The eminent American preacher, William H. Willimon, tells of being approached by an eager reporter for a student newspaper who was looking for a juicy quote.
"Dawk-tuh Will-uh-mawn," the writer drawled, "whawt's yo' view of ho-mo-segs-u-al-i-tuh?"
"I believe everything Jesus said about it," the former Dean of the Chapel at Duke Divinity School replied.
Confident they had something of substance, the reporter proceeded to publish the quote verbatim.
The humorous point of, of course, is that contrary to what that reporter assumed, Jesus never made any overt comments or judgments regarding homosexuality.
WARNING: The primary topic of this post is not homosexuality so seekers of juicy table scraps may wish to click on...
Willimon's anecdote lends itself to several important points but one will suffice for the purpose of this post.
Amidst the scores of "Christian" perspectives, views, blogs, tweets, et al, that daily soar through cyberspace, we do well to periodically inquire regarding what makes an opinion essentially "Christian."
Is it the merely the reputation/legacy of the blogger, poster, or opinion-writer? Is it the opinion's theological proximity to what any particular denomination/tradition considers orthodox? Is it the necessary evidence required to ensure the source will not risk losing that contract with that publisher or that invitation to be keynote speaker at that next big conference?
It's long past time we started applying serious scrutiny to the origins of the thinking that fuels the myriad of messages that encumber cyberspace.
Some of them are far more closely aligned with Churchianity than Christianity - "Christ" being the operative dynamic in that observation.
Some of us are convinced there is a BIG difference between Churchianity and Christianity. Accordingly, it would be appreciated if more communicators would consider such before hitting SEND.
No comments:
Post a Comment