(for those friends from childhood to those who’ve attended the
church I serve as pastor)
I've noted much talk ABOUT, AT and PAST people in
social media today. I’d like to add a little variety and speak TO some friends of mine.
I can’t imagine the elation you feel today as this historic
day unfolded. For many of you, I assume you feel a slight sense of relief from
certain stigmas that are all too often inappropriately thrust upon you (not
that there will ever be a shortage of mean spirited people hurling insults). Others,
might be happy about the financial benefits that have for too long been
withheld from you and your significant other. For still others it might simply
be a sense of ease at the rendering of equality delivered from the nation’s
highest court.
Knowing I’m the pastor of an evangelical church, I’d imagine
you have an idea of where I stand on a number of social issues. However, I’m
afraid that some of you might assume a certain characterization of me that
might not be accurate. I would hope those of you that know me would corroborate
my love and compassion for all peoples of all backgrounds and all worldviews.
With that said, I wanted to expand on a few statements I
made on social media today. My tweets (and one rather lengthy Facebook post)
were primarily geared toward the church and in particular the faith family that
I shepherd. Here are those tweets in their entirety (the Facebook message will
be later in this post)
The postmodernity in which we are
deeply submerged will continue to lead into further & further confusion. Of
this we ought not be surprised
Remember that the church, from its
conception, was the awkward & ostracized voice faithfully defending truth
in a difficult cultural milieu.
Just had a long, involved conversation
w/my 10 yr/ld about modernity, postmodernity & their structures (or not)
& implications #payattention
If Love "winning" is what
matters I'm just wondering when it be true that #Lovewins for plural & even
paedophilial marriages? #notaboutlove
The last tweet was more of a rhetorical question regarding the
interesting use of the hash tag #Lovewins. Admittedly, it might appear to be a
bit argumentative but that wasn’t my intention. I do wonder however if the
philosophical implications of simplifying the understanding of marriage to the "emotion of love" itself has been fully plumbed by those using that tag. But
alas, I’m not here to debate the merits of the topic with you. Our differences are
deeply held philosophical differences and I won’t insult you by trying to
engage in such an exercise today.
Rather, I’d like to make sure you understand what I am NOT feeling/saying
to you today (or any other day for that matter).
Granted, I have read a number of mean-spirited,
“the-sky-is-falling, the world’s going to hell” posts today. I regret that… and
for what it is worth, I would like to apologize for those confused and
misinformed people. I can only comment tonight on where my heart is. With that
spirit allow me to share what my concern is NOT about…
My concern…
1. … is not about Hate. A few friends have posited today that those
who oppose gay marriage are full of hate and wish ill toward the gay community.
Although the sin of hate is prevalent in a number of persons and perspectives, I can assure you, friends, there
is not a bone of hate in my body toward you. Surely I have shown that to those
of you who know me. That two people disagree on some important and even
philosophically foundational topics does not mean that one must hate and
belittle the other because of the differences. I’ve never been able to understand why this argument (and
logical fallacy) is so often utilized. Part of growing in maturity means being
able to rein in one's feelings in order to have reasonable, civil and even
loving dialogue about serious concerns. In fact, while writing this document I’ve
just had civil discussion with an old friend about this very
issue. Although we disagree on a few things, we also agree on a few. Sure there
are (and will continue to be) those on both sides that will be irrational and will eschew civility while continuing to spew vitriolic speech… but how about we just
ignore those folks? I will not participate is such action.
2. … is not about Homophobia. Another charge I’ve noted which has
been leveled today is that those who oppose gay marriage are afraid of
homosexuals and their efforts. Again, and I can only speak for myself, I am not
afraid of you nor will I ever interact with you with fear or trepidation. You come
visit NOLA and Michelle and I will pick you up, take you to dinner, enjoy time
together and wish you well with hugs and kisses in the exact same way we do for
all our friends (and even some strangers). Some of you can verify this
statement to be true. I love you and “perfect love casts out fear.” I will not
fear you and I ask you to not fear me.
3. … is not about “keeping” the Christian worldview as the only or even
primary worldview. The church, especially in America
4. … is not about being against equality for everyone. Making this
an issue of equality, although profoundly successful in terms of defining the popular
argument, is not how I understand the issue. For me, it is first and foremost a
foundational question of logic and ontology and not that of a comparative
analysis of two subjects. Let me see if I can explain. Are my children and I
equal? Are my wife and I equal? Am I equal to one who is of another ethnicity
or from another country? Am I equal to a fighter pilot? How about a police
officer? A stay at home mom? The President? Supreme Court Justices? Absolutely!
We are all equal… in every way a human being is equal to one another in worth,
value and the love of the Creator. However, because of backgrounds,
circumstances, citizenships, training, biology and a host of other determining
distinctives there are numerous way in which we are not “equal.” I’ve visited
France a couple of times but I do not have the right to vote there. I ride
along with the police as a chaplain but I do not have the right to carry a side
arm on those ride-alongs (even though I am certified to carry a concealed
weapon). Sure my wife and I are equal, but due to my biological make up I am
not able to carry a child to term, nor can I know a mothers love for her
children (nor, for that matter, can I even get the reduced insurance rates my
wife does, because I am a male and apparently the girls drive better than the
boys do). I do not have the right to climb into a jet and fly into battle. I do
not have the authority to pass laws or enact judgment regarding those laws. You
see, for me these are not issues of equality… they are issues of ontology. The equality
of the worth and value of every human life are not in question here nor should
they ever be in question!
I hope you see where I am NOT coming from. Now, if I may, allow me to share with you that about which I
am concerned…
Some might not believe this will be an issue over which I
should be concerned. In fact, I have seen my concern specifically mentioned today as
something those who are opposed to gay marriage should not be concerned about. However,
common sense and history itself might suggest the contrary. Specifically, this is the question of
what will be expected of churches such as mine that, due to deeply held
religious beliefs, will decline to host and perform same-sex wedding ceremonies. You
know, maybe better than most, that humans don’t often treat those in the
minority with the compassion and tolerance each person deserves. As my
worldview becomes increasingly at odds with the culture around us I wonder how
our religious rights will be treated. Will we be forced to adhere to what the
culture (government) says we should believe rather than be allowed to live out
our faith life?
Because of these questions and the litigious nature of our
culture (as already noted in the courts regarding this very issue) churches feel
it necessary to act with compassion, faith and determination to prepare
ourselves for what is not only likely to come, but what is philosophically
bound to come due to the continued “postmoderization” of our culture and
current trends. It is from this context that, in July of 2013 after reading the
majority and dissenting opinions of the Supreme Court upon the act of striking down
DOMA, I authored and submitted to our church the following resolution. I also
posted this on Facebook today, not to be a provocateur but in response to
questions I have received from churches and pastors from around the country
regarding what we might do to prepare ourselves for what is next. Here again is
the text.
"Because of our
exegetical interpretation and subsequent understanding of the biblical
testimony, upon which our church was founded and functions, First Baptist
Church
Whereas, First Baptist
Church of Westwego (FBCW) is an independent congregation of believers, who
voluntarily associates in mission endeavors with the Southern Baptist
Convention, but who is completely unfettered by any denominational hierarchical
structure,
Whereas, FBCW is not
beholden to any outside ecclesiastical jurisdiction but is self-governing and
sets its own policies and procedures regarding aspects of church life,
Whereas, functioning
within this autonomy we do accept and adhere to the traditional understanding
of a complementarian marriage passed down through orthodox Christianity as
being between one man and one woman,
Whereas, the biblical
testimony of Ephesians 5:22-33 clearly shows that the relationship between
Christ and his church is pictured in the relationship between a husband and
wife, in which, as the husband is the head of the wife so Christ is the head of
the church, and as the wife submits to the leadership of her husband so the
church submits to the leadership of Christ,
Whereas, scripture clearly
presents the tenet that a romantic relationship alone is not a sufficient
condition for marriage but that the marriage relationship, of husband and wife,
is the foundational unit of the family structure and in biological terms is the
base unit in which natural conception might happen begetting human life,
Be it resolved, that FBCW
laments and seeks to correct the low standards to which marriage has been held,
even among evangelical churches, in recent years,
Be it further resolved,
that FBCW does not recognize same-gender, polygamous, or child marriages as
valid forms of biblical marriages (as is testimony from the New Testament),
Be it further resolved,
that FBCW does not permit its facilities to be used for these types of
ceremonies,
Be it finally resolved,
that although the pastors of FBCW have the autonomy to set their own standards
for their acceptance or rejection of an invitation to officiate a wedding
ceremony (be it that of a member of the church family or a couple from outside
the church family) the Pastors of FBCW are not permitted to participate in
same-gender, polygamous, or child marriage ceremonies."
Presented and adopted on this 14th day of July, 2013.
In the end, I want you to know that I recognize that you
have felt ostracized and that even this wording/action from our church might
not set well with you but I drafted this resolution to protect a deeply held
foundational truth for me and those I lead, not because I hate you, or am
afraid of you, or that I expect everyone to think like me or that I am against
equality for all people. The difference is about our philosophical worldviews
and competing ontologies. My view has been born out of a relentless heart for
the work of the Gospel and the hope of the reconciliation of all men to our
loving God. Jesus Christ came to set the captive free and with Paul, I can say
that I am the “chief of all sinners” and in my adult life have tried to devote my life to one of peace
and faithfulness to Christ as Lord. I wish that same peace for all who read
this letter today.
I am ready and prepared to be in the minority. I just hope
my increasingly extraneous worldview will be as tolerated as you’ve always
hoped your’s would have been (and so often was not). I will always and unashamedly
love you and continue to consider you a friend.
In the Love of Christ,
Jay
No comments:
Post a Comment