I could do this all day, but the above scripture references were far and away my favorites. I like how there are some things (especially from the Old Testament) that we're supposed to look upon with great consideration given to the time period and context upon which it was written. Of course women today can make a living for themselves and don't need a husband to provide for them, so obviously it wouldn't be socially relevant or even necessary for women to marry their rapists.
Then there are things we're supposed to take quite literally, like the very few passages remarking on homosexuality (a word that didn't even exist then). We're supposed to believe that loving relationships between two committed same-sex partners is the same as the forced sodomy committed against young boys that Paul was referencing in a majority of his scornful passages. (It's true, look it up!)
Fundamentalists believe that the mass cultural (what they see as a breakdown) shift in our value system is due to the break up of the family, and maybe it is. But not for the reasons they think. Divorce and feminism they feel, have set us up for national failure. In Ephesians 5: 23-32 it says plainly that the husband is the head of the wife, and like the church submits to Christ, we ladies must respect and obey our husbands. And if more of us did that and left all the leadership stuff up to the men, then things would be juuuust fine, like they were in the 50's - when men could still beat their wives half to death and spent nary a night in jail for it. Back when things were good, silence about rape and incest were the best way to handle those sorts of things. Looking the other way when (some) men abused and tortured their wives and children is how we kept the status quo... But then women began to demand equal rights and look where that got us. We started earning degrees, working full time and supporting ourselves. The next thing you know, we're no longer listening to you, we're filing for divorce, and we're voting too!! And some simple minded, Biblical brained, short sighted barbarians, are still under the impression that where this country went wrong, began when women stopped submitting to their husbands. I counter that and suggest that where we went wrong was in asking women to lock-step behind some men who weren't worthy of being followed in the first place.
I'd follow my own husband into Hell if he asked me to, simply because I know he'd have a damn good reason for asking it of me, and would only ask if he believed he could lead me safely through to the other side. I suppose it's all about who's reading what and what they're reading into things. But when I see: "As the church submits to Christ, so you wives must submit to your husbands in everything. And you husbands must love your wives with the same love Christ showed the Church. He gave up his life for her to make her whole and clean, washed by baptism and God's word. He did this to present her to himself as a glorious church without a spot or wrinkle or any other blemish. Instead, she will be holy and without fault. in the same way, husbands ought to love their wives as they love their own bodies. For a man is actually loving himself when he loves his wife." I don't find that I am bound by God to follow any man's word as though it were God's, or that I am to obey what my husband commands because he holds a higher authority than I do. I read from Ephesians and I think, God made men strong, brave and filled with the desire to provide for and protect his own family. He gave them sound logic and the confidence to stack reason onto good judgment. God made women gentle, kind and filled with the desire to nurture her family. He made her loving and emotional and able to tend the needs of the heart. In this, I see that God created us as a balance for one another. Should we choose to marry, I am to set aside my emotions and trust my husband that he will lead us according to God's will. Likewise, he will set aside logic and listen to my heart, trust that my emotions are genuine, that I will protect his heart (their hearts are fragile, you know?) and he will love me for it, the same as he loves himself. And just as my husband trusts that I would go to the ends of the Earth for him, I trust that he will only ask of me what he believes in his soul, will keep me safe and coming home to him. And as sad as it is, not all men inspire that kind of trust. But they should... Because that's how God designed them. He might not have made women as strong as men on the outside, but he made us mightily brave on the inside.
So if when you look around you, you don't see people living up to what the Bible says, ask then "What makes them defy it?" Perhaps Christians aren't being "persecuted" after all. Maybe... Just maybe, they're not living up to God's design for them. And if they did, the changes we wished to see, would surely come.
If we all partnered with trust, extending it and deserving of it, I can only imagine what good would come of it. So let's leave judgment to our God, and worry more about living up to our design.
Friday, July 27, 2012
Are we literal yet?
Wednesday, July 25, 2012
Who Put the "Gay" in Chick-fil-A?
As with all things swarming in the media, I have to comment on the recent anti-gay and Chick-fil-A controversy. First let me say that I love their chicken! I love their buns, pickles, waffle fries; I even love their chicken wraps! I have always had a pleasant, sometimes even bordering on delightful, experience at each restaurant I've visited in the last 20+ years. I would never accuse the company of not knowing how to run it's businesses.
In today's fiery arena of public politics, it's easy to get caught up in the dramatics of choosing sides. Everyone wants to be right, and in an effort to be more right, we'll hear all manner of argument, including name-calling. My favorites are: bleeding heart liberal and right wing nut-job; neither of which accurately or fairly describes any point of view.
You don't need me to rehash the details of the controversy. We all know that Chick-fil-A has come under fire by Gay/Lesbian equality activists and the media, for their stance on same-sex marriage. Quite honestly, things were running smoothly until Cathy, President of Chick-fil-A, decided to make his feelings on the subject of gay marriage, known in an interview with the Baptist Press. Now that we all know a bit more about this company, it's been hard, for me, to overlook a few things. Obviously, I firmly support all of my LGBT brothers and sisters in their fight for equal rights under the law. But I could care less about what the president of Chick-fil-A thinks about it. Where I take issue is with their WinShape Foundation that donates millions of dollars to organizations I'd rather set on fire than give money to. I have a problem with any company that uses it's profits to promote an agenda, especially if I've contributed to their bottom line. I'm not saying that because someone owns a business, that they're not still entitled to hold firmly to their beliefs and vote accordingly. What I am saying, is that when you own a multi-billion dollar corporation, it's wise to expect that people will not only disagree with your perspective but also take issue with you taking the money they, as consumers spend with you, and handing it over to classified "hate groups".
We all have the right to decide what "family" means to us. The Cathy's have decided that only heterosexual people should be allowed to be part of a family - and if that makes them happy, then so be it... But I, as a long time Chick-fil-A patron, have a right to disagree and decide that I no longer wish to support The Marriage and Family Legacy Fund, The Family Research Counsel, The National Christian Foundation and least of all, Focus on the Family and Exodus International. At first glance, they simply appear to be Christian focus groups that promote a peaceful, Biblical agenda. But some of these groups are classified as hate groups and anti-gay organizations by the Southern Poverty Law Center. Unfortunately, some of these organizations are responsible for mass bullying of gays, especially gay children. And if having a gut churning dislike for that makes me a "bleeding heart liberal', then that's what I'll be. The "Day of Dialogue" was started by Focus on the Family to provide support for Christian students who wanted to voice to their peers that homosexuality was wrong. They believe that our schools are an appropriate place for heterosexual students to inform homosexual students that, according to God, the gays are going to HELL.
If not now, then when would be a good time for me to let you (theoretical you) know that you're going to Hell for being a fat glutton who gossips too much? Can we set aside some time to chastise people with tattoos? Should we have students be on the look out for other kids who are wearing blended fabrics? Isn't school the perfect place for kids to go and be ridiculed and told they're going to burn in Hell???
Once again, let me say that my issue is not with the principles upon which Chick-fil-A was founded. I do NOT care that Mr. Cathy doesn't want gays to marry. I care about how he spends the money that I help to contribute to his company's profits. When possible, I like to make my purchases guilt free. I wouldn't do business with someone if I knew they beat their spouse or held KKK meetings. I want to do business with companies that understand that their values aren't necessarily representative of everyone else's, and thereby use their profits in an all-inclusive ministry, not an exclusive one.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
