Consider Signing the Manhattan Declaration
by Steve Watters on 11/24/2009 at 8:56 AM
Over the past couple of days, a large and broad range of Christians have been signing on to a document called The Manhattan Declaration (including Focus on the Family president Jim Daly and founder Dr. James Dobson -- who invited Chuck Colson and Robert George to talk about the document on his daily broadcast).
It's a bold and well-articulated declaration that we support here at Boundless because of how well it frames many of the issues we care about. Here's the description from the Manhattan Declaration Web site:
Christians, when they have lived up to the highest ideals of their faith, have defended the weak and vulnerable and worked tirelessly to protect and strengthen vital institutions of civil society, beginning with the family.
We are Orthodox, Catholic, and evangelical Christians who have united at this hour to reaffirm fundamental truths about justice and the common good, and to call upon our fellow citizens, believers and non-believers alike, to join us in defending them. These truths are:
1.the sanctity of human life
2.the dignity of marriage as the conjugal union of husband and wife
3.the rights of conscience and religious liberty.Inasmuch as these truths are foundational to human dignity and the well-being of society, they are inviolable and non-negotiable. Because they are increasingly under assault from powerful forces in our culture, we are compelled today to speak out forcefully in their defense, and to commit ourselves to honoring them fully no matter what pressures are brought upon us and our institutions to abandon or compromise them. We make this commitment not as partisans of any political group but as followers of Jesus Christ, the crucified and risen Lord, who is the Way, the Truth, and the Life.
Visit the Websiteto view the declaration, to sign it and/or to share it on Facebook and Twitter.
1. Bill said the following at 10:18 AM on Nov 24:
1
"We are Orthodox, Catholic, and evangelical Christians who..."
No mainline denominations represented? Were they excluded or did none want to sign off on this?
2. Befuddled said the following at 11:06 AM on Nov 24:
2
While I agree that these issues are important and worthy of serious intellectual inquiry, I cannot agree with the following statement published in the Times last week from Charles Colson:
“We argue that there is a hierarchy of issues,” said Charles Colson, a prominent evangelical who founded Prison Fellowship after serving time in prison for his role in the Watergate scandal. “A lot of the younger evangelicals say they’re all alike. We’re hoping to educate them that these are the three most important issues.”
I have doubts about this hierarchy Colson discusses. What makes genocide somehow inherently less important than abortion?
3. twilley said the following at 11:06 AM on Nov 24:
3
I have a question, actually, which has been nagging at me since I first read this document the day it came out. I would love some insight from this site.
The sentence "The truth is that marriage is not something abstract or neutral that the law may legitimately define and re-define to please those who are powerful and influential." includes the stereotype that the fight for gay marriage is being carried on by a group of powerful and influential people, casting the signers of the declaration as the underdogs--less influential and possibly less moneyed.
Why was this stereotype included? I think it is fairly easy to see it is false--the two sides are pretty closely matched monetarily and in polling, and I can find many names among the signers with more influence than the leaders of our side. Why cast the opposition as a large and powerful force, and yourselves as the underdogs? What meaning does this have?
The sentence really stuck out to me when I read the document.
4. Josh M said the following at 12:01 PM on Nov 24:
4
Bill (#1), "Evangelical Christians" covers the mainline denominations. [Greek or Eastern] Orthodox and [Roman] Catholic are decidedly different branches of Christianity from the various denominations (Baptist, Lutheran, etc.) which all call themselves Evanglical. There is some controversy between these branches as to whether the others are "true" Christians.
Al Mohler blogged about his endorsement of this earlier this year which could possibly translate to a Southern Baptist endorsement. Toward the end of that article he discusses some of the differences between Catholic and Orthodox and why he felt comfortable joining them in this while he doesn't in other things.
5. Saidah said the following at 3:18 PM on Nov 24:
5
Bill (1) , I believe that "orthodox, catholic and evangelical" is meant to encompass pretty much everyone.
I'm excited about this, though. I'll read it after my next class! = )
6. Lia said the following at 6:27 PM on Nov 24:
6
I find the idea that my marriage, legally recognized in only a handful of states is (a) a threat towards the dignity of the institution of marriage, and (b) representative of a move to support the rich and influential!
7. Jerry said the following at 8:30 PM on Nov 24:
7
I found John MacArthur's comments on the subject helpful, if troubling because I think he really hit an angle very few people are willing to consider in their blind rush to sign off...
Check it out here:
http://bit.ly/5ABpOq
8. Heidi M. said the following at 11:39 AM on Nov 25:
8
Very helpful, Jerry. Thank you.
9. Lia said the following at 12:33 PM on Nov 25:
9
Oops! I meant "I find it funny &c"
10. Tami said the following at 1:01 PM on Nov 25:
10
I understand and appreciate John MacArthur's emphasis on the gospel. At the same time, I always get the sense that he will find *something* to disagree with in any document attempting to align sincere believers along where we actually DO agree.
I'm not saying "unity at all costs," but at the same time I have a hard time discounting this document just because it doesn't specifically mention the gospel.
And yet, I think it *does*. What is this, except not an affirmation of the centrality of Christ:
"We make this commitment not as partisans of any political group but as followers of Jesus Christ, the crucified and risen Lord, who is the Way, the Truth, and the Life."
I'm not even a big fan of signing statements and proclamations such as the Manhattan Declaration. At the same time, I do think we need to start looking at being ONE BODY and not constantly picking each other apart at where we differ. There is a time and place to discuss the particulars of soteriology, to ensure our viewpoint aligns with what the Word says. This particular statement, in my opinion, is not one of those places.
I'm not even suggesting that I really think he *should* sign it. If this was an interfaith document, I would be more inclined to agree with him. But these are all Christians.
11. Hieronymus Illinensis said the following at 3:50 PM on Nov 25:
11
Befuddled (#2) said:
What makes genocide somehow inherently less important than abortion?
...Maybe because genocide isn't recognized as a constitutional right whose exercise must not be unduly burdened. Because there isn't a movement afoot to require all doctors practicing ob/gyn to be trained to do genocide. Because genocide services are not provided for in the Senate health care reform bill. Because there's not a Freedom of Access to Genocide Camp Entrances act on the books. And so on. And so on.
12. BDB said the following at 3:58 PM on Nov 25:
12
twilley (#3) wrote:
>>Why cast the opposition as a large and powerful force, and yourselves as the underdogs? What meaning does this have?<<
It probably was included because of the perception that the press is 100% against traditional marriage. Even though Prop 8 won with the same % of the vote in California as Barak Obama won nationwide, it took days for the press to come to terms with it. They wildly celebrated Obama's 52% of the vote as decisive evidence of an amazing change in the USA. Yet the 52% win of Prop 8 was at first treated as if it was a mistake, and only finally grudgingly admitted as being the actual outcome.
But like the biological marriage vote in Maine this month, it got the same % of the vote as Obama.
The media shows it's deep bias when they hail Obama's 52% as Glorious, and biological marriage's 52% as hate speech.
13. Kathleen said the following at 6:58 PM on Nov 25:
13
Seriously? Chuck Colson thinks Christians are obligated to enforce one particular interpretation of Christian religious rules upon all of secular American society? Sorry, but count me out.
I'll simply ask Colson to show me where in the Bible Jesus commanded anyone to use the power of governmnet to, say, deny their gay neighbors equal civil rights or to enforce religious rules upon people who don't follow that religion.
14. James said the following at 10:52 AM on Nov 26:
14
Kathleen (13) Isn't everyone who votes in a free society in a way forcing their opinion on others? Regardless of whether a person's worldview comes from religion or not. You might not care for someone's vote or reasoning, but I don't think you can single out religion as the bad motivation for voting.
That said, I will have to pass on the Manhattan Declaration. Yes, I agree with the principles, but the underlying message to never under any circumstance support someone who might differ in the slightest is just not how I approach the issues.
15. twilley said the following at 4:48 PM on Nov 26:
15
BDB, #12:
That might be a valid interpretation. But I don't understand why it was included in a document which otherwise actually tries to address actual gay people as individuals, as far as I can tell. If they wanted to talk about the media why not do it, instead of calling all of us powerful and influential?
We are not a powerful people. We are a hunted people... We're not the influential ones--every time one of us reaches any position of power, like getting elected to Congress, it's a news story, and people come and try to hunt us out... They hunt us in the military and they punish us, even when we follow all their rules. We are hunted in the streets and beaten or murdered. People who don't even know us insult us.
Reading it as a gay person, I found it hard to believe them when they say they understood I disagree, or when they seemed to care about our souls, when they talk in stereotypes like this.
16. twilley said the following at 4:56 PM on Nov 26:
16
James, #14:
This document is different than a simple vote. A vote is one person's voice toward a cause or law.
This document is about bringing together a large coalition of people who are interested in governing all Americans, regardless of their beliefs, by modern evangelical morals.
Casting a vote is about a specific issue, the Manhattan Declaration is about bringing together several issues which are possibly tangentially related, but in many ways also unrelated, in order to create a coalition which will do more than change one law, it wants to change many many laws at once in order to form a coherent whole which accords to its religious ideals.
17. twilley said the following at 5:06 PM on Nov 26:
17
Befuddled, #2:
I also do not understand this hierarchy of issues. Why do these people want to spend their money on things which hurt people like me, when they could be spending it to do good work? Why do they put out papers full of lies when they could print something positive instead?
The only thing I can work out is that there is no power in stopping genocide. It is not a way to find power, but you will find many people who live in fear and who will follow you if you use that fear to get hold of them. If they published a declaration against the imprisonment of Tamil women and children in Sri Lanka, how many would print it, rush to sign it? The workers are few.
18. Jeremy said the following at 8:58 PM on Nov 26:
18
twilley:
This is a bit off-topic, but I have seen you comment on here a number of times and refer to yourself as a gay Christian, and thus I assume you accept Scripture's authority in your life. I don't believe I have ever seen you explain how you deal with passages like Romans 1:24-32 that fairly straightforwardly condemn homosexuality. I don't mean this to sound overly accusatory, but I am honestly curious as to how you deal with those passages.
19. JVR from Denver said the following at 11:23 PM on Nov 26:
19
I find it ironic that MacArthur - and others - refuse to sign a document about religious liberty that they agree with... only because it mentions those of different faith. It's kind of like saying: "Everyone should be free to believe what I do."
However, I refuse to sign it, myself. The largest reason being, it's redundant and pointless. "Oh", the rest of the world says, "Christians are against abortion, gay marriage and believe in religious freedom? Wow, I didn't know that."
You can't call this a "wake up call" when no one is asleep. Make no mistake, this is a purely political document. Why does this document make no mention of caring for the poor, the widowed, the elderly? Or, one thing that MacArthur *did* point out, the gospel?
Because it's a document intended to be a chest-beating in the face of President Obama's administration. It's this kind of political grandstanding that made the Christian Coalition a joke and a failure.
I became a Christian in July and while I, of course, oppose abortion, gay marriage and support religious liberty, I am SICK AND TIRED of feeling like when I came up out of that baptism water, I was expected to start voting Republican.
20. twilley said the following at 2:40 AM on Nov 27:
20
Jeremy, #18:
Well, there are many scholars who disagree with interpretations of the six so-called "clobber passages" in the Bible which are used to condemn LGBTIQ people. If you'd like to read about gay peoples' interpretations of these passages, you might start with Mel White, at:
http://www.soulforce.org/article/homosexuality-bible-gay-christian
But you can also type "clobber passages" into google and find hundreds of other sites with further information.
As for me personally? I have to look at the question through my own eyes. I may read and read pro- and anti-gay people for a year and still won't be able to understand the passages fully. Can I ever finally know whether God accepts his gay children, or wants them to fight their natural impulses? No, I cannot know this. Can I ever know whether there is a God at all, until I die? I cannot know this either.
Whatever I do, and whatever I believe, I do on faith. I have no way of knowing whether the God I pray to is real at all, other than what I can see God doing in my own life and in the world around me. In the Bible, Jesus says that:
"I am the true vine, and My Father is the vinedresser. Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit, He takes away; and every branch that bears fruit, He prunes it so that it may bear more fruit.
"You are already clean because of the word which I have spoken to you.
"Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself unless it abides in the vine, so neither can you unless you abide in Me. I am the vine, you are the branches; he who abides in Me and I in him, he bears much fruit, for apart from Me you can do nothing. If anyone does not abide in Me, he is thrown away as a branch and dries up; and they gather them, and cast them into the fire and they are burned. If you abide in Me, and My words abide in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be done for you. My Father is glorified by this, that you bear much fruit, and so prove to be My disciples."
John 15:1-8 NASB.
If I saw in my life that God was leading me to move away from being a gay person, I would do it in a moment. If I saw that being gay bore bad fruit, I would understand that it was not of God. But I have not seen that. I have seen God use my sexuality to bring both me and others closer to him. I have prayed for a partner if it was God's will and have gotten one, and let me tell you... being in a long-term relationship will drive you to your knees quicker than just about anything else!!
I cannot really know what God thinks of being gay until I meet God to ask. Everyone has questions about the Bible, things which they do not understand, questions which remain in their mind, and I don't believe it is ever possible to have a full and total knowledge of God's will for every situation from the text of the Bible. Until I meet God, I have to live here on earth and do what it is God sets out for me to do. From what I can tell, this is to be a good partner and someday a parent, to work hard at my job, and to become all of the good things God sets out for me to become, working for peace all the time.
21. Jeremy said the following at 12:39 PM on Nov 30:
21
twilley (#20):
I read the article to which you linked, which was somewhat interesting, but was also a very clear example of trying to find Biblical evidence to fit a pre-made conclusion rather than trying to explore what the passages actually mean.
I am sure you intended it this way, but that is a slanted way to pose that question. God accepts people, but He does not accept their sinful behavior. We all have natural impulses to sin, some in the area of homosexuality, some with alcohol, some with food, and so forth. And God very much does want us, with the help of the Holy Spirit, to fight those natural impulses.
The points you make about knowledge being incomplete are fair, but too often they become excuses. I would really encourage you to look at the Biblical passages related to homosexuality for yourself. Don't try to twist them, don't search out gay authors to try to convince yourself that what is on the page is not really what is meant. It is hard, but we have to strive to be unflinching towards our own sin and honest about what Scripture says.
I am glad God is producing good fruit in your life. But that certainly is not evidence that there are no remaining areas of sin. Hopefully we can all remember Paul's words in 1 Corinthians 4:4, and never rest in rooting out sin in our lives:
22. twilley said the following at 3:07 PM on Nov 30:
22
Jeremy, #21:
Glad you were open to reading the Mel White piece. Just one of very many opinions and resources.
"but was also a very clear example of trying to find Biblical evidence to fit a pre-made conclusion rather than trying to explore what the passages actually mean."
I accept that you view it this way--and I'm fine with that. Mel White definitely has made his mind up, after decades of searching. Others in the anti-gay camp are equally well-settled in their interpretations. You and I can have different interpretations of the scriptures, and I have no problem with that whatsoever. It is possible to examine these passages in the Bible and to come to conflicting conclusions over them.
"that is a slanted way to pose that question"
You are absolutely right. In speaking to someone who disagrees with me, I should have tried harder to avoid slanted wording like this. It's just the way I understand the world, so my thoughts came out like that. No argumentative stance intended.
Perhaps a better way to state the question would be:
Can I ever finally know whether homosexuality is holy in the eyes of God, or not?
"God accepts people, but He does not accept their sinful behavior. We all have natural impulses to sin, some in the area of homosexuality, some with alcohol, some with food, and so forth. And God very much does want us, with the help of the Holy Spirit, to fight those natural impulses."
Absolutely true. We do all have natural impulses to sin, and we should fight those impulses if we want to grow closer to God. Our impulses to sin are impulses to distance ourselves from what is holy and godly. I disagree with you that the disposition toward homosexuality is a sinful impulse like alcoholism. My understanding is that it is God-given, and that it teaches me about and draws me closer to God.
"The points you make about knowledge being incomplete are fair, but too often they become excuses."
Thanks for acknowledging that my point is fair. It shows you are listening honestly, and I appreciate that. You are absolutely right that our inability as humans to ever fully understand God's will can very, very quickly become an excuse to just do what you like or what feels right or good to you.
"I would really encourage you to look at the Biblical passages related to homosexuality for yourself. Don't try to twist them, don't search out gay authors to try to convince yourself that what is on the page is not really what is meant. It is hard, but we have to strive to be unflinching towards our own sin and honest about what Scripture says."
Most assuredly good advice. I have, in fact, read the Bible multiple times, spent time meditating and praying on each of the places where the scriptures are said to speak of homosexuality, and read multiple books, articles, and other resources on the subject. Mel White is a classic place to start, but there is no author, gay or straight, who I feel has a whole picture or a perfect explanation of the interpretations of these scriptures. I think absolute honesty about what scripture does and does not say is most definitely what we should strive for, and I agree that we must always be unflinching in confronting our own sin. I believe that we each, after our own honest examinations of the scriptures, have come to different interpretations of the scriptures and of God's will, and I accept and respect that.
"I am glad God is producing good fruit in your life. But that certainly is not evidence that there are no remaining areas of sin."
Boy did you say a mouthful. I hope I would never be so foolish as to claim to be free of areas of sin! Plenty of places I sin, and plenty of places God wants me to correct my sins. And when I don't, I sure pay for it later. I disagree with you that my homosexuality is an area of sin in my life, and believe that I am following God's will for my sexuality pretty well at least, although I'm sure I'll never be perfect :o) I certainly know that being in a committed relationship with my partner falls within God's will for my sexuality, and I know this isn't a sin. What I was trying to say in my last post is that I believe this, I can see God's guidance in this area of my life, because of the great fruit he produces directly out of my relationship with my partner, as well as out of my acceptance of my own sexuality. I could not begin to tell you the number of times I have been able to talk about my faith, and demonstrate my faith, since coming out of the closet. Or about the number of amazing things God has been doing in my life and my relationship lately. I feel truly blessed to be where I am.
Hope that helps you understand where I'm coming from :o)
23. Jeremy said the following at 11:03 PM on Nov 30:
23
twilley (#22):
First of all let me say that I really admire and appreciate the tone with which you approach your comments. I have seen a lot of other people's comments directed at you with varying degrees of hostility, but you always respond reasonably and without apparent anger. You seem to be honestly and whole-heartedly interested in glorifying God, and I wanted to say that even though we disagree about this issue, we all have areas of sin in our lives, and I hope you don't feel attacked or excluded because of the particular sin (in my opinion) that we are discussing.
Also from your comment, it would seem that we agree about most of this, in particular about what is a proper approach to God and to Scripture. What I think is worrisome, though, is the amount of emphasis you seem to place on personal experience as a reliable indicator of what is or is not sinful.
The point of that verse is that God's love is so great that it flows out onto everyone, that "good fruit", if you will, appears in the life of both those who are obeying Him and those who are not. For that exact reason, I think it is dangerous to assume that because good things come from your relationship with your partner, God approves of it, and then to interpret Scripture through that lens.
God can work any situation for good, and I am sincerely glad that through this you have had opportunity to share about God with others. But I think it is an error to say that because good has come because of a situation, the situation itself is good.
24. twilley said the following at 10:55 AM on Dec 1:
24
Jeremy, #23:
Thanks for your respectful response. You're treating me like a human being, and you're actually thinking through my points, and don't think I don't notice that. It's rare, and precious.
I am perfectly fine with the fact that we disagree over whether homosexuality is a sin. That's probably not going to change, and that's not really a problem for me. I think you should believe what God teaches you, and follow where God leads, and I fully respect your interpretations of the scriptures as valid. I'm just thankful to have a platform for discussion.
I think your underlying point is good: that it is dangerous to just look for 'good things,' assume those good things are automatically godly, and assume you can interpret scripture through a preconceived lens because of good things you've seen.
But I still honestly don't think that that is what I personally am doing. I have two reasons for this:
1) I don't think my lens is preconceived. I remain unconvinced that the scriptures actually condemn committed same-sex relationships, and wholly unconvinced that God does. I say this having read probably more widely on the subject than is altogether healthy for one human being to do, and I say this as a scholar. That's my job; I'm an academic. It's my job to be neutral and open to whatever view points come my way, no matter how completely ridiculous they might seem. To look at them and weigh them logically, and see if there is anything of value in them. Intellectual honesty is what makes or breaks you as a scholar. I read everything about German history, language, and culture. From Hitler to Arendt. It's what I do. That's why I read both left and right wing blogs, I read anti-gay authors and gay ones. I read Exodus International and Wayne Besen. And I can't say I'm wholly without bias, but after years of searching, these are my honest opinions as a scholar.
2) Emotionally--it isn't just that good fruit comes from my relationship with my partner--perhaps what I'm not emphasizing enough is that what I see, every single day of my life, is God working in both my life and in my partner's life to bring us closer together. God isn't just bringing good things out of a bad situation--he's building that situation, brick by painful brick. That's what a long-term relationship is--it's every day, getting up and trying, failing, being humbled, and getting up again. Tearing and re-tearing those muscles so they get stronger. And God's the one, as I see it, who's setting the workout schedule.
It's not just that we are building this relationship and that God is bringing good out of it, even though it's evil--it's that He's building it right there with us. If you've ever been in a committed relationship, then I hope you know what I mean. There are times when you have no idea what you are doing, and absolutely no idea how you can keep on. But those are the times that, if you let him, God will support you through, and bring you out stronger on the other side. Where he will put some ridiculously easy solution exactly where and when you need it. Or some hard solution you need to rise up and deal with. Where he will give you the humility to accept his help.
I know that you will probably believe me to be deluded, but that's my honest testimony. That's all I've got--God gave me a brain, and he expects me to use it in interpreting his word. And besides that he gave me my eyes. And what I see, every single day of my life, is God building a big strong gay partnership. And I can't wait to see what his plans are for it.
25. Tami said the following at 1:32 PM on Dec 1:
25
twilley and Jeremy, I applaud your thoughtful and respectful conversation.
And Jeremy, this statement really ministered to me, so thanks:
God can work any situation for good.... But I think it is an error to say that because good has come because of a situation, the situation itself is good.
26. BDB said the following at 4:44 PM on Dec 1:
26
twilley (#15) wrote:
>>We are hunted in the streets and beaten or murdered. People who don't even know us insult us. <<
That happens to pretty much everyone. Four cops were murdered near my home town this week. Just because they were cops at a coffee shop. Every day on the news another little girl seems to be abducted and murdered. Everyday males are hunting down and killing each other in the streets. There's been a number of churches randomly (or non-randomly) attacked by gunmen recently.
And to underscore how widespread violence is, here's a list of serial killers by country.
27. James said the following at 5:17 PM on Dec 1:
27
Twilley,
If we were to know each other in person would you be as understanding if I opted not to associate with you? (hang out, etc, based on Paul's writings) I haven't had to do this (thankfully), and I certainly hope never to have to take this action. I would have to do this because you 1) seem very committed to God (compared to someone who is not practicing) and 2) willfully engaging in what I (and most) consider as immoral action(s)...meaning your physical relationship. This is different from someone considering themselves gay or having temptations or urges, my decision is based on physical actions, which I believe is what the Bible refers to regarding homosexuality. If a person falling into sin acknowledges it's wrong and is struggling, of course I would be there for them...we're all in that same boat.
Yes, your tone and wording has been pleasant but it appears your fully committed and engaged in an issue which is pretty problematic with the faith.
28. Befuddled said the following at 5:40 PM on Dec 1:
28
BDB, no. 26:
"twilley (#15) wrote:
>>We are hunted in the streets and beaten or murdered. People who don't even know us insult us. <<
That happens to pretty much everyone."
BDB, yes, of course this is true. But you miss the fundamental point that LGBTQI individuals are sought out, discriminated against and killed because of their sexuality. There is no comparative groupings or patters of discrimination among the examples you listed.
29. twilley said the following at 10:38 PM on Dec 1:
29
James, #27:
Sure, it's your choice to associate with whomever you wish. I mean, if someone doesn't want to associate with me, I likely wouldn't bother pursuing a friendship with them either. We're talking now because you had a question, and I tried to answer it for you.
Guess that's a hint ;o) Go in peace, then.