Charlottesville, Nashville, and Calvary

Where to begin…

Charlottesville

The world knows of the American embarrassment that is the recent happenings in Charlottesville, Virginia. Neo-Nazis and white supremacists incited violence surrounding the profanely displayed statue of Confederate General and beater of freed slaves, Robert E. Lee.

Gen. Lee’s brutality should be condemned along with the then-institution of chattel slavery. However, certain southerners (and unfortunately, many southern Christians) have insisted on the statue remaining and continue to venerate Gen. Lee as a man of Virginia dedicated to the cause of states’ rights. But the question immediately arises: states’ rights to do what? Answer: enslave black Americans and run an economy based on this enslavement.

As an American History teacher at a classical prep school, I cannot stand to hear the faulty reading of history that venerates Gen. Lee as some sort of hero of the South and a defender against ‘Northern aggression.’

How do evangelicals respond in this moment in history? By issuing the Nashville Statement on Human Sexuality. A document defending traditional views of sexuality and marriage (traditional in the church, not in the history of the West).

Setting aside the content of the statement for a moment, what makes the penners of this document think that this would be an appropriate time for such a proclamation? Surely it cannot be a response to the events of Charlottesville; neither can it be due to a lackadaisical attitude toward said events (at least I would not accuse them of such evils).

So that brings up the obvious question: where is the evangelical statement on Charlottesville? Why is this not an issue of theological relevance, but sexuality is? It seems to be the case that based on a theo-political reading of the cross entails certain commitments and convictions. Perhaps one of them is traditional views on sexuality; but, even more so is the opposition to things like Neo-Nazism and white nationalism/white supremacy.

I grieve that we are no longer in a time where we can trust that the church is opposed to such things, but the sad truth is: here we are in a world where evil is called good and good evil.

Nashville

I mentioned on social media that ‘the Nashville statement is a disgrace to the message of the cross.’ Let me explain why. I’m sure you will come to see my position and the position of so many other evangelicals.

1. The Nashville statement ostracises evangelicals like me, who adopt a more progressive approach to sexuality for biblical reasons. The cross includes evangelicals like me.
2. The Nashville statement was published in too close of a proximity to the events of Charlottesville with no acknowledgement of the tragic death of Heather Heyer, who died defending that for which evangelicals stand firm and that for which the cross happened–the eradication of evil by its extinguishment in Jesus Christ on the cross.
3. The message of the cross is fundamentally one of inclusion and not one of exclusion. Some will be excluded, yes, but fundamentally, the rule of the cross is this: all of humanity is somehow mystically included in the effects of Jesus’ atonement. God pursues humanity to the uttermost in Jesus’ death on the cross. Likewise, the evangelical church should pursue those who do not conform to their understanding of sexuality to the uttermost. This does not mean drawing a line in the sand. The line in the sand has already been drawn, and those who judge gay individuals too quickly/harshly will be judged in the same manner by our Lord.

So, if you are debating signing the Nashville statement, consider this: would Jesus sign such a statement? Would he have written a similar statement about tax collectors and prostitutes? Or would he have approached them in the ambiguity that is love with the specificity that is the cross?