Category: Integrity

Posted on

The Measure of Sincerity

Nine years into Charles Schultz’s Peanuts strip, he introduced us to an off-panel character who captured the imagination of his readers. While this character never made an appearance in the strip itself, nor did he have any speaking or trombone lines, he inspired many strips and even one TV special. The part religious messaging and part myth-making character was the Great Pumpkin. And Linus Van Pelt was at the center of the story telling as the Great Pumpkin’s greatest advocate and prophet.

Sure, the whole world held onto Santa Claus; Linus held onto the Great Pumpkin. The world embraced Christmas; Linus embraced Halloween. The world looked to the North Pole; Linus looked to the pumpkin patch in his own neighborhood. Santa never disappointed; the Great Pumpkin . . . well, he kind of smashed the hopes of Linus like the comedian Gallagher smashing pumpkins.

You likely know his story. On Halloween night the Great Pumpkin rises from the Pumpkin Patch to deliver toys to all the good little children of the world. The line between Santa and the Great Pumpkin is razor thin, but brilliantly written. The key difference between the two is “sincerity.”

The Great Pumpkin chooses the “most sincere” pumpkin patch from which to rise and then to deliver his gifts. Sincerity. It’s not the most measurable attribute. If Linus told us that the Great Pumpkin chose his patch from the biggest pumpkins, then size is measurable. If he told us that The Great Pumpkin chose the patch with the most pumpkins, then volume is measurable. As it stands, sincerity is difficult to measure, even if Linus claims otherwise, as he says, “I don’t see how a pumpkin patch could be more sincere than this one. You can look around, and there’s not a sign of hypocrisy.” Yea, I’m convinced, and I’m sure you are too.

Sincerity is the absence of hypocrisy, deceit, and pretense. Sincerity is infused with genuineness. A small child wraps their arms around you, or offers you a bite of their candy, or invites you to a tea party is working from a place of sincerity. We don’t question motives. We don’t wonder if there is an agenda. However, when a child starts to grow and mature into adulthood, depending on our perception of the child, when they do something that looks kind, we start to wonder if there is some hidden motive.

In the TV show, Leave it to Beaver, no one really questions if Beaver did something nice or said something kind to someone. Beaver had a tender heart and wasn’t poisoned by hypocrisy, or deceit, or pretense. That said, when Beaver’s brother’s best friend, Eddie Haskell, smiled and schmoozed adults, his hypocrisy was like a flashing neon sign. He had an agenda. He was covering up something. We knew it and the adults on TV knew it too, they just allowed him to play out his plan. Normally, we can spot a fraud. Normally.

The Corinthian church was infiltrated by a group of outsiders who attacked Paul’s credibility. They, the antagonists, leveled accusations against him that he lied, had broken his promises, and was untrustworthy. Paul pushed back. He wasn’t the one lacking sincerity, they were.

Paul tells the Corinthians, “Unlike so many, we do not peddle the word of God for profit. On the contrary, in Christ we speak before God with sincerity, like men sent from God” (2 Cor. 2:17). It’s clear that the “so many” is the antagonistic group that had infiltrated Corinth. The phrase, “peddle the word of God for profit,” is an afront to the deceptive practices of these people. It’s hardly flattery. His insult was a backhanded compliment.

“Peddling” holds a negative connotation for Paul. He is not against someone selling his wares, as even Paul himself worked as a tentmaker in Corinth (Act. 18:3). Earning an honest wage is commendable. That is not what is happening with these outsiders getting access to the church. What they are doing is darker. A lot darker. “Peddling for profit” was an ancient marketplace term for vendors who tipped the scales or water downed their wine, employing fraudulent means to increase profits. For the antagonists, they were hawking their wares and using their ministry as a cover for shady business practices – it was a sham. What they were peddling was not tents or dry goods, but the gospel itself. They were compromising the gospel of Christ, and at its root of such insincerity was greed. It’s always greed.

We’ve never quite gotten past Gordon Gekko’s 1997’s Wall Street soliloquy,

“The point is, ladies and gentlemen, that greed, for lack of a better word, is good. Greed is right, greed works. Greed clarifies, cuts through and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit. Greed in all its forms. Greed for life, money, love, knowledge, has marked the upward surge of mankind.”

I’m not sure Hollywood was trying to push the greed agenda or was simply acknowledging the elephant in the room, regarding Wall Street and the American mindset. They don’t need to. Society seems driven by the belief that greed really is good. Look at today’s inflation and compare it to the record profits in the gas and food industry; their profit margins seem to be fueled by greed at the expense of consumers. Note that the financial rift between the workers’ pay benefit to their CEO’s counterpart has widened since 1965. It’s grown some 350%, and whose paying for the chasm? The American worker is. Our TV airways are filled with charlatan preachers bilking their audience for wealth beyond measure, not to further their ministry, but line their pockets. Such preaching ministry is not limited to the big, fancy Televangelists or Mega Church leaders, but includes anyone who holds their naïve followers in the palm of their hands. When the core value is greed, can you really trust their sincerity?

While Paul undermines the antagonist’s sincerity, he reinforces his own integrity. By offering four simple statements, he not only distinguishes himself from his opponents, but also underscores the seriousness of his own calling. First, he speaks before God “with sincerity” as his agenda is pure. He has checked his motives at the door, they have not. One source of conflict between Paul and the Corinthians was his refusal to accept financial pay from the church. Reaching back to his first letter, Paul hints that money was coming between him and the Corinthians (1 Cor. 9:6). In the Greco-Roman world, Sophists went from town to town to share their philosophy of life and were financially supported by their followers. Paul’s refusal to accept support caused a rift filled by the antagonists who expected pay for their services. They passed themselves off, not only as preachers, but as sophists selling a philosophy. Paul was redefining the modern Sophist by refusing a salary. All they were doing was exploiting the church, something Paul never did (e.g., 2 Cor. 12:14-18).

Secondly, he speaks as “from God,” which means his message is not his own, but its source derives from God. Beyond modern day issues of inspiration, Paul may have in mind his ambassador image from 2 Cor. 5:20. He is God’s ambassador, and his role dictates the message he is commissioned to speak. He does not speak for himself, but for God. In the case of 5:20, it’s the message of reconciliation.

Thirdly, he speaks “before God” and “in the presence of God.” Paul is very much aware and in awe of who is present when he speaks to the Corinthians. Throughout this letter, Paul self-discloses his awareness of God in his words. In 4:2 he shares, “We renounce secret and shameful ways; we do not use deception, nor distort the word of God.” In 5:10 he reveals, “For we all must appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that each one may receive what is due him . . ..” And in 12:19b he articulates, “We have been speaking in the sight of God as those in Christ . . ..” Paul is acutely aware of God’s presence in his life and how it shapes not only his messaging, but his integrity.

Finally, he speaks “in Christ” which may very well draw him back to the Acts 9 conversion on the Damascus Road which subsequently united him in Christ. He speaks out of that unique experience.*

These four simple statements reinforce Paul’s integrity, who has no agenda but is sincere when dealing with the Corinthians. The opponents, significantly less sincere, if not plain shysters, cannot be trusted.

During the 1980’s I knew a preacher who was in high demand. He spoke at all the popular gatherings, authored multiple books which were popular among my tribe, preached for a large influential church, and was a leading voice of hope by guiding churches away from legalism and into grace. For that, he wore a target on his back and was often verbally abused by dissenting voices. One time I witnessed a speaker at a forum harshly address him. When I looked to see his reaction, he was smiling and shaking his head. No anger and no thought of revenge. I saw the grace he preached materialize under fire. More importantly, at his large and influential church, he could have written his own check and demanded a greater pay package. Instead, because of his book deals and a family farm income, he refused multiple pay raises from his church, opting for those monies to be redistributed elsewhere. Say what you will, but if greed is the measuring tape for sincerity, he measured up.

The key to measuring one’s sincerity may not be revealed by any one specific action of the person. It may be measured by what a person is willing to give or share verses what they are willing to take or extort from the people around them. One thing for sure, it certainly cannot be measured from a pumpkin patch.

Soli Deo Gloria!
(i.e., only God is glorified!)

*These four statements are influenced by Paul Barnett, The Second Letter the Corinthians, New International Commentary on the New Testament.

Posted on

A Wolf in the Fold

There once was an old, wise Cherokee chief who shared his great wisdom with the tribal children. As they sat around him, the warrior informed the children about a battle that rages on inside of people. “The battle,” he said, “was between two wolves living inside all of us.”

One of the wolves is evil. It growls with anger, envy, jealousy, sorrow, regret, greed, arrogance, self-pity, guilt, resentment, lies, false pride, superiority, and ego.

The other is good. It is filled with joy, peace, love, hope, serenity, humility, kindness, benevolence, empathy, generosity, truth, compassion and faith.”

“These wolves,” he said, “are constantly at battle within us and at each other.”

The children, astonished at the depiction described to them, asked the chief, “Which wolf wins?”

It’s a good question. Which wolf will win out?

Every one of us faces that same battle and struggle within ourselves on a regular basis. Each one of us must ask the question, “Which wolf will master the other wolf?” It’s the struggle between right and wrong. It’s the struggle between good and evil. It’s the struggle of our integrity. We feel its tension. We’re pulled apart. Who “we want to be” versus “what we act like” is always in the balance.

The Corinthians appeared to be enamored with a leadership who lacked quality control. On the outside, like most leadership candidates, they checked all the boxes: charisma, excellent oratory skills, they carried letters of recommendation (somebody endorsed these guys), and were the right pedigree (they were Jews). But underneath the veneer, something was wrong. Something was horribly wrong. A wolf was in the fold.

Striking at the heart of one’s integrity, Paul writes in 2 Corinthians 4:2, “. . . we have renounced secret and shameful ways; we do not use deception, nor do we distort the word of God.” The “we” in this verse clearly speaks of Paul, Timothy, and Titus, who were actively engaging this church. That said, the “we” could also be a means to draw the Corinthians into this delicate conversation. “We” don’t do this, even though the Corinthians were very much guilty of the very character Paul opposes.

The verse in question contains three statements worthy of being fleshed out, at least for a little bit. Two of these are stated in a negative form while the third is stated in a positive form.

The first statement is expressed in the negative form when he says, “we have renounced secret and shameful ways.” Below the surface of our actions lie our motives, why we do what we do. Answering that question is crucial, as those actions are either pure and innocent or they are dark and deadly. They can be somewhere in between. Those dark and deadly motives can look good and are often white-washed, maybe dressed up in religious piety, but eventually they come to light and it’s never good. Motives must remain above board and relationships must never be tarnished by underhanded means. And please note the strong word of “renouncing secret and shameful ways.” Paul is not saying, “we try not to” or “we attempt to avoid” those “secret and shameful ways.” On the contrary, we renounce them. We reject them. We repudiate them. We relinquish them. Those “secret and shameful ways” have absolutely nothing in common with the gospel or anyone representing the gospel of Christ.

The second statement is also expressed in the negative form as Paul says, “. . . we do not use deception, nor do we distort the word of God.” Paul may be harking back to 2:17 where he drops the image of a peddler selling wares. While there is nothing wrong with someone whose occupation is a peddler, the stereotype of a person selling something you don’t need, which doesn’t work, to pocket money is at the forefront of his thoughts. We are not selling the gospel to a market filled with consumers who buy the product today and then list it on eBay tomorrow, though sadly, it’s a common mindset for today’s Americans to understand the gospel.

Respect for God’s word is a motif running through Scripture. The truth is we can bend Scripture to fit our beliefs, repackage it to sell, or worse – we can weaponize Scripture to attack people we disagree with or even hate. We can justify almost any action by quoting a verse or two, and history is replete of people who have committed atrocities in the guise of following God. One does not have to go far back into history to ask how the German Church supported a regime that villainized, deported, and eventually executed six million Jews. Any verse or passage can be perverted to support any vile action of man. Thus, with the Bible opened before us, are we going to submit to its words and allow it to shape our lives, or are we going to manipulate it and the people we address to say what we want it to say? Oh, and by the way, we’ve not even begun question how fear-mongering is used to get people to buy fire insurance, or to control behavior, or to secure power, instead of focusing on God’s desire for fellowship with us.

The third statement is expressed in the positive form as Paul continues, “. . . we commend ourselves to every man’s conscience in the sight of God.” Paul is inviting personal scrutiny as his life is an open book. He has nothing to hide. He believes, and is hopeful, that once the Corinthians pull back the layers, they will finally acknowledge his apostolic integrity. By the way, Paul is not self-promoting himself by dropping the phrase, “commending ourselves.” As he will say a couple of verses later, “We do not preach ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord” (4:5a).

One of the issues facing the church, its ministers, its leadership, and its members is the level of integrity, or I should clarify, the absence of any level of integrity found within the church. We’ve lacked transparency while demanding others to come clean. We’ve lied to, manipulated, and abused people who trusted in a Jesus of compassion, mercy, and grace. Instead of pointing to God’s favor, we’ve finger-pointed guilt and shame, failing to see the three fingers pointing back at us. And where Jesus has refused to throw stones, we’ve been quick to the draw. Instead of fueling a quiet confidence, we have instilled a fire of fear. All because there is a ravenous and raging wolf taking control over our lives.

If we were to take a good look in the mirror and check our own integrity, what might we find? As we interact with our patients and with each other, what are we like? If two wolves are battling each other for supremacy, who is winning?

Do we make promises to our patients that we know we cannot keep?  In part, do we make these promises because we have a quota we have to reach, so we’ll promise the moon to get them to sign up? Do we make visit promises to patients knowing our schedule won’t sustain those visiting, or that we’ll push them off to someone else? At its core is our integrity.

We all have favorite patients, it’s human nature. Some people we connect to easier and deeper than others. It’s normal. Generally, we’ll provide the best service to those people. Do we provide quality services to those patients just because we like them better, or because they are friends? Even worse, are we providing services to a patient in hopes of something reciprocal? Or this, do we shortchange the more difficult patients because they are difficult, or their context is more difficult to manage?

Ultimately, the issue at hand is integrity, who we are not only in the public eye but behind the scenes when no one is looking. And within us is an animalistic, constant struggle between our honesty and dishonesty. The question remains, who will win out?

There once was an old, wise Cherokee chief who shared his great wisdom with the tribal children. As they sat around him, the warrior informed the children about a battle that rages on inside of people. “The battle,” he said, “was between two wolves living inside all of us.”

One of the wolves is evil. It growls with anger, envy, jealousy, sorrow, regret, greed, arrogance, self-pity, guilt, resentment, lies, false pride, superiority, and ego.

The other is good. It is filled with joy, peace, love, hope, serenity, humility, kindness, benevolence, empathy, generosity, truth, compassion and faith.”

“These wolves,” he said, “are constantly at battle within us and at each other.”

The children, astonished at the depiction described to them, asked the chief, “Which wolf wins?”

The chief looked at the children and said, “The one we feed. The one we feed.”

Soli Deo Gloria!
(i.e., only God is glorified!)