With Sanctity of Life Sunday approaching, I appreciate Justin Taylor posting the above video, and President Obama’s visionary words for protecting our children – ALL our children. And I concur with John Piper, who Tweeted:
“This use of the President’s words, with the most intense irony, is right and righteous.”
In a post yeaterday I offered my musing about Sanctity of Life Sunday. In my reading I also stumbled upon something by Russell Moore, Dean and Vice President at Southern Seminary in Lousville, on his blog, Moore to the Point. I found his post: Why I Hate Sanctity of Life Sunday to be simple, insightful, and sensitive.
How can I commend a guy who “hates” Sanctity of Life Sunday, when I just finished writing about it with a positive perspective? Well, you’ll have to check out Dr. Moore’s post to find out.
Like many conservative Evangelical congregations around the country, our church recognized yesterday as Sanctity of Life Sunday. It seems only appropriate. We live in a culture that no longer values human life, except, perhaps, as a disposable comodity. This is evident by not only the continued tragedy of abortion but also the growing, or at least high, percentage of Americans who are OK with euthenasia. But we value life, because God values life.
Like other Evangelicals, we believe that life – human life – is a reflection of the glory of God. Humanity, and humanity alone, was created by God to bear His image. Though vandalized in the Fall, and tarnished by our own sin, all people contine to posess an inherent value because we are still bearers of the image of God, even under all the rubbage.
One of the things I mentioned to our congregation is that there are several ways to obsereve Sanctity of Life Sunday. The most common, I suspect, is to show support for being Pro Life and opposed to abortion. Like many others, we partner with the local crisis pregnancey center (which, in our case here in Bristol, is led by a man who preceded me as pastor of Walnut Hill Church). I also mentioned that adoption is a very important practice. More than that, adoption is a beautiful illustration of the Gospel. (I’ll compose another post to explain that, perhaps tomorrow.) Another related practice is Foster Care, which is in critical condition here in Sullivan County, Tennessee. (Perhaps I’ll draft yet another post about this issue, either this week or next.)
But back to the most traditional emphasis connected to the observation of Sanctity of Life Sunday. It strikes me that there are two ways we can go with our observation of this day:
These are related. And both can be accomplished. But it seems to me the emphasis always leans toward one of these options or the other.
For me personally, I am glad to be part of a church that focuses on the celebration of Life. The recent tradtion at our church is to launch a competition between the men and women to see which group/gender can fill the most baby bottles with coins during the time between Sanctity of Life Sunday and Mother’s Day. All the money collected goes to the AACPC here in Bristol. It is a fun and postitive tradition that focuses on serving those in need more than decrying what we hate. (Though, I do hate the practice of abortion.)
What you will not see at a church that I pastor is a yard full of crosses on Sanctity of Life Sunday – nor during any other time of year. I am not levying accusations at those who do this each year. There is a place for protest, and I suspect that there are people who are reminded about how monstrously large the abortion industry is in this country. But my preference, and my position, is that it is better to celebrate and serve LIFE.
There is a practical, and compassionate, reason for my position.
I often wonder about the message being sent to the women who have chosen to have an abortion – and to a lesser degree, the men who were complicit in that decision. I wonder what they perceive of the love of Christ for people like them, people labeled “murderers” by the most vociferous anti-abortion activists. In our churches, and in our pregnancy centers, we caution women considering an abortion that someday down the road they are very likely to feel a high degree of guilt should they decide to terminate their pre-born child’s life. Reasearch and experiece has proven that to be the truth. And it is women (and men) like that I wonder about. When they see the crosses covering a church yard, representing the millions of children whose lives are taken each year, including the life their decision ended, what message do they infer the church is sending them? I am afraid that the message hurting women receive – whether or not it is the message intended to be implied – is: “We told you so.” Or worse: “We hate people like you (people who kill innocent children).”
I wonder how inclined a woman, feeling the weight of a decision she cannot retract, would be to seek counselling for her grief from a church that has marked her sin with a Scarlet Letter “A” – for Abortion – in the form of a garden of crosses out on the lawn. I wonder if these women drive by and sense the love of Jesus flowing from such an expression of the Body of Christ. I am sure many have received help, forgiveness, and hope through these congregations. But I ask myself, “How many more women drive-by fearing they will never be forgiven or accepted in such a place?”
Again, I am not indicting those churches, nor those Christians, who choose to observe Sanctity of Life in this way. There is a place for advocacy on behalf of those who cannot speak for themselves (in this case, the unborn). What I write here in this post are only my thoughts and concerns. But they are real thoughts and real concerns, deeply held. And for those reasons, whatever others do on this day each year, I will CHOOSE to CELEBRATE LIFE!
It seems like it has been a long, long time since I sat down to write a new post. In reality it has only been a week that has gone by since I last posted. But it has been a few weeks since I have been able to take the time to sit down and write with any real enjoyment.
Since I last posted regularly our church has added an assistant pastor, I have been elected (appointed?) president of the Athletic Booster Club at Sullivan Central High School, Miss California has lost the Miss USA pageant but become the spokesperson for the new religious right, and militant pro-lifers have been thrown in jail for protesting the president in South Bend, Indiana.
There is a lot that would have been great blog fodder.
I want to just take a moment to comment on the Miss California and Pro Life protests. In both situations it has been asserted that there is a sense of religious persecution against Christians occuring. But I am not so sure that things are as clear as some would like to make them out to be.
Miss California, Carrie Prejean, as almost everyone in the Western world knows, was a finalist for the Miss USA crown. She was put in, what was in one sense, a difficult position. She was asked her opinion about gay marriage by an agenda driven celebrity, with no apparent talents, Perez Hilton. In her hesitating and somewhat aplogetic response Miss Prejean affirmed her support of, not just traditional but, God’s standard and governing of marriage. The backlash and media coverage that resulted was more than a little ridiculous. Hilton went on the warpath, ignorantly and offensively attacking Miss Prejean for disagreeing with him. As has been said by many before me, apparently open-mindedness only opens to the Left.
That event provided some interesting cultural insights.
First, I am amazed that Pro Gay seems to have become a mark of righteousness. It is not enough for some that people be open and non-hostile to those choosing homosexual lifestyles. In our current culture any scruples about homosexuality is deemed not only ignorant but actually seems to be considered evil. Pro Gay is not only accepted as enlightened but as a mark of the righteous. This is peculiar in one sense because the position they espouse (no pun intended) is a minority view even in California. What is even more peculiar is that there is no apparent standard that makes their position “righteous” other than the fact that supporters say so. What guage are these people using to determine what is righteousness and what is sin? Romans 1 is being acted out right before our eyes: “They exchanged the truth of God for a lie…” (Romans 1.25)
Second, because of her position on this issue, and because of the noteriety that surrounded it, there was an apparent attempt to destroy Miss Prejean. They dug up dirt to discredit her. They did not have to dig deep. Pictures taken for a modeling portfolio were more revealing than the average conservative Christian girl has posed for. That was enough to get the hounds howling about her hypocrissy, and some pageant officials questionining her qualification to continue as the reigning Miss California.
I have little doubt that the motive behind releasing those photos was malicious and political. But I also thought the response given by Miss Prejean and her handlers was a bit weak and pretentious. To merely explain them as the trademark of her profession is not to uphold the standard of modesty her faith calls for. And to claim that this was happening to her only because she was a Christian is just lame.
I am not offering a judgement on Miss Prejean for the photos. For one thing, I don’t know when she posed for them nor when she became a Christian. But I do think that she assumed a role that has become all-too-common among Evanglicals in our culture: victim. She assumed this role when it was asserted that she was being treated unfairly just because she was a Christian. We seem to cry “foul” far too often when things don’t go our way, even if there are other factors other than our faith.
And this, I believe, is also pertinent to those lamenting the arrests of Pro Life protesters at Notre Dame.
In Miss Prejeans case, while there does appear to have been politically driven motive to destroy her credibility, the ammunition against her came from her own decsions and behavior. Other contestants in recent years have faced scrutiney, and even the loss of their titles, for similar actions, without regard for their faith or faithlessness. While harsh, the standards were comparable.
In the case of the protesters at the Notre Dame commencement, the same princile seems to apply. While I passionately share their position against abortion, and have been both disappointed and outraged by the policies implemeted by Barrack Obama on that front, these people were not arrested because they have trusted Jesus as their only hope and salvation. The protesters were arrested because they crossed a line of civil behavior. While their cause is noble, you don’t threaten the President of the United States and expect to have no consequence. That they are Christians is incidental. They were not arrested for being Christians, nor for being Pro Life. They were arrested because they chose to cross a line; because they chose to violate a “just” law in order to protest an injustice. And as the old theme song from the ’70’s TV show Barretta says: “If you can’t do the time, don’t do the crime.”
Jesus said: “Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me.” (Matthew 5.11)
I think we create serious confusion and distortion when we complain that we are persecuted for our faith, when in reality we are experiencing consequences of our behavior. In each of these cases it may reasonably be argued that the consequences were unjust as compared to the actions and the motives. But we must be clear that none of these people were singled out simply for their faithfulness to the Gospel. If we are unwilling, or unable, to make that distinction then we distort the Gospel, and create confusion about what the essence of the Gospel really is.
My third cultural insight is simply that as Christians we are way too quick to make celebreties. While Miss Prejean may be a very nice and godly young lady, she is hardly prepared to be the national spokesperson for the sake of the Kingdom of God. She is a 22 year old model/beauty queen. While that certaily does not disqualify her, it harldy qualifies her to be elevated as a Christian leader. She’s not the first, nor will she be the last. We do the same for athletes and actors. Consequently, not only do we as an Evangelical sub-culture present a mere cotton-candy face of our faith to the culture at large, we do a disservice to spirituality those we prop up – and soon discard.
I’m afraid that as Evangelicals we are all to often so much like the world that we decry, it is no wonder that they rest of the world cannot tell the difference Jesus makes.
GRACE & PEACE 