To
eat at Chick-fil-A or not to eat at Chick-fil-A – that is the topical question
that is swirling around water coolers, Facebook conversations, the
Twittersphere and beyond. Somehow our religious views have gotten wrapped up in
the decision to partake of waffle fries or to avoid them as a way of making a
strong stance on opposing the statement made by Dan Cathy, the CEO of
Chick-fil-A, on his view of traditional marriage being strictly between a man
and a woman. That got me to thinking about the many disputes that have come up
in the history of the Christian movement, and how our differing views have led
us to surmise what God’s intent is, what Jesus would do, and how we should
respond.
Allow me, if you will, to take a quick journey into the history of the church universal and the difficult debates that tore apart well-intentioned Christians. Without going into all the names and specifics of the issues, consider that at one time, our church leaders found themselves arguing as to whether or not Jesus was fully human and/or spirit only. There was also the debate as to whether or not when we celebrate the Eucharist/Holy Communion/Lord’s Supper, is Jesus present with us, does He become the elements, meaning His body is the bread and His blood is the wine or is the Holy Sacrament only a remembrance. Some Christian denominations believe in transubstantiation (i.e. that there is a transformation that happens in the elements wherein Jesus is present in body) consubstantiation (i.e. there is a ubiquitous presence meaning that Christ’s body cannot be specifically located, that it is like walking in fog and there is no transformation of the elements) virtualism (i.e. there is a spiritual presence of Christ and no transformation of the elements) and memorialism (i.e. the natural body of Christ is not present and there is no transformation of the elements).
This
very topic divided the church and was a central part of the Protestant
Reformation. Roman Catholics believe one thing, Lutherans believe another, and
Baptists believe something different from both. All Christians – yet with very
strong opinions about how they perceive Jesus Christ during the sacrament of
Holy Communion.
Then
there was the debate about what to do with all the books of the Bible, not just
the ones that are part of the Protestant canon as we know it today (for you do
know there are many other written accounts of God and Jesus Christ that did not
make it for inclusion in the Bible), but the ones in the Apocrypha, the ones
that were considered heretical and the ones that didn’t fit the criteria of
either side of the debaters. There came a point when a decision had to be made
about which books would appear in the New Testament, and the decision was a
hard one to make. Everyone didn’t walk away from the Council of Nicaea in 325
pleased, but what we have today is the decision that was agreed upon.
My
point is that just like now, people then had differing views about God, about
Jesus Christ and how we should live out our lives as Christians. There was
name-calling, fights, and drastic measures that led to bloody battles, all in
the name of Christianity. And today, on this proclaimed “Chick-fil-A
Appreciation Day,” there is name-calling, quibbles and hateful words aimed at a
practicing Christian who voiced his opinion on what he believes biblical
marriage looks like. Depending on where you stand on the issue of biblical marriage, you are either right or wrong. Right?
The
debates in our history were rather deep and there was much to consider. Would
there be hymns sung during worship service? At what age could you be baptized?
What punishment was there for people who did not adhere to the rules of the
church? It goes without saying that the view of women in the church drew much
debate, as did the Amerindians (categorizing them as humans or not as was the Valladolid Debate in 1550), the poor, enslaved persons and so on. There has
always been debate in, among and within the Christian realm, so to find ourselves either in the
drive-thru of Chick-fil-A or driving by in protest is not at all surprising. I
also do not find it surprising that remarks are being hurled back and forth as
to whether or not you love your neighbor, that if you eat at Chick-fil-A you
are somehow against the lesbian, gay, bi-sexual, transgender society or that if
you don’t eat there today, tomorrow or next week, you are affirming that
everyone deserves to be loved regardless to what label they are wearing: man,
woman, homosexual, heterosexual, or still searching. What has happened is that the atmosphere is so clouded and fogged that to speak on either side of the argument somehow places you in an unwanted precarious position of having to defend yourself. Just like the debaters of yesteryear, I don’t have to agree with every belief that other Christians carry. It doesn’t make me more or less than a believer in God and in Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior. It simply makes me a person who has a belief that I am rooted in, one that is unshakable and hopefully, one that pleases God.
