One of the commentators on the hotelier debate said that "Christians have to accept the fact that attitudes, acts and lifestyles which were unacceptable twenty-five years ago are now acceptable and approved. Things changed because people made a stand, challenged conventions and got the force of the law behind them and people who don't like this situation must learn to accept or live with this for this is how it's going to be".
What a great display of skewed logic and hypocrisy combined we find in those words.
If it is right for some to campaign about restriction of freedom and rights then surely it is also right for those who, because of the changes, find their freedom, rights and integrity (social, secular and religious) challenged or restricted to do the same. The problem is that Christians appear, generally, to be unable to do this for a number of reasons. These reasons range from a wrong positioning or engagement (and action) and the fact that the minute they try to engage or make a stand they are met with accusations of homophobic activity or an inability (unwillingness?) from those who support the sexual liberalities to listen.
Now, at a personal level I'm happy for people to live out their own choices. I might not endorse their actions but that's their right, just as it is my right not to choose to do the same things or consider them to be right. I have an added dynamic in that I am called to warn those I see doing something that is hazardous to them, even when perhaps societal values and attitudes might not agree (anymore) with this. The reality being that just because man makes something legal, this does not remove the Biblical warrant regarding it.
Take your pick here for there are many areas which fall into this category: living together (which is not cohabitation or common law marriage - and for some is merely a "Long-term shag!*"), Abortion, homosexuality and many more issues besides. Now, I try to engage with people on this topic through developing a relationship and by using the Galatians Six instruction about "restoring people 'gently."
I consider those who send images of aborted foetuses through the post as misguided and contra-Christian; those who act like Phelps and Jones over Christian rights, values and engagement to have nothing to do with Christ and see them as merely working for the enemy! We need to be balanced, consistent and Christian and this issue brings forth much more than just the considerations of the hotelier case. It outlines the difficulty Christians have in making their stand and maintaining their integrity when one side is considered to have more rights and power than the other! It is about the very fabric of democracy and personal rights!
It challenges us to work out how we engage effectively and consistently within the Biblical standards and attitudes we are required live in and communicate this to others. It challenges us to bring a realistic, logical and balanced engagement with people who obviously (in the main) are not!
*One of the couples I counselled a few years back declared their intention to split and when asked about their relationship, this was the response! Not what I expected but perhaps a more honest take on their situation!
1 comment:
I think we need to be careful when referring to folk like the Phelps and Terry Jones. Some of what they teach I wouldn't want to touch with a bargepole, but when I am told (on a different internet space) "Oh come on his view isn't mainstream, he is an extreme fundamentalist. Only fundies believe you have to be 'saved' to go to heaven!", I naturally came to his defence, since this is precisely what mainstream Christianity teaches and has done for the most of the last 2000 years.
Post a Comment