And now from Rev. Clooney...

For anyone whose church attendance is determined solely by having a good looking minister, there is now a rival to Joel Osteen, George Clooney.
Don't know if you saw this, but the debonaire Mr. Clooney has taken to praying, and judging by the substance of this prayer, has likely been praying for longer than he's been on screen.
His prayer 'For our country' is a keeper, with application both in the U.S. and elsewhere, affected by something better than an America First theology, insisting that to kneel is the best posture and protest of all, exceeding the demands of flag and country regardless of where you live...

I pray for my country.
I pray that we can find more that unites us than divides us. 
I pray that our nation's leaders want to do the same.
I pray that young children like Tamir Rice (the 12 year old boy who was mistakenly shot and killed by police in November 2014) can feel safe in their own neighbourhood.
I pray for all of our children.
I pray for our police and our first responders.
I pray for our men and women of the armed forces.
I pray that dissent will always be protected in this great country.
I pray for a more perfect union.
And when I pray, I kneel.

Tamir Rice: police release video of 12-year-old's fatal shooting – video from the Guardian.com

Is homosexuality a sin (2)?

from believeoutloud.com

Having responded to this question earlier (see https://www.linkedin.com/homosexuality), I have to admit that my response of ‘no’ is an answer I slowly backed into.

Backing into truth is a frequent experience for me. Much wisdom comes by musing on events which persist in being re-visited … as though life demands our going through not just one but many conversions, just to remain in touch both with God and with the world swirling round us.

For example, to discover that Jesus is to be found among the poor regardless of what makes them poor, has been a major ‘backing into truth’ for me. Meeting with poor people repeatedly has gradually imprinted them as one of life’s great screen-savers, not only in my ongoing transformation, but in my understanding of Jesus as ‘Immanuel, God with us.’

The Apostle Peter had many instances of ‘backing into truth’, perhaps none more than when he had to defend himself after meeting with a group of Gentiles as recorded in Acts chapters 10 and 11.
In giving his defence to his bewildered fellow believers, the Bible records:
“As I began to speak,” Peter said, “the Holy Spirit fell on them, just as he fell on us at the beginning.  Then I thought of the Lord’s words when he said, ‘John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’ And since God gave these Gentiles the same gift he gave us when we believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I to stand in God’s way?” Acts 11:15-17 (See also Acts 15:7-11)

No doubt his fellow Jews would have been perplexed with Peter’s actions. It bordered on both infidelity to his Jewish faith and outright heresy. One can visualize his friends swarming Peter with their Bibles and concordances in hand.
They’d be referencing all those verses which say in say in black and white that only the descendants of Abraham are God’s chosen people, not for God’s sake those heathen Gentiles. They would have reminded Peter that even Jesus himself said that he had been ‘sent only to the lost sheep of Israel’ (Matthew 15:24), that he had earlier commanded his disciples to go only ‘to the lost sheep of Israel’ (Matthew 10:6).

So what was Peter doing parting ways with both the Bible and the earlier instructions of Jesus?

Note that Peter didn’t respond by bashing his brothers with bible verses. Not because there weren’t bible verses that didn’t apply, but in the realization that what God was doing now required everyone to revisit the Bible with a new pair of glasses. As Peter put it: ‘as I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell on them, just as he fell on us at the beginning. Who was I to stand in God’s way?’

There is no way we can equate as Christians today, the incredible hurdle Peter’s Jewish friends faced in accepting the Gentiles as among God’s chosen. Far greater than any hurdle we face in accepting LBGT believers as fellow Christians today!

So yes though I am hard pressed to point to bible verses that definitively say: ‘GAYS ARE IN', I have met many on whom ‘the Spirit has fallen.’ Like Peter I found myself asking ‘who am I to stand in God’s way?

Could it be that just as an insurmountable hurdle came down for the Gentiles to be counted among God’s own in Peter’s day, a similar hurdle is coming down for LGBT people in our day?
If so, God be praised!

Is homosexuality a sin?

Is homosexuality a sin? No.

I didn't always believe this to be true.

For the first twenty years after my 'born again' conversion, based on my reading of the New Testament and the prevailing teaching in the churches I attended, I believed homosexuality to be a sin, right up there with greed and self-righteousness.

I did have to acknowledge to the gay people I knew, who asked me why Evangelicals were so hard on LBGTQ people and so silent on the sins of greed and self-righteousness, that our talk and behaviour towards them was unloving, in contradiction to the love of God. They were having trouble reconciling the 'GOD HATES FAGS' placards they'd see Christians holding up at Gay Pride events, with the love of Jesus had for prostitutes, swindlers and tax collectors.

Jesus never spoke about homosexuality, whereas his indictments against greed and self-righteousness were relentless, as though religious pride and material greed are where the real evil resides.

The prevailing wisdom from evangelical churches has been: 'to love the sinner and hate the sin' which as Austen Hartke noted in a remarkable sermon on Reconciliation is like saying, “I love the you I think you should be, but I hate the you you are.”

So what changed me? And how could I articulate it to those within evangelical circles who see this as the great betrayal? It was like my own 'coming out' where I'd not only have to answer to my fellow evangelicals, but answer as well that great Christian, The Apostle Paul, who wrote that "those who ... practice homosexuality, or are thieves, or greedy people, or drunkards, or are abusive... —none of these will inherit the Kingdom of God." (1 Corinthians 6:9,10)
To disagree with the Apostle here, was more than a small whimper of dissension. I mean we are talking about the guy credited with writing nearly half of what constitutes the New Testament! What's an insurance agent like me doing taking on a saint whose writings will outlive by generations any word I write! It is quite plainly preposterous!

Why don't you judge for yourselves what is right? Luke 12:57

What helped was to realize there were other passages of Paul's writing which troubled me. They weren't the parts having to do with the efficacy of the Cross or the power of Christ's resurrection to rescue anyone who looked to God for help. They were the other parts, albeit few, such as Paul's discouraging women from either speaking or assuming leadership roles in the church. (see 1 Timothy 2:11 and 1 Corinthians 14:34,35)
If Paul was wrong about women, could he be wrong about gays as well?

Some people have speculated that Paul in condemning gays was condemning the practice of older men having sex with young male adolescents, which I'd agree is sinful. Any sexual relationship driven by aggression and not love on the part of one and resignation and passivity on the part of the other, is wrong regardless of who is involved. But if Paul is referring to consensual sex involving two people of the same gender where love and not coercion is the glue, I think Paul is wrong.

Surprisingly enough, one of the scriptures that had me re-thinking this issue was likewise written by Paul.
For you are all children of God through faith in Christ Jesus. And all who have been united with Christ in baptism have put on Christ, like putting on new clothes. There is no longer Jew or Gentile, slave or free, male and female. For you are all one in Christ Jesus. Galatians 3:27,28

Here is the Apostle, who in his other writings had reinforced a hierarchy where women were subservient to men and where slaves served their masters without complaint, throw that same hierarchy out the window, in this one amazing revelation.
'In Christ,' he wrote, 'there is no longer male nor female, slave nor free'... 'that putting on Christ was like putting on new clothes', where all the usual dividing lines and prejudices between male and female, slave and master, no longer applied.
Could this also apply to the line between 'gay and straight?"
I concluded it did.

So sometime after 1986 when the American Psychiatric Association removed homosexuality as a psychiatric disorder, and before 2005 when the Federal Government's Bill C-38 made gay marriage legal in Canada, I started believing that not only was homosexuality not a sin, but a gift from God to be celebrated. As though God has made us, whether gay or straight, the way we are.

What helped me alongside my scriptural wrestling were the gay Christians I knew. Not only was their faith genuine, I was overwhelmed with the courage it had taken many of them to come out, in many instances paying dearly for it. They were an inspiration given the ridicule they'd endure, especially those who remained committed to God despite the lack of welcome they'd get in many churches.

Two such examples are Austin Hartke and Cassidy Hall whose stories are accessible via the links below:
http://austenhartke.com/blog-1/2017/2/12/reconciling-a-sermon-on-matthew-521-37
https://17spaces.org/2017/09/10/dear-nashville-statement/

Also there is the story of a 'mega-evangelical' church in Nashville who decided to become an inclusive evangelical church. See http://time.com/3687368/gracepointe-church-nashville-marriage-equality/

My faith story

When people commend themselves, it doesn’t count for much. The important thing is for the Lord to commend them. 2 Corinthians 10:18

I wrote this faith bio in response to an inquiry from one of the members of the Global Pastors Network.
He (Simon Mawdsley) wrote:
As you know John, there are many, many saved thru the Cross born again followers of Jesus who are left wing. Here in the U.K. I would say that the majority of those who have truly turned to Jesus through repentance and faith are left wing socialist. However unlike yourself, they place much more importance upon what God's Word says, ALL of it, than any political persuasion. Also, unlike your good self, they know the Way of salvation, walk in it and tell others about it. Come on John. I'm happy to be proved wrong about you. If you're really saved, tell me how, what happened and what you believed. I want to know if you know the saving Gospel and if you've called upon the Saviour, as a sinner and pleaded God's forgiveness, accepted His Cross work for you and turned away from your old life (repentance) and followed Him. (Oops I've given you a bit of a clue there). Be honest. Tell me how u got saved & how I can be saved? I'm not joking or being sarcastic I really do want 2 hear where u stand

This is my response:

Born 1949

1967 - President of Rosedale United’s youth group, first exposure to inner city work

1968 - voted Rosedale United’s Man of the year for my contribution to church life

1969 - left the church, got involved in inner city youth work and head off to University

1971 - quit university to start a rock band, end up moving to California to live with girlfriend attending Stanford University, did the long haired, acid laced hippie thing

1973 - in an apple orchard just outside of Penticton, British Columbia, led by a young 7th day Adventist named Terry Boomer to accept Jesus

1974 - became part of a Jesus people community in North Philadelphia where I became chief cook and house keeper for a Jesus people house of 11 guys. Filled with the Holy Spirit in the middle of a very cold night in February and started speaking in tongues

1975 - moved home to Toronto, joined a charismatic church having upwards of 1500 young people, started writing musical choruses for the church

1977 - married 2 days before Christmas

1982 - the charismatic church my wife and I had met in, where both of us served as deacons imploded with its congregants scattered in many directions

1983 - Deb and I began attending a Christian and Missionary church, Bayview Glen Church.

1992 - for our kids' sake joined a church with more contemporary worship and youth activities.
It was also the year when I became involved in an inner city agency run by the United Church of Canada and was re-introduced to the dynamic of poor communities which provoked significant changes in what I understood the gospel to be. 
Read a lot by Christian writers such as Jim Wallis, John Howard Yoder, Thomas Merton, Simone Weil, Leonardo Boff, Tony Campolo, Dietrich Bonhoeffer and others about the social implications of the gospel. 
The two books that most influenced me during that time were Yoder’s ‘The Politics of Jesus’ and Bonhoeffer’s ‘The Cost of Discipleship’. Profoundly impacted as well by St. Francis of Assisi, particularly as portrayed in GK Chesterton’s biography of him. (see Chesterton - St. Francis)

1996 - the small groups pastor of Unionville Alliance Church, after spending 3 hours with me visiting my various street friends near my office downtown told me and subsequently our church community that my ‘small group was the homeless people I had befriended’ - a charge that has affected my ministry ever since.
In subsequent years, I have became increasingly involved in advocacy - speaking to various levels of government and to churches about the dire need for social housing in Toronto, as well as supports for street people struggling with mental illness and addiction. 
Since the people I advocated for were people I knew intimately and had prayed for, there was some strength to my appeal coming as it was not from a social worker, or social agency employee, but from a downtown business person.  This advocacy is central to what I understand Christ’s call on my life to be.
As someone involved in social advocacy, I have become close not only to other Christians in this work, but people outside the faith, notably Muslims and humanists, in appealing to various groups of political, social and economic influence alongside those who are poor. It was through this period that my 'inter-faith' conversations began and continue to this day.
Among the more dedicated and articulate social advocates I have met are LBGT Christians, who have convinced me that one can be both gay and Christian. Some are indeed "eunuchs for the kingdom’s sake", while others are in monogamous gay relationships.

2003 - was a founding member of a new church start-up (The Olive Branch) in North Markham, an affluent neighbourhood just north of Toronto and lead the community outreach program called 'Branch Out'.  I was also the back-up preacher to the Lead Pastor. From the outset, I was known as the social justice Jesus guy, quite distinct from the regular preacher/pastor, a ministry and perspective he thoroughly supported.

2009/10 - after giving a sermon on ‘The Politics of Jesus’(see Sermon notes), was unofficially taken off the roster of back up preachers. 
That same year I was asked by a inner city Anglican Church (All Saints Community Church) to lead Sunday services 1 to 2 times per month in additional to leading a mid-week sing-along, where old hymns are sung alongside ‘Let it be’, ‘Knock, knock, knocking on heaven’s door’, ‘I can see clearly now’, ‘Lean on Me’ etc., to widen the circle of participants. We close with some scripture verses and prayer, typically lead by the more devout among us.

At present my wife attend an evangelical Anglican Church 20 minutes south of where we live. We have hosted a bi-weekly prayer/bible study group in our home since 2005.

We have 3 grown children, two of whom are married, the third being the closest thing I have known to a saint, he beginning his walk with Jesus in 2001. For more about Michael go to: SDG Imagery
We now have a grand-daughter who has us all amazed at how 'fearfully and wonderfully' each one of us is made.

Are only Christians saved?

Initially posted on Global Pastors LinkedIn Group

Are only Christians saved?
This topic has come up before and no doubt is one where not all Christians are agreed. 
The Bible doesn't say that only Christians will be saved. The term 'Christian' only appears 3 times in the Bible (Acts 11:26, Acts 26:28 and 1 Peter 4:16) and never in the context of delineating those who are saved.
The Bible does say that those who call upon the Lord will be saved (Romans 10:13), it says that those who feed the hungry (Matthew 25:31-46) and those who care as did the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:25-37) will be saved. 
It says that those born of the Spirit will be saved (John 3:3). It says that those who not only believe but do what the word says will be saved (James 2:24) and that not everyone who says 'Lord, Lord' will be saved (Matthew 7:21).
It says that there will be many sitting with Abraham in Christ's kingdom (Matthew 8:11) who we'll be surprised to see there. It even says God has concluded all humanity in unbelief that he might have mercy on us all (Romans 11:32)
All to say that God saves who He will save and as much as we want to draw the line on his behalf as to who is in and who is out, only He knows. (see John 21:21,22)

Some Jon Sobrino

One day an expert in religious law stood up to test Jesus by asking him this question: “Teacher, what should I do to inherit eternal life?”
Jesus replied, “What does the law of Moses say? How do you read it?”
The man answered, “‘You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, all your strength, and all your mind.’ And, ‘Love your neighbour as yourself.’”
“Right!” Jesus told him. “Do this and you will live!”
The man wanted to justify his actions, so he asked Jesus, “And who is my neighbour?”
Jesus replied with a story: “A Jewish man was traveling from Jerusalem down to Jericho, and he was attacked by bandits. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him up, and left him half dead beside the road.
“By chance a priest came along. But when he saw the man lying there, he crossed to the other side of the road and passed him by. A Temple assistant (Levite) walked over and looked at him lying there, but he also passed by on the other side.
“Then a despised Samaritan came along, and when he saw the man, he felt compassion (or 'was moved by pity') for him. Going over to him, the Samaritan soothed his wounds with olive oil and wine and bandaged them. Then he put the man on his own donkey and took him to an inn, where he took care of him. The next day he handed the innkeeper two silver coins, telling him, ‘Take care of this man. If his bill runs higher than this, I’ll pay you the next time I’m here.’
“Now which of these three would you say was a neighbour to the man who was attacked by bandits?” Jesus asked.
The man replied, “The one who showed him mercy.”
Then Jesus said, “Yes, now go and do the same.” Luke 10:25-37

The Samaritan is presented by Jesus as the consummate example of someone fulfilling the commandment of love of neighbour. But there is nothing in the account of the parable to suggest that the Samaritan succours the victim in order to fulfill a commandment, however lofty a one. Simply, he is 'moved to pity.'
We hear of Jesus that he heals people and sometimes manifests sorrow that those who have been healed have shown no gratitude. But in no wise does it appear that Jesus performs these acts of healing in order to receive gratitude. No he performs them because he is moved to pity.
Mercy is a basic attitude toward the suffering of another, whereby one reacts to eradicate that suffering for the sole reason that it exists, and in the conviction that, in this reaction to the ought-not-be of another's suffering, one's own being, without any possibility of subterfuge, hangs in the balance.
Because he is merciful - not a 'liberal' - Jesus prioritizes the healing of the person with the withered hand over the observance of the Sabbath.
Let mercy be reduced to sentiments or sheer works of mercy and anti-mercy will be tolerant enough. But let it be raised to the status of a principle and the Sabbath subordinated to the extirpation of suffering and anti-mercy will react. Tragically Jesus is sentenced to death for practicing mercy consistently and to the last. Mercy, then, is precisely the mercy that materializes in spite of and in opposition to anti-mercy.

For Jesus, mercy stands at the origin of the divine and the human. God is guided by that principle and human beings ought to be as well. All else is ancillary. Nor is this sheer speculative reconstruction, as is abundantly evident in the key passage of Matthew 25. Those who practice mercy - whatever the other dimensions of their human reality - have been saved, have arrived for good and all at the status of total human being. Judge and judged sit in the tribunal of mercy and mercy alone. The one thing that must be added is that the criterion applied by the Judge is not an arbitrary one. Even God, we have seen, reacts with mercy to the cry of the oppressed; therefore is the life of human beings decided in virtue of their response to that cry. 

The church...should reread the parable of the Good Samaritan with the same rapt attention and the same fear and trembling with which Jesus' hearers first heard it. The church should be and do many other things as well. But unless it is steeped - as a church at once Christian and human - in the mercy of the parable of the Good Samaritan, unless the church is the Good Samaritan before all else, all else will be irrelevant - even dangerous, should it succeed in passing for its fundamental principle.

It is the practice of mercy that places the church outside itself and in a very precise locus - the place where human suffering occurs, the cries where the cries of human beings resound. ("Were you there when they crucified my Lord?" sing the oppressed blacks of the United States, and their song is worth many a page of ecclesiology.) The place of the church is with the wounded one lying in the ditch along the roadside, whether or not this victim is to be found physically and geographically within intraecclesial space. The place of the church is with the other and with the most radical otherness of that other - his suffering - especially when that suffering is massive, cruel and unjust.

It is surely urgent that the Christian, the priest and the theologian for example, demand their legitimate freedom in the church - a freedom so circumscribed today. But it is even more urgent that they demand the freedom of millions of human beings who do not have so much as the freedom to survive their poverty, to live in the face of oppression or even to seek justice, be it so much as a simple investigation into the crimes of which they are the object.
When the church emerges from within itself, to set off down the road where the wounded lie, then this is when it genuinely de-centres itself and thereby comes to resemble Jesus in something absolutely fundamental: Jesus did not preach himself, but offered the poor the hope of the Reign of God, grasping his fellow human beings by the lapels, giving them a shake and urging them to the building of that Reign. 
In sum, It is the victim lying at the side of the road who de-centres the church and is transformed into the 'other' (and the radically other) in the eyes of the church. It is the re-action of mercy that verifies whether the church has de-centred itself, and to what extent it has done so.
 Jon Sobrino, from 'The Principle of Mercy: Taking the Crucified People from the Cross'