Saturday, March 29, 2014

Was World Vision's vision blurred?



World Vision President Grieves Over Children Hurt by Controversial Decision on Hiring Married Gays

BY MELISSA BARNHART, CP REPORTER







March 27, 2014|8:27 am

World Vision U.S. President Richard Stearns expressed grief over the child sponsorships that were canceled after the organization announced its original policy change on hiring those in same-sex marriages.


After receiving feedback from supporters and faith leaders who were opposed to World Vision's decision to employ Christians who are in same-sex marriages, Stearns said in a press conference call Wednesday that the board decided to reverse its earlier decision and reaffirm the nonprofit's commitment to core biblical principles and the belief that "marriage is an institution created by God, between a man and a woman."

"I can say from a personal standpoint, the last couple of days have been painful. We especially feel pain and a broken heart for the confusion that we caused for many of our faithful friends and partners around the country who saw the policy change as a reversal of World Vision U.S.'s strong commitment to biblical authority, which was not intended to be," Stearns commented.

Although World Vision doesn't have a precise count on the number of child sponsorships that were canceled following Monday's announcement, Stearns confirmed that many supporters had canceled their donations in protest of the board's decision.

"That certainly grieves us," he said, "because the children that we serve will suffer for that. I can't tell you what the cumulative financial impact has been or will be. But I will say that our choice is not about money or income, it's really about a sincere desire for us to do the right thing: to be consistent with our core values, and to respond to the legitimate feedback and counsel that we have received from faith leaders and friends of World Vision."

Outside of public statements from evangelist Franklin Graham, Russell Moore, president of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, and George Wood, general superintendent of the Assemblies of God – all of whom denounced the policy change – Stearns said World Vision was also contacted by the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability and the National Religious Broadcasters association.

The organization had also received communications from Joel Osteen Ministries, among others, but he noted that he believes "it's appropriate to keep the heartfelt counsel of these friends confidential."

Openly acknowledging the board's mistake in its original policy change, Stearns said they're asking for forgiveness from partners for their "poor judgment."

"[T]he feedback we've paid special attention to has come from our many trusted partners, supporters, pastors and church leaders, many of whom came to us with sincere concern and love and conviction for not only World Vision, but for this delicate issue that this policy governs," he stated.

"We listened to their counsel, and they tried to point out in a loving way that the kind of policy change that had been made was simply not consistent with our commitment to traditional marriage, and authority of Scripture and how we apply Scripture in our lives."

Stearns asserted that although World Vision had received some affirmations of support from various people regarding Monday's announced policy change to offer employment to those in same-sex marriages, they soon realized they were creating a division among Christians and decided that they could not "defer to a small minority of denominations and churches" that affirm same-sex marriage.

"We have created a division that we did not want to create," he explained. "But in the end, the board concluded that we must really stand on our traditional beliefs – the authority of Scripture and our view of traditional marriage – and we cannot have a conduct policy that is not in alignment with those core truths, the foundational truths that we stand on."

Although World Vision's board had made the decision to ratify the employee conduct policy several months ago, Stearns said their major supporters and partners received a letter about the change on the same day media outlets were breaking the story.

"We have made a mistake, and part of that mistake was we did inadequate consultation with our partners and supporters prior to making a decision of this significance. And if I could have a do-over on one thing, it would have been that I would have done much more consultation with Christian leaders," Stearns said, noting the board will continue consulting with key Christian leaders on this issue.

Stearns also emphasized that while "World Vision U.S. has chosen to stand firmly in the biblical view of marriage, we strongly affirm that all people, regardless of their sexual orientation, are created by God. They are to be loved and treated with respect; and we welcome into our employment all sincere Christians who are willing to affirm our statement of faith, and abide by our conduct policy."

He added that all World Vision employees are held to a high standard of Christian conduct that not only governs sexual activity, but other areas of conduct. In its Wednesday statement, the board reverted to World Vision's long-standing policy that requires sexual abstinence for all single employees and faithfulness within the biblical covenant of marriage between a man and a woman.

Following the board's decision, Stearns said he's hopeful that World Vision's individual and church partners will continue to support the organization's mission to helping at-risk children and provide disaster relief.

"We estimate that our work touches 100 million people annually. These are people who are suffering in poverty. They are people who've been affected by disasters and war. We're working in Syrian refugee camps. We're rebuilding after typhoon Haiyan. And we're helping to prevent sex trafficking of children and girls in a number of countries around the world," he said.

"We would much rather be having a conversation about those things, which is core to our mission, than this issue, which has led [to] a great deal of controversy and confusion among our supporters around the country."

8 comments:

Donna Litherland said...

Praise the Lord for speaking to all involved. Thanks to those who spoke up publicly against the decision . And thanks to the Leaders of World Vision who listened and heeded the warnings and reversed their decisions. GOD IS STILL ON THE THRONE.

Unknown said...

 "But I will say that our choice is not about money or income, it's really about a sincere desire for us to do the right thing: to be consistent with our core values,..."

Well, what can I say. .. more than Money Talks.

I find it truly sad that this organisation found it nessesary to revert an, from the beginning, mature decision in favour of an biased but quite logic turn - if you are stuck in a fundamentalistic, conservative position.

This is but one example of many to come.
It's divisive issues, no dault of that.

As for the Salvation army, it will show in time were the leadership will take us.
Is the fundemental theology of our Army based on fundamentalistic and conservative grounds?

Well, a lot of us would feel far left behind if that would be The conclusion.

Kjell - Erik Edlund
Former officer of the Salvation army
Sweden

Anonymous said...

I am so glad the decision was reversed. Well done to those people of conscience who stood by their principles and refused to support the change in policy. Despite the statement, it's obvious that the withdrawal of financial giving had a HUGE bearing on the reversal - which is a shame, as the leaders of World Vision should have realised this before announcing their foolhardy policy change.
'Evangelical obsession with homosexuality' says it all.
‘They soon realized they were creating a division among Christians….’
Maybe the Salvation Army - and the FSAOF - will heed this.

Peter J. said...

So how could I support them now?

Anonymous said...

Dear Anonymous,

There is already a division within TSA and the wider church. What is emerging is two forms of Christianity - a conservative and a liberal, which are becoming more and more distinct and separate. If the church (including TSA) remains conservative, then the liberals will split away and they will have their own brand of Christianity. If the Church (including TSA) becomes liberal, then the conservatives will split away and keep their brand of Christianity.

It is sad. We will then end up with (as far as I can see) 5 'types' of Christianity - Orthodox, Conservative Catholic, Liberal Catholic, Conservative Protestant, and Liberal Protestant. All of them claiming Christ as Lord and Saviour, all of them preaching from the Bible, all of them claiming the others have abandoned the faith. It is a shame.

We should be unified. We are unified in the blood of Christ, not in doctrine. Divisions over doctrine and interpretation of Scripture are wrong. We should all be allowed to have our own understanding of scripture, with our own relationship with God, so long as we are unified in the Blood of Christ. If a married gay man claims the blood of Christ, then as Peter said after Cornelius was received the Holy Spirit “Surely no one can stand in the way of their being baptized with water. They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have.” (Acts 10:47) And then as he said to the Council at Jerusalem “As I began to speak, the Holy Spirit came on them as he had come on us at the beginning. 16 Then I remembered what the Lord had said: ‘John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’ 17 So if God gave them the same gift he gave us who believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I to think that I could stand in God’s way?” (Acts 11:15-17).

If God has poured out His Spirit on the LGBT Christians, then who are we to stand in His way? By so doing, he has shown His acceptance of them and their love for their partners.

If we cannot accept that logic (which many can't), then we cannot accept the logic in Acts which allows Gentiles to be saved without converting to Judaism, and as such, none of us are saved, and none of us have the hope of eternal life.

Yours in Christ,
Graeme Randall
Former Australian East in London

Anonymous said...

....how could I support them now?........
By thinking outside the limits of your LGBT opinions and considering who you are actually supporting - not the leaders, not the organisation, but the people who benefit from their existence - the children, who care not about a person's 'orientation' - get a grip.
The withdrawal of support was to make a point. I doubt whether the donors who withdrew their support would just not give - they would probably seek an alternative organisation who shared their theology. That is a natural thing to do, IMHO.

Anonymous said...

Excellent Graeme! And while we're at it let's also not forget the story in Acts of the angel who told Philip to go talk to the Ethiopian eunuch--a story that many theologians believe may have been the very first biblical recording of the baptism of a gay Xian!

I also find it to be of immense interest that there are people on this site (and other Xian sites) who if they were living in the days of Philip and the eunuch and identified themselves as Jewish Xians instead of heterosexual Xians, would've declared the Ethiopian's baptism to be against the Word of God, since the Torah prohibited eunuchs from entering the Jewish Temple. (The more things change, the more they remain the same....) And yes, Donna Litherland (and commenter # 3)....GOD is still on the throne---not god---AKA some dinky, prejudiced, made up idol, not worthy of anyone's love, praise, worship--or for that matter, I might add--outcasted person's fear or concern!

Daryl Lach
USA Central

"You Must Go Home By the
Way of the Cross, To Stand With Jesus In the Morning!"

Anonymous said...

I have realised a long time ago that any substantial financial support I make is better directed through a non religious, secular structure rather than through a theological dogmatic evangelical one. People often wonder why Christian service organisations such as World Vision and the Salvation Army should get involved in such moral matters in the first place. The leadership of both are privately often enlightened alright but they have to keep the support base happy.

It happened with the same SA sex health benefits in the USA 10 years ago - now widely implemented and perfectly accepted by all and sundry without batting an eyelid.

Shame on the unethical people with a very narrow, exclusive theology who are holding World Vision and the children to ransom in order to serve their own ends.

Despicable and definitely not in the spirit of Jesus comes to mind!

Active UKTI