Wise as Serpents
“Behold, I send you forth as sheeep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.”
Matthew records an instance where Jesus summoned his twelve disciples and gave them instructions to preach the kingdom of God to the people of Israel. He gave them authority over unclean spirits, and to cure every kind of disease and sickness. You’d think that he couldn’t wait to hear all the “praise reports” and testimonies once he sent them out, but he sternly warned them that there was some hard sledding ahead.
See, I am sending you out like sheep into the midst of wolves, so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves. Beware of them, for they will hand you over to councils and flog you in their synagogues; and you will be dragged before governors and kings because of me, as a testimony to them and the Gentiles. . . . A disciple is not above the teacher, nor a slave above his master: it is enough for the disciple to be like the teacher, and the slave like the master. If they have called the master of the house Beelzebul, how much more will they malign those of his household. —Matthew 10:16–18, 24–25 (NRSV)
Flogged in the synagogues? Dragged before governors and kings? The kingdom is good news. They were curing the sick, raising the dead, cleansing lepers, casting out demons. So what’s with all these wolves and persecution?
The short answer is that preaching—real Gospel preaching—is the proclamation of a different kingdom, one that does not operate like the one we know. (Romans 10:9 – confess Jesus as “Lord”). In God’s kingdom, the first shall be last and the last shall be first. So, it shouldn’t surprise anyone that those in power here in this earthly kingdom aren’t too keen on being sent to the back of the line. Jesus was acutely aware they’d use whatever means at their disposal to maintain the status quo. John said as much in his Gospel: “And this is the judgment: that light has come into the world, but men loved darkness rather than light because their deeds were evil. For all who do evil hate the light and don’t come to the light, so that their deeds may not be exposed.”
One of the ways to try to prevent the proclamation of this out-of-this-world kingdom is to change the rules of the game. We’re starting to see the seeds of this in America.
Victory, Yet All is Not Sunny
Robert Otto and Julie Hamilton recently prevailed in an important free-speech case in Florida. They are licensed marriage and family therapists who practice in Boca Raton, Florida. They sought a permanent injunction against the city and county from enforcing two ordinances prohibiting therapies called sexual orientation change efforts (SOCE). One of the ordinances, for instance, barred therapists from treating minors with
any counseling, practice or treatment performed with the goal of changing an individual’s sexual orientation or gender identity, including, but not limited to, efforts to change behaviors, gender identity, or gender expression, or to eliminate or reduce sexual or romantic attractions or feelings toward individuals of the same gender or sex.
Both ordinances contained a carveout that expressly allowed “counseling that provides support or assistance to a person undergoing gender transition.” In sum, they prohibited therapists from suggesting that their clients change from homosexual behavior or advising them that their biological gender was their true gender. Given the carveout, they could, however, counsel them to adopt a different gender from the one they were born to. Many of Otto’s and Hamilton’s clients held religious beliefs that conflicted with their homosexuality and they sought counseling “in order to live in congruence with their faith and to conform their identity, concept of self, attractions, and behaviors to their sincerely held religious beliefs.” The therapists complained that the ordinances were content-driven, prohibiting them from rightfully counseling their clients according to their own faith and beliefs and therefore violated their First Amendment rights to free speech. The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals sided with them, finding that the ordinances did, in fact, violate the First Amendment and the ruling has been reported in the news, both secular (ABC, Slate, USNews) and Christian (CBN, Christian Post) channels alike.
But the court’s opinion presages free-speech troubles that lay ahead for those of us who are looking to live out 1 Corinthians 5:7 (“we walk by faith, not by sight”). First, the court’s opinion conceded that the therapists’ talk therapies could be dangerous. While it rejected the government’s arguments on First Amendment grounds, it said “[p]eople who actually hurt children can be held accountable,” and signaled that other avenues of redress like tort litigation and other state-law penalties are available to those counseled. Second, the opinion wasn’t unanimous. In a foreboding dissent, Judge Martin said she would have upheld the ordinances, not based upon any concrete evidence of harm to minors, but rather upon the bare opinions of psychological experts. Her analysis portends a slippery slope of the decimation of even our most cherished civic rights based upon the ever-changing opinions of professionals in charge (the majority noted that changes about homosexuality had been made in the DSM IV over the years). One last thing to note is the proverbial David-versus-Goliath battle that played out in this particular case. The city and county were assisted by a literal army of lawyers from the National Center for Lesbian Rights, Southern Poverty Law Center, Equality Florida Institute, The Trevor Project, American Psychological Association, Florida Psychological Association, National Association of Social Workers, and the American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy. Otto and Hamilton, on the other hand, had only the slingshot of the Liberty Counsel, a Christian ministry, on their side. Calling this a close case might be overstating it.
“For many today, religious liberty is not a cherished freedom. It’s often just an excuse for bigotry, and it can’t be tolerated.”
A Coming Reimagination of Free Speech?
Joe Biden recently tapped Richard Stengel to lead the United States Agency for Global Media, including the Voice of America, the Middle East Broadcasting networks, and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. This kind of appointment usually wouldn’t raise any eyebrows, but Stengel, ironically, has called for a reimagination of our rights to free speech. Just last year he wrote an Orwellian piece in the Washington Post op-ed entitled, Why America Needs a Hate Speech Law, which denounced America’s free-speech freedoms as a threat to social harmony.
“But as a government official traveling around the world championing the virtues of free speech, I came to see who our First Amendment standard was an outlier.”
Culturally Wise as Serpents
The Apostle Paul lived in a hostile cultural environment, but he didn’t allow it to crush his witness. He, instead, used culture’s norms to his (the Lord’s) advantage. Once, when he had been brought before a Jewish council for his Gospel preaching, he noticed it was comprised of both Sadducees and Pharisees. Knowing their positions on resurrection, he purposefully incited a riot between them which allowed him to bring his defense of the gospel to an entirely new audience.
When Paul noticed that some [of the council] were Sadducees and others were Pharisees, he called out in the council, “Brothers, I am a Pharisee, a son of Pharisees. I am on trial concerning the hope of the resurrection of the dead.” When he said this, a dissension began between the Pharisees and the Sadducees, and the assembly was divided. (The Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, or angel, or spirit; but the Pharisees acknowledge all three.) Then a great clamor arose, and certain scribes of the Pharisees’ group stood up and contended, “We find nothing wrong with this man. What if a spirit or an angel has spoken to him?” When the dissension became violent, the tribune, fearing that they would tear Paul to pieces, ordered the soldiers to go down, take him by force, and bring him into the barracks. —Acts 23:6–11 (NRSV)
Later on, when a new governor wanted to use Paul as currency to curry favor with the Jews, Paul leaned on his status as a Roman citizen to appeal to Caesar. He not only avoided more persecution by the Jews but, again, was able to present the Gospel to yet another audience.
But Festus, wishing to do the Jews a favor, asked Paul, “Do you wish to go up to Jerusalem and be tried there before me on these charges?” Paul said, “I am appealing to Caesar. This is where I should be tried. I have done no wrong to the Jews, as you very well know. Now if I am in the wrong and have committed something for which I deserve to die, I am not trying to escape death; but if there is nothing to their charges against me, no one can turn me over to them. I appeal to Caesar.” —Acts 25:9–12 (author’s translation)
One of the takeaways from these accounts is that Paul bore witness to the full revelation of the mystery of Christ (Acts 26:19 – “I have not disobeyed the heavenly vision”) while at the same time leveraging the existing norms to the Lord’s advantage. Jesus, after all, had appeared to him and told him that he would bear witness of his name in Rome. (Acts 23:11). This wouldn’t have happened if Paul hadn’t invoked his Roman citizenship before Festus. (See Acts 28:17–31 – Paul’s witness in Rome.)
The mettle of our faith is sure to be tested in the coming days. But as Christians who are relatively unfamiliar with societal persecution, we must guard against acculturating the Word to a rising regime of “tolerance.” (See China’s new bishop – “The new bishop is considered very obedient to the government’s religious policy.”) We, like Paul and the disciples of old, must shrewdly use new-found cultural norms to the Gospel’s advantage. It is critical that this generation sees a church of believers who are not afraid to stand fast in the words of the Lord when its members’ social standing, social privileges, occupations, and even their physical lives hang in the balance.
While we were staying there for several days, a prophet named Agabus came down from Judea. He came to us and took Paul’s belt, bound his own feet and hands with it, and said, “Thus says the Holy Spirit, ‘This is the way the Jews in Jerusalem will bind the man who owns this belt and will hand him over to the Gentiles.’” When we heard this, we and the people there urged him not to go up to Jerusalem. Then Paul answered, “What are you doing, weeping and breaking my heart? For I am ready not only to be bound but even to die in Jerusalem for the name of the Lord Jesus.” —Acts 21:10–13 (NRSV)
Materials:
Otto v. City of Boca Raton (highlighted)
