By now, you’ve heard of what happened with Eugene Peterson, the 84 year old pastor/professor/writer when asked what he believed about gay marriage and gay relationships. I don’t want to get into all of the details of that, give links, and make arguments that have already been made. But, I do want to focus in on something I haven’t seen many talk about. His statement affirming gay marriage came out on Wednesday in an article. On Thursday, he released a retraction. He recanted. And, there are three statements that he made here that are particularly worth exploring and should consider:
- “To clarify, I affirm a biblical view of marriage: one man to one woman. I affirm a biblical view of everything.” Here, Peterson submits his statement released on Wednesday, which was based on his personal views of gay people and their spirituality, to the authority of the Word of God – on everything. He moved back away from his own view formed by sentiment, observation, and his own love for gay people and desire to help them, and back to what he recognized as God’s will as revealed in the Bible for human relationships. “A biblical view of marriage: one man to one woman.” I’ve seen conservative evangelicals criticize this as not genuine or a strong enough statement. I’ve seen people say that this is insufficient. But, it seems to be the strongest of statements possible. He submits his will and thinking to the Bible. On everything. He lets us work out the rest of what that means.
- “When put on the spot by this particular interviewer, I said yes in the moment. But on further reflection and prayer, I would like to retract that.” Some have said that Peterson has had this view for some time and that he clearly articulated a view affirming gay marriage. Then, they attacked him for this statement and said it wasn’t genuine. But, let’s back up. He admits to saying something that he now says isn’t true. He perhaps shouldn’t have blamed the interviewer and his question here, I admit. He is responsible for his own statement. But … he says that he thought it through and wants to retract. When do we see this? He rethought his position and changed his mind.
- “We are saved by faith through grace that operates independent of our resolve or our good behavior. It operates by the hand of a loving God who desires for us to live in grace and truth and who does not tire of turning us toward both grace and truth.” In context, he is speaking this about gay people and is saying they can be saved apart from their works because of God’s grace. Now, let’s turn that view toward Peterson himself. I read some people who said that because Peterson was in error here on Wednesday, that his soul was in danger of hell because he affirmed what God rejects. Then, he repented, but there were still concerns about whether he was clear enough. But, let’s just consider the man for a moment and not the arguments. He looks to a God who saves us by faith through grace operating independent of our resolve or good behavior, desiring us to live in grace and truth, and who does not tire of turning us toward both grace and truth. That is important. In other words, Peterson isn’t putting his faith in his right beliefs at every moment. Rather, he puts his faith in God who saves even when Eugene errs and never tires of turning us away from ourselves and back toward him. We are prone to err and wander. God never tires of coming after us and turning us around. This sounds like good news.
Peterson potentially demonstrates something rather remarkable here for a major Christian leader and scholar, in my opinion. Instead of defending his position, he rethinks and shows submission to God and His Word rather than the position he staked out initially. The focus here isn’t what makes sense to Peterson. It is what God has revealed. And, even though he was going off after what made sense to him for a time, this episode possibly jerked him back to God as the authority on this. I responded to a comment on Facebook with this observation …
You know what we possibly see here? It could be the deepest kind of repentance. In other words, he isn’t saying what “HE” believes. He is saying what God says and says that isn’t what he would want to do or what he thinks should happen on his own, but after reflecting further, he will affirm what the Bible says and God’s Way of marriage being one man – one woman. Maybe in the interview we got what Eugene, the man, thinks is fair based on his own understanding and observation. After reflecting and seeing his own words, he relents and says, “But, God …” and resubmits himself to Scripture and God’s character. I don’t know, but when do we ever see this? I hear what preachers think and believe. Rarely do we ever see the struggle. Rarely do we see a man like Peterson want to go one way, get started down the road, and then get jerked back by the Bible and Spirit of God and that all happen in front of us. People with the stature of Peterson always seem to be the authority – never the pilgrim. Why attack him? Perhaps this is his greatest lesson for us? You might want to go one way on your own, but when it comes to the God you love, you are arrested by the Spirit, you relent, you submit, you humble yourself, you reengage in that “long obedience.” Isn’t that the real story for all of us?
I don’t know Peterson’s heart. I can’t look inside his soul. And, it isn’t my place to justify him. That isn’t my point. But, when have we seen this? When have we seen a significant leader say, “I think this because it makes sense to me based on what I’ve observed …” and then after it is made public and he reflects on what he said, he says, “I retract my statement. I submit to God’s Word and God’s Way”? When do we see a man say “I was wrong” and it be because he prays and resubmits himself again to God’s Word? It happens in our churches every day. I rarely see it among leaders at this level. I’m not trying to be cynical. I just often see leaders associated more with positions than as those journeying with God and able to change course.
Here’s the thing: If we can’t err and retrace our steps and come back again to God – if we can’t repent of trusting in ourselves and resubmit to God’s authority – then what are we actually believing? What are we preaching? I’m not saying that Peterson is perfect and should be totally affirmed and “followed.” Obviously. But, no one should. No one’s beliefs or actions are perfect and without any kind of error. Only God and His Word is. We are all in process. We all err. We all fail. We all desperately need grace every moment of every day. But, when we stumble, can we then look to Christ? Will we? He calls out to us – each one of us no matter where we are.
Peterson is now retired. He is 84. He will no longer speak publicly or write. This was the last episode of a long life of service to God and His people and the world. Perhaps, this is his greatest lesson of all. He erred and then recanted. He resubmitted to the God who “does not tire of turning us toward both grace and truth.” It was messy and all unfortunate. But, in the end, he affirms God’s truth. That seems to be the very best way that any of us could leave the public stage. Perhaps God was holding him all along and didn’t abandon him because his beliefs were wrong. Maybe that is a lesson for how we should see all people, no matter their situation.
This will happen a lot more. But, how can we help people reconsider? How can we affirm God’s truth in a way that allows people to change and that demonstrates they are loved? Perhaps this was Peterson’s final lesson for us encapsulating a lifetime of journeying with God. Maybe this was the deepest kind of repentance – from his own way back to God’s way, even when it might not have been what made sense to him or what he would have chosen on his own. Maybe that’s where grace intervenes and saves us from ourselves apart from ourselves? Maybe.
The final chapter of Peterson’s story is perhaps that he never stopped being a sojourner with God. I’m glad.
“I affirm a biblical view of everything.” ~ Eugene Peterson
The firestorm that this has generated reaffirms to me a couple of things: 1. Our shoot our wounded Christian culture is far too quick to attack ANY statement that seems the least bit off from our personal convictions, without taking into account the entire body of work of the commenter. Peterson has been writing and preaching about Jesus for a long time, perhaps before condemning him we should consider all he has said before. 2. The desire to be first in line at saying “Farewell…” in the vein of JohnPiper has superseded a desire to extend grace and to have… Read more »
It is not “our personal convictions,” sir. It is what God’s Word has to say about homosexuality. And His Word does not make allowances for “opinion,” or “cultural changes.” The Word says homosexuality is an ABOMINATION to God.
Ellen, pride is the greater sin – yes, even greater than homosexuality. Bear that in mind.
Btw, that is not (just) my personal conviction. It is the Word of God; one example Proverbs 6:16-19.
The fact that we respond by attacking seems to me a problem in the first place. Gal 6:1 tells us we are to restore one who has been caught in a trespass “in a spirit of gentleness”. 2 Tim 2:24-25 tells us we are to “correct with gentleness”. If we’re responding by attacking, aren’t we *not* acting in a spirit of gentleness?
“I don’t know Peterson’s heart.”
Thank you, Alan. Finally….someone in Southern Baptist life who does not claim to know someone else’s heart. Maybe it’s just a pet peeve of mine, but every time I hear a leader, no matter which side they may take in any debate or discussion, make the statement, “I know this person’s heart,” it makes me cringe.
Only God knows the hearts of men.
Rick, all that I can ever do is deal with someone’s words and actions. I can’t judge motives or hidden intentions, nor am I allowed to. I try to be consistent in following that rule, though I do sometimes fail.
This is to Burwell; I am well aware of what the Bible has to say about PRIDE. But I am equally as well aware of what it has to say about HOMOSEXUALITY. Another good verse: “Be not conformed to the world, but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind….”
I hope he’s really right about this. There’s enough other evidence in his life and statements to make any seasoned Christian wary of its truth. And if this IS due to senility as some have posited, then nobody should be taking ANYTHING he has to say about the Church with any air of authority, especially when he changes his mind in a week so drastically – and quite possibly conveniently.
Maybe the reaction caused him to rethink and adjust himself back to Scripture and 2000 years of Christian history? Why doubt when someone says they affirm Scripture and then explain what that means? He’s done. He’s retired. I see no purpose in doubting his statement on Thursday. And, maybe he really did pray and think and retract? Why would we find that hard to believe? This is my point. We see a man who says that he might choose one way if he’s thinking about it from a human perspective, but he recognizes that God’s Word says otherwise, so he… Read more »
He’s a retired preacher who still wields a lot of clout in the Christian community – as is evident by the ferociousness with which people have come out either in accusation or defense of him in the past few days. I wouldn’t give him a pass for being “retired” when he’s still writing and selling books, and when he’s still making public statements (I know he said he’s done making statements like this, but then again, he said he’d marry two homosexuals one day, then retracted it the next after “thinking about it,” which he obviously has never done before,… Read more »
Okay. Your position is duly noted. I tend to rejoice when the right things are said and people change course. It isn’t my job to give passes or deny passes. I clearly disagreed with what was released on Wednesday. On Thursday, he retracted and affirmed Scripture. I’ll let God judge his heart. As for me, I’m glad that his public life didn’t end Wednesday. I’m glad that wasn’t the last word. Thursday was better as he affirmed his submission to Scripture.
“His retraction was based on one day’s worth of insight.” Not necessarily. The interviewer said in his response to Peterson’s turnaround that he conducted the interview on July 6, about a week before publication. So it could have been a fairly lengthy time of prayer and reflection.
There are some things that do not require “prayer and reflection,” because God’s word is plain on the subject. Homosexuality is one of those. God has already spoken plainly. NO REFLECTION required.
Cool. Consider his books unburned now. 🙂
🙂
So the reporter/interviewer has stated the question was asked in response to reports he received that Peterson in private conservations had changed his views on same sex marriage. I was wondering why the question was even proffered so I appreciate that information from the interviewer. The reporter also stated the interview was not published for over a week and there was no request to change or clarify his remarks until the public backlash. The reporter also showed a link where Peterson was citing a 2014 article by Gerald Schlabach on What is Gay Marriage Now, A Case for Same Sex… Read more »
Nice
Should we cancel the pitchforks and torches as well?
I deleted them from my Amazon cart.
To be honest, I didn’t like the Message before Peterson’s interview. But having said that, I do rejoice at his course correction. I don’t buy the excuse of it being an on the spot interview based on his anecdote about the staff member who was openly out of the closet. Further, if you read the key passages in the NT that deal with this subject in Peterson’s paraphrase it is obvious that he watered them down. I would suspect that he has been compromising in this area for a while. I hope amd trust that his resent recanation is his… Read more »
One such passage from The Message:
Romans 1:26-27 Worse followed. Refusing to know God, they soon didn’t know how to be human either—women didn’t know how to be women, men didn’t know how to be men. Sexually confused, they abused and defiled one another, women with women, men with men—all lust, no love. And then they paid for it, oh, how they paid for it—emptied of God and love, godless and loveless wretches.
Yeah that sounds really watered down. (Where’s my sarcasm font)
It certainly was watered down, because it changes the sin to sex without love, which echoes modern culture.
Yeah, John – modern culture …. and Presbyterian USA church
It doesn’t say they had sex without love and that was the issue. That’s a gross oversimplification of his wording.
“all lust, no love” oh I got his wording right
And NOW it has occurred in Alabama in the Southern Baptist Convention, no less. Samford University in Birmingham has elected to lose $3,000,000 in monies from the Alabama Baptist Convention in order to formally recognize an organization that will promote LGBTQ’s. So lest we SB’s get too pious, it is happening among us, too.
You said, “…in order to formally recognize an organization that will promote LGBTQ’s.”
The facts are in this headline: “Samford forfeits Baptist funds but pulls plug on student gay-straight alliance”
You may be correct down the road at some point but you are incorrect now. Let’s get this straight.
No sir, you are mistaken. My headline says “Samford to withdraw from state funding channel.” This group were told that they could meet and talk anywhere, anytime; they have 1st Amendment on Samford Campus. But what they were REALLY after was official recognition.
Ellen, you don’t have your facts right. Reread what you wrote.
Strider. 😉
Right, William Thornton. In the past, Andrew Westmoreland, President of Samford, has come the the State Convention meeting and said Samford was not taking the money and ALSBOM could divide it with the other institutions who needed it more. Upon that announcement, the Messengers cheered. In addition. Dr. Westmoreland has taken strong stands regarding sexuality. It is highly doubtful he has changed his biblical moorings, in my opinion. It seems that Southern Baptists tend to seek vigilante justice rather than to go to the trouble of seeking out the facts. Facts just get in the way for Southern Baptists at… Read more »
Did they formally recognize that organization? I was told they didn’t. Do you have a link for that?
No the Alabama State Baptist Convention did not formally recognize the group; and THAT was what they wanted so LBGTQ’s could wear that recognition as a badge WE HAVE KNOCKED DOWN THE LAST STRONGHOLD. They already have taken United Methodist, Presbyterian USA, etc. The SBC is the last hold out. If you can find the “Alabama Baptist” on line, you can read the article. “AB” is our state Baptist newspaper.
According to the article at Baptist News, the group was approved by the student senate and faculty but had not been approved by the trustees. But this is probably not the end of it: “Westmoreland said the goals of Samford Together “are truly worthy,” and he hopes after the start of the fall semester to meet with students and faculty about a fresh start for a similar group without the “ambiguity, confusion and rancor” of the current conversation.”
https://baptistnews.com/article/samford-forfeits-baptist-funds-pulls-plug-student-gay-straight-alliance/#.WWwsk4TyvIU
This is in reply to William Thornton. There was conveniently no REPLY after his remarks. Just what fact did I have wrong, William?
Here’s the link to the Alabama Baptist article:
http://www.thealabamabaptist.org/samford-to-withdraw-from-state-convention-funding-channel/
Ellen,
I read the article. I do not believe that is how it happened. Samford denied the funds and THEN denied recognition of the group.
Ellen, here, again, is what Dr. Westmoreland said: “But even before being notified by convention officials that there could be financial consequences if the group was officially recognized by Samford, Westmoreland confirmed he had determined not to seek formal recognition of the proposed student organization by trustees. Instead his plan was to work to address topics related to human sexuality and “other important issues at the intersection of Christian understanding and cultural reality.” “’I will involve (the students requesting official recognition for Samford Together) and others across campus in taking essential steps to create new and ongoing opportunities for robustly… Read more »
Also on that subject–it is interesting to see Samford present their withdrawal from receiving CP funding as a positive for Alabama Baptists and CP overall. Basically asserting that they are making more money available for “the valuable ministries that are dependent upon funds allocated through the Alabama Baptist Convention’s annual budget.”
Right, Doug Hibbard.
Let’s get this straight….
Thanks William, that’s classic!
Strider! What news from the north?
Wow
I knew little about Peterson until this issue appeared. Eugene Peterson reminds me of someone who is right on the edge of biblical evangelicalism, and occasionally takes a step on one side, then the other. Same-sex marriage is such an easy, simple issue for a Christian. You either take the Bible for what it says about morality and homosexuality, or you directly go against it. Kind of like a mathematician being asked what is two plus two. How hard is that to get wrong? Or, like a Bible-believing Christian being asked if Jesus is the only way to Heaven (John… Read more »
Another article at Baptist News implies that Eugene Peterson’s retraction may have been pressure-based. When I first read this article it was titled “LifeWay accepts Eugene Peterson’s retraction,” but the title has since been revised.
https://baptistnews.com/article/lifeway-accepts-eugene-petersons-retraction/#.WWwuNYTyvIV
This article references statements by Russell Moore, Owen Strachan and Denny Burk, among others.
Robert, Interesting article. For me the take away was the differences many in the USA define pastor as a person over a certain set of people… who… are “MEMBERS” of a local congregation. I am not sure if I would define it that way or if scripture does. Unlike the SBC church in the USA I pastor a congregation of 300 where the membership is at 143. Everyone who comes to the church I see as sheep I am responsible for. I do not cater to those in membership differently than I do those not members. To be clear, those… Read more »
I read yesterday that T.D. Jakes seems to have granted liberties toward the gay/lesbian lifestyle that are contrary to Scripture. I tend to think that as social pressures continue many among us will give acceptance to same-sex marriage along with other social constructs of behavior that are alien to biblical faith.
I think the wheat is being separated from the chaff – a pastor/theologian/professor etc… position on this issue will help people clearly define who truly affirms the word of God as actually being the Word of of God – and therefore not subject to the winds of cultural whim….if one cannot absolutely affirm and stand by such a clear and unequivocal teaching of scripture as this one – then its an indicator of something people need to be reminded of – that being: false prophets do exist and they must be identified and marginalized within evangelicalism.
Same-sex marriage, homosexual issues, and their cultural acceptance, have a way of revealing the hidden liberals among us.
“The same-sex marriage issue will act like a truth serum, dividing true Evangelicals from the faux Evangelicals who seek to travel under the Evangelical banner while denying the biblical faith of their Evangelical forefathers.” -Dr. Richard Land; 2014.
David R. Brumbelow
David, I wish I had read your comment before posting above….I agree absolutely with Dr. Land’s statement you cited. That is exactly what I was trying to say.
“I’ve helped several families accept their children as gay. And, uh, they are devastated at first and then with just careful, prayerful conversation, they’ve finally accepted that this is not a bad thing, that this can be a good thing. This can be a flourishing thing.” -Eugene Peterson; 2014. He references an article “in the Christian Century right now” that he calls “brilliant” and “masterful.” What was the article Peterson lauded and recommended? It was titled, “What is marriage now? A Pauline case for same-sex marriage” by Gerald Schlabach. The above from the article: http://religionnews.com/2017/07/13/eugene-peterson-had-this-to-say-about-same-sex-issues-in-2014/ Apparently, his previous statement on… Read more »
Alan, I deeply appreciate the spirit of your article. Your intention to grant a benefit of doubt and acceptance of Peterson’s apparent course reversal is admirable. I hold not ill will against Peterson – I am not “mad” at him – I am saddened to say that He, to me, is simply another domino to fall prey to the temptation to follow the culture rather than stick to the Scripture. I do, however, doubt the sincerity of his retraction based evidence over the years (including the watering down of homosexuality in his bible paraphrase The Message) that shows him “trending”… Read more »
Tarheel, Thanks for reading what I’m saying. And, I get the rest of your point. My purpose in writing was simply to say that yes, perhaps he has been drifting for some time (it seems so). Maybe this episode snapped him back? Maybe this was a confrontation? Maybe God was at work? I’m less quick to judge the sincerity of someone’s statement when they say, “I retract” and then they affirm a biblical view – especially with him retiring. But, my purpose in the post was simply to talk about how change might work when one recognizes that their own… Read more »
Yeah, I hear ya. I guess I would be more likely to assume sincerity if he had in his retraction admitted that he had in fact for years “flirted” with an anti biblical stance and after that flirtation is now back on the right side of the bible….. His retraction states the biblical position yes – but in it he also portrays himself as one who “spoke off the cuff” and did not mean it come out the way it did and was essentially a gaffe. He says, after reflection he wanted to clarify….when it seemed that he spoke what… Read more »
I have doubts, based on what I have read, about Petersen and his theology.
But Alan is right. Mercy triumphs over judgment. Let’s let the burning at the stake be a last resort, not a first response.
I have never really used The Message that much. I don’t feel the need to rush to Peterson’s defense, or to condemn him. His unorthodox views should be condemned. We should be willing to recognize that Christians with beliefs outside the traditional biblical approach to which the SBC and most evangelicals adhere still produce worthy things and say worthy things. The question is whether we can affirm their good works, but still decry their unfaithfulness. That applies in the academic realm all the time. But we need to be careful. In some instances, affirming the works can be taken as… Read more »
How does one “slip” into the liberal, worldly view of homosexuality? Either you believe the Bible or you don’t.
I also read the statement about Samford. I think the correct summary is Samford has rejected the $3M in Alabama Convention gifts, but at the same time decided NOT to recognize the sexuality group on campus. But look at the signs. The students and the faculty voted to give the group recognition. It’s a matter of time, folks. This does not bode well for Beeson. I would not put my money on it 20 years from now. Dr. George and others there have kept the ship aright. But the hand writing is on the wall. It’s just a matter of… Read more »
Yep.
The faculty and students voting to affirm…the trustees walking away from the state convention (perhaps the reason the trustees did not officially recognize??)
Yep, just a matter of time.
Another reason why state conventions, IMO – should not fund state schools unless they also own them and appoint all their trustees.
I’d like to see Alabama designate this $3m to the SBC in furtherance of moving toward a 50/50 split.
(around 50/50 is my preference for all state conventions split with the SBC – but, relax William, I am not shaming anyone! 😉 )
There’s a lot more to the story than many of you know. Demonizing Samford outright is missing the mark. There were other factors at work that makes this more complicated than the old type of Baylor story. But, hey, the narrative seems set so let’s not let other factors get in the way of the “narrative.”
The fact that a 195 year old Baptist institution would CONSIDER a lgbtq xyz group is enough said. Either one believes the Bible or they are being “conformed to the world” in this matter.
Louis,
It may be a “matter of time.” That has been the case with several institutions in the past and will be so in the future. However, I think that during Westmoreland’s tenure, he will lead the institution to stand on biblical principles regarding homosexuality and other issues of human sexuality.
CB:
I like Dr. Westmoreland a lot, and if anyone in formerly Baptist college life can stay strong, it will be Dr. Westmoreland.
Unfortunately, for the mid to long term, I am pessimistic.
I thought Dr. Mohler’s piece on this today was remarkably astute… “Consider these lessons from Eugene Peterson’s ordeal. First, there is nowhere to hide. Every pastor, every Christian leader, every author — even every believer — will have to answer the question. The question cannot simply be about same-sex marriage. The question is about whether or not the believer is willing to declare and defend God’s revealed plan for human sexuality and gender as clearly revealed in the Bible. Second, you had better have your answer ready. Evasive, wandering, and inconclusive answers will be seen for what they are. Those… Read more »
I’m glad Samford did not recognize that group.
But that the students and faculty wanted to is a sad commentary on those majorities.
Do they not recognize the infallible Word of God there?
Are they sitting on judgment over it?
Unless God intervenes, the days will get even darker in the USA and do so rather quickly s this country continues to throw off any allegiance the culture has to its Creator.
Doctrine matters.
parsonsmike, Many of the students and faculty at Samford do recognize the “infallible Word of God.” Andy Westmoreland is a conservative Christian, a very straight laced guy in all honesty. However, his problem was when he came to Samford and still is that age old monster; Faculty tenure. In the past when liberal faculty were not only hired at Samford, but aggressively enlisted, those faculty gained tenure. It is all but impossible to fire a tenured faculty member. Dr. Westmoreland is a conservative, Bible believing university president who deals with a majority of liberal faculty members every day. His journey… Read more »
My prayers go out to Dr. Westmoreland and the people at Samford.
Thank you for this, CB. That is how I understand the situation at Samford as well. And, there are a lot of strong trustees there too. We should not “write off” Samford as though its destiny was certain. I agree. Thanks for these comments.
Mike: When I was at Samford (in the law school) 30+ years ago, the undergrad Religion department had its share of neoorthodox profs – like most Baptist colleges. They had some faithful, as well. The thinking was that Beeson would be established as moderate alternative to the SBC seminaries, which were becoming more conservative. But, whether intended or not, they got Dr. George. And Beeson became a much better place than it would have been. But they still had problems. I love Samford and would highly recommend it, but my love for it doesn’t cause me to go so far… Read more »