Perhaps the greatest indictment on evangelical churches today is that they
are not generally known as refuge houses for sinners—places where hurting,
wounded, sinful people can run and find love that does not question, an
understanding that does not judge, and an acceptance that knows no
conditions.
To be sure, evangelical churches are usually refuge houses for certain
kinds of sinners—the loveless, the self-righteous, those apathetic toward
the poor and unconcerned with issues of justice and race, the greedy, the
gluttonous, and so on. People guilty of these sins usually feel little
discomfort among us. But evangelical churches are not usually safe places for
other kinds of sinners—those whose sins, ironically, tend to be much less
frequently mentioned in the Bible than the religiously sanctioned sins.
It is rare indeed that a drunkard, drug addict, or prostitute would think of
going to church because he or she just needed to feel loved and accepted. These
people may go to bars, fellow addicts, drug dealers, or pimps to find refuge and
acceptance, but they would not go to a church. In fact, as with the Pharisees in
Jesus’ day, the church has generally represented everything people with these
kinds of sins want to avoid at all costs. It has most often represented nothing
but condemnation for these people. Indeed, churches frequently cultivate a
reputation for “cracking down” on sins that fall into their “unsanctioned sin”
category. To fail to do this, many have assumed, is to compromise our reputation
for being set apart for holiness.
The sins we declare ourselves to be against are invariably selected to
not target ourselves. If we were consistent in cracking down equally on
all sins, we’d be cracking down on ourselves more than on those outside
the church. And if we retained a system of evaluating sin at all, sins such as
impatience, unkindness, rudeness, and self-righteousness—all indications that
love is absent (1 Cor 13:4-5)—as well as prevalent “church” sins such as gossip,
greed, and apathy would rank higher on our list than sins such as homosexuality
or heterosexual promiscuity.
Striving for a holy reputation is also self-serving because the whole
enterprise is unconsciously designed as a strategy for getting life for
ourselves. Though it is mostly unconscious—indeed, though we uniformly deny
it—we are feeding ourselves with our devised sin lists. We feel righteous and
secure that we are “in” while others are “out” as we compare ourselves favorably
with others who don’t measure up (according to our own biased measuring
devise).
Above all else, love is that for which the church is called to be
known. Sadly, in the name of acquiring for ourselves a reputation of holiness,
we have often compromised the one reputation God calls us to have. Jesus was
willing to forsake any possibility of having a holy reputation for the sake of
loving those who were unholy.
To be sure, Christians are called to be a holy people, set apart by their
good works. This is what transforming love looks like as it takes hold of
people. But this is not a reputation we should seek to acquire or
protect. The one reputation we are called to acquire is identical to the
one reality we are called to live in: We are to be, and to be known as, a people
who receive and give love in an outrageous, impartial, unconditional way.
- Greg Boyd
No comments :
Post a Comment