Note from Tim Bayly: Since this was posted many months ago, Dr. North has denied our post's accuracy, saying he never gave an evening lecture at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary calling for pastors to leave the Social Security system. Contrary to Dr. North's claim, we were there and it happened. Also, we checked our memory with others who were there and have confirmed the lecture was NOT a part of Dr. North's debate with Ron Sider--which, by the way, we didn't attend. Here's our more recent response to Dr. North's denial.
But woe to you Pharisees! For you pay tithe of mint and rue and every kind of garden herb, and yet disregard justice and the love of God; but these are the things you should have done without neglecting the others. (Luke 11:42)
Over the years we've changed our minds on a number of things, but one thing we've viewed with consistency is the reformed theologian Gary North. We do not trust him. This has caused some sadness for Tim because one of his dearest friends is so committed to North that he volunteers time editing North's books and articles. If we were inclined to reconsider our position, though, the article just posted by North on the Terri Schiavo case is all we need to reaffirm our longtime conviction about this man.
Gary North and Social Security:
Back in 1983, North was invited to speak at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, the seminary where all three of the Bayly brothers--Tim, David, and Nathan--received our Masters of Divinity. It was an evening lecture and we don't remember the announced subject. But we do remember that North spent the evening attacking the financial stability of Social Security and ranting about the stupidity of any pastor who failed to opt out of it.
The law gives pastors the rare privilege in their first year of ministry of choosing whether or not to be a part of Social Security. If they wish, they may opt out and this has a huge impact on the financial well-being of any pastor who makes this choice.
To be specific: for the first nine years of Tim's ministry he pastored a yoked parish in rural Wisconsin. During that time his total income (salary plus fair rental value of the manse owned by the church that he lived in) averaged somewhere between $25,000 and $30,000. Then for the past thirteen years, he's ministered in Bloomington, Indiana, and his salary has averaged about $57,000. Federal tax law has determined that, in connection with Social Security, the pastor is self-employed and must pay a little over fifteen percent of all his income--including housing allowance or fair rental value of any manse the church asks him to live in--to Social Security.
Do the figures and you'll see that opting out of Social Security would have saved Tim around $151,650--about $7,000 per year (and he could have used it). Talk to financial planners and they'll tell you he could have taken just a small part of that total, invested it privately, and realized a return much larger than the return he'll get from the Social Security system. So why didn't he opt out?
The key detail Gary North left out, neither mentioning it nor even alluding to it at his Gordon-Conwell lecture, was that the U.S. tax code requires pastors who opt out of Social Security to do it for theological reasons only. We may not opt out because we think Social Security is a bad investment and we can get a better return on our money elsewhere.
Now ask us if we have a theological objection to Social Security and we'll tell you we don't. We have political objections, many financial objections, U.S. Constitutional objections, and so on. But we see no basis in Scripture for telling the federal government that Scripture forbids our participation in Social Security.
And truth be told, those friends and colleagues of ours who are pastors and have opted out of Social Security have never yet made a theological case to me of their conscientious objection based on Scripture, so we've told them we think they are wrong to have opted out. True, we can't know their hearts, but we have a sneaking suspicion that most pastors who have opted out have done so for the very reasons Gary North said we ought to: namely, because Social Security is an awful investment.
Years back, I (Tim) told my wife that I had no objection to being a part of Social Security even if by the time I was ready to retire there was nothing left for me. In other words, I don't mind sending the federal government money as my part of helping take care of widows, orphans, retirees, and the feeble elderly.
Which brings us back to Gary North piece on Terri Schiavo.
Gary North and Terri Schiavo:
North, being never in doubt concerning his own perspicacity, is in full hue and cry over Christians who want Terri Schiavo to live. "Who's going to pay for her?" he asks over and over again. Near the end of his Schiavo piece, he writes:
The fundamentalist Christians who make up the bulk of Terri Schiavo's defenders have no social philosophy. They never have. They hate such "academic stuff." "We love Jesus. We have no time for social philosophy!" They are deeply emotional. They want to Do The Right Thing. Their idea of the Right Thing is to Be Nice - with taxpayers' money. They are welfare statists for Jesus. What would Jesus do? Raise taxes!
North is wrong on so many levels, not the least of which is the fact that any number of Christians have offered to pay for Terri's care--including her own parents who have asked to be permitted to take Terri home and care for her themselves. Currently, the place where Terri is being executed by the civil authority, Woodside Hospice, is not charging for Terri's care. Money simply isn't the issue here as would be obvious to any person who walked in the plastic snow fence cages the protestors were confined to outside of Woodside Hospice. Scores of the handicapped, old and young, paraplegic, quadriplegic, and every other malady, all lovingly cared for by their families.
Love, Gary. It's all about LOVE!
We see their love--where's yours? You know, all that "I was hungry and you fed me, thirsty and you gave me to drink, naked and you clothed me, sick and you nursed me, lonely and in prison and you visited me" stuff.
Remember how, on the Day of Judgement, the sheep and the goats will be separated on the basis of this criteria stated by our Lord Jesus Christ: "Inasmuch as you have done it to the least of these, my brothers, you've done it to me."
But of course, North looks at the big picture; he's busy developing a "social philosophy" to serve the widows and orphans in their distress.
To be strictly personal about this, we're sickened by Gary North and we exhort Christians not to feed on his cruel mercies.
Yes, we understand the necessity of developing a social philosophy. And yes, we see and abhor the disdain evangelicals have for doctrine and theology. And yes, we believe not only in biblical, but also systematic theology. Yes, we believe that the redistribution of wealth by the state through our tax system is theft by other means. Yes, our nation's judiciary is out of control and ought to be impeached. Yes, the reading and study of the Old Testament, including its laws, is imperative for the Christian to understand the New Testament, including the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
But the heartless reductionism of Gary North simply asking who's going to pay for Terri is a direct attack upon the mercy and grace and faith that are supposed to characterize the lives of the Children of God. It reminds us of nothing so much as Jesus' words for the theonomists of His time:
Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint and dill and cummin, and have neglected the weightier provisions of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness; but these are the things you should have done without neglecting the others. You blind guides, who strain out a gnat and swallow a camel! (Matthew 23:23,24)
Strong words, yes. But Jesus' words.
David J. Bayly
Timothy B. Bayly
