Compromise Or Opportunity?

"Compromise Or Opportunity?"

1Corinthians 9:19-23

A minister acquaintance of mine found the following ad in a newspaper:

PREACHER.  We would like to find a clergy-person who will marry us in a cocktail lounge on February 14; Call after 4 p.m.  555-2620

There are some who would say that any minister who answered that little ad would be compromising their Christianity by holding a service of marriage in a bar.  Others might look at it as an opportunity to influence the couple for Christ and the church.

That may be a mild example.  Here is another one, out of my own experience, that has also to do with a wedding.

I was asked to do the marriage ceremony for a young couple, the groom being of the Sikh religion from India.  The bride-to-be had grown up in the church.  The family had been extremely active and giving people.  The hitch came when the couple decided to hold the service in the church sanctuary.  But, they didn't want the name of Jesus Christ to be mentioned, in deference to the groom and his family, since they did not believe in Jesus.

After much discussion with the couple, and with the senior Pastor I worked with, as well as time spent in prayer, I decided I could not compromise the blessings of our Lord Jesus Christ for their wedding service.  I went to the Elders and informed them of what I had decided, because there might be repercussions that might have to be dealt with.

As the Elders discussed the situation, they went a step further.  They decided that any service that was held in the church, that consciously left out Jesus Christ would not be allowed to take place.  So, now I had to tell the family: 1) I wouldn't do the ceremony and why; and, 2) that their wedding could not be held in the church without the mention of Jesus Christ.

This was equally complicated by the fact that the bride-to-be's parents had become very close friends of mine.  It was like I had given the face of that friendship a hard slap.  We came at the issue from two different angles.  I came from a position of Christian principle and theology.  The bride and her parents came from the position of relationship--that our friendship should over-ride principle and theology.

Was it an opportunity to influence that young man and his family for Christ, by bending my convictions and beliefs?  From my viewpoint, intentionally writing Jesus Christ out of the wedding service (which is a worship service when held in the sanctuary) would have been a stark compromise to my faith and to the sacred trust given to me when I was ordained as a minister of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

It was one of the hardest and most emotionally charged decisions I had made, up to that point in my ministry.

As was read earlier, Paul wrote:

When I am with the Jews, I live like a Jew to win Jews. They are ruled by the Law of Moses, and I am not. But I live by the Law to win them.

And when I am with people who are not ruled by the Law (of Moses) I forget about the Law to win them. Of course, I never really forget about the law of God. In fact, I am ruled by the law of Christ.

There's the rub, isn't it?  How do we become a part of the lives of others with depth of understanding and sympathy, and even become close friends, but not abandon our Christian beliefs and principles?  In a more general sense, as the old saying goes, how can we be in the world, but not of the world?  How do we influence without being influenced?

Paul wrote in his second letter to the Corinthian church:

 For we are like a sweet-smelling incense offered by Christ to God, which spreads among those who are being saved and those who are being lost.  (2:15)

There are certain aromas and odors that seem to be able to over-power all the other aromas that are floating around.  Like when you come into a house where bread is baking, the aroma becomes captivating.  It's all you can do until you ask when it will be done so it can be carved, buttered, and eaten.  There may be a hundred other minor household smells, but the bread will overpower them all.

Likewise a feedlot or pig farms have the same kind of pervasive influence.

Christians are called into every segment of society, but not to become like them.  Instead we are to be an over-powering aroma to each person, each group we come into contact with the love of Christ.  That is what Paul is saying here, isn't it?  Paul, and ourselves, have the freedom to conform to other kinds of people and beliefs, but only where basic Christian foundations are not compromised.  We will go this far, and no further.

"Yes," says Paul.  "I can become like a Jew, but I will not give into the ways of the law, because I am under the grace of Christ.  Yes, I can become like those who have never even heard of the law--in a sense become lawless; but I will not give in because I am under the law of Christ."

Paul has the intention that the influence will only go one way--from he to them, and not the other way around.

A dignified old minister owned a parrot that he really liked a lot.  But the bird had picked up an appalling vocabulary of cuss words from a previous owner.  After a series of particularly embarrassing episodes, the minister decided he would have to have his parrot put to sleep.

But a lady in the congregation suggested a last-ditch remedy.  She said, "I have a female parrot.  She is an absolute saint.  She sits quietly on her perch and says things like, 'Let us pray.'  Why don't you bring your parrot over and see if my own bird's good influence doesn't reform your bird?"

The pastor said it was worth a try.  The next night he arrived with his pet.  The bird took one look at the girl parrot and chirped, "Hey baby, let's kiss (get it on)."

The girl parrot responded, "My prayers have been answered."

That's not exactly how the influence was supposed to happen, but more often than not, it does.

C.S. Lewis once wrote,

The difficulty we are up against is this.  We can make people (often) attend to the Christian point of view for half an hour or so; but the moment they have gone away from our lecture or laid down our article, they are plunged back into a world where the opposite position is taken for granted.  As long as the situation exists, widespread success is simply impossible.  We must attack the enemy's line of communication.  What we want is not more little books about Christianity, but more little books by Christians on other subjects--with their Christianity latent...It is not the books written in direct defense of Materialism that make the modern man a materialist; it is the materialistic assumptions in all the other books.  (God In The Dock, page 93)

One of the points Lewis is making here is that we don't lose the war in one battle, but as in a state of siege, one brick of the wall at a time.  What Lewis is calling for, and I agree with him here, is that as Christian change-agents in the world, we need to use the same kind of influence, in our friendships, in our behavior, in our writing, in our businesses.

I was talking with a businessman who told me if he ran his business in a Christian manner he felt he would be bankrupt, and on his ear in a matter of months.  He seemed to think he would lose his respect and toughness among his peers and clients.

That is a tough place to be in.  It is usually within our primary relationships of business and friendships, that present the hardest situations where we must decide, Is this a compromise or is this an opportunity?  Will we allow our Christian convictions to be overruled by the fear of losing a friend or profit?

Our main temptation will be that of yielding to the winds of doctrine or worldly convention, not of ignoring them.  We are not likely to be narrow, rigid, and inflexible in our opinions.  We are more likely to be the slaves of fashion.  The standards of clear Christian witness must be clear in our minds.  It is against those standards that we must test all contemporary thought and behavior.

Why was Paul doing what he was doing, infiltrating, becoming a one man underground force?  "...I do all things for the sake of the gospel."

The gospel of Jesus Christ is our prime motivating factor.  The main emphasis of our influence is from the gospel and for the sake of the gospel.  The emphasis is not on getting, but in sharing with others the blessings of the gospel.  That is why the Christian faith must not be compromised or contaminated.  It remains its own definitive standard.  We are defending Christianity, not "my religion."

A lady once gave detailed instructions to a friend for making a special and original recipe for crabmeat casserole.  Some time later when at a luncheon at her friend's, she was greeted with, "Guess what, Runa?  I'm serving your gorgeous crabmeat dish today."

The lady went into the luncheon telling everyone about her famous casserole.  "I must admit, though, I had to change the recipe just a bit.  Since fresh crab meat wasn't available, I had to substitute canned tuna.  I didn't have time to make the delicate white sauce so I just threw in a can of mushroom soup.  It was easier, anyway.  I omitted the sherry and blanched almonds since I forgot to put them on my grocery list."

With that, the hostess plunged the serving spoon into the steaming casserole while saying to the guests, "So, if this casserole isn't any good, don't blame me.  It's Runa's recipe."

The gospel can't be amended or changed or compromised, no matter how difficult a situation that might lead us into.  As Christians, as God's change agents in the world, we need to follow God's recipe to the letter, or drop it all together.  Either we let it influence us, and thereby influence others, or we give in to the enemy.

Again, to C.S. Lewis for a concluding quote:

One of the great difficulties is to keep before the audience's mind the question of Truth.  They (always) think you are recommending Christianity not because it is true but because it is good...You have to keep forcing them back, and back, to the real point.  Only thus will you be able to undermine their belief that a certain amount of "religion" is desirable but one mustn't carry it too far.  One must keep on pointing out that Christianity is a statement which, if false, is of no importance; (but) if true, of infinite importance.  The one thing it cannot be is moderately important.  (God In The Dock, page 101)