Jesus In the Classroom 2
Jesus In the Classroom - Pt. 2
Last time I spoke we discussed the case of a 5th grade teacher at Stevens Creek School, in Cupertino, California. I spent the time that we had simply laying out the facts surrounding the case and then pointed out three issues which the case had raised, that we felt went far beyond just Stephen Williams and the Stevens Creek school. We had to leave the case at that point, so tonight we want to look at each of those issues that we raised and see if the Scriptures shed any light on how we as believers in Jesus Christ, as followers of Him, ought to act when confronted with this issue of those in authority over us, and our rights as citizens.
Let me briefly summarize the case. Mr. Williams was a 5th grade teacher at Stevens Creek school. He got gloriously saved, as we saw, what a beautiful testimony contained right in the pages of New Yorker magazine. He began to add supplements to his teaching because he felt that the text books that they were using did not cover California's own standards concerning, especially the place of faith at the nation's founding. He was reprimanded a few times by his principal, which led to a difficult situation at the school. Finally, when his principal gave him a packet of handouts and ordered him to use only those handouts or he would be fired, Mr. Williams brought suit against the school district, claiming religious discrimination. We saw that his suit was not without merit, at least as we understand the facts, and we also saw that in the process of bringing the suit, he appears to have destroyed any possibility of a testimony with those immediately around him, such as the teachers that he worked with, and many of the parents as well. We also noticed that one mom, who was active in his classroom and was a believer, disagreed vehemently with his pressing forward with this lawsuit. Two Christians, two strong opinions on the issue, both diametrically opposed to each other.
We laid out three issues, or three questions that we felt the case raised, that we must answer, so that we as Christians, could gain wisdom from the case as we face the world as both Christians and citizens of these great United States. Issue one was, “Did Mr. Williams do the right thing by bringing suit? Issue two was: “Did he do it in the right (and by right we mean Christian) way? And Issue three was: “Was It Worth It?” Was the hate and discontent that the lawsuit caused worth pressing on with it.
So let's take each of those issues and see if we can apply the Scriptures and reason to them and gain some wisdom.
Issue 1: Did Mr. Williams do the right thing by suing for religious discrimination?
We must notice that Paul, the apostle, never hesitated to claim his rights as a Roman citizen. A Roman citizen at the time in which Paul lived had certain rights and privileges which were sacrosanct, much as we have today. We have the right of freedom of speech - although political correctness seems to be taking that one away quickly. We have the right not to be subjected to unreasonable search and seizure. We have the right to keep and bear arms, etc. etc. etc. A Roman citizen had many rights, not the same ones that we had, but a set of rights which protected them against unreasonable actions by the government, like being beaten without a trial.
When Paul is addressing the crowd of Jews in Jerusalem, in Acts 22, they suddenly erupt when he tells them that God raised him up to reach the Gentiles. The Roman commander, picking up the narrative in vs. 24, “the commander ordered him to be brought into the barracks, stating that he should be examined by scourging so that he might find out the reason why they were shouting against him that way. “ Now there is an unusual way to interrogate someone, “examined by scourging,” such was the violence of Roman government. At any rate, vs. 25 continues, “And when they stretched him out with thongs, Paul said to the centurion who was standing by, “Is it lawful for you to scourge a man who is a Roman and uncondemned. And when the centurion heard this, he went to the commander and told him, saying, “What are you about to do? For this man is a Roman.” One could not simply “examine a Roman by scourging” without having condemned him at the law. Paul understands this fact. He is a Roman citizen, so he does not hesitate to take advantage of his rights. He cannot be whipped without being condemned for something, without a legal trial.
We also find Paul appealing his case to Caesar, which was also the right of every citizen.
To claim our rights as a citizen of the state in which we live does not go against the Scriptures. We can do this. It is allowed by the Scriptures. We may choose not to claim our rights under the law, but Scripture allows for citizens to be citizens.
So if we judge Mr. Williams by the Scriptures we must answer that, yes, the Scriptures allow for him to bring a lawsuit against those in authority over him for religious discrimination. The law of the United States says that you cannot discriminate against an employee based upon his or her religious beliefs. It also allows for appeal to the law if one feels that ones rights have been violated. So Mr. Williams is merely taking advantage of his rights as a citizen. So the answer to issue one is, “Yes, the Scriptures do allow, appeal to the law when a Christian citizen feels as if he is not being treated in a legal manner.”
The second issue is: “Did Mr. Williams act in a consistently biblical way in this issue.” In other words, in the process of dealing with the conflict, and then bringing a lawsuit, did he act in a biblical manner? Now, I do not want to disparage Mr. Williams without all the facts, so I draw my conclusions based upon the facts in the New Yorker article, realizing that I do not know everything about the case. Bear that in mind, that I am going to raise some criticism here, which I think are important to note, but if Mr. Williams were here, he might have more facts which would put the case in a different light.
One issue which is crucial here, and Charlie Nunez pointed this out, is the issue of authority. By that I mean, did Mr. Williams give a sufficient level of respect for and submission to authority in the process of legitimately pursuing his rights under the law. I don't think we can overemphasize the importance of this issue, because we can bring difficulty on our own head, whether it be from the government or a boss, or any other authority, simply because of our attitude towards authority, not because we are Christians.
It is here, that, with the facts I have, I would fault Mr. Williams. There is no evidence that he sought a compromise which was acceptable to both him and the principal. There is no evidence that he took the issue to a higher authority, the school board, before he brought suit. The lawsuit appears to have come as a great surprise to the school board, as if he had sprung it on them suddenly.
Now we again have the example of Paul here. He is arrested by the Romans and taken to Felix, the governor of Judea. When Paul is brought before Felix, look how he begins his address, in Acts 24.10, “Knowing that for many years you have been a judge to this nation, I cheerfully make my defense.” I think what stands out there is Paul's respect for, and willing submission to, Roman authority.
Felix ends up keeping Paul in prison, so when his replacement, Festus takes office. Paul appeals to Caesar, to take his case to the highest Roman authority. Festus says, “fine, you have appealed to Caesar, to Caesar you shall go.” A few days later, King Agrippa and Bernice, come to visit, so Felix says, “hey, you need to hear this guy we have in prison here, Paul.” So Paul is brought out to Agrippa and Bernice, again, look in Acts 26.2, and look at the extreme respect that Paul brings to authority. He says, “In regard to all the things of which I am accused by the Jews, I consider myself fortunate, King Agrippa, that I am about to make my defense before you today; especially because you are an expert in all customs and questions among the Jews.”
I think that is a beautiful example of what Paul wrote to the Romans in Romans 13 concerning submission to authority. We are to respect and obey authority, except when the command of authority goes against what God has commanded us. Now, under the law of the United States, we can bring suit, when we feel that the authority over us is discriminating against us in an unlawful way, but if we choose to do that, we must ensure that we do it in a way which shows respect for the very authority against which we are bringing suit. Now, what do I mean by that?
As I said, Did Mr. Williams seek a compromise which would have been acceptable to all, such as, “how about if I bring each handout to you before I teach on it, explain what I am doing, so that if a parent calls, you will have the information readily available. Now whether or not that would have been acceptable to the principal, I do not know, but it does show respect for her position, respect for her authority, and that is biblical.
Did Mr. Williams appeal to higher authority, before he filed suit? There is no evidence in the magazine that he did. In other words, he had not exhausted his appeals to higher authorities before he took the step of filing a lawsuit. I think it shows great respect for authority to say, “Mrs. Vidmar, we disagree on this issue, I understand the pressure you are under, I am sympathetic to it, but I do not feel you are acting correctly. I have nothing against you personally, but I am going to take this matter to the school board, to a higher authority.” She may not have liked that step, most people in authority would not, but again, I think it shows respect for and submission to authority, to the extent possible.
Instead of appealing to the school board, he brought a lawsuit, and we saw what has happened since then.
So I think we can say, with the facts we had, Mr. Williams could have been more rigorously scriptural in his approach to appeals and authority. This is a key issue, because we might think that we are being discriminated against in a certain issue, we might see religious discrimination, when in actual fact, the root problem is a disrespect for authority at the heart of the issue. I may have a personnel conflict with my boss, whom I do not like, and I may refuse to submit to their authority out of spite for them, and call it discrimination. Brothers and sisters, there is not witness there. There is a great witness to the world when I submit to a difficult boss, or a difficult authority with whom I clash or disagree, there is no witness when I attempt to subvert authority because I dislike or disagree with them. No witness at all. Not to mention we will have a difficult time explaining how our actions at that point, square with Paul's command to submit to the governing authorities.
So, it appears that Mr. Williams did attempt to resolve the conflict in a biblical manner, but I think he could have been more rigorously scriptural in his respect for authority before he filed suit. He could have at least notified the school board that he was filing suit, so that they would be prepared and not surprised. The surprise led to some disinformation that went national before it could be corrected. This was not Mr. Williams doing, but by not informing them, he indirectly led to it.
So now, we come to this difficult final issue. The third issue is: “Was what Mr. Williams did, worth it?” Was the destruction of his personal testimony to those around him, to his immediate colleague, worth standing up for the principal that all Christian school teachers, ought to be able to teach what the law, in this case California school standards, expressly say that they can teach?
I do not want to play down the difficulty of this issue. As we saw last time, on the one hand, Mr. Williams has a good argument. He is saying, in essence, “I realize that this issue is creating hate and discontent here, but I feel that I must fight for all Christian teachers who are being discriminated against illegally. This is just not right, and the principle is greater than you or I, and our immediate circumstances. Can you not see that?” That is a brilliant argument and a farsighted one and I am sympathetic to it. I think it is a good argument.
On the other hand, you have the side represented by one of his school mothers, Kim Item, who is a Christian, who says to him, ““Mr. Willliams, you have to stop. This is not your fight, this is God's fight. You're trying to play God, and it's got to stop. Now, I think what she means by that is, “Mr. Williams, look at what you are doing. You are destroying any testimony you might have to those around you. You are making people more resistant to the gospel, for the sake of the gospel, you must stop pressing for your rights under the law. Let this be God's work, not our work. Can you not see that, Mr. Williams?”
I am very sympathetic with that argument. I think it is a good argument. I think it is a legitimate argument. In fact, when I first read this article, it was my reaction. “There is nothing more important than testimony. Stop creating hate and discontent, and for the sake of the gospel, drop this lawsuit. “ The more I thought of it, however, the more conflicted I became, because the more I could see legitimacy in both sides of the issue.
So there we are, which one is the correct answer. Its kind of like the short story of the lady and the tiger, what was behind the door, the other lady pointed out, the lady this guy loved, or the tiger who would eat him.
Is it possible, in reconciling this question, that we consider the fact that God makes different types of personalities. He makes peacemakers, I will call them, who are concerned with people's feelings and are careful not to offend. He also makes, fighters, or visionaries, who look at issues from the long view, and say, “yes, there are consequences to an issue in the immediate situation, but there are far greater consequences when you look at the big picture issues, and it is those issues which are much greater and far-reaching, so we must disregard the immediate issues and consider the more important ones, the one's that are more far-reaching.
So that two different believers come at the same issue with different personalities and characters and they come up with two diametrically opposed positions, but in a sense can they both be right? In other words, can I tell Mr. Williams, “no Mr. Williams, your conclusion is unbiblical?” or can I tell Mrs. Item, “No, Mrs. Item, you just don't see the big picture. Your conclusion is unbiblical. In all honesty, I can do neither, and it is just here that we pick up real wisdom from this case study. And it is why I think it is so important.
When I have a certain personality type and certain values as a believer, what I will call rose-colored glasses, I approach all issues in a certain way. As I said, between the two, I am more of a peace-maker, more of one who is careful not to offend, who does not want to shut people off from being open to the gospel. Well, along comes Mr. Williams who we will describe as a visionary, or a fighter, Mr. Williams has one daisy-tinted glasses. He sees the world as a visionary and as one who is concerned with broad issues, he sees the far-reaching consequences. What I do as a peace maker is say, Mr. Williams, take off your daisy-tinted glasses and see the world as you should, through my rose-colored glasses. And Mr. Williams says, 'Ah, but Mr. Murphy, you are wrong, take off your rose-colored glasses and put on my daisy-colored glasses, and then you will see the world correctly.”
What neither of us realize at that point is that neither of us fully see the world. We bring our own character and personality, that God has given us and gifted us with, and we assume that everyone else should approach all issues in the same way. Wisdom, real wisdom, understands that we bring these tinted glasses to life. So that I say, “well, I do not see the issue the way you see it at all, but perhaps God has brought the issue here at this time, to teach me something, perhaps there is wisdom in me, doing the best I can to see the issue from your perspective and to appreciate the character and personality that you bring to it. I still may not agree, but I may just be wise enough to say, “you know what, I am not sure what God is doing here. He is certainly not doing what I think he should be doing, but then, I am not God. So perhaps I had better value this brother's opinion, whether or not I understand it.”
Let me tell you folks, this takes real wisdom on your part. When everything in you says, “no you are wrong, I can't prove it from the Scriptures, but I feel it in my rose-tinted glasses,” to say, “you know what, perhaps these are to legitimate sides to a difficult and thorny issue, both of which God will use in his way and at His time and for His purposes.”
So no, I do not see either side as right or wrong in this case, neither Mr. Williams nor Mrs. Item. I think there is wisdom in both positions, and there is real wisdom in me being able to set aside my own personality and character and see that God uses all types of personalities and characters, some much different than mine, to accomplish his purpose here on earth.
Jesus In the Classroom: Pt. 2
I. Introduction -
A. Three Issues
B. Brief Summary
C. Three Issues/Questions
1. Did Mr. Williams do the right thing by bringing suit?
2. Did he do it in the right (Christian) way?
3. Was what he did worth it?
II. Did Mr. Williams do the right thing by bringing suit?
A. Paul's example - never hesitated to claim his rights as a citizen
1. Acts 22.24,25
2. Appealed his case to Caesar
3. Conclusion - We can claim our rights as a citizen of the country in which we live.
B. Mr. Williams?
1. Yes - Scripture allows it
2. Law allows it
III. Did Mr. Williams bring suit in the right way? In a Christian way?
A. I do not have all the facts
B. Question of Authority - Did Mr. Williams give a sufficient level of respect?
1. No evidence that he sought a compromise satisfactory to both
2. Suit surprised the school board.
C. Paul's Example
1. Before Felix - Acts 24.10
2. On to Festus -
a. Appeals to Caesar
b. Defense before Agrippa and Bernice - Acts 26.2
c. Beautiful working out of Romans 13. 1-5
D. Mr. Williams
1. Did he seek a compromise?
2. Did he appeal to higher authority before bringing suit?
Application: Such a key issue. We may have conflict brought on by our approach or disrespect of authority, that has nothing to do with our faith. No witness in that.
IV. Was the lawsuit worth it?
A. Immediate testimony destroyed - and testimony of any other Christian trying to reach those people.
B. Kim Item - Room mother for Mr. Williams - Mr. Williams you have to stop. This is not your fight, this is God's fight. You're trying to play God, and it's got to stop.
C. Mr. Williams - No, but there is a greater issue here, much deeper than just you or I or our testimony, do you not see that?
D. What is the answer?
1. Personalities and Character - God makes different types.
a. Peacemakers
b. Visionaries - Fighters (Martin Luther)
2. Both approach the same issue, both are believers, both are scriptural, but come up with diametrically opposed answers. How can this be?
3. Can't say either side is being unscriptural. So what do we make of this. This is where we pick up real wisdom
E. Rose-colored glasses/vs. daisy-colored glasses.