Caner would have us believe that Amyraut disagreed with Calvin during Calvin’s lifetime and was fiercely opposed by Beza. Calvin (1509-1564) died 32 years before Amyraut was born and Beza (1519-1605) died when Amyraut was 11. Those must have been some fierce debates between the octogenarian Beza and the pre-adolescent Amyraut!

Blum’s Book Win’s Award

Earlier this year I made a post on Ed Blum’s work on W. E. B. Dubois. It recently won a Gustavus Meyrs award! Congratulations to Ed! I hope many will enjoy this fine work. (It’s not too late to get a copy for Christmas!)

Today, I also enjoyed an article in the Washington Post by Duke University’s Mark Anthony Neal on the “Race Man.” Please notice that he suggests (with others) my colleagues and I are part of an industry that is no longer an (the?) incubator for Black leadership. I suspect we are now the lacuna on the score of 21st Century leadership.

Neal’s mentioning of the church’s stillbirth problem reminds me of part of the message in Spike Lee’s Get on the Bus. Remember, the bus left from the church, but never returned. Spike’s analysis is on target.

But I am not worried. A reformation could do for our community what the Reformation did for Geneva.

Gene Veith on Barack Obama

In a previous post, I have talked about my admiration for Gene Veith. I appreciate his intellectual integrity, which remains consistent even when speaking of Barack Obama. Of course, the discussion of politics and presidential succession is never simple. I am thankful to the Lord for the grace of having Prof. Veith in the body of Christ. 

More Sad News, Diabetes and Adoption Too

LaShawn Barber has some strong words about the disproportionate number of HIV/AIDS cases in the African American community and some other related things here. I like the boldness with which she proclaims the truth. And for those of you who are not regular LaShawn Barber readers, be assured that she is not advocating the non-marriage option she mentions. (For more on that, see her Rebelliously Chaste post.) Instead, it seems that she is hoping that the fools who will not heed God’s word on marriage-then-sex might be spared of suffering an STD from their foolishness.

I do not wish HIV/AIDS or any STD on anyone either. But the Scriptures are clear that fools do not learn after many blows, and that those in sexual immorality create a mysterious union – a unholy one albeit, unlike marriage – that needs the power of the death and resurrection of Christ to break it:

A rebuke goes deeper into a man of understanding than a hundred blows into a fool. (Prov. 17:10, ESV.)

A whip for the horse, a bridle for the donkey, and a rod for the back of fools. (Prov. 26:3, ESV.)

Or do you not know that he who is joined to a prostitute becomes one body with her? For, as it is written, “The two will become one flesh.” But he who is joined to the Lord becomes one spirit with him. Flee from sexual immorality. Every other sin a person commits is outside the body, but the sexually immoral person sins against his own body. (I Cor. 6:14-18, ESV..

So there will always be those who ignore the warning of God’s word and hasten toward an STD. I only hope LaShawn’s post can be heard by the people who need to hear it most. Why not pass on this message to your networks so that the seriousness of the situation can get to people in our community?

November is also American Diabetes Month and National Adoption Month. The messages of diabetes care and adoption opportunities also need to be heard by members of the African American community. As an adoptive parent and as one who lives in a home where diabetes is a daily factor in our lives, I cannot emphasize enough the joy to be had in adoption, and the vigilance needed to care for one you love who has diabetes.

Oh, here’s an idea.

Frank Rich, The Hypocrisy Slayer

We are very familiar with Satan’s accusation that people only served God because of his benevolent gifts, not because we are pro-God with unswerving conviction regardless of wealth and health. I am thankful that Job did not sin with his lips. 

Now New York Times OP-ED columnist Frank Rich suggests that Christian social conservatives only vote Republican when they know they can win the Presidency, not because we are pro-life with unswerving conviction before God regardless of the chances of the most pro-life candidate. Of the “czars’ of Christian social conservatism, Rich wirtes, 

If they really believed uncompromisingly in their issues and principles, they would have long since endorsed either Sam Brownback, the zealous Kansas senator fond of using fetus photos as political props, or Mike Huckabee, the former Arkansas governor who spent 15 years as a Baptist preacher, calls abortion a “holocaust” and believes in intelligent design rather than evolution.  

But they gave Senator Brownback so little moral and financial support that he folded his candidacy a week ago. And they continue to stop well short of embracing Mr. Huckabee, no matter how many rave reviews his affable personality receives on the campaign trail. They shun him because they know he’ll lose, and they would rather compromise principle than back a loser.  

His article is well written although this sort of attack is not new. 

Are Christian social conservatives guilty as charged? I had been waiting for the Reformed cultural commentators to pick up this discussion. I am asking he question so we can start the discussion here. But be careful not to sin with your lips. 

If you see thoughts on Rich’s accusation at another’s blog, please send me the URL.

UPDATE, NOVEMBER 9!  (HT: Ben Stevenson): Apparently things have changed in Dobson’s mind:

 http://ihearthuckabee.blogspot.com/2007/11/james-dobson-to-endorse-huckabeee.html.

Let’s see if anyone follows Dobson.

Magnify God and Lured by Infinity added to Blogroll

I have added Magnify God and Lured by Infinity to my blogroll. I am enjoying these blogs. Magnify God alerted me to the $5.00 sale at Desiring God (www.desiringgod.org) on Piper’s new work on justification.

“Black Like Us:” Lewis on Bynum, Courageously and Truthfully

Lance Lewis previously made a Wittenberg Door-like post on the Juanita Bynum incident that speaks with clarity on the problem of the priority of philosophical blackness within the church. Read more here. (Maybe that post also helps the reader to understand the reason why T. D. Jakes can have a book on the bestseller list among African Americans and what this says about what is really taking place in the Black Church as a whole.)