Could you skip a meal a month to alleviate life-threatening hunger? Or, if you don’t think you can stand missing a meal, would you match the cost of one dinner to provide food for someone who otherwise might not eat all day?

If Texas Baptists would take either of these tiny steps, we could walk a long way together toward Christlike ministry to the people Jesus called “the least” in our state, across our nation and around the world.

Hunger dwells very near each of us. More than 3.1 million Texans are food-insecure, meaning they don’t know where they will get the groceries or money to supply their next meal, according to the Center for Public Policy Priorities. Beyond that, almost 900,000 Texans suffer from outright hunger. They don’t receive enough nutrition to sustain healthy bodies.

Texas is home to the highest percentage of food-insecure and hungry families in the nation, the Texas Baptist Christian Life Commission reports. Texas’ poverty rate is 25 percent higher than the national average, and impoverished people in Texas comprise almost 10 percent of the national total.

Other Texas hunger statistics:

• Almost one of every six Texans lives in poverty.

• Ten of the nation’s 30 poorest counties are in Texas.

• One in 10 Texas children under age 12 is hungry.

• Almost one-third of Texas children are hungry or at risk of hunger.

• One in four Texans along the Rio Grande is poor.

• The vast majority of Texas’ hungry are from working families. More than 80 percent of poor families with children and almost 60 percent of poor families and individuals without children include at least one adult who works.

• Hunger and poverty are racial issues. African-Americans and Hispanics are three times as likely to live in poverty as are their Anglo neighbors.

Of course, hunger does not confine itself to Texas. More than 36 million Americans—10 percent of the entire population—live in households that experience hunger or food insecurity. Of those, 13 million are children. No matter how you feel about their parents, can you blame the children for their poverty and hunger?

Worldwide, the situation is even worse. More than 1.4 billion of Earth’s inhabitants live on less than $1.25 per day, according to Bread for the World. One of every five people on the planet subsists on less than $1 per day, the Christian Life Commission adds. Nearly half the population ekes out an existence on less than $2 per day.

Texas Baptists have determined to do something about hunger. As part of our Texas Hope 2010 endeavor to spread the gospel and alleviate suffering, we’re trying to raise $2 million through the Texas Baptist Offering for World Hunger, beginning this fall and running through the end of next year. Allocations will include $700,000 for worldwide hunger and developement ministries this year, $700,000 for those ministries next year, $250,000 to fight urban and rural poverty, $150,000 for Texas-Mexico border ministries, $100,000 for disaster relief and $100,000 for Christian Women’s and Christian Men’s Job Corps.

These are terrific, but the goal is too low. Texas Baptists actually can count 1,532,735 resident members. Suppose all of us would skip a not-chinchy-but-not-extravagant meal per month at $10 and contribute it to our world hunger offering. In one year, we could raise $183,928,200 to fight hunger. (For the faint of heart, halve the participants and the price of lunch; you’re still at $38,318,375.)

Just imagine what we could do to save and improve lives. We cannot comprehend the impact on time and eternity that would derive from saving many of their souls.

Marv Knox is editor of the Baptist Standard. Visit his blog at baptiststandard.com .

Texas Baptists’ challenges to unity and cooperation have changed. The new challenges aren’t as inflammatory as the previous challenge. Still, they’re deep, more diverse and potentially more debilitating.

The former challenge was theological discord. Texas Baptists divided into two groups, largely over how we felt regarding charges of liberalism and fundamentalism in the Southern Baptist Convention. But theology doesn’t divide the Baptist General Convention of Texas anymore. Sure, we reflect a range of theology. But those who only fellowship with people who share their ultraconservative beliefs have left to join a competing convention. Remaining BGCT Baptists share many key doctrines and disagree on some. But we grant each other the grace to disagree on non-essential beliefs.

Today, the BGCT faces different challenges to unity and cooperation. They’re not likely to create the kind of conflict that confounded the convention in the past. But if left untended, they will dissipate our affections, develop into apathy if not outright antipathy, and continue to dilute our effectiveness and diminish our efficiency. The results could be even more dire than those ground out by theological conflict.

These are the elephants in the BGCT room. We must name, tame and harness them:

• Church size. Depending upon their size, churches hold very different expectations of the BGCT. The largest and/or wealthiest congregations don’t want much from the convention. Most don’t feel they need it, because they can procure their own resources—primarily for training and missions. They send clergy and laity to conferences most anywhere. They also send members on mission trips—and even long-term assignments—worldwide. Some large churches still value the BGCT for providing opportunities to support missions and institutions, but not much else. Meanwhile, the BGCT is the only vehicle for training and equipping, as well as doing missions, for thousands of small churches. So, what large churches and small churches want out of the BGCT is very different. More and more, their willingness to compromise is diminishing. This creates an almost impossible scenario for developing convention programs and ministries.

• Age. A generation gap is rending many churches, and it’s stretching out in the BGCT. Like most organizations, the convention tends to confer leadership based upon age and experience. But we have raised young church leaders who are ready to exert their influence. And they feel they can’t wait. As change whipsaws their congregations and all of society, they sense that if the BGCT doesn’t keep up, they won’t even have a convention to inherit by the time they’re “old enough” to be trusted with leadership. They have ideas and passion and courage. They’re unencumbered by a generation of denominational conflict. And they’re not patient. So, if the convention cannot keep up with the currents of change, they’ll engage elsewhere—within the confines of their congregations, in their communities, in networks they create themselves or in groups that accommodate their vision.

• Race and ethnicity. In the BGCT, we work hard at liking each other across the races. In many cases, we genuinely love each other. But we don’t respect and trust each other as we should. Respect/trust means staking our future upon each other. It means valuing each other above ourselves and risking comfort and position for the good of the whole. It means acknowledging and affirming racial and ethnic cultural differences. But it also means refusing to make everything about race and recognizing some issues transcend race.

Compounding these challenges is the fact Texas Baptists mirror our culture, with its heightened sense of self and desire to dominate rather than to create win-win solutions. We must embody Christ’s agape love and graciously submit to each other for the sake of God’s kingdom—and the BGCT.

Marv Knox is editor of the Baptist Standard. Visit his blog at baptiststandard.com .

While our emissaries to Washington take a vacation, you and I can do a little work that could improve the lives of millions of people all over the world.

Please join me in writing members of the Senate and House of Representatives, urging them to support companion bipartisan bills that will strengthen U.S. assistance to foreign countries.

The House bill is the Initiating Foreign Assistance Reform Act of 2009 (H.R. 2139), and its counterpart in the Senate is the Foreign Assistance Revitalization and Accountability Act of 2009 (S. 1524).

The House bill calls on President Obama to implement a comprehensive U.S. strategy to advance global development, which translates into the tools to help feed hungry people, support healthcare and lift them from poverty.

The bill’s four main sections: Require President Obama to develop a comprehensive national strategy for global development. Direct the president to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of U.S. foreign aid. Mandate that both taxpayers and recipients have full access to information about U.S. foreign assistance. Repeal outdated provisions of current policy.

The Senate bill articulates U.S. policy that promotes global development, good governance, and reduction of poverty and hunger. Like the House bill, it specifies U.S. foreign assistance should be transparent. And it restores planning, policy and evaluation capacities for the U.S. Agency for International Development.

Before their August recess, 100 House members signed on as co-sponsors of H.R. 2139. Only four—Charles A. Gonzalez, Sheila Jackson-Lee, Eddie Bernice Johnson and Mac Thornberry—are Texans. S. 1524 was introduced right before the break. It has five sponsors, none of them Texans.

Christians and other people of faith and goodwill need to contact their senators and representative and call on them to co-sponsor the bills immediately and then support them when they come up for votes.

This effort “is crucial to the overall reform of U.S. foreign assistance,” noted David Beckmann, president of Bread for the World, the highly regarded Christian organization that works for solutions to hunger, both in the United States and around the globe. Bread for the World has made H.R. 2139 and S. 1524 the focus of its 2009 “Offering of Letters,” an intense effort to rally Christians to shape policies that can end hunger and reduce global poverty.

“If the Obama Administration and Congress improve the effectiveness of U.S. foreign assistance, our dollars will do more good for decades to come,” Beckmann said. He is correct. And we can strengthen his voice by adding ours to his—if you will take a few moments to write three letters, urging your senators and representative to support these bills.

The need is vital. The U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization recently reported that, for the first time in history, more than 1 billion people on Earth are hungry. That means one out of every six people go to bed hungry each night.

Now, every time I address hunger and poverty, I hear from Christians who say we should not be involved in government solutions to hunger and poverty. They say it’s the church’s job. They’re only half right. Yes, the church should work to end hunger and poverty. But this is too big of a task to do ourselves. And besides, one way we can work on behalf of the hungry and the poor is to advocate for all means—including U.S. foreign aid—to assist them.

To determine your representative and locate contact information for your senators and representative, go to: www.capitol.state.tx.us. Fill in the “Who Represents Me?” box.

For more information about H.R. 2139 and S. 1524 and other hunger issues, visit the Bread for the World website, www.bread.org.

Just like so much of life these days, the way we train ministers is changing. This trend is vital, because even though Baptists affirm the priesthood of all believers, pastors’ and staff ministers’ influence is inversely proportional to their actual numbers. An exceptional minister cannot single-handedly build a great church, but he or she can impact hundreds, if not thousands, of lives. And a poor minister can bring a church to its knees and ruin its influence.

This issue of the Standard carries a cover package about creative new approaches to ministerial training. They supplement outstanding training provided by traditional Baptist seminaries and theology schools. Texas Baptists benefit directly from three—Baptist University of the Americas, Logsdon Seminary at Hardin-Simmons University and Truett Seminary at Baylor University.

With due respect to all these programs, here are 10 skills seminaries need to emphasize. Churches also need to support these skills with opportunities for lifelong continuing education. Most seminary graduates do a passable job of interpreting Scripture, preaching and/or operating church programs. But a vast majority of church travail traced to ministers involves failure touching on one or more of these skills:

• Spiritual discipline. Seminary students spend so much time handling the sacred it can seem mundane. The same is true in ministry. So, a life of prayer and devotional Scripture reading is vital. Ministers can’t survive without this.

• Communication. A huge number of church challenges stem from poor communication. Pastors and staff must be able to present ideas and vision and even basic information clearly. The often-overlooked key is learning to listen.

• Team-building. A church is an army of volunteers. Success often hinges on enabling members to pull together in the same direction. An equally important corollary of this skill is learning to motivate with integrity, not manipulation.

• Conflict mediation. Churches are going to experience conflict until “the roll is called up yonder.” Ironically, conflict can be a catalyst for many valuable developments, such as learning from one another, clarifying goals and expectations, healing old wounds and finding common ground. Unfortunately, many pastors waste these opportunities by either pretending conflict doesn’t exist and allowing it to fester or escalating the conflict into win-lose scenarios that damage their ministries and hurt their churches.

• Transparency and vulnerability. Pastors quickly learn to mask their weaknesses, because some church members will exploit them. But this skill set can strengthen and empower church members by enabling them to identify with and learn from their ministers’ struggles.

• Healthy families. Here’s a strength that becomes a weakness: Ministers are so committed to the church they sacrifice their families. Then, when their marriages corrode or their families crumble, everyone loses. Ministers’ families must come first, before church, just as marriage preceded the church.

• Financial management. Many—most?—churches should do better at compensating their staff. But in this materialistic, consumeristic age, ministers must exercise financial discipline and teach values by the way they conduct their personal business.

• Basic planning. How can you get where you’re going if you don’t know the way? We need pastors who can lead, and it starts with the ability to conceive and execute plans.

• Healthy lifestyles. This is important on multiple levels. Like everyone else’s, ministers’ bodies are the temple of God. Ministers perform best when they’re healthy. And church members need to see the example of fit ministers.

• Humble courage. Maybe neither of these traits can be taught, but they are essential. Both arrogant tyranny and passive cowardice ruin churches.

Marv Knox is editor of the Baptist Standard. Visit his FaithWorks Blog.

Many Baptists and conservative Christians have set homosexuals aside as unparalleled pariahs. There are sinners, and then there are sinners. Ordinary sinners engage in everything from adultery to zealotry. Sometimes, they receive rebuke, and at other times, their church-going friends look the other way. But sinners are women who have sex with women or men who have sex with men, and they can get their church kicked out of the Southern Baptist Convention.

That’s what happened again this summer, when the SBC voted to disfellowship Broadway Baptist Church in Fort Worth because of the congregation’s perceived tolerance of homosexual members. Article III of the SBC constitution notes, “… churches not in cooperation with the convention are churches which act to affirm, approve or endorse homosexual behavior.” Controversy erupted at Broadway when some same-gender members asked to be photographed together in its pictorial directory, but church leaders insisted Broadway still complies with convention policy. Messengers to the SBC annual meeting disagreed and severed the convention’s relationship with the church.

The situation most likely will affect the Baptist General Convention of Texas—if someone proposes the BGCT follow in the national convention’s footsteps.

But the issue presents broader implications than the affiliation of one church. Homosexuality will not go back into the closet. Besides, most churches of any size likely include gay and lesbian members, in the open or not.

I’m not a geneticist or a biologist, so I don’t know if someone is “born homosexual.” I do know many homosexuals who swear they did not choose their orientation and never would choose to feel this way. Still, a direct reading of Scripture says sexual relations are designed by God to be enjoyed between one woman and one man exclusively within the bonds of marriage. While I empathize with the pain and grief of homosexual friends, I believe the Bible says their option is to remain celibate. I do not belittle their suffering, because the sex drive is one of the most powerful forces on Earth, but I also cannot ignore what seems to me the plain teaching of Scripture. Likewise, I do not feel their same-sex yearnings alone comprise sin. Humans are responsible for actions, not feelings. So, we must differentiate between homosexuality and homosexual activity.

This said, Baptists and other Christians must determine how we respond redemptively to homosexual church members. The SBC’s action does not seem to be redemptive, because it singles out one behavior for condemnation while turning a blind eye to the broad range of sins.

Many Christians fear homosexual activity—and perhaps homosexuality itself—and set it aside as a special category. This not only is unbiblical (since blaspheming against the Holy Spirit is named the unforgivable sin), but it also is irrational and disproportionate.

Gossips, back-biters and tattlers have divided many multitudes of congregations. Authoritarian, arrogant and hypocritical church leaders have run an infinite number of new Christians out of the church. Mean ministers and deacons have shoved untold thousands of children and youth so far away from Christ they never will draw near again. These sinners have done far more damage to the Kingdom of Christ than Baptist gays and lesbians. And yet we overlook these damaging and damnable sins. In fact, many of their practitioners are considered pillars of their congregations.

I write this with a heavy heart. I’m sure these words have angered many of you—to both the right and the left of me. And I know one editorial will not resolve one of the most sensitive, frightful and serious issues in the church today.

But we must talk about it. We cannot be afraid to talk

The Southern Baptist Convention crossed a generational divide at its 2009 annual meeting. To be sure, the SBC may or may not succeed in consolidating strong commitment from young adults in the long term. But their presence in Louisville this month wrested leadership from the hands of the old cadre who took control of the convention a generation ago. Younger leaders and their allies now have ascended and will call the denominational shots unless they, too, get out of touch as they age.

A case in point: Danny Akin and Al Mohler overwhelmed Morris Chapman.

Chapman represents the old guard of “fundamentalist” or “conservative resurgence” leaders (your modifier depends upon whether you agreed with them or not) who took control of the SBC in the late 1970s through the early ’90s. Chapman was a favorite son of the movement: A pastor who progressed to ever-more-prominent pulpits. The successful SBC presidential candidate whose 1990 election sealed convention control. And, soon after, the anointed head of the SBC Executive Committee, theoretically the convention’s most powerful staff position.

The fundamentalist/resurgence coalition held together for most of a generation—long enough to defeat their adversaries; consolidate their victories in most state conventions and launch new state conventions elsewhere; reward their faithful with convention offices, board appointments and denominational jobs; and shape the convention in their image.

What they haven’t noticed is they are getting old, the world is getting younger and since Baptists reflect culture at least as much as, if not more than, the Bible, a rising generation of pastors and laity are finding them irrelevant. (Full disclosure here: This problem isn’t unique to the SBC; it’s a primary issue facing the Baptist General Convention of Texas.) Also, the triumphalism of their early successes—God rewarded their political victories with strong finances and fast growth—rings hollow now that their finances are tight and the convention has suffered two years of membership decline.

Along the way, two youngish seminary presidents—Akin of Southeastern and Mohler of Southern, both around 50 and downright vigorous in the SBC age spectrum—developed the convention’s most vibrant theological schools and, with that, attracted a strong following among both their graduates and other young pastors. This year, they joined forces with Johnny Hunt, the most interesting SBC president in ages, who enjoyed benefits of a denominational insider but apparently saw himself as something of an outsider and consistently demonstrated affinity for befriending and mentoring younger pastors.

So, Akin, Hunt and Mohler proposed creating a “Great Commission Resurgence” task force to turn the SBC toward growth. Apparently fearing denominational upheaval, Chapman opposed it and even lashed out at their recommendation during his report in Louisville, an act of old-bull desperation that young-bull Akin felt secure in blasting as “shameful.” When messengers finally got around to voting, their support for Akin, Hunt and Mohler’s idea was so overwhelming, the convention parliamentarian ex-claimed, “Wow!”

The Great Commission Task Force faces a complicated task. It will need to deal with denominational duplication. It must address how to respond to America’s demographic change, or else everything else ultimately will be irrelevant. It should be honest about differences of theology (Calvinism and Arminianism), practice (missions outreach, worship style) and even behavior (everything from dress, to lifestyle, to attitudes about gender).

But at the outset, the Louisville vote was about the SBC’s generation gap. The power base has shifted.

Imagine you’ve just moved into a community. You’re driving down the street, and you see “Baptist” on a church sign. Does that make you want to stop in for a visit next Sunday? Do you have any idea if you would feel welcomed? Does “Baptist” in the church’s name tell you if you would agree with the brothers and sisters who call this their spiritual home?

Baptists around the world are celebrating our 400th anniversary this year. In 1609, a small group of English Separatist exiles led by John Smyth and Thomas Helwys sought refuge in Holland. After considerable prayer, Bible study and deliberation, they decided to follow a new path. So, Smyth baptized himself, then Helwys and the other adults, and they founded the first Baptist church in the world.

While believer’s baptism may have been Baptists’ earliest distinguishing feature—thus their name—it wasn’t their sole characteristic. Within a generation, they were known for their disputes. Two groups soon developed. Particular Baptists emphasized God’s sovereignty and a “particular” salvation set aside only for people of God’s choosing. General Baptists promoted free will and a “general” salvation for whoever accepts God’s gift of grace. And that was only in the 17th century. Through the generations, Baptists have argued and split over so many issues that Walter Shurden has written a fascinating history of Baptists (Not a Silent People) by telling the tale of their disputes.

Now, all things Baptist have become even more bewildering. Some churches that are Baptist in every respect—up to and including affiliation with Baptist conventions—have dropped “Baptist” from their name. Some of them are embarrassed because of decades of Baptist battles. Some think denominational labels are a liability in a post-denominational age. Some just don’t want to be pinned down.

On the other hand, many churches fly the Baptist banner simply because they practice believer’s baptism by immersion. Baptism is their distinguishing feature, so they must be Baptists. Never mind that they never affiliate with other Baptists and don’t follow broadly recognized Baptist polity or hold to beliefs embraced by most Baptists. Oh, and some who even affiliate still don’t hold to many Baptist beliefs.

Still, you’re new to the community, and you’re scoping out churches and you see “Baptist.” Makes you wonder. Since the “Baptist” label means practically nothing, you’ll just have to check the church for yourself. If you’re a true Baptist, you’ve got the freedom to define what being a Baptist means to you. But here’s my checklist. Historic Baptists believe in:

• Soul competency and the priesthood of all believers. God gave each person the inalienable ability to relate directly to God. You don’t need another person to mediate between you and God.

• Salvation by grace through faith in Christ. God’s unmerited favor makes a relationship with God—now and forever—possible. All you have to do is believe and accept.

• Believer’s baptism. The act of baptism does not confer salvation. It reflects our willful, knowing identification with Christ’s death, burial and resurrection, and hope for resurrection from our graves.

• Local-church autonomy. If Baptist believers are free and independent, so are their churches.

• Separation of church and state, and religious liberty. Historically, Baptists have believed the freedom they desire should be extended to everyone. To be authentic, faith must be free—from both religious and political coercion.

• Absolute authority of Scripture. The Bible is our certain and infallible guide for seeking God’s will, following Christ and living in the power of the Holy Spirit.

• Passion for evangelism, ministry and missions. We who have been blessed should not horde so great a gift.

Marv Knox is editor of the Baptist Standard.

Here’s a conundrum for you: How can bloggers keep on blogging if they’re unable to dial a telephone?

Beats me.

But unfortunately, that’s apparently the case. Three “prominent” Texas bloggers (I say “prominent” because they would have us believe they’re read widely. We don’t know for sure. They don’t document their circulation.) recently damned the Baptist General Convention of Texas for allegedly escrowing Texas Baptists’ gifts to the Lottie Moon Christmas Offering. (See the news story on page 2.) If they’d have bothered to pick up the phone to check the facts, this never would’ve happened. Of course, that wouldn’t have been so much fun.

Here’s how your Lottie Moon Offering gift gets to the Southern Baptist Convention’s International Mission Board, where it’s used to support missionaries around the world: You give your gift, designated to the Lottie Moon Offering, to your church. Your church sends its contributions, including your Lottie Moon gift, to the BGCT Executive Board. The BGCT wires all SBC-related contributions—including money allocated for the Cooperative Program unified budget, Lottie Moon and the Annie Armstrong Offering for Home Missions—to the SBC Executive Committee. The Executive Committee transfers your share of the Lottie Moon Offering to the mission board.

In March, the BGCT was installing a new information management system when it wired its monthly collection from the churches—including the Lottie Moon Offering money—to the Executive Committee. However, the BGCT inadvertently failed to send a document telling the Executive Committee how to distribute the Texas convention’s money. That document didn’t arrive before the end of the month, so although the Executive Committee had received more than $3.3 million in Lottie Moon money from the BGCT in March, it went on the books as $0.00.

Someone at the IMB got wind of this and told one of the bloggers, a pastor who had led his church to leave the BGCT and to join the competing convention here in Texas. Well, this seemed like a great opportunity to whack the BGCT over the head, and he did. Soon, a couple of other bloggers picked up the first blogger’s accusation and joined the fray.

You would think at least one of these brothers would have thought to check his facts. They all claim to understand the intricacies of Baptist polity. So, even if they don’t trust the BGCT, they should have known to phone the treasurer of the Executive Committee to learn the truth.

This is the problem with so many bloggers. Unlike a Baptist newspaper editor who is accountable to a board of directors and, ultimately, a convention, a blogger only is accountable to pay his monthly Internet bill. Bloggers aren’t even accountable for genuine apologies. Rather than eat crow, they burp loudly and say, “That was from the crow I (wink, wink) ate.”

I understand why these bloggers jumped on the BGCT without bothering to check the facts. The first blogger despises the BGCT and basically said so in his “retraction.” (His blog actually parallels history. It’s reminiscent of so many lies about the BGCT’s positions on homosexuality and abortion that have been told to exhort churches to join the competing state convention he led his church to join.) A couple of others are disappointed in the BGCT and have become so jaded they only expect continued disappointment.

Still their animus does not justify their actions.

We should not judge all bloggers by this incident. But it should remind us not to take independent blogs at face value. Many blogs can and do provide helpful and needed information. But we must remember independent bloggers are accountable to no one. Readers must hold them accountable by demanding demonstrable verification.

Marv Knox is editor of the Baptist Standard. Visit his FaithWorks Blog here.

What do you think about torture?

For most of our lives, that has seemed like a theoretical question. Torture was the stuff of spy thrillers. So, your answer could have been based more on your antipathy for the villain in the latest James Bond movie or Robert Ludlum novel than on principled ethical decision-making.

Unfortunately, torture no longer is the stuff of fiction. Nor, sadly, can we pass it off as the exclusive domain of despots and dictators. Now, we are familiar with the places, legal theories and techniques that force us to acknowledge our beloved country has implemented torture for its own purposes. We know about Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo. We have read and heard about government legal briefs that justified torture. Most of us could describe how waterboarding works.

We cannot deny torture. We must confront its reality. We must come to grips with how we feel about it.

Recently, I have been disappointed to learn the demographic group in which I reside—white evangelical Protestant Christians—is the segment of the U.S. population that most enthusiastically embraces torture.

A new survey by the Pew Research Center reveals 62 percent of white evangelicals believe the use of torture against suspected terrorists can often (18 percent) or sometimes (44 percent) be justified. This compares to 49 percent of the total U.S. population who believe torture can often (15 percent) or sometimes (34 percent) be justified.

I know many of you—in fact, apparently, most of you—disagree with me. (On this issue, I take ironic comfort in joining company with an ultra-conservative ethicist with whom I often disagree, Richard Land, and a moderate/progressive ethicist with whom I usually agree, David Gushee.) But it’s embarrassing to realize the population at-large is more likely than evangelical Christians to take what I believe to be a Christlike position regarding torture. No matter how I analyze the situations and possible outcomes, I cannot picture Jesus torturing someone—for any purpose.

Of course, torture is exceedingly complicated. Although we don’t have the space to do it here, we must differentiate between “enhanced interrogation techniques” and torture. Some physically and psychologically demanding practices do not cross the line into torture. But most reasonable people agree waterboarding is torture. And my own tribe of Christians leads the way in embracing it. This is disturbing.

Some people defend torture because they believe torturing a small number of foreigners can be justified to save the lives of a larger number of Americans. This argument should be dismissed on two counts. First, it’s based on a questionable assumption. Considerable evidence suggests torture is less effective than many other interrogation methods. More significantly, however, this is a utilitarian approach to ethics. At root, it means the ends justifies the means. Americans, not to mention Bible-believing Christians, historically have taken pride in being better than that. We must avoid such flimsy ethics, even when we approach something as scary as terrorism.

Ironically, many Christians who practice utilitarian ethics to justify terrorism excoriate others who argue the ends justify the means to support embryonic stem cell research.

This brings us to a broader point: Christians must lead the way in developing a consistent ethic that supports life. Christians who oppose abortion but then endorse torture and support capital punishment (particularly in the face of mounting evidence of wrongful convictions) are not consistently pro-life. Catholics come the closest to being consistent, but evangelicals are far from it.

These are difficult issues. Consensus is challenging. Still, for the sake of righteousness and the gospel, we must be consistent.

Marv Knox is editor of the Baptist Standard. Visit his blog at baptiststandard.com.

If Texas Baptists will be friendly, and if we don’t forget our families, Texas Hope 2010 should have a huge impact on the Lone Star State.

Texas Hope 2010 is the Baptist General Convention of Texas’ audacious campaign to share the Christian gospel with every person in the state and to feed every hungry person within our borders by Easter Sunday of next year.

The challenge is staggering. Texas is home to 24 million people. At least 11 million of them are not affiliated with any church. They speak a cacophony of languages, and many have immersed themselves in subcultures far from the reaches of churches. At least 3 million residents are classified as hungry. They live in rural hamlets and dense inner cities, along rivers and in the shadow of expressways.

Fortunately, as one former pastor said, “Texas Baptists would take on hell with a water pistol.” We don’t back down from a challenge. In fact, our history demonstrates we tend to fall head-over-heels in love with outlandish goals, particularly if they have to do with telling people about Christ and helping people who hurt.

Recent research indicates we should get a receptive audience. A new survey conducted by LifeWay Research and the North American Mission Board revealed 67 percent of Americans say a direct invitation from a family member would get them to visit church. Almost that many—63 percent—say a friend or neighbor who invites them to church will be successful.

That’s the good news: Two out of every three of your non-Christian family and friends will come to church with you if you ask them to.

The bad news, of course, is that collectively we don’t know millions of our fellow Texans. So, they fall outside the realm of the survey. They can’t be invited to church—or have a meaningful conversation about Christ—by a Texas Baptist (and perhaps any Christian, for that matter) because they don’t even know one.

That’s where the vision of Texas Hope 2010 comes in. The campaign involves three areas of focus—prayer, care and share. Each of them is crucial.

Thousands of us are setting aside time at noon each day to pray for our fellow Texans—particularly those who do not know Christ as their Savior and those who are hungry and hurting. Prayer for them is wonderful and proper. But most likely, God will answer our prayers by changing our own hearts. As we think about these fellow Texans day after day, we will grow increasingly burdened for their spiritual and physical needs. Burdened enough to do something about them.

Share always has been a major goal for Baptists. We’re evangelistic people. We don’t hoard salvation. We want others to enjoy a saving relationship with Jesus, just as we do. That’s why we want to present the gospel in a variety of ways to each Texan in her or his own language. We’re focusing like a laser on sharing.

Ultimately, care will be the key to sharing. We fight hunger and poverty because it’s the right thing to do, because we believe every person—created in God’s image—should have the physical essentials for healthy life. We feel this burden because we love people.

In the next year, caring for fellow Texans will earn our right to share the gospel with them. By asking them how we can meet their physical needs and then doing something about it, we will earn the right to be their friends. And the research shows our efforts to share the gospel will be received much better after we become their friends.

Like most Texas Baptists, I need this emphasis on caring to go with my praying and sharing. It’s easy to curl up in a cocoon of wonderful Christian friends and not even know many lost people. Caring pushes us out of that cocoon and into the lives of people who need all we have to share.

If you’ve been following the financial news lately, you’ve probably seen the phrase “best and brightest” written to describe the men and women who have made millions of dollars on Wall Street the past few years.

Such wasn’t always the case, of course. Nineteenth century poet Percy Bysshe Shelley wrote of lovers, “best and brightest, come away!” David Halberstam employed the phrase in the title of his 1972 book about how America blundered into Vietnam. Most recently, New York Times columnist Judith Warner lamented the application of “best and brightest” to the titans of Wall Street.

“Best and brightest” appeals to an ideal that is both intangible and tangible, qualifiable and quantifiable. “Best” is an intangible quality. How do you determine the “best,” especially among people? The answer bends toward subjective preference. “Brightest,” at least at some level, can be measured. IQ scores, test results and grade point averages offer a measure of credence to mental brilliance.

The notion that America’s best and brightest congregated on Wall Street got me thinking about where our “best and brightest” young people should spend their lives. Of course, while everyone who owns investments, a pension fund or other retirement savings depends upon the virtue and brilliance of Wall Street workers, finance doesn’t seem a worthy calling for the very best and brightest Americans.

So, where do I wish the next generation of the “best and brightest” would invest their lives? Here are four ideas:

• Ministry. One of the most lamentable cultural shifts has been declining respect for clergy. Once, ministers—particularly pastors—were among the most-respected members of any community. Intelligent, vigorous, committed young people aspired to the ministry. Now, it’s often considered a low-end vocation of questionable relevance.

And yet few, if any, professions possess the potential to impact individuals and communities as positively as pastors. If more of our best and brightest young people felt called into this noble and divine profession, they could change lives and touch communities like no other force.

• Teaching. Low pay, unreasonable demands and layers of bureaucracy have just about ruined teaching as a possibility for young people who have the skills to make a living elsewhere.

Still, no one can turn a life around quite like a gifted and passionate teacher. If you could survey every balanced, successful adult, you’d find the list of people who made the difference in shaping their lives would be weighted with teachers. Now, more than ever, we need creative, vibrant, caring teachers.

• Ethics. One of the most serious challenges facing people today is what to do with the stunning advances in science, medicine and technology. Many of the smartest people in the world are pushing capability beyond the borders of reason.

We need a generation of ethicists who are smarter than the scientists, doctors and engineers, so we can coalesce around moral, faithful answers to the questions their discoveries and inventions raise.

• Social work/social policy. We live in a world of misery and hurt. The gaps between rich and poor, educated and uneducated, justice and injustice are growing exponentially.

The answers to these problems are not handouts and entitlements. If we had more brilliant social workers, we could teach millions of poor and disadvantaged people to care for themselves. And if we had more brilliant social policy analysts, we could resolve systemic problems that push people into poverty.

That’s my list. What professions are on yours? Encourage the best and brightest young people you know to invest themselves in careers that will enrich society, not merely their own bank accounts.

Soon, we will commemorate the most awkwardly and confusingly named day of the year—Good Friday.

What’s so “good” about the day Jesus suffered and died on the cross? All four Gospels tell the story of what happened on this particular Friday almost 2,000 years ago. This week, read the accounts from Matthew 27:27-28:8; Mark 15:16-16:19; Luke 23:26-24:35; and John 19:16-20:30.

Good Friday is the year’s most somber day. Some faith traditions allude to the agony of Jesus’ passion and call this day Black Friday. It is a day for prayer and fasting and repenting. It doesn’t feel “good.”

And yet Good Friday it is, because we would not celebrate Easter Sunday without it.

Tony Campolo, the sociologist, author and evangelist, has preached a sermon about Good Friday, quite literally around the world: “It’s Friday, But Sunday’s Comin’!”

The illustration that gives Campolo’s sermon its title comes at the end of a powerful, poignant discussion of God’s redemptive grace. The whole sermon is magnificent, and then he closes by telling about preaching at his home church in west Philadelphia, where he grew up. When he was young, the Baptist church was predominantly white, and now it’s mostly black, but he’s been a member there his whole life. Campolo jokes about how “good” he was that night but readily acknowledges his aged pastor preached a better sermon, taking one line and improvising on it for an hour and a half: “It’s Friday, but Sunday’s comin’.”

Here’s an excerpt of Campolo’s recitation of his pastor’s sermon:

“It’s Friday, but Sunday’s a comin’. It was Friday, and my Jesus is dead on a tree. But that’s Friday, and Sunday’s a comin’. Friday, Mary’s crying her eyes out, the disciples are running in every direction like sheep without a shepherd. But that’s Friday, and Sunday’s a comin’. Friday, those (enemies of Jesus) are looking at the world and saying: ‘As things have been, so they shall be. You can’t change nothing in this world! You can’t change nothing in this world!’ But they didn’t know that it was only Friday; Sunday’s a comin’. Friday, them forces that oppress the poor and keep people down, them forces that destroy people, them forces in control now, them forces that are gonna rule, they don’t know it’s only Friday, but Sunday’s a comin’. Friday, people are saying, ‘Darkness is gonna rule the world; sadness is gonna be everywhere,’ but they don’t know it’s only Friday, but Sunday’s a comin’. … Friday! But Sunday’s a comin’!”

This world has wallowed in a Friday funk for a while now. The economic crisis has people squeezing their wallets, wondering about their jobs, fretting about their homes, worrying about their future. Wars and genocide and terrorists tear at our consciences and bruise our psyches. Slavery and sex trafficking and poverty and disease break our hearts and leave us feeling impotent. Even those of us, like most Texas Baptists, who enjoy some measure of protection from the most extreme grievances humanity inflicts upon itself feel brittle, ill-at-ease, borderline hopeless.

Yes, it’s Friday. But Sunday’s coming.

We do not delude ourselves into thinking the risen Christ will make war and famine and disease and wickedness disappear. Not in the short term. But when we remember Christ endured Friday—death and descent into hell—and rose again on Sunday, we live in the certainty that God has won and will win the ultimate victory over evil.

Friday reminds us God physically descended into this fallen world. In Christ on Friday, God experienced complete brokenness and devastation. But on Sunday, the sun rose and the Son arose, and death and evil and destruction lost the battle for control of the world. On Easter Sunday, the day we await, God redeemed all our rebellion and transformed all our transgressions. We live in hope. Sunday’s comin’!