Posted on 03/25/2014 1:24:07 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Shortly after I broke the news on my radio broadcast and on social media, Christianity Today confirmed the report: World Vision has decided to embrace homosexual "marriage" among its employees and to recognize practicing homosexual employees who profess faith in Jesus as true Christians.
This is a betrayal of the gospel, a betrayal of the Lord, a betrayal of the family, and a betrayal of the countless thousands of Christians who have put their trust in World Vision as a legitimate Christian organization.
In no way does it contribute to "building a better world for children" – one of the fundamental goals of World Vision. In fact, it does the opposite.
Last June, World Vision U.S president Richard Stearns stated that, "No one ever died of gay marriage," thereby trivializing the importance of the issue, as if it contrasted with the organization's mission of providing tangible relief to suffering humanity.
Today, he went much further, claiming that this radical, unbiblical move is actually a "very narrow policy change" that should be viewed as "symbolic not of compromise but of [Christian] unity."
What? World Vision redefines the nature of marriage – the most fundamental institution of society, ordained by God in Genesis 2 as the lifelong union of a man and a woman and reaffirmed by Jesus as such in Matthew 19 – and ignores the explicit and repeated condemnation of homosexual practice throughout the Scriptures and then claims it is a "very narrow policy change"?
What? World Vision mocks the sentiments, convictions, and sensibilities of countless thousands of its Christian constituents, rejects the historic testimony of virtually all branches of Christianity, decides to take a terribly controversial stand on the most socially divisive issue of the day, and then claims that this is "symbolic not of compromise but of [Christian] unity"?
With all respect to the massive amount of good that Richard Stearns and World Vision have done in helping the poor and needy for many years now, his words strain Christian credulity.
Stearns stated, "We're not caving to some kind of pressure. We're not on some slippery slope. There is no lawsuit threatening us. There is no employee group lobbying us. This is not us compromising. It is us deferring to the authority of churches and denominations on theological issues. We're an operational arm of the global church, we're not a theological arm of the church."
No slippery slope? No compromise? By sanctioning homosexual relationships, World Vision is "deferring to the authority of churches and denominations on theological issues"? Worst of all, World Vision did not make this decision under duress or pressure, making their decision all the more inexcusable.
Stearns said, "It's been heartbreaking to watch this issue rip through the church. It's tearing churches apart, tearing denominations apart, tearing Christian colleges apart, and even tearing families apart. Our board felt we cannot jump into the fight on one side or another on this issue. We've got to focus on our mission. We are determined to find unity in our diversity."
Is this not the height of self-deception? Does World Vision not realize that they have just exponentially increased that "tearing apart" of believers? Do they actually think that this divisive, destructive policy change will unite Christians around serving the poor? Does their board, which overwhelmingly approved the policy, actually feel that they have not "jump[ed] into the fight on one side or another on this issue"? It would be like saying, "Because politics can be so divisive and we don't want to get into the fight, we'll just vote for the Democrats."
Anonymous sources informed me about this coming change two weeks ago, telling me how the convictions of committed Christians within World Vision were scorned when the new policy was announced. This is the way to find "unity in our diversity"? (One family activist suggested to me that the organization be renamed World DiVision.)
The fact is that World Vision claims to be a Christian organization, with phrases like this on its website: "World Vision is a Christian humanitarian organization . . . . Motivated by our faith in Jesus Christ . . . ." As Stearns reiterated, "World Vision is committed to our Christian identity. We are absolutely resolute about every employee being followers of Jesus Christ. We are not wavering on that."
Well, if claiming that two men can "marry" and their sexual acts be holy in God's sight is not "wavering," then words have no meaning.
That's why listeners to my radio show who supported World Vision called in today to express their shock, feeling deeply betrayed.
One caller said that he and his wife recently decided to sponsor a child through World Vision after being introduced to them at a Christian concert in New York City that featured Casting Crowns. Now he was flabbergasted to hear that they were recognizing "gay Christianity" and same-sex "marriage" among their employees.
According to the World Vision website, their first Core Value is that "We Are Christian," even stating: "We proclaim together, 'Jesus lived, died, and rose again. Jesus is Lord.' We desire him to be central in our individual and corporate life."
Let it be stated plainly to the leadership and board of directors of World Vision U.S.: The Lord Jesus is no longer central in the corporate life of your organization. You have denied his lordship by your actions.
Remarkably, Stearns claimed that World Vision's moral standards have not changed, explaining that they still required "abstinence outside of marriage, and fidelity within marriage" for their employees. So, just redefine your terms, and poof! Sin disappears.
This would be similar to saying that World Vision still requires sexual purity, except that fornication is now considered pure, or that they still require marital fidelity, except that adultery is now considered fidelity.
The fact is that no matter how much two men or two women love each other, their union is not marriage in God's sight – nor will it ever be – and their sexual relations, even if totally monogamous, remain sinful in his eyes.
Now is the time for every church that works with World Vision, every Christian musician and artist that partners with World Vision, and every believer that supports World Vision to inform them that they have made a terrible choice and that they will no longer have your support.
And then, without missing a beat, partner together with other fine Christian, humanitarian organizations like Samaritan's Purse or Food for the Hungry, and continue your compassionate giving.
And for every child who will fall through the cracks because of World Vision's betrayal of its Christian principles, I say to Richard Stearns and those who made this decision together: You will have to answer to God.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Michael Brown holds a Ph.D. in Near Eastern Languages and Literatures from New York University. He is the author of 25 books, including Hyper-Grace: Exposing the Dangers of the Modern Grace Message, and he hosts the nationally syndicated, daily talk radio show, the Line of Fire.
I’m in the same boat, and I’m considering giving World Vision a couple months notice. Hopefully what they do with the time is find a way to get the many kids whose support is being withdrawn over to Compassion International, or Samaritan’s Purse, but I doubt that. They seem more interested in making a political statement now, rather than doing God’s work.
RE: I am currently sponsoring a beautiful child in Haiti through World Vision. I want to let them know I do not approve of this, but there is no way I can withdraw my sponsorship of the child.
My advise is to write them a letter telling them what you think. But don’t conflate your helping the child with the newly changed values of the organization, these are two different issues.
In future, you might want to consider COMPASSION INTERNATIONAL instead.
RE: to recognize practicing homosexual employees who profess faith in Jesus as true Christians.
A Christian will not “practice” what God’s word considers sin. World Vision is one confused and morally wobbly organization.
Thank you; I am so disappointed; I’ve always heard good things about this organization; in fact, the Christian Family bookstores are aligned with them; next time I go there, I am going to ask if they are going to continue the relationship in light of this new policy.
It is a very sad day indeed when followers of Christ depend on our worldly govt. to act as their firewall. We should be relying on the Lord for all our defenses and strengthening one another in the body of Christ to resist Satan's attacks.
World Vision no longer depends on Christ for its help and fears the govt. and man far more than God.
The homosexual mafia strikes again.
How can the World Vision leadership believe Jesus lived, died, and rose again? They obviously choose to ignore significant parts of Scripture. What makes them think the stuff printed in red is true?
Just this minute ended 25 years of sponsorship to world vision, on top of that I put permanent stop payment on my bank account in case they try to take 1st of the month payment out
I spoke in a live chat with a employee, they tried to suggest they had no choice, I went to world Vision facebook page as well, they said basically same to others I read
I cancelled via on line account, I suspect they will ask me to send a handwritten letter via snail mail to cancel? At any rate the permanent stop payment will take care of this
Why now?? Was it to show they disapprove with Hobby Lobby?
Franklin Graham is the Christian man I admire most, he said there are other alternatives to World Vision
I am going to today give same monthly amount to Samaritans purse
REVERSED!
” there is no way I can withdraw my sponsorship of the child.”
Tough call. But, could it be that World Vision are relying on this? Relying on people sacrificing Christian principles because they know the child, albeit from a great distance?
They reversed the decision. :)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.