Evangelicals Concerned Inc.
"The Bible Condemned Usurers, Too" by John Corvino, The Harvard Gay and Lesbian Review, Fall 1996; "My Absolutely Inappropriate Religious Bias" by John Suk, The Banner, July 29, 1996; "Homosexuality Gets on Our Agenda" by John Suk, The Banner, April 14, 1996; "If You’re Offended by What We Print, Read On" by Harvey A. Smit, The Banner, March 4, 1996.
by Dr. Ralph Blair
He accurately translates Galatians 3:28 as "there is no longer male and female" rather than as "neither male nor female" as it’s often mistranslated and misquoted. Paul is using terms of heterosexual pairing from Genesis, though Corvino doesn’t note this. The philosopher rightly concludes that if, in Christ, there’s no longer male and female, homosexuality should be "a non-issue" for Christians.
In grad school at Wayne State University, Christian Reformed Banner editor John Suk observed professors’ approval of his classmates’ speaking out as gays, feminists or African-Americans. But when Suk spoke of his Christian perspective, the prof retorted: "All through the millennia, Christians have been the oppressors ... [therefore] Christians have forfeited their right to speak." Although it’s absurd to blame Suk for the Inquisition and the prof evidently is ignorant of a fuller or more nuanced history, Suk grants that he "was closer to the mark than I liked to admit," recalling "the virulent prejudice against Roman Catholics and Native Americans expressed in The Banner before the turn of the last century." Says Suk: "Rather than try to coerce others who do not follow Jesus to live as we do [or should?], we Christians should try -- in fear and humility and Spirit-inspired hope -- to follow Jesus ourselves. Scripture calls us to the way of the cross rather than to crusade."
Addressing the issue of homosexuality in his denomination, Suk sees it’s "becoming what I never expected it to be: a pressing and potentially contentious issue," for even in this conservative church, not all members agree. A denominational position, now willfully ignorant for a quarter century, contradictorally urges that homosexuals be well-treated and that all meaningful expressions of homosexuality be prohibited. Suk reveals that "I’ve received two articles which I will not publish, from well-known denominational personalities who take positions contrary to that of Synod 1973." Though Suk says the Synod "position is advice -- no more, no less. ... [and so] we should respect the right of church members to dissent," an antigay seminary executive responds that it’s "a moral imperative." Suk guesses that churches get so incensed over this issue because homosexuality is something "nine out of ten of us can honestly say we have neither been tempted by nor committed." C. S. Lewis made much the same point, adding: "How many of those who fulminate on the matter are in fact Christians?"
Managing editor Smit remembers the many angry letters that, over the years, underscore that "so many things offend so many people!" He notes we’re to try not to offend others, but Smit knows that, biblically, to avoid offense, the stronger Christians must be gentle with the weaker so that the weaker might not stumble into over-scrupulous traps but grow stronger. He warns that church leaders who loudly indulge their unbiblical taking of offense over a younger Christian’s conduct "might drive that ... new believer away from the faith." He urges that The Banner "always consider the impact of what we print on people who are new to the faith." He doesn’t apply any of this to the case of Christians who are forced by their elders to choose between an unasked-for longing for same-sex intimacy and a desire to follow Jesus -- but the application fits. Pushing a failed "ex-gay" promise, as the magazine and denomination do, is just such a stumbling block of offense.