Popular preacher Alistair Begg of Parkside Church near Cleveland, OH with the radio ministry, "Truth for Life," has caused no wee bit of controversy in the past two weeks with an interview he had done a few months ago for a book he has written on the "Sermon on the Plain" of Luke 6. (Only a "storm in the teacup" according to him.) In that interview, he recounts counsel he had given to a grandmother pertaining to her attending the transgender wedding of her grandson. (It's unclear whether this is a case of the grandson identifying and presenting himself as a girl marrying another guy or marrying a guy identifying as and pretending to be a girl or vice versus. Just that this certainly would not be an ordinary wedding of a man who lives as a man marrying a woman who lives like a woman.) After asking her if the grandson knew where she stood on the issue on account of her faith, he shocks her (as well as many of those listening to the interview) by telling her that she should go and even bring a gift. The thought being that such would catch him off guard and not fuel the perception that Christians are so critical and judgmental. It would be a way to maintain the relationship the grandmother has with the grandson. The purpose in sharing this incident was to demonstrate how we need to find radical ways of loving our enemies as Christ has called us to. (The full interview can be found here with a transcript so that the account at the end can be seen in context.) Following significant push-back, Alistair addressed the issue in a sermon on Sunday evening to his church on Luke 15 with the parable of the prodigal son entitled "Compassion vs. Condemnation." (You can listen, watch, or read the message in its entirety here.) In it, he basically argued that the counsel he gave was in accord with the compassion of Jesus eating with sinners rather than the complaining of the Pharisees who had a problem with that. It is implied that those who are taking issue with it or disagreeing with his counsel fall on the side of the Pharisees with their lack of compassion according to him.
I love and appreciate Alistair Begg and have greatly benefited from his ministry. He is one of my favorite living preachers and I typically listen to two or three of his sermons each week. My congregation certainly knows his name because a quote or illustration from him often will work its way into my sermon. I have been to his Basics pastor's conference at least twice and came close to meeting him three times. (I chickened out going up to him or saying something to him each of those times.) His many years of faithful preaching of the Word is commendable in a time where such is becoming more and more rare. But I cannot agree with the advice he said he had given to this grandmother who had written into his ministry to go ahead and attend her grandson's transgender wedding.
What makes Alistair's advice so problematic is that the very nature of a wedding is that of affirmation and celebration. By attending such, you are giving visible approval and support to the couple and their union. No one is a mere spectator at such an event. Everyone is expected to stand in honor of the bride as she makes her way down the aisle, to smile and cheer when the couple share that special kiss, and to shout and clap when they are announced as Mr. and Mrs. for the very first time. The service really doesn't allow for someone to be a neutral part of it who doesn't join in the celebration it entails. In fact, the traditional words of the service from the Anglican Book of Common Prayer even has the pastor say towards the beginning of it that if there would be any reason someone could give why the two should not be married, they are to speak now or forever hold their peace. Attendees have also been called "celebrants;" those who are there to celebrate the union they are witnessing. How can a Christian attend what clearly goes against God's good design without giving any verbal or public indication that they object to such on the basis of God's Word? Would they not be obligated to speak up in some way to bring God's truth to bear on the situation? Wouldn't sitting there quietly with a gift for the couple on their lap be an implicit way of affirming that which they cannot affirm? A so-called homosexual or gay "wedding" is anything but a wedding as God has defined such. Following His officiating of the very first wedding in the Garden, He stated clearly that it was to be only between one man and one woman (Genesis 2:24) which Jesus points out that we should understand being a union only separable by the death of one of the two (Matthew 19:4-6). How can we go to something modeled like a wedding which would not be considered one in God's eyes but is actually rebellion to Him? Texas Pastor and blogger Dan Phillips has said it well when he tweeted (or X'ed?), "Given
that there is no such thing as a marriage of two men or a marriage of
two women- so take that away- then what is this occasion that the
grandmother is being asked to go to?
It is just a celebration of perversion, and it's just a celebration of
two people promising each other that they will never repent of the sin
that will send them to hell." That really puts it into perspective!
It is never loving to affirm or go along with sin in any way. And the most loving person to ever walk on this earth, Jesus, never did that. He is the perfect balance of grace and truth (John 1:14). While Jesus did spend time and eat with notorious sinners, He never participated in their sinful practices, condoned their sin, or joined them in something which would be an abomination to God or go against His Word. We can be sure that the discussion He had with them during such was the same message He gave to all. He would have called them to repent rather than being a part of a service seeking to bless that which God cannot bless since it is rebellion to the union He wisely and rightfully designed us to have. In fact, that is exactly what He did when eating with tax collectors and other well-known types of sinners in Levi's house. When the Pharisees complained there of His eating with such sinners, He states, "I have not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance" (Luke 5:29-32). Jesus' compassion is seen in His confronting the rich young ruler's idolatry and calling him to give up his stuff to follow Him (Mark 10:21) and in calling the woman caught in adultery to "go and sin no more" (John 8:11). Not in attending something pretending to be a marriage when it really is not or participating in two people pledging to continue in an union God describes as detestable and unnatural.
Attending the so-called gay or transgender wedding ceremony of someone as a way of showing love to them actually will wind up sending mixed signals and create confusion, even if it has been made clear what the person thinks about the wedding due to his or her faith. I can't say that I have issues with the lyrics of Taylor Swift's songs, the way she dresses when she performs, and what she promotes and then show up at every single one of her concerts provided I had the money and time to do so. If I did, you would question just how genuine my issues with her actually are. Or, if I was greatly disturbed over the way a certain restaurant fixed their food and what they put in it, yet I continued to choose to eat there instead of other places, you would have to wonder how disturbed about it I really was. If we proclaim that a homosexual relationship and transgender identity is sinful and then show up at a service celebrating such a union, doesn't it cause some sort of question about our convictions or downplay at least what we have spoken? Rather than being a good witness by going to such a "wedding," we will instead wind up hurting our witness and our conveying of the seriousness of the matter. After all, this is no small thing. Homosexuality is included in the list of the practices which characterize those who have no inheritance in the kingdom of God and will be going to hell unless they are saved and repent (1 Corinthians 6:9-10). It is called an abomination which is one of the strongest words God could use to describe such (Leviticus 18:22; 20:13). The most loving thing we could do is not show up at the "wedding" but stay away to demonstrate our disapproval on the grounds of Scripture since we view this as something damning for those who practice such.
I understand that Alistair is concerned about what the grandson will think of the grandmother and what not attending the wedding may mean for their relationship moving forward but shouldn't the greatest concern be about honoring God? Sometimes our obedience to Christ will wind up causing division even within our families. Jesus Himself alluded to this when He said that "I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I came to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daugther-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man's enemies will be the members of his household" (Matthew 10:34-36). While we certainly should not go out of our way to damage such relationships, we cannot compromise for the sake of avoiding the difficulty we know will ensue on account of being faithful to our Lord.
And there really is no easy way to convey our love to someone identifying as LGBTQ. They have accepted the lie that their sexuality is the grounds of who they are so that to refuse the preferred sexuality or gender of their choice is to refuse them as a person. This is unfortunate since we are so much more than our sexuality and it is limiting to make that comprise our identity. And it is possible to love someone yet not affirm and support certain choices and decisions they make. Our love for someone will lead us to do so if those choices and decisions are damaging to them and continues them on a path away from the Lord and under His judgment. Rather than compromise our convictions shaped by God's Word and convey something different than we are seeking to say to our LGBTQ loved one by going to a celebration of their union, we need to continually reiterate our love for them and how nothing will change that. And it is on account of our love that we cannot support or affirm them in their sin. It will take patience and much prayer to work to convince them of this. I remember a couple I talked with a number of years ago who shared in tears their struggles with conveying their love for their lesbian daughter. They were clear where they stood on her relationship and had ground rules for her and her girlfriend whenever they came to visit in their home. But they were equally clear in affirming their love for her regardless. They told me that it took time but she did come to eventually understand that they very much did love her and that their refusal to affirm her relationship wasn't due to them not loving her.
Despite being the careful exegete he is, and he is one I often look to to see how he handled a certain verse or passage of Scripture in my own study, Alistair seems to miss the point of the parable of the prodigal he used to justify his counsel. The issue with the Pharisees wasn't that they refused to celebrate Jesus spending time with sinners but that it was a refusal to celebrate the repentance of lost sinners who had now been found. Those who once were spiritually dead but have been given new life in Jesus. After all, the one common thread of the three parts of the parable (notice Luke refers to all three as being a parable singular rather than parables plural) is the rejoicing over the finding of something that had been lost. First, it was a lost sheep, then a lost coin, and finally the climax being the lost boy. And the older brother in the story not joining in the party for the returned prodigal who clearly represents the grumbling, murmuring Pharisees is not chastised by the father for refusing to celebrate the younger son in his sinfulness but in his repentance. It is not being Pharisaical for a Christian to refuse to go to a wedding celebration which is an acknowledgment and celebration of a sinful union God has never sanctioned. It would be though to refuse to go to a baptism of someone who once was LGBTQ in their lostness but by grace are no more as they have been found by Jesus and given new life in Him evidenced by their repentance of that sin as well as others which once characterized them. I believe Alistair uncharacteristically completely missed the mark on this and pray that he rethinks both the counsel he has given and the justification he has made for it.
Overall, what Alistair has said is shocking to me as it appears to go against everything he has taught on the subjects of sexuality and marriage the past 40 years. He has been crystal clear that both homosexuality and transgenderism are sins that one must repent of and how there is no salvation for those who identify as and practice such outside of Jesus Christ just as there is no salvation for any other sinner. Also, he has emphasized the sanctity and uniqueness of the marriage ceremony, not even allowing those whose marriages he officiates to write their own vows. His reasoning being that it loses the powerful act of unconditional commitment devoid of any feelings or emotions communicated in the traditional vows established by the Book of Common Prayer. I fear that this is a case where he himself has left his "grandfatherly" emotions take precedent over the truth of Scripture. (At the end of Sunday evening's sermon, he did concede that "if I was misguided in any way, it was I allowed my grandfatherly hat to take over.") Again, something uncommon for him. As Alistair himself likes to say, "The best of men are men at best" and this recent kerfuffle he has caused with this unwise counsel has proved that. I still very much love and appreciate Alistair and his ministry but am certainly disappointed with this counsel which was unwise at best or misguided. Praying for Alistair!
Lee Smith
1 comment:
Very well put and thank you
Post a Comment