Jesus Loves You. Here’s a Condom.
Weird situation at church yesterday. A group of us were sitting around talking, waiting for our weekly men’s group to begin, and there was this plastic bucket sitting on the table in front of me, filled with condoms. All kinds of condoms. Colored, textured, lubricated, plain. Not your father’s typical church supplies. As part of our outreach (to use a little Christianese), we’ve opened our building as a site for free HIV testing twice a week, and despite the adamant message of the abstinence-only crowd, a condom is the best defense against HIV. But in MY church?! ¹
Yeah, I get bent out of shape easily sometimes. And I threw one of my “you can’t be serious” looks at the pastor. But he was dead serious. And since I knew I was on a journey of “radical acceptance” and opening myself up to allow God to use his Church in ways he wants (even if it raises some eyebrows), I was eager for the theological justification. Too bad I didn’t get it. The pastor’s position was simple. While as believers, we maintain a Biblical standard for purity in intimate relations — marriage and fidelity — we still need to love people enough to help them stay safe even if they don’t live up to our standards. Nutshell theology. Good for the soul, but not really satisfying to my analytical mind. So as I picked through the bucket, marveling at the assortment of glow-in-the-dark colors, I started wrestling with the arguments and implications. Another mind-stretching experience.
Would Jesus be handing out condoms at the Oklahoma Gay Rodeo Association? According to my pastor, of course he would. But I could already hear the protests of my conservative evangelical friends and colleagues, rolling in disgust in their pews. Isn’t this tantamount to condoning sin? I don’t know. But what does Jesus think?
Did Jesus ever overlook a moral shortcoming in order to save a life? Images of scenes from ancient Middle East started flooding my mind. Isn’t this the same argument about working on the Sabbath? Isn’t it better to allow people to rub grains of wheat in their hands in order to satisfy their hunger, even though Sabbath laws forbid it? Or, could pulling your ox out of a pit in sheer mercy and compassion justify overriding the Sabbath restriction against it? And David, before he became king, entering the tabernacle and stealing the holy bread there to feed his hungry men — doing what was unlawful. Jesus justified him, applauded him. Here was a man who understood the heart (and priorities) of God. (Lk 6:1-5; Lk 14:5)
Didn’t a tablecloth containing all kinds of forbidden meat lower from heaven to Peter in a vision, with a command to eat and call nothing unclean that God has made clean? Because it’s about people, not rules. (Acts 10:10-15)
That scene of the Samaritan woman at the well also presses itself into my mind. She’d been married five times, and was currently living with a man not her husband. Yet because Jesus spends time talking with her (a scandalous action back then), God’s salvation was brought to her entire village (John 4). And he never once rebuffed her for her disreputable lifestyle. That other woman caught in adultery and about to be stoned by the righteous people of the day … Jesus steps in and saves her life. In this case, he does correct her: “go and sin no more.” But he doesn’t look at her offense. He focuses on saving her life. The correction comes later, when she was in a more receptive position (John 8:3-12).
And that famous parable of the Good Samaritan who takes care of the man, beaten, robbed and left on the side of the road to die by the holy people of his day. Are we, the Church, not the Priest and the Levite who walked by, not wanting to dirty ourselves even to save a life? We’d rather preach to him, tell him God loves him, all the while pointing out his faults in an effort to change him. But we won’t kneel down in the dirt with him to offer him the help he actually needs at that moment. Who ultimately was the good neighbor? Jesus’ words: the one who showed mercy. “Go and do likewise” (Lk 10:30-37).
Condoms, oddly enough, are never mentioned in the Bible. I can’t find any single passage in Scripture that specifically states that doing something which might appear to condone sin is acceptable if done out of love. But there are plenty of examples where Jesus himself does this. Love overrides Law. It is the “Ox on the Sabbath” principle.
Am I completely comfortable with this? Not yet. It may be a little while longer before you see me at the Rodeo passing out condoms, telling people Jesus loves them. It’s still a little too far from my traditional, conservative upbringing to adjust so quickly. But I am completely convinced that this is the kind of attitude and thinking we need to embrace if we’re going to be a light in the 21st century. It’s what Jesus would do. The world seems to be falling apart, people are dying. They need God, and we the Church have failed to deliver. This is the kind of out-of-the-box action that demonstrates who we really are. This is the message people need to hear. God loves you. We love you. Our greatest desire is for you to have an intimate relationship with God. In the meantime, be safe. Here’s a condom.
———————-
¹ Just to clarify, the condoms were not in the sanctuary and are put away during services. They were in the fellowship area of the church where the HIV testing was going on, and HIV testing sites are required by law to have condoms available.
This entry is filed under Coffee with Steve, Rethinking church. And tagged with condom, Radical Acceptance. You can follow any responses to this entry through RSS 2.0. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Being gay is not a “moral shortcoming”
Good thoughts nonetheless.
Super-comfortable with the idea, no. But super-agree, yes. So much of what He did was unacceptable in that day’s standards, and would even be today. It’s our perceptions that are off, not His. Another great one Steve, thanks!
Oh wow. Very thought-provoking.
Very detailed. God’s thoughts are so much higher than our thoughts and His ways are not our ways. Yes, it is hard to comprehend passing out condoms. I do believe we have to go to where they are even if it is on the ground and love them and be their friend. We have also got to trust that God is leading Pastor Neil and if Pastor Neil gets out of line, God will correct him. Pastor’s need our prayer so much since they are on the front lines of the battle.
If Pastor Neill gets out of line, I have no problem laying the smack down on him — as the loving instrument of God, of course.
In love of course as you guys put it
The question asks if Jesus would hand out condoms. The answer, as I see it, is absolutely not. While He loved sinners, He did NOT accommodate sin. “Go and sin no more,” he told the adulteress. Comparing this to Jesus’ examples of exalting the spirit over the letter is a really bad analogy, IMO.
There’s a HUGE difference between people picking corn on the Sabbath because they’re hungry (or eating from the table of shewbread because of hunger, or saving an animal’s life on the Sabbath) and people choosing to have sex because they’re horny. Considering these things moral equivalents is problematic at best. So yes, theologically, I have to admit I’m not a fan of it, especially when you hold Jesus’ actions and teachings up as justification.
Having said that, I don’t really have a problem with a church giving out condoms as long as they consider it a practical and not a spiritual/theological matter. Call it what it is–a natural accommodation for people who may choose to have sex (and, in so doing, to sin, despite the fact that there are NOT extenuating circumstances, like hunger or saving an animal’s life). Call it a practical accommodation, but don’t try to make it spiritual.
I LOVE MY CHURCH
Oh lord, the problem with people thinking that JESUS WOULD NOT HAND OUT A CONDEMN is like saying that if Jesus was here he wouldnt care to stop a speeding truck from running you right over. I for one believe he would stop that truck, and for me, I believe Jesus? Yep, he’d give out those condemns and you know why? Because he’s a realist he hears the young kids crys who dont use them and then ask why AIDS god? Why me? Why unplanned Pregnancy God? Why ME? See.. I for one believe Jesus is wiser than any of us here on earth would give him credit for! Just MY thoughts of coarse.
I think the idea that our Lord would hand out condoms is more then a bit loopy
Interesting points, everyone. Certainly grounds for some fresh thinking. A little bit of “loopy” every once in a while is what keeps the Church alive. It’s always the radicals that inject fresh blood into crusty traditions and religious entrenchments. But thanks at least for not throwing any stones.
Oh, and I suppose I should point out that condoms are not just for “sinners”. Married people need them too.
and so do gay people; there are lots of those without “moral shortcomings”
I would argue that there is good radicalism and there is also deep error
“hold fast to the traditions I have passed unto you”
I’m not dismissing what you guys are saying (Pastor R and Brian). I value your opinions. And I am still working this out myself.
But my question would be, Does the fact that Jesus turned water into wine, at a party where people were obviously getting drunk, mean that he condones drunkenness?
I use this example because here he is actively doing something which could be seen as contributing to “sin”, in contrast to passive activity, like “not” stoning someone, being argued that he was “not” condoning adultery by his actions.
And although Pastor R’s distinction between a “practical” matter and a “spiritual/theological” one is attractive, I think it’s arbitrary. I tend to view every action as having spiritual/theological implications. We either should do it or not — IMHO.
so, is the issue whether this HIV testing/condom supplying should happen in “your church”? or whether or not Christians should be involved in such an initiative at all (whether in the church building or not)? if the point is to show God’s love by preventing disease and ministering to those with illness (i.e. HIV or anything else), then do that – and do it in the way most effective at preventing disease, in this case encouraging abstinence and condom use. otherwise stay out of the disease prevention business and stick to other, more benign (but needed) things like feeding and clothing people. then again, feeding people might give them the bodily energy to go sin. ooops.
would some of you be more or less uncomfortable with a clean needle exchange program? or is it the sex?
sorry…..but this seems a bit silly to me if I look at it too long. yes, sin is sin – and people will be judged in the end (acc. to Christian belief). but I don’t see where true religion requires Christians or anyone to deny people needed or effective treatment simply because they have sinned, are sinners and no doubt will sin again.
IMHO not a good idea
Thanks for the chance to “think” about god in this way. i was sharing this idea w/ my husband tonight and it lead to yet another interesting conversation about god. im sure he appreciates us thinking of him and bring fresh ideas to the table! ———- Sent from AT&T’s Wireless network using Mobile Email
The thing is we have taken God out of to many things and look what is happening, people are dying, kids are shooting kids and how do you think that is affecting the heart of God. His creation, the ones He has created are dying. God is reaching out to the hopeless, dying, world with His love through his body and who are we to tell God how to reach the people He is wanting to reach. Never underestimate Jesus because He will always prove you wrong. People are going to do what they want to do whether we like it or not. Why not give them something that can save a life and allow us to share the love of God with them so they can live another day.
Right On Steve! I believe your Pastor understands Christ’s genuine message and his true intent for how we behave towards others who might not be walking in his light.
Hey all. I really love the dialogue going on here. Lots to think about. But, I have to say, the more I think (and pray!) about it, the simpler this becomes.
Jesus never avoided doing something because of how it might look, what people might think, or because it offended people’s religious sensibilites. He never ran from doing the right thing because of the controversy it might stir up. He didn’t have an image problem. So, for me at least, it all boils down to 2 simple questions:
Will giving out condoms save lives?
And is saving lives something important to God?
If yes, then that settles it for me. And asking whether it is appropriate in a church, or whether Christians should be involved, becomes moot. As my pastor originally pegged it, it’s a matter of doing the loving thing.
I’m just picturing you in a church sanctuary – stained glass windows, carved wooden pews, plush carpets – rifling through a bucket of neon-colored, scented condoms. Funny. Funny.
I am a theology-lite individual living in a predominantly black urban neighborhood with several active black churches and very high teenage pregnancy and HIV rates.
Kudos to your pastor for not succumbing to traditional thought and conventional pressures. It’s just such action that might bring back the “prodigals” like me.
You know, you all make sense! As I read one letter, I think, “Yea, you’re right!” Then I read the next, and think, “Hmm, maybe they weren’t so right after all.” The bottom line is, we have to follow our heart, not our theology! So many times in the Gospels, it says, “And Jesus moved with compassion…..” I think we need to be “moved with compassion” also. No one, at least not any caring Christian, delights in seeing the effects of sexual disease. If there’s a way to prevent it…pardon me, there are some folks who justify non involvement by saying the “sinner” has reaped what he has sown…. but I think for those of us who are just too dumb to know God’s judgment when we see it, we should be moved by hearts of love, the love that God put there in the first place.
Yes, I, too am having a smile over Steve picking through condoms, church or no church!
Ah, but getting back to the original question….each of has to search our own heart and ask God for the answer for him or herself…involvement? or no involvement? and above all…not condemn or judge those Christians who do not agree with us.
Here Steve, have a condom.
http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D-WybvhRu9KU&h=ca60e694b0017db6772f1da5f7c596f6
As someone who has witnessed what the lack of understanding and an “abstinence only” approach does to people and a country, I am all for handing out condoms. Uganda, where I served the Lord for the past 7 years is a dismal failure in the light of telling people to keep in their pants.
I think morally you are obligated to prevent suffering. Even if the suffering is the result directly or indirectly of someones sin.