Influence

‘You are the salt of the earth. But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled underfoot. Matthew 5:13 NIV

The South of Ireland held their referendum on abortion, and in a shock to many on either side of the argument, the swing to allowing abortion in many situations was agreed. The vote was 65:35 in favour of relaxing the current legislation. The real shock was the size of the majority.

Two comments struck me as I watched the aftermath unfold, and both were sadly accurate. One commenter said, “Just because the majority voted for it, doesn’t make it right”. In a democracy that can be shown to be true in many societies. The second opinion was this: “The influence of the church has been largely dismissed as a result of the recent child abuse scandals involving the priests and the associated cover up. How can the ordinary person believe what they say now on anything?”.

The ordinary Christian in the pew has a responsibility to be a witness to the Jesus they profess, but a much greater burden of responsibility lies with the leaders in all and any church of all and any denomination. The thought and fear expressed in the wake of the referendum result is this: Would the outcome have been different if the church had spoken its advice in truth, purity, sincerity and the integrity they always claimed? In this case, the change could have been massive and an opportunity was lost.

To a smaller degree, our church of members and leaders should be aware of the impact on other people’s lives if we are seen as hypocrites, or at best a poor reflection of the Saviour we claim. When we lose our ‘shine’ we automatically lose the witness that should and could attract the unbeliever to become a believer. Perhaps not on a massive scale as shown by the recent Irish referendum, but certainly on that friend or family member you would love to see become a believer, and even more so because your life and lifestyle made the difference. In the words of the old saying, “The kingdom was lost for want of a nail.” Let’s make sure our influence is not dismissed. Think what you like, people do notice.

Influence or Reflection?

The following story was released on the Christian Institute website, and shows a disturbing trend.

“Popular soaps EastEnders and Emmerdale are set to launch three more homosexual characters between them in the coming months. Homosexual lobby group Stonewall has previously boasted about its influence on TV soaps – citing one character who wore a campaign shirt from the group. ITV soap Coronation Street has already caused a storm of controversy with its homosexual characters – and some of its former stars have expressed doubts about its growing number of same-sex plotlines.

Last month art critic and TV personality Brian Sewell hit out at the excessive number of homosexuals, transsexuals, and teenage lesbian characters on Coronation Street. Mr Sewell, also attacked the same-sex storylines on EastEnders. He said soaps were being used as “sexual propaganda”. In May former Corrie star Nick Cochrane, who played Andy McDonald, commented on the number of same-sex storylines on the soap. He said: “Would one road in a working class area generally produce that number of gay people?””

There has been a long dispute over whether the media (especially TV) influences society, or just reflects it. I have already cast my vote on that issue long before this particular article was published. I would draw your attention to the bold type phrase in the release above. I have no doubt that homosexual groups, like Stonewall, have a clear, direct, and unambiguous agenda. They don't shy away from stating it, and are happy to repeat it as often as they get the chance. Their role in society is to 'educate' us into accepting that their way of life is not only good, but desirable. They don't want to stop at equality, they want to be superior. They are a protected species, a bit like the 'cuckoo'. At this point you are possibly thinking that I am that over-used word, 'homophobic'.

Like you, I also know that there are some very 'nice' homosexuals, but 'nice' does not equal 'right'! The Bible tells us to love the sinner, but not the sin. I also believe as moral and ethical Christians, we should be trying to balance the scales quite a bit. Stonewall does not have a monopoly on truth or justice, nor is it holding up any shining light for our youth to follow. Unfortunately, my views are open to be seen as intolerant and wrong in the eyes of the homosexual community, but am I allowed to call them 'abnormal' or 'unnatural' or 'sinful'? Apparently not, so the scales of debate are unbalanced. As unbalanced as Stonewall itself has helped to make it.

So, as a nation of addicted TV 'soap' watchers, what are we going to do? Will we stop watching Emmerdale, Eastenders, or Coronation Street? If not, why not? It is difficult to defend. If we don't, I suggest we are condoning and supporting not only Stonewall, but the very abhorrent and immoral lifestyle they represent. What about the moral scales of right and wrong? Are we going to be happy to leave them alone for another while, and pretend the problem is not that big? That is not a question for a nation, or even a street, it is a question for you and for me. It has become personal! Another question for you; who really are the intolerant extremists in our society?