Become a Clash Insider!
Big Tech is clamping down on conservative media big time. Don’t let Big Tech pre-chew your news. Sign up for our free email newsletter, and we’ll make sure to keep you in the loop.
Follow Doug on Parler @TheGilesWay.
It’s not enough to go after people for things they said today. Now they have to dig back in history a decade and more and blast people who were arguing on the ‘wrong’ side of the culture war of the day.
By that standard, even Barack Obama ought to be ‘canceled’ for espousing the very same traditional views on marriage that led to the demonizing of Chick-fil-A.
The latest example of digging back through history to blast people for past comments is pastor Max Lucado.
Lucado had been invited to speak at the Cathedral Church of Saint Peter and Paul in the City and the Diocese of Washington, D.C. They are an Episcopal church, which is a denomination that has embraced same-sex marriage among other progressive ideas.
Activists, upon hearing he was invited to speak there, brought forward a petition to rescind his invitation over past statements critical of homosexual behavior.
Lucado’s detractors circulated a petition that highlighted a 2004 sermon in which he likened homosexual sex to incest and bestiality. “Fear-mongering and dehumanizing messages from powerful speakers like Lucado have been used to justify rollbacks of LGBTQ rights and to exclude LGBTQ people from civil protections and sacred rites,” the petition said. “To our knowledge, Lucado has not publicly renounced these views.”
In a Feb. 11 letter to the Washington National Cathedral, Lucado wrote, “In 2004 I preached a sermon on the topic of same-sex marriage. I now see that, in that sermon, I was disrespectful. I was hurtful.”
“I wounded people in ways that were devastating,” Lucado continued. “I should have done better. It grieves me that my words have hurt or been used to hurt the LGBTQ community. I apologize to you and I ask forgiveness of Christ.” –DailyWire
It was part of a longer letter in which he maintained he still holds the same view of traditional marriage that he always has but now believes that faithful people can disagree about what the Bible says about homosexuality and was wrong to address it in the manner in which he did.
While I understand that Christ’s example wasn’t one to take unnecessary cheap shots at people, He was never one to pull punches over the topic of sin, either.
If Jesus were in the modern context and addressed the woman at the well with the words ‘you have had five husbands and the one you now have is not your husband’, that would trigger a riot. How dare he say that about her.
But that was exactly what she needed to hear. In essence, He said: your life is in a shambles, you don’t have the answers, but I have the answer to your deepest questions. Follow me, go and sin no more.
It’s interesting that Lucado regretted comparing homosexual sex to incest or bestiality, without explaining what puts those sex acts in different categories. Not to be too blunt about it, but even now, certain activists are pushing for the mainstreaming of both of those sexual categories. At the current rate of change, it would not be too surprising to see some kind of acts that society currently considers repulsive to be tomorrow’s ‘stunning and brave’.
Related:
Say, What? Major Institute Says, ‘Not All Pedophiles’ Have Mental Disorder
Yale Hosts Workshop Teaching Sensitivity to Bestiality
There is a key question at the heart of moral authority: where do we draw it from? Secularists argue that it’s a matter of personal choice and expression.
The problem with that view is the goalposts are always moving, and there is no moral absolute to which they could appeal while taking a stand against, say, incest, ‘zoophilia’, necrophilia, or pederasty.
In the secular world without absolutes where there is no absolute ideal, there can be only a range of preferences. Once there is no ideal or traditional understanding of sexual union, ‘wrong’ (in the moral sense) loses any real force of meaning.
Jesus loved that woman at the well (John 4) enough to take a moral stand and point her to a better way.
If these WOKE churches are going to rewrite several thousand years of religious history, they had better make up their mind about what the RIGHT definitions of rightly-defined moral relationships are.
Otherwise, they are selling a God of no moral absolutes whatsoever… which is a starting point that makes an absolute mockery of the atoning work on the Cross.
There some kind of a difference between ‘sin’ and ‘not-sin’. If you can’t articulate that difference in echoing Christ’s invitation to go and sin no more… that’s a pretty good hint that it’s time to close up shop until you can wrap your head around that most basic of concepts.
Check out ClashRadio for more wit and wisdom from ClashDaily’s Big Dawg. While you’re at it, here’s his latest book:
If Masculinity Is ‘Toxic’, Call Jesus Radioactive
Much of the Left loathes masculinity and they love to paint Jesus as a non-offensive bearded woman who endorses their agenda. This book blows that nonsense all to hell. From the stonking laptop of bestselling author, Doug Giles, comes a new book that focuses on Jesus’ overt masculine traits like no other books have heretofore. It’s informative, bold, hilarious, and scary. Giles has concluded, after many years of scouring the scripture that, If Masculinity Is ‘Toxic’, Call Jesus Radioactive.
