Thoughts on the World Vision developments

Yesterday's quick and contrite reversal by World Vision U.S. on its new same-sex marriage policy proved to be welcome news for most of those who identify themselves as evangelical Christians. Only two days after announcing it would hire people in same-sex marriages, the relief organization resorted to its previous policy after widespread opposition from influential evangelical leaders and, undoubtedly, sponsors. Its president and chairman said the board had made a terrible mistake and asked for forgiveness. As forgiven people, evangelicals should extend forgiveness to World Vision and pray for it and other Christian organizations to remain faithful to Scripture.

While we can rejoice in the ability to move forward regarding this incident, here are a few thoughts on this week's developments that are by no means exhaustive:

-- This was, and is, important. It is not just a minor annoyance when a Christian organization finds as acceptable sexual relations outside the covenant relationship designed by God. In its initial decision, World Vision showed a misunderstanding of or departure from the gospel and the authority of Scripture, the latter which the board acknowledged in its letter seeking forgiveness. It is difficult to understand how the board could think it would not encounter the widespread opposition that greeted its acceptance of same-sex marriage among employees.

-- To oppose World Vision's acceptance of same-sex marriage was, and is, not to betray needy children. Some bloggers who seemingly identify themselves as evangelicals sharply criticized at least some evangelicals who wrote posts taking issue with World Vision's initial policy change. These critics seemed to indicate the biblical admonitions to feed the hungry absolutely trump the biblical admonitions to reserve sex for true marriage. They made it sound as if the bloggers who disagreed with World Vision cared little for the destitute but much for targeting gays and lesbians. Yet, the blogs I read -- by such evangelical leaders as John Piper, Al Mohler, Russell Moore and Kevin DeYoung -- demonstrated graciousness and heavy-heartedness, as well as truthfulness and biblical faithfulness. As some of these blogs pointed out, how faithful are evangelicals to God and how much good are they doing if they relieve suffering in this life but approve policies that tell sinners they are okay to continue in practices the Bible says are indications they will suffer eternally if they do not repent?

-- To withdraw support from World Vision is not necessarily to withdraw support from evangelical relief and witness. World Vision is the best known of the international evangelical relief organizations -- kind of the 800-pound gorilla in the field. It is not the only one. That seemed to be the implication, however, from some who criticized those who disagreed with World Vision's original policy change. Compassion International and Food for the Hungry come quickly to mind. Singer Shaun Groves, who works with Compassion, provides what appears to be a balanced explanation of the difference between Compassion and World Vision in which he says, "Compassion always works through the local church to develop one child at a time into an adult who can transform their community some day. World Vision, sometimes in partnership with local churches, develops communities in a way that positively impacts the lives of children." You can read his explanation of the differences -- and he expresses support for World Vision -- here. Included in his post is a video by World Vision explaining its work.

-- This is about the gospel of Jesus. Several bloggers made this point eloquently after World Vision announced its original policy change. Piper explained it this way: "Make no mistake, this so-called 'neutral' position of World Vision is a position to regard practicing homosexuals (under the guise of an imaginary 'marriage') as following an acceptable Christian lifestyle. . . . Over against this, the apostle Paul says they will not enter the kingdom of heaven. It is that serious. If it were not, God would not have given his Son to be crucified for our rescue. Therefore, World Vision has trivialized perdition and the cross."

-- This is not the end. Hopefully, it will be for World Vision. Having humbly corrected its error, the World Vision board may be cured permanently from considering such an action. But we live in a culture where same-sex marriage has made stunning gains in the last nine months in courts, legislatures and public opinion. The pressure continues to mount for Christians to acquiesce to the spirit of the age rather than stand strong against the cultural winds. Christians, churches and evangelical organizations face a growing outpouring of human contempt and, likely, government sanction without obeisance. May we not bow before these or any other pretenders to the throne of God.