To be fair, World Vision claimed in that
same news release that they were expressly not recognizing gay
marriage.
To be real, that’s precisely what
they were doing.
World Vision states unambiguously that
they require from their employees sexual abstinence outside of
marriage. Unless World Vision has also redefined “abstinence,”
one can hardly consider anal sex as sexual abstinence. Hence, they
did recognize gay marriage as marriage, despite their
sophistry to the contrary.
They proclaimed that this move was made
to foster unity among the churches. Um, would that be the same sort
of unity that has split The Episcopal Church, because last time I checked that's precisely what endorsing homosexuality did for TEC? Would that be the same
sort of unity that is splitting the PCUSA?
And of what unity do they
speak, anyway? The prayer in which Christ sought for unity among His people
in John 17 also included a request for their sanctification—their
holiness, by means of the truth. On what grounds does World Vision
see homosexuality as a move toward sanctification?
Does World Vision ignore the great
disdain in which the global south holds the practice of homosexuality? Do they wish
to subject their workers to added danger as Muslims in other
countries react with anger to this decision, as one more example of the decadence of the West?
This was not a policy or procedural
error. This was an abandonment of truth.
In his explanation for their decision
to divorce gay marriage after having married themselves to it, Richard Stearns said that he did not consult
enough Christian leaders. Perhaps he could have saved himself a bit
of trouble by consulting the Bible instead.
No comments:
Post a Comment