Considering Civil Unions

I thought I wrote something about this subject a few years ago. Apparently that post is like many conversations CavWife and I have had: we thought about it but never actually did it.

If I could turn back time, I would write that blog post advocating the use of civil unions as opposed to the push for gay marriage. I think our national leaders really let their constituents down.

Civil unions would grant people the rights often connected with marriage without trying to redefine marriage and engaging in the mother of all culture wars which has polarized America (and other nations) and taken one group out of the closet and is putting another group in the closet.

Civil unions aren’t marriage. Words matter. Ask any progressive; they are pro-choice not pro-abortion. They call their opponents anti-abortion instead of pro-life. The majority of Christians I know have no problem with civil unions but a big problem with gay marriage because of the word “marriage.”

By pushing for marriage (I understand activists pushing for this since they often had additional agendas) our national leaders pushed an entire population into a corner. Are you surprised people have their hackles up? Something they consider sacred (regardless of how we actually act in marriage) was up for a radical make over.

It pushed businesses into a corner. Maybe I’m crazy but fewer Christian bakers, photographers and DJs would have a problem working a civil union than a marriage. Even if they don’t, as we see from the arguments against the photographers in New Mexico they advertised they do weddings. If you don’t advertise civil unions as one service you provide you won’t get sued.

But this push for marriage over civil unions put these businesses into a dilemma that resulted in lawsuits. Litigiousness increased (of course many of our elected officials are lawyers).

I want to weep at times because so much of this was avoidable. This pain. This conflict. This polarization. This victimization. All of this was largely avoidable and homosexual partners would have gotten the rights most of them say they wanted- to be recognized legally for medical and death benefits. Our leaders either grossly miscalculated this thing or they purposely sought to maximize damage to particular populations. Out of charity I’ll assume they grossly miscalculated and future generations will suffer for that miscalculation.

Tom Petty sang, “the waiting is the hardest part.” He was talking about long distance love, but I’ve found it to be true of all kinds of things in my life: waiting to be married, looking for a new pastoral call, adopting internationally. It is also true when renovating and expanding church facilities.

We now have a quote for a modular from the new company. We are not ready for our congregational meeting though. We still need the estimate on the renovation as well as the trenching to bring utilities to the modular. Very frustrating, but the architect has spend plenty of time making sure he didn’t set us up for failure. More on this later.

If/when we approve this we will wait 10-12 weeks for the modular to be constructed. We are now into April and August is looking too close for comfort as a deadline.

Expect the Unexpected. In preparing for renovation you will discover problems that you didn’t realize existed. We have found some problems with our sewer pipe. We will need a bigger pipe to service the bigger bathrooms in our current facility and the new bathrooms in the additional modular. We discovered that our A/C units really aren’t big enough for the facility as it is. Forget the addition of the narthex. We may not be able to upgrade them in light of the cost involved due to our size. But this is something we’ll probably have to do in the future.

Expect Things to Break. A few weeks ago we smelled an odd smell in the hallway. Our water fountain, or bubbler if you grew up in New England, was shorting out. We were considering a move around the corner. Now we will need to repair or replace it first. You can still get water, it just won’t be cold.

Expect Unexpected Distractions. A number of key people in our process have had emergencies that occupied their time, energy and money. The chairman of our diaconate experienced a pipe break in his home. They had the tubing that was used about 20 years ago. The upstairs bathroom had the break in the middle of the night, so that bathroom experienced damage, as did the walls downstairs. The insurance company, seeing more of these tube problems in the future, paid to have the whole home re-plumbed. The whole process took weeks when you add in talking to contractors to get estimates, and then the actual work.

CavWife was driving my car when she was hit totaling the car. She was not injured but I then spent the next few weeks looking for a car. That is a little distracting.

Things like these suddenly happen when you are in the midst of renovations and expansion. You better keep praying as you engage in this process.

Many Boston Red Sox fans, self included, are still on a World Series championship high. It was an off-season that had a bit of drama as Jacoby Ellsbury left to don pinstripes, Jerrod Saltalamacchia went home to the Marlins, and Stephen Drew entered the nether world after turning down the Red Sox’ qualifying offer. They retained Mike Napoli, took a flyer on Grady Sizemore and signed some more arms for the bullpen.

Spring Training itself was relatively quiet. Ryan Dempster, for whom they overpaid in the previous off season, decided to sit out the season with a variety of injuries and a desire to spend more time with family. It was a bit of a shock that solved one of the Red Sox’ “problems” since they had 6 pro level starters. We should have seen the Big Papi drama coming. He craves security, as well as the spotlight. They ended up signing him to an extension that should result in Ortiz retiring as a member of the Red Sox. I have no problem with the deal since he is still one of the best hitters in the big leagues. The option years have benchmarks that should mean they don’t end up in a Yankee’s like situation of paying a nearly useless player lots of money. The other storyline of importance (Peavy’s injury wasn’t much of a distraction when it was all said and done) was about who would play centerfield: Bradley or Sizemore. This was prompted by Sizemore’s amazing return to health and a level of play reminiscent of his days as an All-Star for the Indians. Bradley’s offensive struggles didn’t help his cause. Proving that he can play 4 days in a row, at a high level, sealed the deal and Sizemore has been named the opening day centerfielder.

The Outfield As a nameless GM said, the Red Sox should ride the Sizemore horse as long as they can. This means that as long as he plays they experience little to no drop off in play after losing Jacoby. He is an experienced lead off man (though he won’t play that role immediately,Nava will play that role) who is probably a better defender than Jacoby (whose speed covered a multitude of sins on his initial reads) and has more power than Jacoby. He won’t steal anywhere near the number of bases as Jacoby, but he can steal a few bags. He has thus far proven more healthy than Jacoby. If he does get hurt, Bradley can more than fill his shoes defensively and hopefully he’ll sort out the offensive issues he had this spring. Victorino can do spot starts in center, but he will mostly patrol right field, assuming he’s healthy. Last year he provided the best right field defense of any Sox player since Dwight Evans. That is saying something. Nava and Gomes will likely platoon in left giving the Red Sox an outfield with 2 excellent, 1 good and 1 mediocre defender but all hitters who help the team. Should the bodies start dropping, in addition to Bradley, they have the revived Brentz to play right field. He displayed the power that could make him a middle of the line up guy at some point. Continue Reading »

Considering Antinomianism

Publishing is an odd thing. Some topics are flooded with titles and other topics are almost impossible to find. When a book like Antinomianism: Reformed Theology’s Unwelcome Guest? is published you have to take notice because books on this subject are exceedingly rare in this day and age. Think perhaps for any other title on this subject published in the last 50 years? You can think of plenty on the subject of legalism, but its mirror image antinomianism is quite rare.

Mark Jones doesn’t quite lay out the book as some people might hope. That can breed some minor frustration. For instance, he really doesn’t try to define antinomianism, or better the types of antinomianism until the end of the book.

“Antinomianism must not be confused with the etymological meaning of antinomian (i.e., “against the law”). There is some overlap, of course, but the historical debates focused on more specific areas of the Christian life.”

This is not a systematic theology, but a volume onĀ  historical theology. The primary focus on his research is the antinomian movements in Puritan England and in 1640′s New England. The reason is two-fold. First, these were disputes among people laying claim to the Reformed heritage. Second, there is a revived dispute among those laying claim to the Reformed heritage in our day. Most people I would consider to have an antinomian theology deny having such a view, usually based on the etymological meaning of the term. But when you look at the strains of antinomianism you can begin to see more clearly that some who claim they aren’t really are.

Jones works through a variety of topics in which historically antinomians have departed from mainline Reformed thinking and formulations. Jones’ main point though is not that antinomians’ error comes primarily with regard to the law but their Christology. This is similar to how Sinclair Ferguson addressed these twin errors of legalism & antinomianism in lecturing on the Marrow Controversy. The answer to both errors is the gospel in its fulness.

“Discussions and writings on holiness often lack a strong Christological basis and center.”

Part of me is tempted to expand more fully on some of the topics that Jones works through. I may “think” through a few here. But for now I will be content to lay them out very briefly.

Jones begins with the imitation of Christ. Peter notes that Christ, in addition to being our Savior, is an example to us. Much of what is written in the gospels is there for our imitation. Jesus models for us how to live by faith as fully human. Jesus lived in the power of the Spirit as an example to us as well (here Jones is similar to Sinclair Ferguson in his series Who is the Holy Spirit?). The way of holiness, Jones notes, is that is pursued by faith and in the power of the Spirit. Many of the antinomians, as Jones and Packer in his brief but excellent forward assert, limited our activity in sanctification. They essentially make sanctification monergistic like justification is. As a result they talk about Christ not only obeying for us, but in us. They sound like some hyper-Calvinists I’ve talked with who limit the use of our will. Both groups don’t have much room for Philippians 2:12-13 in their theology. There we see God works so I will will and work resulting in obedience. Both God and I will and work: synergism! In other words, Christ does not act immediately but mediately. Jones is careful to guard the difference between Christ’s impretration (redemption accomplished) and impartation (redemption applied). We see here, and elsewhere that antinomians tend to conflate justification and sanctification.

Continue Reading »

I’m reading a book on sermons by Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones on John 4 in preparation for my sermons on that chapter coming up. The book is only 750ish pages. I have plenty of work ahead of me. But some of the sermons are well worth it, like one entitled Spiritual Dullness and Evasive Tactics preached in October, 1966. Think about that for a moment, 1966. Amazing to me how much of what he says fits our contemporary situation.

He begins with noting the essence of Christianity: “we have within us a well of water springing up into everlasting life.” The Christian life is a spiritual life under the power and direction of the Spirit. This great salvation “is to enable us to live in the world and to look forward to the glory that is to come.” This positive beginning shifts as the Dr. begins to lay the smack down. He gets quickly to exposing the sins of his time in England that mirror those of ours here in America.

“We face national prejudices, class prejudices, race prejudices, and so on. There is almost no end to them. What harm they have done in the life of the individual Christian, and what harm they have done in the life of the church throughout the centuries- the things we cling to so tenaciously simply because we have been born like that!”

He was addressing the Jewish-Samaritan prejudice. Later in the sermon he brings us to the problems of Apartheid and the Civil Rights struggle in the U.S. The people in England were denouncing the white South Africans and Americans. He admits, obviously, the sinfulness of racism, but takes this as evasiveness. The woman at the well used this prejudice to evade Jesus, and the Dr.’s contemporaries were using those prejudices in other nations to evade the truth about themselves.

“You see, in denouncing somebody else, you are shielding yourself. While you are denouncing these people or friends in America or somewhere else over this racial problem, you are full of self-righteous indignation. That is very clever, but you are just evading the problem of your own life, the running sore of your soul.”

Continue Reading »

Considering Car Shopping

Recently CavWife was driving my car when she was involved in an accident. Someone driving along the shoulder to avoid the stopped traffic hit her. My car was ruled totaled by the insurance company. This placed me in a personal odyssey that has caused no small amount of thought, lost sleep and lost hours looking at cars and talking on the phone.

We’ve been praying that the Father would grant us wisdom as we approach this whole process, and especially the choice of a car.

We had a car fund, once. A long time ago. During the great transition of 2007-10 we used it to pay bills. This was the year we were going to use our tax refund to replenish the car fund so we can prepare for the day when the minivan gives up the ghost. When you are under-employed for nearly 3 years it takes time to replace all that the “locusts” ate up. We are getting there, and thankful that the locusts didn’t leave us with debt.

Most pastors are in my shoes. Those who aren’t are few, and sometimes it is because of God’s kindness to them. Sometimes it is because … well, you know. So most pastors will go through a similar thought process to arrive at a wise choice. Here are the things I’ve been putting into my internal algorithm.

Continue Reading »

Life sure can be strange. The media fawns over athletes who come out of the closet. This is a supposed controversy, as if there haven’t been homosexual athletes in the locker room.

One of the comments that often arises by media people is that Christians in the locker room won’t welcome a homosexual teammate. They usually use the term “religious” when they do this. Let’s think about this for a moment.

Christians in every workplace are surrounded by sinners, including themselves. The issue is more serious sins which are public. Outside of a church or parachurch context, and I’ve worked in those, you will work side by side with people who “sin big,” those whom Paul says will not inherit the kingdom of God. Christians work with drunkards, adulterers, fornicators and more. Christians recognize these as sin, and serious sin. We would not be pleased if our spouse was an adulterer, or our kids. We don’t want our kids to be drunks and fornicators.

We may, at times, mention that such activities are sinful. But we still work side by side. There is no charge made of hating drunks, adulterers or fornicators. In these cases people are able to separate the activity from the person. There sin is not perceived as being who that person is at their core. This neglects the Christian teaching that outside of Christ all people are sinners at their core. They may just sin differently.

A Christian can, and should, work side by side with a homosexual. You don’t have to approve of your co-workers’ lifestyle choices (and drunkards, adulterers and fornicators are making lifestyle choices) in order to work with them.

While we recognize that all people sin, we also recognize the reality of common grace. All people are still made in the image of God and He has given them various gifts to contribute to the common good of society. As a result, we value and treasure our co-workers regardless of their particular sins. We should not shun, exclude or attack people we work with on the basis of their particular sins unless, perhaps, they sin against you. If they do you should work toward reconciliation. Since they may not want to admit they have sinned against you or in a way that adversely affected the workplace then you may put up an emotional barrier. For instance, if Joe keeps missing work because he was out too late drinking resent within the rest of the work unit will grow until management acts. He may miss important meetings or not get projects done in time which may leave you hanging. Talk about that and work towards resolution.

I can’t foresee how one’s homosexuality should affect the workplace with the exception of sexual harassment.

No co-worker should feel they have to embrace the lifestyle, religious or political views of others in the workplace. There can be disagreement on those issues and people can effectively work together. This is not the place for a Christian to “make a stand.” This does not mean that you can’t talk about the gospel in appropriate situations. What I am saying is that you don’t have to badger anyone about their sexual orientation or lifestyle. It does not compromise your faith to work with a homosexual any more than it does to work with a gossip, glutton, thief, fornicator or drug addict. The only thing that would compromise your faith is if you joined your co-workers in their sin. In that case, you shouldn’t blame them but take responsibility for your own actions.

So, the Christian does not need to be militant about their faith with regard to particular sins. Neither should they be compelled to lie about how they view particular sins. If a Christian is genuinely and generally warm toward the variety of sinners with whom they work, there shouldn’t be any real problems. But if a Christian singles out particular sins and therefore particular sinners for verbal lashings, shunning or other behavior reserved for our enemies there will be problems. More importantly you would be failing to love your “enemies” and compromising your faith in a way you don’t be actually being friendly with the sinners around you.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 82 other followers