The Gospel lesson for my morning prayer today was Luke 6:1-11, which reads in part,
On another Sabbath, Jesus entered the synagogue and was teaching, and a man was there whose right hand was withered. And the scribes and the Pharisees watched him, to see whether he would heal on the Sabbath, so that they might find a reason to accuse him. But he knew their thoughts, and he said to the man with the withered hand, “Come and stand here.”
Jesus knew the thoughts of those around him. He knew that healing this man on the Sabbath – an act that was right and just – would ignite accusations against him, causing division among the chosen people of God leading ultimately to his crucifixion. Healing on the Sabbath flew in the face of the conservative Jews, those who knew and followed their Scriptures better than most.
And yet Jesus said to the man, “Come and stand here.” Stand with me. And he healed him.
This passage flew in my face, too. It seems that Jesus had two choices before him. He could
1. Acquiesce to the traditional, “churchly” code of his day and just wait until sundown to heal the man. This would have made everyone happy. The man still gets healed, just a few hours later, and the Torah-abiding worshippers don’t get all upset. It’s a win-win. Or,
2. Take a stand and heal the man in order to make an important point, regardless of the consequences brought on by the old guard.
Jesus’ choice is obvious. The cross is a constant reminder that Jesus never shied away from taking the road less traveled.
As I continue to read the fall-out from Sojourners choice to not run an ad that welcomes (and if you dig enough, even affirms) gay people, I find the most common defense of Jim Wallis and his organization is one of pragmatism. They would love to affirm gay people, we are told, but this would upset their base. It would alienate the conservatives in their camp. It would cause people to accuse them. It would cause division and disruption.
And Jesus said, “Come and stand here.”
It’s a shame that Sojourners did not take this opportunity to make a stand for something that people with the best intentions among us want to believe they believe. That is, we want to believe that the powers that be at Sojo actually DO affirm gay people in every respect but believe today is just not the day for that. It’s the Sabbath, we are told. Come back at sundown.
And Jesus said, “Come and stand here.”
But this reaches far beyond Sojourners. Jesus’ word today is for all of us who lead churches, bible studies, faith based organizations, universities, youth camps, justice leagues, etc. There are far too many who remain silent. You know the thoughts of those in your congregations and classrooms and know they are waiting to accuse you. And yet you also believe that the old guard is wrong when they call two people of the same sex in love an abomination. You know deep in your soul that this is not the Gospel. You have studied the texts and know that they are missing the spirit of the law in favor of the letter.
It’s the Sabbath. They are watching. What are you going to do? Continue to wait for a sundown that never comes?
I know all too well the backlash that comes when you say, “Come, stand with me” to the “abomination” of our day. As was reported, my release from the church as pastor was not just because I dared to believe against hell. That was the last straw. The straw before that was my vocal affirmation of gay people.
Yes, speaking up may very well cost you your job (it cost Jesus his life, so a job isn’t a bad trade-off). But I can say from experience that you will not be left alone. As Tony Jones said in his latest blog,
If you publicly affirm GLBT persons and their full inclusion in the life of the church and in the marriage laws of our country, you will be amazed at the support that you will receive.
You will find freedom you never knew could be possible. Jesus was right: The truth really does set you free.
But even more than that, you will be giving voice to people who need one. It is no longer acceptable to allow injustice to roll on for the sake of honoring the Sabbath and the judgments of the old guard. Stop waiting for sundown and take a stand.
The liturgical refrain for today’s morning prayer reads,
Shine the light of your justice, God: in our hearts and in our world.
Amen.



Thanks, Chad! A very thoughtful post.
Chad, think about adding a link to the BOL logo on your post to their website: http://www.believeoutloud.com. It’s another way to show support!
Thanks, Jamie! It is linked under the word “affirmed” in the post. but let me try to link the logo….
Very thought provoking. Jesus never rejected the Jewish law. So, therefore, in doing what he did, he realized he was breaking the Jewish law; God’s law. But, evidently, he felt that showing love for the man with the withered hand trumped the law. So, it makes me wonder if — even if one concludes that all homosexual acts violate God’s law — even so — isn’t Jesus saying it’s more important to show love and so it is OK, even preferable, to “do the right thing” rather than doing the wrong thing simply to adhere to the law.
Now, conservatives might well say, sure, we are happy to “show love” and welcome the gay person — but we can’t tolerate the sin. But, if that was the correct view, then wouldn’t Jesus have said — “Man with the withered hand — I love you and I will heal you; just not now. Instead, we will wait till sunset so as not to violate God’s law.”
Yet, that’s not what Jesus did. Love trumps all. So, maybe the only question is how can we show the most love and support for our gay neighbors? Forget whether their acts may (or may not) technically be sinful. Regardless, wouldn’t it still be more christlike to FULLY accept gays as they are and allow them all of the rights and privileges we have.
Seems like it to me.
Thanks Chad, again, very thought-provoking.
Very thought provoking. Jesus never rejected the Jewish law. So, therefore, in doing what he did, he realized he was breaking the Jewish law; God’s law. But, evidently, he felt that showing love for the man with the withered hand trumped the law. So, it makes me wonder if — even if one concludes that all homosexual acts violate God’s law — even so — isn’t Jesus saying it’s more important to show love and so it is OK, even preferable, to “do the right thing” rather than doing the wrong thing simply to adhere to the law.
Now, conservatives might well say, sure, we are happy to “show love” and welcome the gay person — but we can’t tolerate the sin. But, if that was the correct view, then wouldn’t Jesus have said — “Man with the withered hand — I love you and I will heal you; just not now. Instead, we will wait till sunset so as not to violate God’s law.”
Yet, that’s not what Jesus did. Love trumps all. So, maybe the only question is how can we show the most love and support for our gay neighbors? Forget whether their acts may (or may not) technically be sinful. Regardless, wouldn’t it still be more christlike to FULLY accept gays as they are and allow them all of the rights and privileges we have.
Seems like it to me.
Thanks Chad, again, very thought-provoking.
Thanks for opening up these thoughts for me today. I read through your previous post on the “6 clobber verses” through the link above. One question that came up as I was reading your section on Lev. 18 & 20 is whether the writer would accept a distinction between worship practices and life practices for the Israelite. I personally interpret the decrees given in ch.18 as pertaining to how the Israelites interact with one another and foreigners outside the tabernacle as well as inside. However, if the decrees are only pertaining to the worship practices of Israel in relation to the worship practices of other people (Canaanites, Egyptians, etc.) is it incorrect to assume that the decrees apply to their daily living as well? Do you think that (in Colossians 3:23 style) I am interjecting some bias from our own Evangelical culture that affirms, “All of our life is worship”?
Very well said, Chad. I will not wait for sundown…here I stand! http://jeromyj.com/mendingshift//2011/05/11/my-letter-to-homosexuals-i-stand-with-you/
Several years ago I was asked by some church members to participate in a city-wide rally against a bill to redefine marriage in Canada. I wasn’t thrilled to go but at the time believed it was still a worthwhile cause to support (I still tend to favor civil unions) and I also didn’t want to offend those who were asking me to come. At the rally I expected the speakers to make a concise and balanced argument and to speak on behalf of traditional marriage. Instead I heard a hateful tirade of anti-gay messages (the typical “God created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve” kind of stuff) and a shameful attempt to get the crowd’s emotions worked up.
At the exit of the public park where the rally was held, stood a small group of Christians from a “liberal” United Church, silently, praying, holding up signs that said “God loves gay people too”. I felt in my spirit that I should be standing with them instead of continuing on with the crowd. I didn’t have the guts. I feared the repercussions. I didn’t want to lose my job as a pastor. I resisted and grieved the Holy Spirit. I felt so ashamed. I still do. I did ask God for forgiveness but I’m asking my gay brothers and sisters who may be reading this now to forgive me as well. I wasn’t just silent when I should have spoken up. I kept walking with those who condemned you. I am truly sorry!
Out of fear of beating a dead horse, I am wondering if Jim Wallis has said anywhere that he takes the “progressive reading” of the texts that on the surface can be read to condemn the gay lifestyle? If not, then this should not be an issue. We need to have room for both theological perspectives. I feel like the distinction still needs to be between social issues and theological issues and feel that you have been packaging them together.
You have my forgiveness @jshmueller:disqus !
Hugs.
Kurt, did you read Andrew Marin’s response on http://www.loveisanorientation.com/ ? I quote: “No one is going to listen to “love first” when there is no tangible expression of unconditional love or equality in importance of issues in the group of people you align with that these issues are extremely important.”
This is not about failing to make necessary distinctions. It’s all about the message you send out to people who are human beings, not issues. And if we can’t even say “ALL are welcome!” because of the offense it might cause, we have reached a very sad level of fearing men instead of God!
@jshmueller:disqus , I have no problem with welcoming folks on all levels. Here is the issue for wallis with this website. It is openly “welcoming and AFFIRMING”. If it were only a site / group encouraging evangelical churches to be a safe place for LGBT people, that would not be a big deal for sojo, but the fact that they give resources for 1) finding an open and affirming church in your area, 2) theological discussion resources for the progressive interpretation of the texts http://www.believeoutloud.com/tools/become-welcoming-church and 3) The mission statement says: “Believe Out Loud seeks to accelerate the existing Christian movement toward LGBT inclusion and significantly increase the number of local churches and denominations that are fully-inclusive of LGBT individuals,both in practice and policy.”
The campaign is clearly not simply about “welcoming” but is about theological power-over folks who happen to read the bible more traditionally. Personally, the ads would have run if it were more in the spirit of finding “third way” or common ground. This was about accepting a progressive view of sexuality. Sojo would have lost its credibility with the group they are trying to win over – conservative evangelicals.
Well, that makes a little more sense. If I were Wallis, I would have allowed the clip then with a note that Sojourners fully stands behind the content but recognizes that not all supporters and board members agree on all aspects of the theology promoted by the organization (and their website) that airs it. IMO, that would have at least been a valiant effort to recognize and support what shouldn’t be controversial – and if it still is, accept the consequences. Now it looks like nothing but a very bad political move in order to lose as little financial support as possible.
Bro, you might be right about Jim taking a different approach. Nevertheless, his overall position seems to be very “third way -ish” and that is wisdom during these turbulent times.
Thank you, Mo Johnson. Your response to this sermon has helped me more than you could ever know. Peace be with you, Diana
[...] When I saw Tony Jones, Brian McLaren, First Things, Christianity Today, Peter, David Henson, Chad Holtz, & (my favorite post) Nadia Bolz-Weber all in my RSS feed talking about it I started to blog [...]
[...] Come, Stand with Me, Time to Believe Out Loud by Chad Holtz [...]