Sunday, May 8, 2011

Sojourners Can't Decide if it's a Good Idea to Welcome Gay Families to Church

I've always had trouble Sojourners.  I would subscribe to their magazine, enjoy a few articles and then get put off by their legalistic tone (yes, friends, Liberals can be legalistic, self-righteous jerks too).  I think they really do think we can save ourselves by being pacifists and giving up stuff for the poor.  That sort of thing always rubs this Lutheran the wrong way.

Well according to Rev Robert Chase in this article LGBT “Welcome” Ad Rejected by Sojourners, Nation's Premier Progressive Christian Org   Sojourners doesn't want to take sides on welcoming gay families to church. 

I find it really strange that an organization that can be so sure of itself and so self-rightous about some things (these are the same kind of people scolding people for being happy about Bin Laden's demise) can't make up their minds about God and homosexuality.  Gee I hope it's not a cynical move to keep evangelical folk who are socially conservative but socially progressive in the movement.  

But even if say, you can't make up your mind about Gay can't take a side about WELCOMING gay families in the church?   

Well this is how I feel about that:

So, because you are lukewarm--neither hot nor cold--I am about to spit you out of my mouth -Revelation 3:15


  1. I accidentally deleted Father Anonymous's comment:

    Seriously. Last thing you want to do is take sides on the ugly question of welcoming families to church.

    Next up: Apple pie -- great American dessert or the Devil's torte?

  2. I too have had issues with Sojourner's. They are an Evangelical movement that has some social justice concerns for the poor and marginalized but remain fairly conservative when it comes to LGBT concerns and women's health, I have never really regarded them as progressive or liberal, but rather a social justice movement concerned primarily with race and poverty...

  3. hi, I think you meant, "Gee I hope it's not a cynical move to keep evangelical folk who are [theologically] conservative but socially progressive in the movement".

    Let me ask you though, when you say "I find it really strange that an organization that can be so sure of itself and so self-rightous about some things"

    you seem to imply that being sure of oneself is a bad thing. But aren't you sure of yourself about certain things as well, such as homosexuality? I don't think anyone can escape this. We must search the scriptures to see which viewpoint is right and that is all we can do.

    Now being right always carries the danger of being self righteous, but I don't think that means we should denigrate coming to a right knowledge of things.

    Let's say a policeman catches a mugger mugging an 80 year old woman. I can picture the following dialogue:

    mugger: "Mr. Policeman, I bet you like bossing people around and feeling morally superior to them. I bet you enjoyed catching me."

    policeman: "To a certain extent you are right. And to that extent I must be honest with myself and repent of that. But I cannot deny what is right merely because that carries certain temptations with it. I'm still obligated to stop you from doing evil. I'm still obligated to proclaim that what you do is immoral. I can't deny that just because you construct hypothetical ad hominem attacks against me."

    Just something to think about from a conservative viewpoint.

  4. I don't believe I said I thought being sure of yourself is a bad thing. Just that if they can be so sure of other things, why the indecision about welcoming gays in church?

    So do you think gay families should be welcome in church? If not, because they are "sinning", what other sinning people are not welcome? And how do you keep track of everyone's sin? And would you need someone at the door to check the list and make sure no sinners get in?

  5. I'm also curious about your use of the image of a policeman. Do you think the role of the church is to police people?

  6. "Just that if they can be so sure of other things, why the indecision about welcoming gays in church?"

    I think that all unrepentant sinners should be witnessed to outside of church, and be allowed inside the church to hear the Gospel preached, but they shouldn't be allowed to take communion (1 Co 11:27) or become members (1 Co 5). I think this is the straightforward meaning of these passages. The Sunday service should be primarily for the edification of the body, not necessarily as a point of evangelism.

  7. Oh you are one of those that likes to rank sinners - and I bet you believe you are a "repentant" sinner as opposed to those unrepentant sinners that belong outside. Well I say that you and I are both unrepentant sinners who deserve to be outside the church but have been redeemed and invited into the Kingdom by Jesus.

    Do you think you are responsible for your own repentance? Does your repentance save you? Or does Jesus save you? Are you really so different than any other sinner?

  8. I agree with Luther- I am a monergist and agree we sin daily and sin much - but there is another issue - how would you tell the difference between a sincere seeker and just an activist who is only interested in promoting his or her cause? Shouldn't there at least be some conviction on their part?

  9. We are all show up promoting our own cause and then we encounter Jesus who throws us all off course. i wish you well C. but I don't want to turn my blog into a discussion forum.