If I were going to pay $8,000-$12,000* for a half page ad in the Houston Chronicle I think I'd want to talk about something else; like maybe the hundreds of people suffering tonight in Joplin in the wake of this nation's deadliest tornado in 50 years; or those still recovering in Arkansas; or Haiti; or Japan. I think I'd use my advertising power to communicate a different kind of message to a world, that sadly, cares less and less what the church has to say about anything let alone what the latest revision to our church constitution is.
I'm not very proud tonight to be a Houstonian Presbyterian follower of Jesus Christ. I may just stay home tomorrow and hope than none of my non-church going friends read the newspaper today. How in the world is that newspaper ad a conversation starter about the good news of Jesus Christ?
I'm not very proud tonight be a conservative evangelical follower of Jesus Christ. The real kicker is, I agree theologically with the Layman. I agree that God's design for human sexual intimacy is in the context of a lifelong covenant of marriage between a man and woman. I believe that our culture is tremendously confused when it comes to what constitutes good and beautiful sexual relationships. I believe there are a myriad of ways sin leads us away from God's good and beautiful design. And I believe that Jesus Christ purchased redemption from each and every one of those ways on the cross.
But I would much rather others be confused about my stance on homosexuality than that they would be confused about my love for Jesus Christ. In fact, I really don't think God is sitting in heaven right now wringing his hands over lifelong monogamous relationships just because they happen to be homosexual. I gotta believe there are other concerns topping God's list. Perhaps one of them is how irrelevant the world perceives the church? Perhaps one of them is why the church is squabbling using the world's language of power and politics rather than communicating with the language of love, mercy and grace?
"All to Jesus I surrender. All to Him I freely give."
*I have no idea how much the Layman paid for the ad. I just read on "Yahoo! Answers" somewhere that a half-page ad in the Sun Times is about $9,000.
15 comments:
A great articulation of faith in the midst of controversy. We all have to expend more effort in keeping the main thing the main thing.
Thank you, Steve.
very well said.
Pat Clark
"I would much rather others be confused about my stance on homosexuality than that they would be confused about my love for Jesus Christ"
But if we are willing to ignore His commands just because society doesn't agree, won't that confuse people about our love for Jesus Christ too?
Bruce, good point. I don't think it gets us anywhere to not call something sin that the scripture calls sin. The church can end up just being a mirror to the culture - and that's not helpful. But then sometimes I think the church is so irrelevant and out of touch that we just look like a brick wall (pure in doctrine and purpose perhaps, but completely out of touch). My ideal is that the church is a window into the Kingdom of God. Good windows allow one to see clearly from one space/realm into another. The Presbyterian Layman Ad strikes me as a 'brick wall' approach.
Steve -- Thanks for this post.
I hate it when people reinforce negative stereotypes.
I was thinking about blogging my response to these ads when I saw yours--and it's perfect.
I've linked your post on my blog:
Quotidian Grace
I guess I don't see why posting the ad negates anyone's ability to proclaim the Gospel. My guess is the folks at the Laymen are wanting to reach out to the many Jesus followers who attend (or used to attend) a local congregation that is part of the liberal drift and wants them to know there are others who are still seeking to be faithful to God's word. Don't see a need to bash the Layman on this one as I think they are just trying to get the word out that not all PCUSAers agree on the recent action and if you don't agree, here are some things you can do. And why doubt that those who paid the ad aren't also helping victims of storms? And if you charge them with being wrong for doing the ad instead of spending that money on the ad then are you pulling back on all sort of spending elsewhere so you can send money to the victims? If not then . . . . well, you know
I disagree with many of your conclusions but I completely agree that the message the Church (that is big C) is sending is confusing and often times counter to the Love of God shown through the life of Jesus. It needs to be a both/and. We need to embrace the beauty of sexuality, which is a gift from God while also caring for the pain in the world. But to do one to the exclusion of the other is just as wrong. Thank you my brother from across the aisle (and up in that big steeple) for calling out an injustice. Now lets fight together to bring about God's love on earth as it is in heaven for ALL People.
I think of what a profound waste of money. How many people could have received spiritual or material support with what they spent on it. But time will cure this. Fewer and fewer people are going to be willing to bankroll this kind of thing.
It is the passage of A-10 that is changing the focus of the discussion in the church from Jesus as Savior, redeeming us from sin instead of changing the definitin of Sin and keeping repentance out of the picture for those who now accept homosexual behavior as normal and accepted.
The Layman only wants the "silent majority" in the pew to now be aware that the battle is now in their arena and they should be ready. Sad that it will stir up a "war" in the local congregation that pastors have been trying to avoid. I think God is weeping over the loss of intregrity and vision of His church, but wringing hands is not necessary because God can and will move in this. I say hurry up and move Lord, because this place of chaos is uncomfortable. L. Lee
God Abides - Now there is news worthy to print.
Perhaps we should pool our advertizement monies and begin putting that message in the media ...
Good blog response to the adv. Thanks
Should something like this response be sent to the papers as opinion where the advs appeared?
Steve, Thanks for your post. Although we differ about homosexuality, I believe there is great hope when people like ourselves can agree that mission is at the top of the list and this is not of God's pinultimate concern. I'd love to sit down for coffee with you anytime to talk about mission.
Btw, I looked it up. They spent at least $4,200 to run that ad first of the week. Aside from wanting to take a shower after reading the ad, I would love to see us all consider that a challenge to do at least that much more mission in our communities over the next year.
Many years ago, back in the days of PresbyNet, I learned something very important from a leader in the Witherspoon Society. The organization then known as PLGC had done something that greatly upset the larger Presbyterian community, and overtures to the GA were calling for severe discipline of the group. In the PNet Witherspoon forum, a moderate progressive wondered how much capital people should spend defending what most considered a bit of a misstep by the PLGC leadership.
A Witherspoon leader replied the disagreements with PLGC were over minor things like strategy, tactics and the tone of the debate -- the fundamental goals of Witherspoon and PLGC were the same. The disagreements with the Lay Committee were over profound issues about the nature of the church, the person and work of Jesus Christ and what the call to ministry involved. Who would you rather have setting the pace in the Presbyterian Church, the leader asked, Chris Glaser or Parker Williamson? And if defending Chris Glaser meant from time to time supporting some things that were tough to stomach, well, that was the price of working together to reform the church. Keep your eyes on the real prize, the leader urged: on the stuff that really matters, Chris is our friend, and Parker isn't. Don't give Parker any encouragement.
What I learned from that discussion is there are issues that really matter, and there are things that reasonable people can disagree about. And I learned there is power in saying "I disagree with you tactically but I agree with you theologically, so let's support each other and defend the confession of faith we share." You can change a church with that attitude…
I do not see how this furthers the Gospel. I understand what the Laymen is trying to do and I may even agree with it but this was completely the wrong venue to do it in. If they wished to make this statement it should have been made in a publication that targets Christians. When making a statement to the world the gospel should always be at the center of it.
Post a Comment