This past week, World Vision (a Christian aid organization, through which thousands of children overseas are financially supported) released a statement saying that they were allowing Christians who were in same-sex relationships to work for them. Their given reason was that they did not want to take a stance on the issue; they were letting individual churches decide the issue for themselves, and they would allow anyone who is a follower of Jesus to serve.
I was elated when I saw this statement released. This was perhaps the first time I have ever seen a large, mainline Christian institution make such a progressive move. Usually large Christian institutions move the other direction, toward exclusion and marginalization of LGBT Christians.
Unfortunately, evangelicals across the nation saw otherwise. Even though World Vision deliberately said that they made this change to avoid taking a stance on the issue, evangelicals saw it as an endorsement of same-sex relationships. Evangelical sites on the internet, including my favorite (*cough cough*), The Gospel Coalition, exploded with hateful and ignorant responses to the policy change. And the responses of individuals were depressing. Here is a sample from a comment on an article from The Gospel Coalition:
"Help! We’ve been sponsoring a child through World Vision for years. Do we pull our funding and hurt the child? Moral dilemma… At the same time I don’t want to support World Vision any more… Thoughts?"
It is heartbreaking that this is even a "dilemma" at all. But a response to this question was even more frightening:
"Drop your support. The organization has taken a stand antithetical to the God of the Gospel. Under the ruse of “unity” they’ve embraced wickedness and tossed the Good News. The Gospel is the Good News that we can be delivered from our sin. They’ve turned it upside down and simply said there is no need to be delivered. Pray for the child you support; attempt to contact them for direct support; see if you can provide support for the child through another faithful ministry. But if we cannot even eat with those claiming Christ who embrace evil (1 Cor 5), how much more should we not support them with our our tithes and offerings that, after all, are really offerings to the Lord. The Lord can direct your giving in a manner that reflects his character."
So the gospel that this person follows believes that correct ideology trumps helping the needy. I sure hope this person doesn't call his gospel "Christianity." Another thing about this comment: "But if we cannot eat with those claiming Christ... (1 Cor 5)." The word "cannot" implies that a desire is there, but it is disallowed by God's commandments. Please. As if evangelicals wanted to spend any time with LGBT folk.
And, unfortunately, thousands of "Christians" began dropping their sponsorship of children because of World Vision's policy change. In fact, churches were even advocating this to their congregations! It's shameful that American Christians' care for the needy is so shallow.
And then the worst part happened. World Vision reversed its policy change.
That's right, instead of sticking by and defending its neutrality stance, it caved to the peer pressure of evangelicals. Why? Probably because they were scared of not having enough money to cover costs.
I'm sorry, but I thought we served a God who provides. A God who wants us to trust him.
This conflict has also revealed a secondary dark part of the cult of evangelicalism. There was a series of responses to the "Drop your support" comment. The conservative comments sent shivers down my spine.
Comment response:
"Matthew 25:45 – ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’ We can all play the quote game, John. I ask: do you choose the letters of Paul, or the words of Christ?"
Then:
"The words of Paul ARE the words of Christ."
Then:
"That’s blatantly untrue, bordering on blasphemy. Paul himself would certainly have disagreed with you."
(http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/trevinwax/2014/03/24/grieving-for-the-children/?comments#comments, comments on 3/24 and 3/25)
The words of Paul are the words of Christ. That's terrifying that Christians believe that. And unfortunately, it's all too true that that belief is common among evangelicals. Ugly, ugly, ugly.
I think the extremities of the situation point to the fact that evangelicals have made opposing homosexuality an essential part of their gospel. When the policy change was in place, evangelicals dissociated with World Vision. When the policy change was reversed, they were satisfied. And all this happened over the course of two days. I personally don't have the emotional energy to be supportive one day, angry and heartless the next, and then appeased again two days later.
In closing, fuck the Pharisaical, hypocritical cult of evangelicalism. Sorry for the long post. I don't feel catharsis even after writing all this.
P.S. The article written by The Gospel Coalition is entitled "World Vision and Why We Grieve for the Children." That title is blatantly phrased in an attempt to evoke emotions to side with the writer--similar to a "think of the children" argument. How low can you sink, TGC?
P.S. The article written by The Gospel Coalition is entitled "World Vision and Why We Grieve for the Children." That title is blatantly phrased in an attempt to evoke emotions to side with the writer--similar to a "think of the children" argument. How low can you sink, TGC?
