The Defrocking of the Culture

Monte Kuligowski

I write this piece not because it’s easy to point out the folly of mockery. It’s not that any pleasure is derived from reproving those given to the strong drink of delusion. It’s simply that it must be done. The seductive error of our generation must be opposed. The contest for the approval of homosexual practice must be met with honest and firm rebuke.

In fact, the opposition must not cease until the irreverent challenges end. And at this point it looks as though we could be in for a long campaign.

It is bad enough that a person should give himself to a sin that is against nature and nature’s Creator, a sin surpassed by no other in its ability to arouse the fierce wrath and judgment of God, a sin that is in its essence, direct mutiny against the rule of God – but then to go further and say that Jesus approves the sin is to make a mockery of his holiness; it is to offer him vinegar on a reed and to pour contempt upon his cross. Still further, for an alleged minister of Christ to proclaim that the Lord of consuming holiness stands indifferently, and even ready to embrace an unrepentant sinner is mockery of the worst kind. And for a minister to be that sinner is to stoke the oven of God’s wrath to the highest degree.

Such is the case of Irene Stroud, a minister of the United Methodist Church who was recently reinstated to the clergy on appeal by a church panel vote of 8 to 1. (Not terribly surprising news from the UMC.) Min. Shroud had been defrocked after announcing her lifestyle of homosexual practice.

If Stroud had disclosed to the church that she was engaged in a battle against sin; that she needed help in her fight to overcome; that she hated and despised the sin, but was trapped, then my words above would not be so seemingly insensitive. In fact, they would reflect the sweet fragrance of God’s amazing grace and mercy towards sinners. More importantly, if Stroud had been in a state of repentance (even if it meant over and over again), the God whose wrath is infinitely harsher and whose mercy is infinitely deeper than any man’s, would have run to her crying: Inasmuch as you have confessed your sins I am faithful and just to forgive your sins and to cleanse you from all unrighteousness; for I took all of the Father’s wrath and judgment that you deserve, upon myself on the cross (see 1 John 1: 9).

Regrettably (there’s no word to describe such sorrow of heart elicited, so regrettably will have to do), rather than being repentant, Stroud is unashamed. Even more, she (like other activists) is proud of her homosexual lifestyle.

After learning of the panel’s decision, the reinstated minister summed up the thinking of her wayward church, “The church is not free to disregard the standards of justice and inclusiveness that are preached by Jesus Christ . . . and are a part of church law.”

Min. Stroud certainly is not speaking of God’s standard of justice. God’s standard is so high that it is just and right that men are punished eternally for their sins. Unless, of course, they embrace the mercy of Christ, which is open to anyone. Inclusiveness is a feature of the gospel. Anyone may lay hold of Christ. As really preached by Jesus, however, no one can have Christ without repentance (see Mark 1: 15).

Stroud’s idea of inclusiveness (which is based on moral relativism) makes the cross of Christ irrelevant: “[G]iven the choice between burning in hell and believing that a devout Muslim or Buddhist was on the wrong path, I guess I would have to burn in hell.”

When Jesus said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me,” he was speaking of the way to heaven. There is a path to God and it is entered through the gate of the cross. If you want to get to New York City from where you are (if you’re in NYC, then to LA), you must travel the right way. If you choose to go the wrong way, no amount of devoutness and sincerity to the path you’ve chosen will ever get you to your intended destination.

So what should be said to the Strouds of the world? The pleasures of heaven far surpass the passing pleasure of any sin.

PS: To those who are tempted to label Christians committed to the fundamentals of biblical teaching (“fundamentalists,” as you say) as haters of those practicing homosexuality, consider this: If we are correct, then we wouldn’t be loving if we didn’t have a genuine concern for souls in rebellion to God. If we are truly incorrect, then you should express love and concern for us who will be judged by God.

©2005 Monte Kuligowski – Distribution for non-profit use is permitted.

###

Monte Kuligowski is an attorney who writes on topics of social, religious, political and legal interest. He writes for Opinion Editorials, MichNews, American Daily and Conservative Truth. His columns have been linked by Google News, Christian Headline News, Tysk News, Free Republic and others sites.

columns@att.net