6/13/2008

To Rev. Boisson

Today I read your letter to the Red Deer Advocate for the first time.
I have to say, I was actually disappointed. I was expecting something completely different, especially given that you are a minister and you work with troubled kids.
Where is God in this letter? You say He stands with you, but the only person you quoted is Edmund Burke! Big deal that is!
Where's the call to true holiness? (And no, moral living is not the same as holiness. Anyone can be moral. Only the regenerate can be holy.) Freedom from sin in Christ? The pronouncement of grace? Scripture? As a minister, you ought to know well that a Christian's first line of defense is not mere words, but the Word! He has given us wisdom that no adversary can resist (Luke 21:15) and yet it does not appear anywhere in your letter.
The Christian's responsibility is to first preach the law which convicts of sin, and then preach the gospel, which is the grace offered us in Christ. You did not provide your readers with a spiritual context. You simply talked about an agenda. Many Christians like to talk about a homosexual agenda. What they neglect to mention is that, according to Scripture, homosexuality is a sin. If they do call it a sin, they don't explain what that actually means. Sin is not just those things we do. It is something fundamentally wrong with us that causes separation from God. Sin stains our entire character and ruins every relationship. A clear recognition of this fact seems to be generally lacking in your letter.
Allow me to explain.
You call on the average individual to "take whatever steps are necessary to reverse the wickedness." You ask for the impossible. Surely you must know that such a reversal can only be done by God and not by the average individual, who is utterly incapable of such a thing. Where is the recognition that the average individual is just as lost in their sin as any homosexual and will by no means pray unless God revives their hearts? (Rom 1:18-31, Eph 2:8,9) Heterosexuals who don't know Christ are not more holy just because they aren't gay. Far from it! They just happen to be sinning in other ways. Furthermore, God only heals our land when we humble ourselves, repent and pray (2 Chron 7: 14). Yet where is the call to prayer? Repentance features nowhere in your letter!
Odd thing that, since you are speaking out against a sin.
As you rightly mention in your letter, there are some ministers who say that sexual sin (of any stripe) is fully compatible with God's Word. It is incumbent on us, the good seed (Gen 3:15, Matt 13), to expose this lie. The only way to do that is with Scripture. You cannot simply stack up your word against someone else's and hope everyone buys it. You have to prove it Scripturally (which you didn't do) and wait for God to do the rest through His Holy Spirit.
Having said all this, however, please note that I still think the Alberta Human Rights Commission is wrong. I hope the decision is appealed and over-turned. It is also my prayer that God can use this situation to bring in more of His elect, to His greater glory.

9 comments:

Anonymous said...

Very good Ruth.

Thucydides said...

The Reverend's letter was dictated by the AHRC, just like Stalin's victims had their confessions dictated; just like Mao's victims had their confessions dictated, just like the Khmer Rouge dictated confessions to their victims.

Maybe they didn't actually write it out for the Reverend, but they certainly made it clear what it should say........

Stephen Boissoin said...

Ruth,

I appreciate your passion for Christ and certainly respect your right to have an opinion...even if it differs with mine.

The answer Ruth is that not in all cases does a Christian have to, or benefit from, quoting scripture. Though scripture is the basis of our lives as Christians, it is not in every case some magic ingredient that alone convicts or instructs the target audience when spoken or read. I didn't have a weekly or daily column Ruth. Many of my letters before this one included scripture and many after. Though there were other letters that did not have any scripture but were still true to the truth of the scriptures. That was one of them. That letter intentionally did not include scripture. It was not addressed to Christians alone and if it were a scripture filled letter, my local paper might not have printed it. It was a sound the alarm about gay activism in schools Ruth. It was not intended for evangelism purposes but instead to make people swallow hard and remember the things they just read. It was not designed to be fluffy and forgotten. I am certainly not Jesus but he did his fair share of rebuking and turning over the money lenders tables. The damage that the gay activist agenda is causing to the welfare of our children and youth is severe. No less severe than what angered Christ. Maybe you should have written the letter for me Ruth...you seem to know how I should have worded it to cause the greatest effect.

I think that you have some very valid points when undertood in their proper context, which is exactly where you are in error. You cannot understand context without having all the facts. You are also obviously very passionate for Christ but I also think that you are preaching to the choir and getting way ahead of yourself.

Ruth, I've spent almost fifteen years in ministry. I don't need a lesson in Theology and or evangelism especially from someone who doesn't even know me. When the opportunity has been there, I have shared more scripture with more people than I could ever recount.

You simply appear to be judging me and jumping to conclusions based on one letter.

Again you're entitled to your opinion but your opinion fails to ask questions...and to discover the details before you go and instruct a person who you have never met on how he should undertake ministry when he devoted his life, his studies and his finances to such but you wouldn;t know that. True, even I can make mistakes but you haven't even done due diligence to discover if I have or is an examination of one letter enough to give me a Evanglism 101 diatribe on?. You cannot reproof, rebuke and instruct me based in your interpretation of a single document.

Then again, the simple answer may be that we may just have a differnt opinion on how God works and what and who he uses to get the job done. I believe he is pretty diverse. I believe he uses you and uses me. I believe he uses scripture, spoken wisdom without scripture, actions, rubukes, righteous anger, compassion etc etc....but I also believe that he uses that letter, toughly worded rant that it is.

Blessings

Here is a little more context. A little more undersanding of me beyond that one letter. http://www.stephenboissoin.com/custom.html

Stephen Boissoin said...

Before I hit the sack, I decided to re-read your reproof. A point I missed is that based on your diatribe, you clearly don't understand what my letter was about, intended for and who it was directed at.

Ruth said...

A couple of things.
To be frank, I actually did not think you would see my post. But, I am pleased that you have. As I said in one of my comments in a previous post, what I have written is intended to be constructive. Since you and I have never met, to help you understand my motivation know that I am a wife, a mom to two, I have a large extended family, am a devout Christian (duh) and have more experience in this area than you might think. Please do not think that I would ever opt for a cushy letter or something soft spoken. I am sure you can tell by my treatment of your letter that I much prefer straightforwardness.

"You simply appear to be judging me and jumping to conclusions based on one letter"

This is where you are mistaken. I am not judging you at all. I am not judging your motivations; in fact, I think you have good motivations. I have already looked at your website and seen the background information. Furthermore, I applaud your courage in speaking out against an issue you are clearly passionate about. There is much in your letter that I agree with. I would actually extend it to say this issue has also had quite the impact on families and even the church.
However, I do feel there are some issues with your letter that are important for Christians to think about. This is the letter about which you have been before the AHRC. This is the letter everyone is reading. This is the letter which you are being persecuted over. Indeed, you say such persecution is religious in nature. How can that be, since our religion features nowhere? If I cannot comment on this letter, then what should I comment on?

"[Scripture] is not in every case some magic ingredient that alone convicts or instructs the target audience when spoken or read"

True, it is not some magic ingredient. However, God does convict through the Holy Spirit via the preaching of His Word. I do not dispute that He will use people when and where He chooses. In fact, I do not even dispute that He may well (and probably has) use(d) your letter. As I said in a previous comment, it is my desire that He will use this situation to bring in more of His elect to His greater glory. However, I strongly feel that it is incumbent on us, as Christians, to rely on the Word more than on our own words (1 Cor 1,18-28). How else are we able to ensure that in the passion of our arguments we do not also go astray? You say that your letter was "still true to the truth of the scriptures." Without actual Scripture refertences, how can you show this? How can you talk about morality without giving people the absolute plumbline (Amos 7) of Scripture?

"That letter intentionally did not include scripture."

And this is what I suspected. Your apparent answer to my "why not" is that: "It was not addressed to Christians alone and if it were a scripture filled letter, my local paper might not have printed it." which doesn't make any sense at all. If you are addressing unbelievers, you ought to make all the more use of Scripture that they might hear and be converted (Rom 10: 14,15, 1 Cor 2:4, 2 Tim 4:2) You can't prove that your paper would not have printed it (since it didn't happen). Furthermore, if you say that you intentionally did not include Scripture, how can you also say you are being religiously persecuted?

As Christians, we have to do things in a manner that is so totally different from the world. It is not enough to just speak out against the world's practices. We have to do so not using the world's way, not relying on our own word, but by relying totally on God and using His Word. Think on Stephen (Acts 6,7) before the Sanhedrin and also Paul's many defenses of the faith. Their number one weapon was Scripture, against which there could be no answer. As Martin Luther rightly points out in his Bondage of the Will, this does not mean the world will stop talking. All it means is that they can make no rational defense, because God confounds the wicked (Psalm 55).

Stephen Boissoin said...

YOU SAY "And this is what I suspected. Your apparent answer to my "why not" is that: "It was not addressed to Christians alone and if it were a scripture filled letter, my local paper might not have printed it." which doesn't make any sense at all. If you are addressing unbelievers, you ought to make all the more use of Scripture that they might hear and be converted (Rom 10: 14,15, 1 Cor 2:4, 2 Tim 4:2) You can't prove that your paper would not have printed it (since it didn't happen)."

This my friendn is where, I believe, you are incorrect and attempting to use one method for every situation. I chose not to use scripture and I am glad I did not in that specific case. Again, as I have already stated, I have and continue to use scripture today when I feel it is appropriate. That letter was not meant to have scripture in it and you have a hard time accepting that that is appropriated and I beleive that is due to your inexperiece in the socio-political arena. Remember Ruth, I too have used scripture when speaking to unbeleivers on many many occasions. I agree with your methodolgy ONLY in certain contexts...not every one.

You SAY "Furthermore, if you say that you intentionally did not include Scripture, how can you also say you are being religiously persecuted?" Ruth you must be missing that the traditional Christian position on Homosexuality is being persecuted across Canada. My letter was singed REVEREND and I was known as a Pastor in my community. Trust me and numerous other reputatbale people, my religious beliefs are being persecuted. Every Christian who hold the biblical view of sexuality is having there beleif persecuting...even if they never submit letters to the editor. Also, you obviously are not aware that many letters were included in the complaint against me.....many included scripture. The one you posted was the foundational letter that the complainant used. Research a little more Ruth. You obviously have a limited understanding of my case and how I attempted to defend myself at the Tribunal. You accuse and instruct before you enquire...bad habit.

Also, my attorney is a Christian....he never uses scripture when speaking to the media about my case,nor in court. He focusses on constitutional law and he is doing the perfect thing.

Again Ruth, it is obvious that you love God and are probably a great sister in Christ but I do think that you act like you know a little too much for every circumstance. God uses you Ruth, I trust him to choose how he does so. He uses me too, possibly in different ways than you. Same God...same working of the Spirit etc. I have a major in Theology and have read the Bible backwards and forwards more times than I can count. I love scripture LOVE IT!!! but I choose when and where to use it. I trust Gods spirit to be in the midst and sometimes I just be the scriptue in action. Quoting scripture without the prodding of the Spirit of God means nothing. Remember...when you read the Bible you need to first read it in context understanding that some of the scriptures primarily apply to an audience that had an understanding of the Old Testament and/or were influenced by the Jewish culture around them. This is not then and we need to be wise and adaptive to our day when we use scripture.

Take care and be blessed. This will be my last post as we have different views. You want me to be you, I want you to be you and for you to let me be me.

Peace

Stephen Boissoin

Ruth said...

"I chose not to use scripture and I am glad I did not in that specific case. Again, as I have already stated, I have and continue to use scripture today when I feel it is appropriate... I believe, you are incorrect and attempting to use one method for every situation... I agree with your methodolgy ONLY in certain contexts... I love scripture LOVE IT!!! but I choose when and where to use it... This is not then and we need to be wise and adaptive to our day when we use scripture."

The implication of your argument here is that there might be a case where Scripture is not appropriate. Surely this is not what you intend to argue, is it? Because if so, then you and I have wildly different views on things.
Scripture has an answer to every moral and spiritual situation, which this clearly is. There is simply no answer better than what one can find in the Bible.

"Ruth you must be missing that the traditional Christian position on Homosexuality is being persecuted across Canada"

Um.
No.
I am definitely not missing that at all. Read my blog. You are not the only case of a Christian vs a homosexual at an HRC. There have also been the cases of Bill Whatcott, Scott Brockie, the Knight of Columbus and their hall, the more recent case of Fr. de Valk. Even the CHP is being investigated, and a whole host of others.

"The one you posted was the foundational letter that the complainant used. Research a little more Ruth. You obviously have a limited understanding of my case and how I attempted to defend myself at the Tribunal. You accuse and instruct before you enquire...bad habit."

Again, I have read your case. I have read your position. As I said already, I agree with much of what you have to say. We're on the same team here. What I am looking at is this specific letter. Or, do you think what you wrote is above critical examination? Would you prefer a mindless "good job Rev" in the face of some obvious problems? That would be dishonest of me.

"I do think that you act like you know a little too much for every circumstance."

This is unwarranted, not to mention completely untrue. Or, again, do you think your letter above critical examination? Are you unwilling to have people ask questions of you?

To be frank, I am now far more surprised than I was when I read your letter. We're on the same team, yet you honestly seem to not want honest discussion and examination of what you had to say.

Jordan said...

I thank God for your posts, Ruth. I believe that if we truly love the Word of God, we will believe and follow it. The Bible tells us in Paul's 2nd letter to Timothy, chapter 4 to "Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine."
Jesus tells us in Matthew 10.34 "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword." This is explained in Ephesians 6.17 "And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit which is the word of God " and in Hebrews 4.12-16 "For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his sight: but all things are naked and opened unto the eyes of him with whom we have to do. Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession. For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin. Let us therefore come boldly to the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need." If we think we can spar with the world through our own logic or wisdom we will be on our own to whatever end our opponents choose, if we stand on the Holy Bible and let it speak for us it will remain with us and fight for us and remain as always true and victorious!
The strength of God be with all who humbly pray to and stand in Jesus Christ.
Jordan Staudinger

Ruth said...

Thank you, Jordan.
That was a really nice thing to read first thing this morning and I really appreciate it.

Listed on BlogsCanada Blogarama - The Blog Directory Powered by Blogger FeedBurner Blogging Tories
Southern Ontario Conservatives