[Vision2020] RE: Commissioner Paul Kimmell (In Re: Oversight by Christ Church)

[Eric Engerbretson]

Dear Tom, Rose, et al,

I'd like to put in my 2 cents on this issue. After reading it, you may 
decide it was 2 lira worth, but
I'll take that chance.

Now, I don't know the context from which the offending statement--“Doug 
Wilson reported that Paul Kimmell, in his role as County Commissioner, 
is open to oversight from the elders on certain issues.”  in the 
minutes was *taken*. I am sure
the full context would alleviate a bit of the concern. But that is not 
my point.

My point is that I'm not sure that you all understand the way churches 
were designed to work, and what the point of being a member of a church 
is.  I am pretty sure that you wouldn't want for County Commissioner 
the kind of man who would join a church and then not consider oversight 
from its elders. That man would be either very confused about what it 
means to join an organization, or he would have an extremely flexible 
morality.  If you want an easily confused, amoral man to be your County 
Commissioner, go ahead and vote for one-- but I don't think you do.

Now, if it was true that every other person in your city and county 
government was completely and absolutely neutral on every issue, and 
had no opinions or philosophical leanings, and Paul K. was the only 
"religious" one, then I would think you had a good point.  But the fact 
is, that kind of disinterested, altruistic neutrality does not exist in 
the form of anyone in your government.

Do any of your other city/county officials happen to be members of a 
church?   When someone joins the average Christian church what he is 
saying is that he respects the leaders of that church enough that he 
wants to regularly listen to their teaching, and that he will accept 
the advice, oversight, and authority of those elders/pastors concerning 
his sin, should he fall into sin that needs to be corrected.  Almost no 
one in a church agrees with every single word that is preached, or 
every single precise interpretation of scripture that is laid out.  He 
says "this is a place that I respect and I will listen to these people 
and worship with them as long as what they are saying is in line with 
what the Bible says".  The church member will not go against his 
conscience to do something commanded him by the church leaders-- if he 
was "commanded" to do anything, he would say "this is seeming like a 
cult" and would leave the church.

Paul K. is a man of conviction and a man of integrity who absolutely 
will not bow to pressure from anyone to do anything that he thinks is 
not right.  He has a clearly defined morality, and he will vote in 
accordance with it.  It may not be a morality or interpretation of 
equality that you agree with, but that does not make him unfit for 
office.  By being a member of Christ Church, he has simply said that he 
is "open" to the oversight of the elders. That is what everyone who 
joins a Christian church is in effect saying.  He is saying "hold me 
accountable to the morals of the Bible, hold me to my convictions".  He 
will be open to the advice/admonishment of the elders, and will search 
his conscience concerning any oversight they give him.  If what they 
are saying is simply a reminder to him to hold to his Biblical 
convictions, he will say "thanks for the reminder", and vote his 
convictions. If he felt that his elders/pastors were asking him to do 
something that was questionable ethically or morally, he would say 
"sorry guys" and quit the church-- and continue to vote his conscience. 
  Christ Church would only provide "oversight" to Paul K. if he was 
voting for something that the church considered sinful or against God. 
They would tell him "you are being a double-minded man-- knock it off". 
  If he continued to "say" he believed one thing and vote the opposite, 
the church would say "you are persisting in being a man of no 
integrity, please leave our church"-- "we will pray that God causes you 
to repent and live in accordance with your convictions, and that day we 
will welcome you back".  This is the way Biblical churches work.

This is very little different from the situation any other church-going 
member of your government has placed him/herself in. Now, there may be 
church-going politicians who go to churches whose leaders would never 
dream of admonishing a member who was walking in a persistent sin. 
Whose church leaders wouldn't dream of telling them if they were voting 
the opposite of the convictions they claimed when they became church 
members.  There are many churches that are little more than social 
clubs and who do little to convince their members to do anything other 
than feel good about themselves.  There are other churches who say "God 
was serious when He talked about sin, and it is our job to hold you 
accountable when you are caught sinning or voting for sin."

**What kind of person do you want for County Commissioner??  One who 
doesn't have enough convictions to join a church? Or one who after 
joining a church, and making a statement of faith, would then vote the 
opposite of what he said his convictions were?  Do you want a city 
government with absolutely no church goers?  Or only wishy-washy people 
who go to impotent churches?  But wait, non-church goers have opinions 
and worldviews, too... and they, too, are "open to oversight" from 
people they look up to. So who can we vote for??!  Please don't pretend 
that there are unbiased people out there.

Do you want a city government with only people who share the exact 
opinions you do? Yes-- we all do.  So we vote for them.  But I thought 
that the city government was supposed to represent the people...  so we 
have to have some church-goers in the government.  What we need are 
people who have convictions, but who understand the ethics of office.  
People who will vote their convictions, but will compromise when 
necessary and not step over the bounds of propriety in pursuing the 
kind of society they long for.  We need people who if they are 
church-goers will keep one eye on their elders, and one eye on the 
Bible.

I believe our current city and county government is filled with just 
such people. And Paul Kimmel is one of them.

If Paul Kimmel is not your kind of man, then come up with a better 
person, hype the heck out of them, and
vote for them.  If Paul Kimmel did something unethical, then prove it, 
and vote him out.

But please don't pretend that because Paul goes to a church that 
actually holds people to their convictions that he is therefore unfit 
for office.  Everyone is biased, and everyone votes accordingly-- 
welcome to democracy. Welcome to diversity.

Can we give it a rest? Maybe find a hobby?


Eric E.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/enriched
Size: 6724 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20040818/0b9c1064/attachment.bin