|
"Take
Heed" Ministries
|
|
Cecil Andrews, PO BOX 13, Ballynahinch, BT24 8AL, Northern Ireland. Telephone/Fax 028 9756 5511. E-MAIL - takeheed@aol.com WEBSITE - http://www.takeheed.net |
December 2008
"Be not afraid or dismayed by reason of this great multitude for the battle is not yours but God's" (2nd Chronicles 20v15)
When commenting on the parable of the householder
and his vineyard (Matthew
Your servant for Christ
CECIL ANDREWS
Pages 2-11: ‘The Rock’ of Christ’s Church. Pages 12-16: No ‘straight talk’ from Cliff Richard. Enclosure
for all:
‘The Rock’ of Christ’s Church
In June of this year I spoke over
a weekend on a number of topics given to me by a local church. The topics all
related to Roman Catholicism and one of the subjects allocated was ‘The
Papacy’. In the course of my preparations for that particular talk one of
the important issues that needed to be addressed was the Roman Catholic claim
that the Apostle Peter is ‘the rock of Christ’s Church’. There is a
saying that goes something like this ‘when a text is taken out of context
it becomes a pretext’. Basically this means that if a verse of
scripture is ‘wrenched free’ from the verses surrounding it then it can be used
as the basis of false teaching. Keeping that saying in mind I want first to
quote the relevant verses from Matthew 16 in the course of which
13 When
Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples,
saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?
14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias;
and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets. 15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? 16 And Simon Peter answered and said,
Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. 17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou,
Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it
unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. 18 And I say also unto thee, That thou
art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of
hell shall not prevail against it. 19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind
on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt
loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. 20 Then charged he his disciples that
they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ. 21 From that time forth began Jesus to shew
unto his disciples, how that he must go unto
You will note that in these
11 verses I have highlighted and underlined what for
‘When was St Peter made Pope or head of the
Church?’ and the answer given - ‘Chiefly
when Christ said to him “Thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build my
church and I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Feed my
lambs, feed my sheep” – Matthew 16: John 21’.
Let me quickly deal with the ‘giving of the keys of the kingdom of
heaven’ and the command to ‘feed my lambs, feed my sheep’.
The giving of these roles and responsibilities within the church were not
restricted solely to Peter. ‘The keys’ must not be divorced from what
follows namely the subject of ‘binding’ and loosing’. We learn
from Matthew 18:15-18 that these issues deal with the matter of sin in
the life of a professing believer. In those verses we read –
15 Moreover
if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between
thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.
16 But if he will not hear thee,
then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three
witnesses every word may be established. 17 And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto
the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let
him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican. 18 Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever
ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose
on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
Pastor John MacArthur in his Study Bible makes
these comments on ‘the
keys’ of Matthew 16:19
‘These [the keys] represent
authority and here Christ gives Peter authority to declare what was bound or
loosed in heaven. This echoed the promise of John
Clearly this authority [‘keys’] within the church resides with the ‘ruling elders’ and
was not the sole prerogative of Peter who wrote in 1st Peter 5:1
“The elders who are among you I exhort, who am also an elder”- Peter viewed
himself as merely being a fellow-elder, on a par with local church elders and
not superior to them.
Moving on then, is Peter the
only one able to ‘feed my lambs, feed my sheep’ as quoted in Dr
Butler’s catechism? Well, if I continue on from the quote from 1st
Peter 5:1 Peter goes on to write these instructions to the elders in verse
2 “Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight of it”. This
echoes very much the parting words of the Apostle Paul to the elders at
The ‘keys’, the ‘binding’,
the ‘loosing’ and the ‘feeding’ of God’s sheep were not roles and
responsibilities given solely and exclusively to Peter [and to his supposed papal successors] but according to God’s Word are roles and responsibilities given to and
exercised by local elders in local churches.
Dr Butler’s catechism that I
quoted was the 1944 edition – have things changed in more recent times in
‘The Lord made Simon alone, whom he named Peter the “rock” of his Church. He gave him the keys of his Church and instituted him shepherd of the whole flock. The office of binding and loosing which was given to Peter was also assigned to the college of apostles united to its head [This ‘head’ is not Christ but the Pope for Vatican 2: Volume 2 states in paragraph 22 of Lumen Gentium on page 375 “The college or body of bishops has for all that no authority unless united with the Roman Pontiff, Peter’s successor, as its head”]. This pastoral office of Peter and the other apostles belongs to the Church’s very foundation and is continued by the bishops under the primacy of the Pope’.
Paragraph
936 of the catechism
reinforces these claims by
‘The Lord made St Peter the visible foundation of his church. He entrusted the keys of the church to Him. The bishop of the Church of Rome, successor to St Peter, is head of the college of bishops, the Vicar of Christ and Pastor of the universal Church on earth’.
|
Verse |
Text |
Theme |
|
13 |
When Jesus
came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am? |
The Person of Christ |
|
14 |
And they said,
Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets. |
The Person of Christ |
|
15 |
He saith unto them, But whom say ye
that I am? |
The Person of Christ |
|
16 |
And Simon
Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the
Son of the living God. |
The Person of Christ |
|
17 |
And Jesus
answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona:
for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father
which is in heaven. |
The Person of Christ (Divinely revealed) |
|
18 |
And I say also
unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church;
and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it |
The Foundation upon which
Christ’s Church will be built |
|
19 |
And I will
give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and
whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be
loosed in heaven. |
Christ’s authority over
and delegation of a function to His Church |
|
20 |
Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was
Jesus the Christ. |
The Person of Christ |
These 8 verses begin and end with
the Saviour focussing upon His Person. Verses 14-17 that precede Peter’s
great declaration also focus upon The Person of Christ. In the context
it is clear that Christ is preparing His disciples to learn a great truth about
His Person – and what is that truth? - the truth
that upon “this rock”, that upon the divinely revealed truth that He is “the
Christ, the Son of the living God”, He will build His Church. And
because it will be His Church in verses 18-19 He demonstrates His authority
over it by entrusting ‘the keys’ to His disciples. What can we
understand by ‘the keys’? I believe we find the answer in Acts
“If thou put the brethren in
remembrance of these things [the threat posed by ‘seducing spirits and doctrines
of devils’] thou shalt be a good minister of
Jesus Christ, nourished up in the words of faith and of good doctrine…Till I
come give attendance to reading, to exhortation, to doctrine…Take Heed unto
thyself and unto the doctrine” [1st Timothy 4:6, 13 & 16]
“Thou therefore my son, be strong
in the grace that is in Christ Jesus. And the things that thou hast heard from
me among many witnesses the same commit thou to faithful men who shall be able
to teach others also” [2nd Timothy 2: 2]
“For a bishop (elder) must
be…Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught that he may be able by
sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the opposers”
[those who contradict sound doctrine] Titus 1:7 & 9]
“But speak thou the things which
become [are proper for/in keeping with] sound
doctrine” [Titus 2:1]
‘Sound doctrine’ and the
practice and disciplines that flow from it [such as dealing with sin within
the professing church as we read earlier] are ‘the keys’ that have
been entrusted by Christ to the ruling elders of His Church and that is why
Christ’s Church should be “the pillar and ground of the truth” [1st
Timothy 3:15]. To wrench 3 words “thou art Peter” from the context
of these 8 verses and build a doctrine of Papal rule as enshrined in the
Catholic Catechisms is a glaring example of turning ‘a text’ into ‘a
pretext’. But the identification of “the rock” upon which Christ is
building His Church does not end with verse 20. The foundational theme is
carried over into the next 3 verses, as we shall see from the following table –
Verse |
Text |
Theme |
|
21 |
From that time forth began Jesus
to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go
unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and
scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day. |
The Redemptive Work of Christ on The
Cross |
|
22 |
Then Peter took him, and began to
rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee |
The RedemptiveWork of
Christ on The
Cross rejected
by Peter |
|
23 |
But he turned, and said unto
Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that
be of men. |
The RedemptiveWork of
Christ on The
Cross is God’s
plan |
Foundational to the building of
His Church is not only ‘the Person’ of Christ but also ‘the
Redemptive Work of Christ on The Cross’. These 2 elements in the foundation
of The Church are inextricably linked as only ‘the Person’ of Christ
could satisfactorily perform ‘the Redemptive work of Christ on The Cross’. Only
‘the Christ, the Son of the living God’ could offer an acceptable,
redemptive ransom price to God His Father [Matthew 20: 28] by which rebel
sinners could be freed from sin’s curse, hell’s claims and the grave’s
constraint.
Only Christ’s shed blood could
propitiate His Holy Father’s just and righteous anger against sin [Romans 3:25]. Only Christ’s shed blood could
purchase redemption for those who were slaves to sin and its curse [1st
Peter 1:18-19]. Only Christ’s shed blood could obtain justification [the divine
verdict of ‘not guilty’] for guilty hell-deserving sinners [Romans 3:26 &
5:1]. Only Christ’s shed blood could effect reconciliation between an offended
Holy God and a straying sinful people who were by nature enemies of God [Romans 5:10].
So where is Peter in all this – is
he as Rome claims ‘the rock’ upon which Christ would build His Church?
The reference to Peter in the midst of verses 13-20 is incidental to the main ‘theme’
of these verses that centre and focus supremely upon ‘the Person of
Christ’ as the foundation of His own Church.
And in the next 3 verses the role
of Peter is to demonstrate how Satan would seek to blind men to the truth of
the ‘theme’ of these verses that, essential to the foundation of
Christ’s Church, is ‘Christ’s Redemptive work on The Cross’ – “the
god of this world hath blinded the minds of them who believe not” [2nd
Corinthians 4:4].
It is clear that Peter learnt
great lessons from this encounter for on the day of Pentecost, in the midst of
his sermon and referring to the person and death of Christ on the Cross, he
said that Christ was “approved of God” [‘The Christ’] and “delivered [to
‘The Cross’] by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God”. He
was unveiling ‘the rock’ upon which Christ would build His Church and on
that day alone about “three thousand souls” [Acts 2:41] were added to
Christ’s Church and these “lively [living]
stones” were laid upon the foundation of “Jesus Christ and him
crucified” [1st Corinthians 2:2].
The verses of Matthew 16:13-23 teach
a truth that Paul would later repeat when dealing with factionalism within the
Corinthian church. There were elements there that wanted to align themselves
with people like Paul, Apollos or Cephas [Peter] [1st
Corinthians 3:22] but earlier in verse 11 Paul declared “Other foundation
can no man lay than that is laid which is Jesus Christ”.
Paul, on another occasion and
referring to the Old Testament scriptures wrote, “whatsoever things were
written aforetime were written for our learning”
[Romans 15:4] and in a similar vein in 1st Corinthians 10:11 he
wrote, “they are written for our admonition”. Can we learn anything from
the Old Testament scriptures about the identity of “the rock” that will
be for our “learning” and “admonition”? I believe we most
certainly can.
When it comes to understanding
what the Scriptures teach there are a number of universally accepted principles
or laws. There is a principle known as ‘hermeneutics’ and there is also ‘the
law of first mention’.
Under the principle of
‘hermeneutics’ we should interpret any scripture in the light of other
scriptures. In other words, when considering a particular topic or theme we
must consider all the relevant verses in the scriptures that pertain to that
particular topic or theme in order to get the ‘full/complete picture’ to
enlighten our understanding.
Then in relation to ‘the law of
first mention’, when considering a subject, attitude or principle we should
look for its ‘first mention’ in the scriptures to see what meaning is revealed
there for that meaning will hold good throughout the rest of scripture. A
useful website that has an article on these principles/laws is http://bibleresources.bible.com/Bstudy.php
There also you can do a word or
passage search and it will list all relevant usages in the entire scriptures.
When it comes to the word ‘rock’ we find that the ‘first mention’ is
found in Exodus 17:6 that reads as follows –
“Behold, I will stand
before thee there upon the rock in Horeb; and
thou shalt smite the rock, and there shall
come water out of it, that the people may drink”.
Here we find people wandering in
the wilderness who were saved when a rock was ‘smitten’ and it brought forth
life-giving water. The Apostle Paul made reference to this incident in 1st
Corinthians 10:1&4 when he wrote, “our fathers…drank of that
spiritual ROCK that followed them and that ROCK was Christ”.
Pastor John MacArthur
in his bible study notes writes ‘The Jews had a legend that the actual rock
Moses struck followed them throughout their wilderness wanderings, providing
water for them. Paul says they have a Rock providing all they need but it is
Christ’. All that is needed for spiritual life is found in Christ and that
echoes the words of Christ Himself in John 7:37 “In that last day…Jesus
stood and cried…If any man thirst, let him come unto me and drink”.
This first mention of ‘rock’ In
Exodus 17:6 is a picture of Christ and His Redemptive work on The Cross. Isaiah
53 is known as a prophetic picture of the sufferings of Christ on The
Cross and there in verse 4 we read of Christ being “smitten of God”.
The weight of what Christ would have to do and endure to redeem His people
began to weigh heavily upon Him when he went to Gethsemane after the Last
Supper and there to His disciples Jesus said “All ye shall be offended
because of me this night; for it is written, I will smite the shepherd and the
sheep shall be scattered” [Mark 14:27 making reference to Zechariah
13:7]. We tend to think of the ‘rock’ that Moses smote as being a
very large boulder but in Vine’s Expository Dictionary we read this about the ‘rock’
of Exodus 17:6 - ‘means “rocky wall” or “cliff”. This is probably what
Moses struck in Exodus 17:6’ and by way of further illustration Vine goes
on to say ‘Thus God hid Moses in a cleft of the “rocky cliff” [Exodus
33:21-22]. My how the hymn writer captured it so well ‘Thou blest rock
of ages, I’m hiding in thee’. One final illustration of how ‘rock’ clearly
refers to a “rocky cliff” is found in 2nd Chronicles
25:11-12 “And Amaziah strengthened himself, and led
forth his people, and went to the Valley of salt and smote of the children of Seir ten thousand. And other ten thousand, left alive, did the
children of Judah carry away captive, and brought them unto the top of the rock
[‘rocky
cliff’] and cast them down from the top of the rock [‘rocky cliff’] and they were all broken in
pieces”. Keeping this picture of Christ being like the ‘rocky cliff’ that
was smitten by Moses to bring forth life-giving water the significance of the
location where Christ made His statement that “upon this rock I will build
my church” should not be overlooked. From verse 13 we learn that the
location was ‘Caesarea Philippi’ as
in the picture below.
This pictured ‘rocky cliff’ (I had the
privilege of visiting this location during a trip to Israel back in 1986) could
possibly have been the backdrop to the dialogue between the Lord and His
disciples. This ‘rocky cliff’ at Caesarea Philippi was the ‘home’ to
statues of Pagan gods like ‘Pan’ that were located in ‘clefts’ in its surface.
How all the more fitting then would it have been for the Saviour to declare, in
the face of this natural ‘shrine’ to Paganism, that upon ‘the rock’ of
His sinless Person and of Him being ‘smitten’ like a ‘rocky cliff’ of
old that brought forth life-giving water, He would build His Church. How truly
inspired Paul was when he wrote, “whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning” [Romans 15:4]. One
final thought in conclusion. Vine’s Expository Dictionary also has this to say
about ‘rock’ – ‘In some cases this noun is an epithet or meaningful name of
God’. There are many examples of this to be found in the Old Testament but
let me just cite two from the book of Psalms. In Psalm 40:1-4 we read “I waited patiently for THE LORD…
He brought me up also out of an horrible pit, out of the miry clay, and set my
feet upon a ROCK… he hath put a new song in my mouth even praise unto our GOD…
Blessed is that man who maketh THE LORD his trust” and then in Psalm 62:1-2 &
5-7 we read, “Truly my soul waiteth upon GOD…
He only is my ROCK… My soul, wait thou only upon GOD… He only is my ROCK… In
GOD is my salvation and my glory, the ROCK of my strength; my refuge is in
GOD”.
We learnt earlier that the 1994 Roman
Catholic Catechism declares in Paragraph 881 ‘The Lord
made Simon alone, whom he named Peter the “rock” of his Church’. God’s Word
teaches clearly that ‘the [foundational] rock’ of
Christ’s Church is not Peter but rather it is ‘The Person’ and Redemptive
Work on The Cross’ of Christ Himself. Are foundations important? Let me
finish with this in Luke 6:47-49 and I have highlighted and capitalised
just a few crucial words to emphasise the importance of the right ‘foundation’
–
47 Whosoever
cometh TO ME, and heareth MY SAYINGS,
and doeth them, I will shew you to whom he is like:
48 He is like a man which
built an house, and digged deep, and laid THE
FOUNDATION ON A ROCK: and when the flood arose, the stream beat vehemently
upon that house, and could not shake it: for it was FOUNDED UPON A ROCK.49 But he that heareth, and doeth
not, is like a man that without a foundation built an house upon the earth;
against which the stream did beat vehemently, and immediately it fell; and the
ruin of that house was great.
No
‘straight talk’ from Cliff Richard
For many years the issue of pop-legend and professing
Christian Cliff Richard’s ‘sexual orientation’ has been a matter of much
speculation. This article will not concern itself directly with that particular
issue but will rather focus on Cliff Richard’s views on one of today’s ‘hot’
topics namely the attitude of the Church towards those in same-sex
relationships. He has been making various public comments on this issue over
recent years. Going back to December 2005 the Irish Examiner in a short
article reported as follows
Christian pop legend
Cliff Richard has urged the Church to "learn to deal" with
homosexuality, and accept
the world is very different from when Jesus Christ was alive. The Saviour's Day
singer, 65, is saddened by conservative religious figures' attitude to gay
priests and has urged for tolerance of homosexuality. Speaking on the
Sky Report on British TV channel Sky News, Richard says: "I'm sad because
we have to learn to deal with everything. Everything has changed. The church
has got to come to terms with the fact that things have changed since even
Jesus has died. It's only a mere 2,000 years. I mean slavery was an in-thing at
one time. We were told to deal with it. And we've dealt with it. And we've got to deal with every aspect of life. There are gay people in this world. Some of them are
very talented. Some of them could be great priests."
I don’t quite follow
Cliff Richard’s line of thought when he first says ‘I mean slavery was an in-thing at one time. We
were told to deal with it. And we've dealt with it’ and
then goes on to say ‘we've got to deal with
every aspect of life. There
are gay people in this world. Some of them are very talented. Some of them
could be great priests’. No
true Christian would deny that ‘slavery’ was wrong and sinful and it was right
for someone like William Wilberforce, motivated by his Christian faith, to
campaign for its abolition. However, whilst ‘slavery’ was morally sinful, the ‘repudiation
of homosexuality’ that presumably Cliff Richard views as another ‘in-thing’ is
most certainly not in the light of the teaching God’s Word. True Christians
have no need ‘to deal’ with their
‘repudiation’ of this type of immoral behaviour except in the sense of
resolutely defending their opposition to it. Clearly Cliff Richard would like
to see true Christians setting aside their Biblical objections to this type of
immoral lifestyle and instead embracing it as being perfectly acceptable in the
light of his claim that ‘things have changed since even
Jesus has died’. In one sense he is probably
correct as we see the increasing wickedness and sinfulness that is engulfing
the world as prophesied
in passages such as 1st Timothy 4:1-2 and 2nd Timothy
3:1-5. How apt that Paul identified that in the
midst of the predicted coming immorality and wickedness those engaged in such
would have “a form of godliness but denying the power of it” [2nd
Timothy 3:5]. The “power” of
all true “godliness” is of course God the
HOLY Spirit, but clearly these prophesied immoral religious people will be and
are totally devoid of HIS presence and influence. The biblical command to true
Christians in relation to these false professing religious people is “from such turn away” but
in contrast Cliff Richard urges an embracing of such – is this a Holy Spirit
inspired response by Cliff Richard – not in the light of the clear teaching of
God’s inspired Word. Moving on to May 2008 the Times Online
reported
‘Sir Cliff Richard marked the 50th anniversary of his
start in showbusiness yesterday with the publication of a book containing his
top 50 Bible stories for children. The pop star, a devout Anglican, said that
the Church of England could overcome its present difficulties over gays and
declining attendance by letting go of the intellectual approach to faith and
learning to keep it simple…“The Church has to remain relevant ...
I often admire America, they have a spirituality that we seem to have
lost…“Maybe we have lost that simple touch…He was also critical of the Anglican
Church's approach to the debate over homosexuality, currently driving it to
schism. Sir Cliff, who is on the Church's evangelical wing, said it was not up
to the Church to judge homosexuals. He said: “It seems to me that the Church is
going to have to start seeing people as people and have God be the judge.” He
said he had many gay friends, some who had been in committed relationships for
50 years. The Church moved on from condoning slavery, and there had to be a way
for it to move on from its impasse over gays. The answer was to “just take away
the intellect” and let the heart deal with it, he said. Describing how he is
writing his autobiography, he said he had no regrets about not having children
of his own. His nieces, nephews and now
great-nieces and great-nephews kept him busy’
Once again
we see Cliff Richard resorting to his false analogy of comparing supposed
Christian acceptance in times past of slavery with current Christian
repudiation of homosexual behaviour. He then reportedly makes the astounding
statement that ‘it was not up to the church to judge homosexuals’. The Church
is very much commanded to judge sin within its professing ranks as these
scriptures show –
“Them that sin REBUKE
before all, that others also may fear” [1st Timothy 5:20]
“Preach the word; be diligent
in season, out of season; reprove, REBUKE…”[2nd Timothy 4:2] “Hymenaeus and Alexander whom I HAVE DELIEVERED UNTO SATAN
that they may learn not to blaspheme”
[1st Timothy 1:20] “It is reported
commonly that there is fornication among you…and ye are puffed up and have not
rather mourned, that he that hath done this deed MIGHT BE TAKEN AWAY FROM AMONG
YOU, For I…HAVE JUDGED already…in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ…to DELIVER
SUCH AN ONE UNTO SATAN for the destruction of the flesh that the spirit may be
saved in the day of the Lord Jesus…PURGE OUT therefore the old leaven” [1st
Corinthians 5:1-7].
Commenting
on 1st Timothy 1:20 John MacArthur
wrote ‘Paul put both men [Hymenaeus and Alexander] out of the church thus
ending their influence and removing them from the protection and insulation of
God’s people. They were no longer in the environment of God’s blessing but
under Satan’s control. …God hands some people over to Satan for judgment such
as King Saul and the sinning member of the Corinthian church (1st
Corinthians 5:1-5)’ and in his comments on these verses in 1st
Corinthians Pastor MacArthur writes ‘This sin was
so vile [incest] that even the church’s pagan
neighbours were doubtless scandalised by it. [No doubt
the same applies today in how Muslims view the lax supposed ‘Christian’
attitude towards homosexuality within much of the professing ‘church’] The
Corinthians had rationalised or minimised this sin (and were) so
arrogant and carnal as to excuse even that extreme wickedness…Paul had passed
judgment on the sinner (excommunication) and the church also needed
to’. Cliff Richard is totally wrong when he states ‘it is
not up to the church to judge homosexuals’. Before moving to another
report on this subject can I just mention that in the Times Online report they
referred to how Cliff was then ‘writing his autobiography’ and I’ll make
further comment on this shortly. Moving to his most recent pronouncements we
turn to the Times Online of 4 September 2008
Sir Cliff Richard has rarely courted the degree of controversy likely to be
provoked by a chapter in his new autobiography, in which he calls on the Church
to give its blessing to same-sex marriage. Sir Cliff…claims same-sex marriages
are a modern example of how the world has moved on. “I think the Church must
come round and see people as they are now,” he says. “Gone are the days when we assumed loving
relationships would be solely between men and women." The singer, who is a well-known pin-up for
the Christian faith, has long been dogged by speculation about his sexuality.
In his book he says he is sick of such rumours and defends homosexuality as a
way of life. “In the end, I believe, people are going to be judged for what
they are. It seems to me that commitment is the issue, and if anyone comes to
me and says: ’This is my partner - we are committed to each other,’ then I
don’t care what their sexuality is. I'm not going to judge - I’ll leave that to
God.” Sir Cliff, 67, also spoke …about
his friendship with the former Roman Catholic priest with whom he shares his
many homes. He describes Father John McElynn as his “companion”… “John and I
have over time struck up a close friendship. He has also become a companion,
which is great because I don’t like living alone, even now," he says. “People often make the mistake of thinking
that only marriage equals happiness. I may suddenly meet someone and feel
differently, but right now I am not sure marriage would enhance my happiness.
As for my sexuality, I am sick to death of the media’s speculation about it. “What business is it of anyone else’s what
any of us are as individuals? I don’t think my fans would care either way.”
Here Cliff Richard calls ‘on
the Church to give its blessing to same-sex marriage’. In a recent article [enclosed with this newsletter] ‘Welcome to the Church of Ireland: Diocese of Sodom and Gomorrah’ I dealt with the ‘What we Believe’ statement posted on the website
of the pro-gay group ‘Changing Attitude Ireland’.
Amongst portions I quoted was the following [underlined] and I gave God’s
answer to it with a biblical quotation that follows
‘Gay,
lesbian, bisexual and transgendered people are called
by God to express their sexuality in loving, faithful and committed
relationships’. “Therefore shall a man leave his father and his
mother and shall cleave unto his wife and they shall be one flesh. And they
were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed” [Genesis 2:24-25].
“Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled, but fornicators and
adulterers God will judge” [Hebrews 13:4].
It is clear from God’s Word that “marriage”
is only honourable in the sight of God when it is between a man and a woman and
that is the only setting in which sexual intimacy is viewed by God as being
pure and free from any sinful defilement. This report also made reference to
Cliff’s ‘companion’ - former Roman Catholic priest, John McElynn.
Again I am not going to speculate as to the full nature of their friendship but
it is interesting that on the ‘Changing Attitude Ireland’ website you
can see a posting of the comments made by Cliff Richard in the Times Online
report. In this report Cliff Richard asserted – “It seems to me that commitment is the issue, and if anyone comes to me and
says: ’This is my partner - we are committed to each other,’ then I don’t care
what their sexuality is. I'm not going to judge - I’ll leave that to God.” I’m not saying that people of the same-sex couldn’t or shouldn’t live
together simply as friends and for companionship but this is not what this
whole debate is about – it is about such relationships that include a sexual
dimension and Cliff’s view is “I'm not going to judge - I’ll leave that to
God.” That
flies in the face of the Lord’s command to His people that they are to be “the
salt of the earth” and that they are to “let your light so shine before
men” [Matthew 5: 13& 6]. True Christians are to be God’s agents in
helping to stem and hold back the tide of sinful immorality that would seek to
engulf the whole world and likewise they are to be beacons of spiritual light
in a world that ‘loves darkness rather than light because its
deed are evil’ [Jon 3:19]. True Christians are not to remain neutral
or silent when confronted by those who would seek to introduce and portray
sinful immoral concepts as being acceptable standards within the Church of the
Lord Jesus Christ. One really does have to wonder what ‘spirit’ is driving
Cliff Richard to come out with such publicly-expressed anti-biblical
sentiments. By way of conclusion I made reference earlier to the Times Online
report of May 2008 that mentioned that Cliff was ‘writing his
autobiography’. In this more recent report of 4th September 2008
we learn that the book is now printed and published. The Belfast Telegraph of
Saturday 20th September under a heading of ‘Gloria [Hunniford] and Cliff in a battle of the books’ wrote ‘Cliff’s book “My Life, My Way” is top of the literary charts and
with the launch of Gloria’s new book, “Always With You” she would love to
leapfrog over Cliff to the number one spot. “But having said that I want
Cliff’s new single ‘Thank You For a Lifetime’ to make it to number one and
fulfil his dream of a chart-topper for six successive decades” said Gloria’. Clearly the advance pubicity concerning Cliff’s autobiography such as that
reported in the Times Online article of 4th September stimulated
buying interest amongst the general public so much so that by 20th
September it was ‘top of the literary charts’. In an article published
by The Guardian on 23rd January 2006 on the subject of the spending
ability of ‘gay’ people we read –
‘The true power of the pink pound
was revealed today with the publication of a survey of gay men and women's
earnings suggesting they outstrip the straight salary by up to £10,000 a
year…Gay men in full-time jobs earn on average £34,200 a year, compared with
the national average for men of £24,800. Lesbians earn £6,000 more than the
national average for women, take two more holidays a year and spend £400 a
month on credit cards, according to the survey of 1,118 readers of Diva and Gay
Times by the marketing consultancy Out Now. Last year's government figures,
which put the number of gay people in the UK at more than 3 million - or 6% of
the population - has enabled companies to make clearer estimates of the
potential of the pink pound and led to huge interest among some of Britain's
biggest brands. Based on those numbers, gay men and women in the UK spent more
than £800m on CDs, even more - £843m - on DVDs and as much again on books and
magazines…Ian Johnson, managing director of Out Now, said: "Now that the
market is able to be accurately measured, more companies can develop marketing
plans to better position their brands to attract gay and lesbian customers’.
It
would be interesting to be able to gauge if the ‘pro-gay, pro-same-sex
marriage’ views expressed by Cliff Richard in the run-up to the publication of
his autobiography led to an increase in the number of ‘pink pounds’ being
spent on copies of his book than might otherwise have been expected but that is
something we could never be certain about. However I think it would be fair to
say that his comments would not have harmed the potential ‘pink pound’ market
and that is a market that any faithful Christian would not want to be actively
courting. The ‘Changing Attitude Ireland’
website, under a heading of ‘Prejudice is unacceptable’ stated ‘the church
should stop colluding with cultural repression and discrimination against
lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered people in
all parts of the world’. Cliff
Richard is doing his best to promote that unscriptural agenda and my response
to him is the same as the one posted in our earlier website article - “it is a shame even to speak of those things which
are done of them in secret” [Ephesians 5:12]. It would
appear that Cliff Richard has no Holy-Spirit-inspired “shame” when it comes to this issue and that perhaps
might explain why he does not come out with biblically based ‘straight talk’
when commenting on it.
The article ‘Welcome to the Church of Ireland:
Diocese of Sodom and Gomorrah’ that can be accessed on this link
http://www.takeheed.net/Current_Concerns/CofI_Sodom_Gomorrah.htm
was included as a photocopy enclosure.