De-Served?

     In recent days the debate over "gay rights" was refueled by bills before state legislatures dubbed "freedom of religion laws."  The poster child in many of the debates was a Christian couple who had a bakery. They were sued because they refused to bake a cake for a gay couple's wedding. As has happened at every juncture in this controversy, the debate has grown heated.
     As Christians, how should we think about these issues? Unfortunately the arguments on both sides are often ill-informed or overly simplistic.

     Any number of comparisons might be drawn on either side. Would we think it acceptable for a bakery to refuse to bake a cake for a minority couple's wedding? Would we accept the argument that a company could refuse to hire an otherwise-qualified applicant merely because they are female? Of course not.
     On the other hand, could we insist in good conscience that a Jewish printer be forced to print signs for a neo-nazi rally under threat of lawsuit? Would we be willing to require that an African-American tailor take a job sewing hoods for a Klan event? Only the most callous or fanatical among us could answer yes.
     Who's right? Can there be any winners in this contest of laws and wills and morals? And which of these comparisons is most appropriate?
     In the first scenarios, someone is being discriminated against because of an indisputably innate physical characteristic that doesn't otherwise impair their ability to pay for services or perform the work. Some argue that sexual orientation is no different -  that people are born with one sexual orientation or the other.
     In the second set of scenarios, someone is forced to ply their trade in support of something they find deeply offensive. Should anyone who owns a business be forced to support something so morally repugnant to them, so violating of their consciences, even if that event will not impact them personally?
     The argument over whether being gay is by nature or by choice will likely rage for years to come.  All humans are born with sinful inclinations, but all humans also choose their actions. It's possible that both sides are equally right (or equally wrong), so how can this be resolved?

     Sadly, it seems unlikely that either side of the debate will ever be willing or able to walk a mile in the others' shoes. It's too easy for some Christians to wag an accusing finger at the advocates of homosexual rights and insist that they shouldn't be required to condone sin, because hating the sin is always easier than loving the sinner. It's also too easy (and often astonishingly hypocritical) for the LGBT community to hide behind inflammatory epithets like "bigot" or "homophobe" because nobody wants to hear that someone considers their choices morally unacceptable. Sadly, both sides end up succumbing to the same disease - an inability to show compassion (or even tolerance) for someone whose convictions differ from their own.
     One might hope the homosexual community could show the tolerance and acceptance it craves, but at this point that is a remote possibility. Christian-sounding groups have burned too many bridges, and high-profile activists on both sides have drawn lines that entrench them in perpetual, angry intolerance. While anything is possible with God, it appears to be a remote possibility that either side will soften their hard hearts.

     This issue, as with many others, seems destined to remain part of the ammunition with which the church is assaulted and persecuted. From John the Baptist, who was beheaded because he preached against Herod stealing his brother's wife, to Henry VIII, who split the church so he could get the divorce(s) he wanted, people will go to great lengths to defend their sin from the word of God. We should expect no more and no less.
     Against this, God's word calls us to a different path. We are called to do what others cannot - forgive as we have been forgiven, love our enemies, and pray for those who persecute us. We are called to follow the perfect example of Christ, to eat with sinners, and even if we were qualified to cast the first stone, to withhold it instead. Unlike the world, we are called to love as we have been loved, sin and all. We are called to always be ready to explain our hope with gentleness and patience, not skimping on Law or Gospel, but persisting in love. It's an almost impossible demand, and the world is not called to this, but we are.

     So, what of our couple who refused to bake the wedding cake for the gay couple? No doubt they were as well-intentioned as the Jewish printer or the black seamstress, and they truly objected to what the wedding cake would symbolize and celebrate, and according to God's word, rightly so.
     But did refusing to make the cake serve God's purpose? What was the goal? I don't know anyone who takes the presence of a wedding cake as a sign of the bakery's sanction of the marriage. Why, then, should baking this couple's cake imply approval of their partnership? Would the baker also refuse to make a cake for the wedding of a couple who divorced their previous spouses to marry each other? Would they even ask? Would they refuse to bake for a couple that had lived together before marriage? If the purpose is to not condone sexual sin, why pick on the gays and not the adulterers or the fornicaters? Singling out one sin and ignoring the others means the message is lost in the noise of inconsistency and hypocrisy, doing little good and great harm.

     Sometimes the Christian's best witness is setting a silent example and turning the other cheek. I have had three different gay friends ask me how I could be a Christian and also be their friend. I always give them the same answer: I don't think God approves of your choices, but when I get done cleaning out my own closet I'll have time to start on yours, and that isn't likely to be for a very long time. The humility of recognizing and acknowledging that we are no less sinful than the gay or lesbian in front of us advances God's kingdom farther and faster than strident condemnation ever will.
     How, then, can we bear witness, be faithful, and love our sinful neighbors as Christ loved our sinful selves? That is a thornier question. If the couple were to bake that cake, would they be loving their neighbor or betraying their Lord? If we don't put God's disapproval of their lifestyle in their face at every opportunity, are we living the Gospel or merely abandoning the Law?

     Perhaps the question must be answered on an individual basis. It's entirely possible that not all Christian bakers should give the same answer, or even that any one Christian baker shouldn't give the same answer to every couple. Our witness needs to be as individual as the individuals we witness to. 
     The administration of Law and Gospel is a pastoral decision, not one that can be made legislatively and applied uniformly. Therefore neither church nor government can or should dictate one response for all circumstances. No pastor can reasonably pass uniform judgment on those who choose to bake, and under our Constitution with its Bill of Rights guaranteeing freedom of religion, no U.S. government should force someone with an established religious conviction to violate their consciences.

     And just as Muslim extremists have brought rejection and persecution to Muslims in the U.S., so Christian extremists are bringing rejection to U.S. Christians. The Taliban and Westborough Baptist are unfortunate bedfellows, bringing great harm to both friend and foe.
     This leaves Christians in a lose-lose situation. If the bakery bakes that cake they are assaulted from one side, and if they don't they are assaulted from the other. Despite Constitutional protestations to the contrary, freedom of religion is rapidly becoming a thing of the past.

     So what do we suggest the bakery do? The only advice I have to give is to pray - a lot - and when they follow their consciences, to be prepared for the backlash, from whichever side it may come. Whether it comes from one side or the other, Jesus' words remain true: "Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven."  (Mt. 5:10-12)

The New Science?

     Perhaps we as "modern" Christians have not given enough consideration to witchcraft, paganism, and even the occult.

     Now that I have your attention, let me warn you that what follows comes from a tiny bit of experience, a little knowledge, a fair bit of pondering, and a boatload of speculation.  I offer this for discussion, not education.
     Secondly, let me reassure you that this isn't a defense of that which the Bible truly teaches to be evil.  We are to leave the dead to be brought back by the Lord, not the occult. We are to discover our futures as we live them out. And demons are still not our friends and definitely not to be trifled with.
     Finally, this is not an argument for modernistic or liberal theology.  Jesus is still the second person of the Trinity.  He is still the only way, truth, and life.  The Bible is still God's inerrant and infallible word.  Right and wrong are still right and wrong, and the world still needs the Gospel as desperately as ever.

     All that said, I would still suggest that we may not have given enough thought to other "spiritual" phenomena.  Think back five hundred years or so.  Science was in its infancy.  The church insisted the Bible taught that the world was flat and the earth was the center of the universe around which the sun revolved.  Today, few if any of us are threatened by talk of the planet earth and its place in the solar system.  Similarly, while we may not agree with every "scientific" proclamation, most don't see science as anti-Christian, and the notion of a scientist who is Christian generally doesn't end in excommunication or imprisonment.
     Nor have we swallowed science whole or made it God, and the fact that some outside Christianity have made it their God doesn't generally move Christians to the opinion that all science is evil.  Rather, we have largely come to the (I believe correct) conclusion that it is a tool, and like any other tool, it can be used or misused.  Certainly worshiping the creature rather than the Creator is never good, but if some people wrongly worship snails, that doesn't make the snail evil.  It is still just a snail, and as Scripture tells us, everything God created is good if it is recognized as his gift and received with thanksgiving. That some people revere cows does not leave most Christians with the conviction that beef is of the devil.  Mostly, we have learned that the physical things of this world are themselves spiritually neutral, even good gifts, and it is our actions that are sinful, not the less-than- or non-sentient things around us.
     We've made peace with the world that is seen and measured, but I would suggest that perhaps our relationship with the less tangible world is still quite young and undeveloped. Let's look at an easier example first.  Would (or should) we immediately conclude that ESP is evil?  No doubt its long affiliation with charlatans and occultists leaves most people dismissive if not condemning, but must we conclude that those with unusual mental abilities are evil?  What if clairvoyance, telepathy, or telekinesis are merely gifts humans have, and we are talking about something we simply haven't adequately studied?  Perhaps they're neither angelic nor demonic, but merely talented, with a talent that can be used for good or evil.
     
     A more careful examination of Scripture muddies the waters even more.  Consider 1 Samuel 28. The witch of Endor that called Samuel's spirit back to speak after his death on that basis correctly identified the man before her as Saul, and the spirit of Samuel she called up out of the earth prophesied for the Lord then as he had in life.  Certainly Scripture repeatedly condemns mediums and spiritists, but clearly it's not because there is no reality in what they do.
     In Numbers 22 we meet Balaam, to whom we are told the Moabites brought a "fee for divination."  Still, God used Balaam the diviner to deliver his own message, and we are told that he sought God's will.  What are we to think of Balaam?
     The Magi were astrologers.  They studied the heavens for signs and portents, and then followed one star in particular, because they were convinced it must mark the birth of a king. Do we condemn them for divining from the stars or commend them for following the one star for which they are remembered?
     Consider the transfiguration.  Some believe the glow of the transfiguration was Jesus' perfect, glowing aura.  They are also quick to point out that early Christian artwork shows full body "halos" and only later did halos become crown-like.  Do we think it impossible that some can see these auras?
     Joseph and Daniel interpreted dreams and signs.  Do we automatically assume that those who claim to interpret dreams today are crazy, lying, or demonic?  Has interpreting dreams become evil since Daniel's time?
     In addition, there is an important distinction to be made between knowledge and action. When Adam and Eve ate the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, that did not mean it became OK to do evil.  We know how to clone mammals, but that doesn't mean we should go and clone humans. We may know of things that we are clearly told not to do.  Did the medium really call up Samuel?  Yes.  Does that mean we should call up the spirits of dead people or patronize someone claiming to be a medium?  Certainly not.  Learning to discern between fact and fiction is not enough.  We must then discern between that which God says is good and that which he forbids.  Even today, there are some who call themselves Christian who believe God has forbidden transfusions, or medical care of any kind, or even machinery or electricity. Who has correctly discerned God's will?

     Let me offer one more less threatening example before moving into more frightening territory.  We've learned that many actions of "shamans" or "witch doctors" actually have roots in science and psychology.  Concoctions often have medicinal substances among their ingredients.  Rituals often have intense psychological consequences that make a very real difference.  Mostly we've learned to ferret out the truth and separate it from the merely superstitious, but the admixture of superstition doesn't remove the medicinal properties of the concoction or the psychological effects of the ritual.  Do we reject the good gift because some have built false worship around it?

     With the slightest nudge, this proposition broadens into unnerving territory.  Alchemy used to be thought occultic, and perhaps for some it was, but now we recognize in it the seeds of chemistry.  Astrologists likely assign more meaning to the heavenly bodies than they're due, but they made great strides in observing the heavens.  What if things we soundly and roundly (and even appropriately) condemn have a basis in morally neutral facts?
     Having caught the scent, follow the trail wherever it leads and the trip is likely to be treacherous.
    Certainly we don't consort with demons or worship the devil, but is every remedy in "witchcraft" evil?  What if a token, a brew, or the burning of an herb has a real effect?  We don't worship nature either, but what if there exist previously unproven energies that can, in fact, be accessed?  We may not be comfortable with a lot of what Edgar Cayce said, but can we ignore the evidence (even within the historic, orthodox church!) that auras exist and that there have been (are?) those who can see and interpret them?
     Even more unnerving, what if some "fortunetelling" devices are not demonic but natural in ways we don't understand?  Is there some sort of Heisenberg-esque reality behind tea leaves or Ouiji boards?  Do the lines on our palms naturally reflect facts about us in ways we don't understand?  Do changes in the astronomical arrangement of heavenly bodies have subtle but poorly understood effects on our lives?

     Christians often accept and welcome what are, on their surface, stranger concepts.  What effect does a blessing or the laying-on of hands have?  How is there a real sense in which bread and wine become body and blood?  What difference does water or oil or the speaking of words make?  We readily accept the incomprehensible in our own faith -- Perhaps, though other faiths may be misguided, there are underlying realities that are worth studying.

     The issues are multi-layered and sometimes lacking in clear information or direction. That said, these things do seem to demand that we really understand them, discern their origins, and sort the good gifts of God from the evil to be shunned.  If we don't do the work now, we might just find ourselves teaching that the unseen world is also flat.
     This is not a plea for universalism, acceptance of pagan religions, or participation in the occult.  Rather, it is a plea for open-minded study.  Perhaps in the 21st century, we can avoid the egg on our faces from insisting that the sun revolves around the earth because God said so, and instead use what we know to help guide the alchemists of our day into the chemistry of tomorrow and the shamans and Reiki healers of our day into the hospitals of tomorrow, all while standing uncompromisingly on the foundation of the apostles and prophets.

     Ready?  Discuss.

On the Pointy End of the Fence Part 3: A Balancing Act

     How do feelings fit into our faith?  Some people base everything on their feelings and experiences.  They decide what is true based on a "burning in the bosom" or their "sensing the Spirit."  Others reject feelings entirely and act as if they have no place in our faith life at all.  In some churches, even just an "Amen" or lifting of hands to God is frowned upon as a breach of propriety.
     Scripture doesn't reject our feelings and experiences as invalid or inappropriate.  God's Word is full of examples of intense emotions expressed to God.  Crying and dancing, kissing the hem of Jesus' robe or washing his feet with tears are commended and rewarded, not rejected or condemned.  It is natural and appropriate that God's infinite majesty and bottomless love should provoke powerful feelings and strong responses.
     That said, feelings cannot serve as the foundation of our faith.  Contrary to some postmodern thinking, truth isn't different for each person and does not depend on our feelings and experiences.  Our feelings and experiences can serve as hints or pointers, but ultimately, for the word "truth" to have any meaning, it must be objective and not subjective.
     The question then becomes, "What are the proper roles of feeling and experience in our faith life?"  Dangers arise on either side should they become out-of-balance.
     If we allow feelings to become the substance of faith, spiritually we're just chasing the next cool experience.  Religion becomes a drug, and we spend our lives seeking the next and better high.  When the good feelings elude us, we are left looking for our next emotional fix.  If this is faith, it should not surprise us when people move on to sex, drugs (and rock 'n roll), or anything else that can push them to the next intense experience.
     There are good reasons to value feelings but, out of balance, they can wreak havoc. First, consider some reasons to forego the hype in favor of substance, to allow facts to rule feelings.

1.  Feelings are ephemeral.
     How we feel changes with a multitude of factors, ranging from the sublime to the irrelevant.  It's like the weather in Chicago: If you don't like it, wait five minutes.
     Think back.  How many times have you been moved by something priceless -- the love of God moves you to joy, a success encourages you, a sunset gives you a quiet smile -- and then it evaporates when someone cuts you off in traffic you can't afford something you need or want, or someone brings you low with a thoughtless comment.
     On the flip side, how many times has sadness at a profound loss, guilt or shame upon hearing the law and recognizing your sin, or loneliness when you can't be with loved ones been abruptly lifted by a stroke of good luck, a compliment, a joke, or a song that brings something else to mind?  The most profound of feelings can be changed by hunger, the weather, or an off-hand comment.  Feelings are not stable enough to be relied on for truth.

2.  Feelings are unanchored and subjective.
     When feelings can change so quickly and for such trivial reasons, they are not anchored in truth.  Feelings are absolutely dependent upon perspective and perception, not facts and evidence.  Even worse, feelings vary by personality type, life circumstances, or worse yet, mental illness.  Will taking prozac change the spiritual value of the preacher's sermon?  On the contrary, it changes us, but it does not change the truth.  If faith is based on anything less than objective facts and evidence, our God is our latest amusement, crush, or medication.  Feelings are, at best, an elastic yardstick from which you can extract any measurement at will and not a valid way to measure truth.

3.  Feelings are isolating.
     The modern diseases of alienation and interpersonal disconnection are a direct result of reliance on feelings to evaluate reality.  Feelings are almost certain to be out of step with someone near you, and frequently completely the opposite of all those around you.  If it's Christmas and you're depressed when everyone around you is glassy-eyed at the candlelight, beautiful carols, and quaint story of no room at the inn, does that mean Jesus is therefore not God incarnate?  If you don't feel the way they do, does that make the message untrue?  And if what's true for you is what you think is true, then you are very much alone in it, because what's true for someone else is likely different.  Feelings are not the Church's one foundation or the tie that binds, they are sinking sand and Elijah's lonely cave.

4.  Feelings are impotent.
     If you choose your faith based on the good feelings you experience, what happens when they change?  You are left with empty hands and heart.  If faith consists of what makes you feel spiritual, what happens when you feel tempted, discouraged, or angry?
     A feeling-based faith has no power to support or change us in the emotional storms of life, when we desperately need someone to throw us a tangible, objective life ring.  How many people, when offered comfort, have a hundred and one reasons why it doesn't help or won't work?  Tossing a drowning swimmer or a falling climber a lifeline doesn't help if it's not anchored to anything.  In times of struggle, feelings have nothing to offer us and no power to change us.

5.  Feelings are contradictory.
     "Mixed feelings" is a common term for a reason.  Our feelings are mixed most of the time, not always half-and-half, but rarely pure.  If feelings are the foundation of faith, is it only half-true?  How can we have any assurance?  If feelings are the basis on which we make decisions, when it really matters, how can we have any confidence in them?  Is it any wonder they change so quickly when they were mixed to begin with?  If it's all about how you feel, you may never fully escape the nagging doubts and second-guessing.  If truth is based on feelings, there is no truth.

     Now, all of this is NOT to say that feelings have no value.  God created emotional creatures, and to divorce ourselves from emotions is to abandon that which makes us alive and human and to lose our weather vane, our traffic signal.  We ignore feelings at our own peril!

1.  Feelings are signals.
     No, feelings don't determine right and wrong or good and evil, but they help us sense where or when to look deeper.  Whether physical or emotional, pain's purpose is to let us know that something is amiss.  Itches prompt us to scratch, and feelings should prompt us to ask hard questions.  They prompt us to go to the doctor, where facts and evidence can be collected to arrive at a diagnosis.  They are important symptoms, but they are not the disorder itself, and while treating the symptoms is not a cure, ignoring them isn't either.

2.  Feelings can motivate.
     We can be chasing feelings we desire, such as safety, affection, pleasure, satiation, or belonging.  We could also be avoiding unpleasant feelings like shame, guilt, pain, loneliness, or fear.  In either case, feelings push us to things we might not do otherwise. They can ignite us or hold us back.  Often they submit to the will, but not always.  Feelings may not tell us what to do, but desire or discomfort can make us need to do something.

3.  Feelings are an appropriate human response.
     God intended us to feel, created us to feel, and calls us to feel.  Joy and grief, resolve and compassion, affection and anger are all things God asks of us in different circumstances.  Jesus, the perfect demonstration of God's will, felt loyalty and angry refusal. Jesus was moved with compassion in the face of suffering people and resolute in the face of temptation.  Jesus felt affection for little children, his mother, and the disciple whom he loved.  Jesus wept.  Perfect, sinless Jesus sweat blood and cried out in agony.  Feelings are part of God's intention for us.

4.  Feelings facilitate communication.
     Mad, sad, and glad are part of our fundamental human vocabulary.  We may speak languages incomprehensible to one another, but still read fear, fury, joy, sadness, pride, and pain in faces without a single word.  Texts are one thing, but a phone call where you can hear a person's voice is another, and a face-to-face meeting where we can observe body language is yet another level of communication.  Words can mean different things, often distinguishable only by inflection or body language.  They form an instinctive, non-verbal, universal human language.

5.  Feelings enrich our lives.
     Our ability to feel makes the difference between dull numbness and life lived in vivid color.  Those who have ever had their emotions numbed by medication, shock, or grief have described themselves using phrases such as "half alive," "half awake," "walking around like a zombie," "not really there," etc.  When a portion of our body is numbed, we say it is "deadened" because it feels less than fully alive.  Just as God created humans to feel, when we don't feel we are less than fully alive.
     There is also an intimate connection between the arts and human emotions.  Much in the fine arts is, at its root, expressive, and the art that we admire most is that which touches us most deeply.  Master musicians are not computers, but living, soulful, passionate people who pour themselves into their performance.  An educated and thoughtful ear can readily hear the difference between a master musician and the quantized, auto-tuned, or entirely computer-generated.  It's just not the same.  This is true of all of life:  A life devoid of feelings is a life half lived.

     In the long run, can emotionless faith be any faith at all?  Only the hardest of hearts remains unmoved when shown the incredible things God has done for us.  If they don't move us to feel, have they moved us at all?  Faith without feeling is barren, dry, and cold -- Is it any wonder that churches without feeling are empty too?
     God made us human, feelings and all, and God doesn't make mistakes.  He gave them to us for a purpose, so should we not bring those feelings to the Lord along with the rest of us? However, as with any good gift, things go south pretty quickly when we misuse them.  Keeping each in their proper roles is how we walk between the dual perils of robotic faith and roller-coaster feelings.  It's a balancing act.

1.  Feelings are not truth but can point us to the truth.
     Things are not right merely because they feel right.  They are objectively true or they are mere placebos.  That is why we examine, discuss, and express feelings, but we turn to God's word for truth.

2.  Feelings are a response to God's word but do not interpret or judge it.
     Just because you'd rather have warm fuzzies than fire and brimstone doesn't mean that God just hugged it out with Sodom and Gomorrah.  Just because a murderer feels the world is better off without her victim or a molester believes he is loving the child he violates doesn't make their feelings truth or their behavior acceptable.  And just because you've convinced yourself that you weren't born to be heterosexual or society accepts any consensual sex doesn't mean God won't judge homosexual sex or fornication as sin.  God will be worshiped and obeyed on his terms, not yours.

3.  Feelings are a tool in relationships but not the basis of them.
     Marriages built on feelings often fall apart because feelings are ephemeral.  That so many people today equate love with romance or infatuation instead of commitment is one factor feeding the rising divorce rate, increasing numbers of children born to single moms, and a great deal of pain.  Romantic love is pleasant, even enchanting, but real love is a far more serious -- even deadly serious -- proposition.   Most Christians can recite John 3:16, but have we really listened to it?  God gave his Son!  When Paul says husbands are to love their wives as Christ loved the church, that's deadly serious, and just as Christ loved us and gave himself for us while we were yet sinners, husbands' commitment doesn't end when she's grouchy or not as pretty as she used to be. Habakkuk and Good Friday put that in sharp focus.

4.  Feelings are natural and appropriate but are to be controlled.
     Yes, Jesus wept over Lazarus.  He also wept and sweat blood in Gethsemane.  Abraham certainly loved Isaac, but when God told Abraham to make him a burnt offering, he obeyed.  Scripture didn't say, "Be angry, but do not sin unless you're furious!"  Feelings aren't bad, but often we need to act in spite of them.  As many combat veterans will tell you, courage isn't lack of fear, it's being afraid and still doing what needs to be done. Uncontrolled emotions translate into violence, impulsiveness, short-sighted choices, and failure.  Following feelings without reason or restraint eventually leaves us inconstant and empty.

5.  Feelings can be enjoyed but not relied on.
     As Martin Marty wrote about, summertime faith is nice, but sometimes winter catches us, cold and bleak, when rainbows and sunshine are nowhere to be found.  The things we can rely on  -- God and his objectively true word -- are constant and unchangeable.  If we are only faithful because it feels good and right, what happens when life just hurts?  What happens when we live with pain or a disability, when someone we love deeply dies, when we fail miserably, or when our heart is broken?  All we have been promised is that we are not alone in our trials, and that in the end God will wipe all those tears away.

     Keeping things in balance is a challenge, and sometimes, even though we're pulled to one side or the other, the right thing to do is to stay on the fence.  It is not a comfortable position to sit on the pointy end of the fence, but it is often the correct one and the wisest one.