Truemors
is reporting from
Member
NP Rank:
NP Rank:
U S Evangelical Leader Richard Cizik Resigns
Share:
by Mary Richard | December 11, 2008 at 10:19 pm
513 views | 52 Recommendations | 12 comments
Photos
A top evangelical leader was forced to resign his post following criticism over an interview where he said he supports civil unions for gays.
On Fresh Air with Terry Gross, National Association of Evangelicals vice president of governmental affairs Rich Cizik admitted that his views on same sex unions are shifting. While he made it clear that he does not favor same sex marriage, he did affirm the that he favors same sex civil unions.
National Association of Evangelicals (NAE) President Leith Anderson, said that his views did not "appropriately reflect the positions" of NAE policy.
Richard Cizik was the Vice President for Governmental Affairs of the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE) and is one of the most prominent Evangelical lobbyists in the United States.
It was time for him to go," said Tom Minnery, a Focus on the Family senior Vice President said on Thursday. "He no longer represents the view of evangelicalism."
Cizik, who has in the past boasted that he is "five years ahead" of his constituency, has moved NAE away from its traditional social conservatism towards issues of the left, especially global warming.
There's another good article about him in Christianity Today Magazine, speaking more of the controversy he's caused with the NAE over his supporting global warming.
Do you think the NAE is too rigid in its views? Or maybe behind the times?
Advertisement
NowPublic on Facebook
What is NowPublic?
NowPublic lets people work together to cover news events around the world.
Crowd Power
dioramist
New York, New York, United States
Mary Richard
Toronto, CanadaColeman-Hinnen
United States
Most Recommended Stories in World
Recommendations (52)
Dave Keating
London, United Kingdomlefty_liberated
New York, New York, United States
Uwe Paschen
Narita, Chiba, Japan
Amy Judd
Vancouver, CanadaAnonymous user
A. Tran
New York, New York, United States
Albert Milliron
Columbia, South Carolina, United States
gerrypopplestone
London and elsewhere, United Kingdom
dunkelberg
United States
Rhonda J Mangus
North Tonawanda, New York, United States
Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (12)
at 22:54 on December 11th, 2008
Due to our new story creation process, for which we are still working out some glitches, 'US' has to be displayed as 'U S' for now - sorry for the inconvenience.
at 23:03 on December 11th, 2008
Hum...
at 23:40 on December 11th, 2008
I'd like to know where we can write to condem them forcing him to resign and to support him.
Update: Here we go: http://www.nae.net/index.cfm?FUSEACTION=nae.contact
at 23:44 on December 11th, 2008
Ha ha, knew someone would find it, if I didn't! :-)
at 00:01 on December 12th, 2008
: )
at 03:00 on December 12th, 2008
You can really condemn an organization for expecting members to follow what they stand for.
That's silly.
That would be like PETA allowing members to promote the consumption of meat and not do something about it.
If that happened you be saying "Yeah! They should get rid of him!"
If he doesn't agree with the views of the organization, then he should not associate himself with that organization, regardless of what the principles are.
If I promote products produced by illegal whaling, and was a member of Green Peace, it would essentially hurt Green Peace and what they stand for. They would have no alternative action, than to ask me to resign.
I think it makes perfect sense, regardless the issue.
Bottom line, if you can't support an organization on it's values, don't associate yourself with that organization.
Pretty simple logic if you ask me.
at 04:21 on December 13th, 2008
The reason He did not come to condemn was because He came to save, the condemnation has already befallen all of mankind.
You need to understand the role of Jesus Christ to understand the process of redemption and judging.
Judgment has already been passed upon this earth and it's inhabitants.
Christ came to offer an escape from that judgment and condemnation.
Without Christ, all would perish eternally upon the final judgment, which Christ will hand down.
But He did not come to the earth to hand down judgment.
You can not take one scripture out of context, and understand it's meaning.
Otherwise we would all be drinking poison, dancing with snakes and wiping our feet as we left the resident of "non-believers".
As far as the scripture saying "neither do I condemn you..." well, its all about context...don't stop reading when you find what you like, keep reading for context and understanding.
Jesus did say in John 8:11 "...And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee:"
BUT keep reading...
"go, and sin no more"
Keep the context.
at 05:05 on December 12th, 2008
That was a fascinating interview, by the way. As for rushing to condemn a private group for enforcing what it believes to be its values, it's their party.
This couldn't have come as a surprise to him.
at 06:42 on December 12th, 2008
I think it's outrageous that evangelicals and catholics still condemn same sex activity even though their churches are full of gays!
at 04:23 on December 13th, 2008
Your absolutely correct...it is outrageous.
at 06:59 on December 12th, 2008
As soon as a religious person is showing a little dignity and decency towards fellow humans; Out he's kicked.
Where are the xstians outcry against the anti biblical achievements as equality between sexes, abandonment of slavery and so forth? Do they have selective mindsets?
I tend to put stories like this in the "Oh, that's a pity"-bag. It's a free country, and the group believe and do as they seem fit.
For the rest of us: Let's move on and hope for better days ahead.
at 04:27 on December 13th, 2008
Well as I've stated before, he is free to believe and choose as he wills for his life...but the organization also has those freedoms, and they choose not to feel the same way he does...
He does NOT have to be part of that institution if he does not believe what they do.
But the institution shouldn't have to allow him to be part of their group if he doesn't believe what they do.
Would PETA allow someone to be a member who owns a fur coat factory?
Would Green Peace allow Japanese whaling ship Captains to be members of their group?
Would Mensa allow someone with an IQ of 119 to be a member?
It IS the Institutions RIGHT and FREEDOM to choose what they believe, and if you believe like them, you can be part of their institution.
If you do not...ps, you don't have to... so move on.
at 12:42 on December 12th, 2008
Here is what the Bible says about Homosexuality. Keep in mind that these scripture also condemn acts in like manner as drunkenness. So before one condemns homosexuals, one might want to read the entire verses to see where one falls. Another portion of scripture to consider is, "why do you try to remove a sliver from your brothers eye, when there is a log in your way"
The Bible commands us to love one another as we love ourselves. So even though the Bible condemns the acts, it does not mean for folks to terrorizes Gays or not love them as children of God. The idea is to disdain the behavior but love the person.
Lev 18:22-23 "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination."
Lev 20:13 "If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death."
1 Cor 6:9 "Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals" will enter the Kingdom of God
1 Tim 1:9-10 "realizing the fact that (civil) law is not made for a righteous man, but for those who are lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers and immoral men and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars and perjurers"
Rom 1:26-27 "For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error."
So where many like to forget about these scriptures they are in the King James and also appear in the earliest manuscripts in existence. There is no dispute in Greek or Hebrew about the meaning of the word homosexual.
I just thought I would add information from the actual text a Christian is bound too.
About the story. If my Paster violates tenets that he has affirmed to adhere to, He would be counseled and possibly removed. They are issues of High order like Birth of Jesus, Belief in the articles of the scriptures etc. The idea of civil unions is a difficult one.. The problem has come because the government has got involved in church actions and rights to partners for medical, health benefits is the issue here... I am not sure that the Paster should have been removed as he considered these issues when developing his opinion.
at 20:15 on December 12th, 2008
Richard Cizik spoke at the opening session of Envision '08 in Princeton, NJ on June 8, 2008. The United Methodist Church of the Village was a co-sponsor of the 3 day conference that was focused on Christian Engagement in the Public Square
Coleman-Hinnen has contributed a photo to this story.
at 13:51 on December 13th, 2008
Well there's something in america called seperation of church and state and religious groups should not be able to prohibit same sex couples from getting married. marriage in our consittution is not based or should not be based on deifintions of esoteric morality in the bible.
the general public has every right to contest it, too. just like consumerism is changing and people want to make more ethical choices, i think people should be able to demand equality from all types insitutions both for themsevles and others.
at 15:13 on December 13th, 2008
This discussion is not about religious groups prohibiting same sex marriage...it's about religious groups exercising their right to allow or disallow people from their group.
Which is their right.
This issue also has nothing to do with the constitution, nor the Bible for that matter.
The principle here applies to ANY organization and their system of beliefs, and members representing that system of beliefs.
Pretend the religious group is mensa, and the pastor has an IQ of 114.
Or pretend the religious group is Green Peace, and the pastor is a whale boat captain.
Come on...
Don't try and make this anything other than what it is and should be.
An organization has the right to say WHO represents that organization...and if someone is NOT representing the system of beliefs (regardless of what that system is) then the organization has a right to ask that person to leave. Period.
The general public has every right to contest, because this is a free country...but do you allow the public to dictate who is allowed into your house?
Maybe I (as the public) should start demanding MY idea of equality upon you and your household and tell you how to operate?
Do you really think that is right?
If so, I have a list I can email to you of my demands :D
at 15:58 on December 13th, 2008
My feelings exactly, lefty! Cizik was realistic about the need to recognize the difference between political policy and religious convictions.
In ousting him, the NAE has reinforced the negative attitude that many of the general public have towards them. They're on a downward spiral, with more and more dissassociating themselves from the church.