Commentaries
|
 A Moment to Be Clear Courage, not SilenceEvangelical Christians are in danger of tragically misapplying the gospel. It’s a mistake we’ve seen before. BreakPoint is next. Listen Now | Download
The other main group advocated staying on the sidelines and simply obeying the government, saying that gospel witness was just too important to be muddied up with controversial political stances. In both cases, Hitler had little to fear from these pastors—and he knew it. “They will submit,” the Fuhrer said derisively. “…they are insignificant little people, submissive as dogs, and they sweat with embarrassment when you talk to them.” Of course, Hitler overlooked Christians such as Dietrich Bonhoeffer, who risked their lives to boldly oppose Nazi injustice. No, we’re not facing a Hitler, but the stakes are still very high. You’re no doubt aware of the battle over marriage raging across the country. And it’s time to make a choice: Speak out, or acquiesce. On one side are those of us who say that marriage is and always has been the union of one man and one woman. On the other are those who want to redefine marriage as between any two people, including two men or two women. In every state where voters have been given a choice, marriage as Western civilization has always understood it has been affirmed. Well, the battle has moved to Minnesota. This November, an amendment to define marriage as being between a man and a woman will be on the ballot. You would expect pastors in the Land of 10,000 Lakes to take a clear stand. Unbelievably, a couple of evangelical stalwarts are electing to sit this fight out—choosing not to endorse the amendment. Leith Anderson, a former pastor and President of the National Association of Evangelicals is one. John Piper, of Bethlehem Baptist Church, is another. During a recent sermon, Rev. Piper said “Don’t press the organization of the church or her pastors into political activism . . . Expect from your shepherds not that they would rally you behind political candidates or legislative mandates, but they would point you over and over again to God and to his word.” I’m all for pointing people to God’s Word—surely we need that! But is attempting to protect marriage from a dangerous redefinition mere political activism? Anderson warned that “churches should seek to be nonpartisan in their approach to teaching moral truths.” Agreed! But defending marriage is not a partisan activity! As our late friend Chuck Colson said, marriage is a central pillar of our civilization, and if we allow it to be redefined, the religious liberty of all will be imperiled. I talked about this recently on BreakPoint—pointing to Canada, where so-called gay “marriage” is legal, and where a Catholic bishop was charged with a human-rights violation for writing a letter to his flock about the Catholic Church’s stand on marriage! In Denmark, by law, gay couples, may now get married in any church they want! Don’t think that can’t happen here. Look, I understand we’ve been rightly criticized for, at times, politicizing the gospel. But the fact that we have sometimes gotten our civic engagement wrong doesn’t mean that we should stop trying to get it right! We believers simply cannot sit this one out. I urge you, join the half a million Christians and sign the Manhattan Declaration in defense of marriage, life, and religious liberty. Come to BreakPoint.org, click on this commentary, and we’ll link you to it. As Bonhoeffer and like-minded German Christians knew, there comes a time to choose. Pastors: Choose courage, not silence. Further Reading and Information Minnesota Same-Sex Marriage Amendment ManhattenDeclaration.orgKey Minnesota pastors opt out of marriage fight Bonhoeffer: Pastor, Martyr, Prophet, Spy
|
Discover more: Search our family of websites.
PRINT
RSS
Before the Second World War, the rise of Adolf Hitler forced German Christians to make a choice. Some attempted to make peace with the Nazis, engaging in dialogue and endless discussions. Most in this group ended up allowing their churches to become accomplices.
Comments:
Piper's job is to preach the Word, not advocate for or against political measures. He is not the conscience of his congregation. In his own words:
"[O]ver the long haul Christians will take clearer, stronger, more effective stands for justice and righteousness and the common good if pastors and preachers speak powerfully and faithfully and biblically to the moral and spiritual and ethical and theological issues surrounding political issues, rather than advocating particular candidates and laws."
How would you feel if your pastor urged you from the pulpit to support left-wing legislation or vote for left-wing candidates, based on his reading of Scripture passages related to government's role toward the poor? You can see how this could easily become a slippery slope.
To draw an analogy between Nazi-era Christians and John Piper is intellectually lazy at best. The difference couldn't be more stark: the former ignored what was going on around them and refused to address it, whereas Piper is doing the very opposite.
I would encourage everyone to read Piper's response: http://bit.ly/L9eovh
When it came to Proposition 8 here in California, my wife and I knew we had to do something. We had to take a stand. To allow for misinformation and untruth to go unchallenged would be to stand for the other side. We could not in good conscience countenance that. So up went our "Yes on 8" yard signs.
Not that our residence is on a well traveled street or anything. . . not the case. But we gave the Yes on 8 side our support in a visible way. We were amazed that in the dark of night these simple yard signs were pulled up and taken over and over. Anticipating that these signs would be defaced or stolen, I had wisely stockpiled replacements. So we had our message out for a few consecutive days before Election Day.
Amazing that something as simple as a yard sign would be offensive or so subject to derision by others right here in our neighborhood. We took a stand, and have not suffered for it as yet. When it comes time to suffer for taking a Godly stand, we shall depend and rely on God to help us in that hour. May God help us all!
You said in paragraph 6 "On one side are those of us who say that marriage is and always has been the union of one man and one woman" but I'm curious where you get that notion? By the above link I posted you can see clearly in scriptures there were MANY men married to more than one woman. There were even more than this article covers actually.
So between the Hitler reference and the blatantly wrong statement in paragraph 6 I wonder how your remaining arguments can be convincing?
Your article is about gay marriage so I'll return to that topic. Really, what's the WORST that could happen if same-sex couples wed? That two people who love each other would live together legally? They are already living together engaging in the same sex acts without the "legal cover". Would that be ANY worse than the broken heterosexual marriages in society today?
abounds with regard to the whole church/ politics issue when it comes to liberals and conservatives. Check out this article - http://godfatherpolitics.com/5970/michelle-obama-encourages-pastors-break-law/.
BTW - it is very evident throughout Scripture that we are called to be 'salt and light' and to do so first and foremost in our deeds but then also be willing to speak boldly, yet gently and respectfully from the Truth of Scripture in every realm of our culture in order to advance Christ's Kingdom, not just the Church!
Thanks again for your stance and heart and God bless in Christ!
I have a great respect for Eric Metaxas and the work he does, so I was honestly very disappointed that he would choose to go this route.
There is something completely different between Christians not standing up against an evil dictator bent on taking over the world and committing mass genocide, and Christians not opposing gay marriage. We need to recognize that distinction.
~Pastor Martin Niemoller
I don't agree with this statement. Are not moral truths inherently non partisan issues? There is no partisan way to teach TRUTH!
I don't know if you're looking for real feedback or just hi fives from folks that agree with you. But if you're looking for feedback, the Hitler analogy was a bit much.
You don't get to make the point with the Hitler comparison and then throw in the "It's not Hitler but..." so one can shrug their shoulders when people don't like the Hitler reference.
I'm sure you're well intentioned. But that opening dramatically weakened your voice with readers that weren't already firmly agreeing with you in my opinion.
May God bless you,
J
Do you actually believe that the church could be weakened anymore that it's already been with the arious scandals and vulgar accusations that sometimes just happen to be true. Am I ashamed of that sometimes? You better believe I am.
Do you actually think our constitution could be weakened anymore than it already has been with the whittling away of rights, taking away from the majority and giving to the minority? To all of us being forced to now refer to The U.S. Government as our healthcare plan?
How much worse can things possibly get Calvin?
When Jesus comes and asks you where you stand on issues I hope you will know for sure by then.
Because right now, in His own miraculous way...He is forcing the churches to make a choice.
God works in mysterious ways and you better believe that He is working.
With some people He searches their hearts and minds. With others, maybe He just looks to see if they have signed the right list.
The first question that needs to be answered is what are the biblical criteria for deciding which issues are primary? Secondly, what are the valid options for a response by the church to the government & the culture? My take is that there seem to be a number of cultural assumptions underlying your call to action. I'm not so sure that "speak out or acquiesce" & "courage or silence" are the only two available options, although they are helpful for forcing someone to take a position. The nomenclature of warfare seems unnecessary as well.
I am disappointed with Eric. He took the article of the Star Tribune and swallowed it. The article was trying to show that two significant voices in evangelicalism were sitting this one out when it was far from the truth.
Piper's sermon spent 45 minutes giving the case clearly for a yes vote on defining marriage biblically and then he spent 5 minutes stating that the church would be weakened if it took a political stand to a constitutional amendment, ever, not just in this case. He was totally correct and I support his message completely. Anyone who heard the message knows exactly where the pastor stands and what he was supporting.
Eric needs to spend a little more time listening to the source and not falling for the rhetoric of the left. It is kinda like NBC commenting on the firefighters in Colorado being without health insurance!
http://www.desiringgod.org/blog/posts/vote-as-though-not-voting