Something random (Southern Baptists and alcohol)
It seems that Dr. Mohler, President of Southern Seminary, made a statement to the effect that 99% of all SBC church doors would be closed to men entering the ministry that practice moderate consumption of alcohol.
In what seems to be a reaction against this, some SBCers are going to propose a resolution during the 2006 convention against Gluttony and Self-Control.
ON GLUTTONY AND SELF CONTROL
WHEREAS, One third of all American
adults (well over 60 million) are obese; and
WHEREAS, 16% of American
children (9 million) are overweight, and the
percentage continues to increase (the numbers have tripled since 1980);
and
WHEREAS, Obesity is now recognized as a major risk factor for coronary
heart disease, which can lead to heart attack; and
WHEREAS, Gluttony is one of the causes of obesity; and
WHEREAS, The Bible condemns gluttony as a serious sin akin to
drunkenness; and
WHEREAS, Gluttony is the abuse of God’s gift of food to
us; and
WHEREAS, Gluttony is the opposite of self control, a fruit of the
Spirit; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the messengers to the
Southern Baptist Convention meeting in
Greensboro, North Carolina, June
13-14, 2006, decry the lack of self control,
and over-indulgence in eating
throughout our culture and our churches; and be it
further
RESOLVED, That
we promote moderation in all of our eating, giving thanks to God.
Relevant Links
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/04facts/obesity.htm
http://www.nal.usda.gov/foodstamp/T...alth_stats.html
http://www.gnpcb.org/esv/search/?q=Proverbs+23%3A20-21
I do find this interesting considering one of the hallmarks of Baptist (and Presbyterian) life is to be liberty of conscience.
Doubly interesting is the proposal bring up gluttony, which comes from (what I understand to be) pro-moderation SBCers.
I know why they are doing that. It's to point out the folly of decrying a 100 calorie light beer (or a Guinness) when it's perfectly okay to hit the buffet at Shoney's, or value menu at Taco Bell and stuff yourself. I do hope that this doesn't lead to a split, but even moreso, I hope it leads to a consideration of practice in light of Scripture, rather than a very short tradition.
One last thing to ponder: which is worse, one glass of wine daily, or a Big Mac? And which is more likely to be attacked from the pulpit?
Disclaimer: I am not attempting to bash anyone in the SBC. I have great respect for the SBC and many who are leaders in that denomination. My problem with this situation, and it can be said with regard to issues in my own denomination, is that sometimes certain cultural traditions to not withstand the scrutiny of Scripture. When that happens, the cultural tradition must never be placed over Scripture. When we do that, we lose sight of the basic principal of sola scriptura.
posted by Bobby's blog at 4:10 PM
6 Comments:
Bobby, thanks for the link to my site and my buddy's site (Joe).
Careful on your take on the gluttony resolution. First of all, it's to point out the folly of alcohol resolutions (of which there have been many). It's not going to be submitted, in my understanding. So it isn't "retaliation" or an "attack," as you put it.
Second, it's not about obesity, but gluttony, which is directly mentioned as sin in the Bible while "alcohol" is not (the abuse of it is sin, just as the abuse of food is sin).
Good to see the conversation moving along.
Steve
I made a typo and accidently put "obesity" instead of "gluttony" and for that I apologize and made the appropriate correction.
I read your blog last week with a buddy of mine who's a student at SBTS and we talked about this situation in the SBC, and I truly hope that it works out for you guys.
As an aside, I was considering Southern for PhD studies since I would have good access to materials which interest me for studies. After reading the SBTS rule on alcohol, I would not be able to partake communion if the PCA church we would attend used wine. I can't be bound to that.
The Presbyterians aren't any better.
Look at Covenant's own policies concerning students and alcohol and you will find something just as, if not more, ridiculous than the Baptist policy. At least the Baptists are consistent and ban it across the board. Separating students into groups of "can handle alcohol" and "cannot handle alcohol" and then basing that distinction on their marital status is flat out wrong.
The Covenant policy quotes a statement by the General Assembly out of context for their rationale. (The funny thing is, if I remember correctly, Covenant uses it to bind the conscience while the General Assembly resolution was all about liberty of conscience.)
Having grown up in a Southern Baptist church, I can say fairly confidently that we did not have a hallmark of "liberty of conscience." It took me quite a while before I actually understood that concept of freedoms within the body of Christ.
Also, according to the on-campus resident meeting I attended a couple of weeks ago, the reason for the no alcohol rule for the singles was given as something like a zoning policy from the neighborhood when the housing was put in. Apparently the neighbors were afraid of a frat house-like atmosphere in their backyards. And the Dean of Students also said they would consider a written proposal to reverse the rule if anyone were to submit one. I guess no one has done that yet.
When I first heard about the rule, I thought it might be due to having people with differing views on the subject in a shared living space and so to not cause anyone to stumble, they just decided to not allow the single students to partake. It would make sense that a married couple would share a view on that and thus not cause the other to stumble if they did or did not drink alcohol. I'm sure I made this up in my mind, but it seems like something that would make sense.
Anyway, for whatever that's worth...
Megan, thanks for the information about the zoning requirements. Given Covenant's location, I could see that being a concern, albeit misguided, in a neighborhood meeting.
I'm sure that if any single students had a problem with not being able to drink on campus, the Dean of Students would be happy to talk to them. In fact, when I see someone at Student Services tomorrow, I may just ask them point blank just to know.
Also, I have had plenty of single Covenant friends who go to Growler's in the afternoon anyway, so it's not like a single student has to live a "dry" life. It's dry on campus for single students.
However, in defense of the single students, I can see how that would seem like a very frustrating policy if one did not have all the information.
Post a Comment
<< Home