My Take: Chick-fil-A Takeaway
Okay, so it’s my turn.
Now that the dust is settling a bit, I’ve been reflecting about what’s happened over the last few weeks surrounding Dan Cathy’s statements about biblical marriage and what ultimately culminated in Chick-Fil-A Appreciation Day this past Wednesday. And while I’m not the first or last to make these observations, please take them for what they are: simply observations about what has become perhaps the most polarizing social/religious issue of the year. They are not meant to critique anyone who chose to participate or anyone who chose not to. There have been thoughtful opinions on both sides (here and here for example) and I think it’s safe to say that choosing to eat or not eat a chicken sandwich is truly (in a divine twist of humor) something that we can file under Romans 14.
(For the record, we did not eat at Chick-Fil-A on Wednesday primarily because we ate there last week and as much as we believe in freedom of speech, we also believe strongly in supporting a balanced family budget and lower cholesterol.)
So first things first…
Chick-Fil-A makes a really good chicken sandwich. And waffle fries. And coleslaw. And lemonade. I wish we could settle this whole thing right there on the merits of what a company produces, but in this day and age…
Companies are no longer just companies. Matthew Lee Anderson has an interesting explanation on why this is the case. Because we have become primarily a consumption-based society, the things we choose to consume are intrinsically linked to our identities. And because we are a society driven by the marketplace, we will naturally articulate our values in the marketplace. Unfortunately, this makes us easy prey for companies that choose to leverage social issues in the marketing of their products, and so for my part…
I respect Chick-Fil-A for choosing to distance itself from social policy as much as I respect their decision to remain closed on Sundays. Unlike some companies (JC Penney, for example), Chick-Fil-A has decided to let their business rise and fall on the merits of their product. JC Penney, on the other hand, currently in the midst of a last-ditch effort to re-invent themselves (unofficial slogan: “This is not your Grandma’s JC Penney.”), has actively embraced controversial social issues in an effort to drum up business. Part of their make-over included featuring same-sex couples for both their Mothers’ Day and Fathers’ Day ad campaigns; so that instead of re-inventing their products to appeal to a younger generation, it seems like they simply looked at statistics, saw that the Millenials and Xers tend to support same-sex marriage, and made an advertising decision based on a targeted demographic. To me—a member of that very demographic—it came off as patronizing and cheap. Still…
Homosexuality is the defining issue of this generation. As such, Christians are going to have to learn to navigate it with charity and boldness, grace and truth. We are going to have to be both wise and harmless, and that means coming to accept that…
Public statements are likely to be misunderstood. What we mean to say (“I’m standing up for civil liberty.”) and what others hear (“I hate gay people.”) will rarely be the same thing; and while we can’t control someone’s interpretation of our actions, we better make certain that we’re not erecting extra barriers that might lead him to think that his conclusion is justified. And to do that, we must be willing to take the beam out of our own eye first, and…
We must be honest about our own lack of God-honoring marriages and families. Every time we accept divorce as normal; every time we deny a man and woman the sacrament of marriage based simply on skin color; every time we entertain ourselves with movies that highlight heterosexual couples living together but shudder when the same movies portray gay couples; or let’s get even more personal—every time we complain about how inconvenient our children are, we are overlooking our own sin in favor of judging another’s. Because in the end, if we don’t hold biblical family values privately, we have very little ground to be promoting them publicly. And speaking of being honest with ourselves…
We must not confuse the privilege of freely practicing our faith with the power to practice our faith. Many have rightly understood the current debacle as a threat to the basic freedoms of speech and religion. (Public officials simply have no right denying permits based on their own personal values.) But if we’re completely honest with ourselves, I wonder how many of us are standing up for civil liberties, not because we understand that they are essential to a just society, but because we have so long intertwined them with our faith that we can’t imagine how we could be Christians without them. We have confused the freedom that comes from Jesus Christ with the freedom that comes from the United States’ Constitution. The first empowers us to follow Him, while the second simply makes it socially acceptable. Please don’t misunderstand. We must certainly fight to protect constitutional rights (for Christians and Jews and Hindus and Muslims), but we must not fight for them simply because we can’t envision our faith surviving without them. Because in the end…
We need to remember what we’re really about. As of August 1, the conservative church proved that we can marshal a movement. We proved that when given a call to be part of something bigger, we will show up. So now, I’m issuing a call. Let’s have the same show of support for the gospel. Let’s muster the same enthusiasm for the grace and power of Jesus Christ to change lives. And let’s put our energies and time and money into proclaiming that the love of Christ is by far the best solution for what ails us as a society.
Note about the title: When my husband and I lived in NZ a couple years ago, we quickly learned that what we Americans refer to as restaurant “take out” is termed “takeaway” by our English speaking cousins. I simply couldn’t resist the pun.
[node:bio/handerson body]
handerson Bio
Hannah R. Anderson lives in Roanoke, VA where she spends her days mothering three small children, loving her husband, and scratching out odd moments to write. She blogs at Sometimes a Light and has recently published Made For More.
- 2 views
One customer told a Chik Fil A team leader, “People are just tired of being told what to do,” For many August 1 was an early vote, more political than religious. While one can hope Christians will avoid an “us versus them” mentality, many Americans saw this day as support for freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and protection of property rights. Christians are rightly concerned about those issues because ideally our Constitutional law is equal to “the powers that be” to which we are subject. Ideal and real…well, not always the same, I know.
L Strickler
One writer in fundamentalist circles seems to see the matter roughly with the same significance as Moses’ commitment to YHWH… http://www.proclaimanddefend.org/2012/07/27/i-ate-a-chicken-sandwich-on-purpose/
Nice…
I commented elsewhere that this would likely become something of a shibboleth (not for Christian activism—whatever that is) but for Christian obedience. Hoping many more agree with the OP author’s point #8 than with the link I provided…
SamH
[handerson] At the same time, the nature of ssa is so fundamentally unnatural that I think some of our reaction is also due to having to come face to face with how broken we are as people. We are just this messed up—we have fallen so far from Eden that we can’t even do what “comes naturally” to us. The very existence of ssa is a condemnation of all of humanity. And we don’t like that. So we try to distance ourselves as much as possible. We try to assure ourselves that we are not broken to that extent; and so maybe what we’re really reacting to isn’t so much other people’s sins as what their sins remind us about ourselves.
Very interesting way to look at it. Not sure I agree with the last couple of sentences, but it bears thinking over a while.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
I’m not sure I agree with it entirely myself :-) but I’ve been trying to fit our strong reaction to homosexuality into the bigger picture of our common understanding of depravity and how we view our condition before God. It seems that people who have a firm grasp of human brokeness should be the people least surprised and offended by unnatural sins, and yet we continue to be so. I suppose it could be answered either by:
1. We retain the image of God so certain things will naturally repel us… but that doesn’t explain why homosexuality does so more than something like lying or stealing, which are both entirely antithetical to God’s nature. If we are rooting our distaste in the residual image of God, then we should expect to have a strong visceral reaction to these things as well.
Or another option is that…
2. We do not have an adequate view of our own brokeness. We continue to believe that the human condition (including our own) is in better shape than it really is and that redemeption is not a fundamental re-creation but merely a corrective agent. So when we’re faced with behavior that is so unnatural that it reveals the depth of our brokeness, it presents a reality that our theology simply can’t handle. Our paradigm doesn’t have room for the human condition to be THAT broken; and instead of correcting our paradigm, we react to the behavior (and those who engage in it) as somehow fundamentally different from what WE suffer from.
I think part of it is that homosexuality is a sin we never partake of, even vicariously. But we partake of many others, if only in the privacy of our own minds.
Why is it that my voice always seems to be loudest when I am saying the dumbest things?
why do we insist on categorizing same-sex lust in an entirely different category than heterosexual lust? Isn’t same-sex attraction simply a perversion of healthy brotherly/sisterly love the same way that heterosexual lust is? The object, is different of course, but in the end, both forms sexually objectify a person that we should be engaging as a brother or sister.
So many thoughts swirling around… I suppose this is important for me to tease out the nuance because in my generation, SSA is no longer a theoretical issues. I have too many friends who have and who are struggling through it.
Yes, it’s a perversion too, but it is a more familiar sin that we more often face in our own hearts.
Why is it that my voice always seems to be loudest when I am saying the dumbest things?
[handerson][…] SSA is no longer a theoretical issues. I have too many friends who have and who are struggling through it.
Just curious - do you believe SSA is akin to alcoholism in the sense of being involuntary and/or hereditary/genetic?
V/r
Ashamed of Jesus! of that Friend On whom for heaven my hopes depend! It must not be! be this my shame, That I no more revere His name. -Joseph Grigg (1720-1768)
The biggest reason, {and because we have been born again it becomes more natural for it to be so,} Christians react more against homosexual sin which often leads to homosexual marriage, is because in the
Holy Scriptures, marriage is a picture of our Lord and His Church.
Eph. 5, Paul speaks about the relationship between the husband and wife, then concludes by saying he is speaking about Christ and His Church. This in itself makes it important for born again believers to
understand and take strong positions against the direction we are being told to take by our leaders and society itself to embrace this wicked sin.
It is also important to look at the historical record of Holy Scripture to recognize the destruction of the cities in Genesis brought about in a super large way by this sin.
It is true however, Romans 1 does detail other sins, but the sin of homosexuality is linked to those who would not honor God as God, but became vain in their own imaginations.
When born again believers speak out against homosexual sin in our country, we are also trying to help preserve our country by being salt.
It is also true, we must be willing to share the Good News to a world that does not want it. D.L. Moody stated that about his life and ministry and it should be ours as well.
Ex. 15:2
From my understanding of the nature of sin and the nature of human beings, I believe that the attraction to the same sex is not inherently sinful but is a symptom of the greater brokeness of the human condition. I believe it is possible that there is an involuntary aspect to SSA as well as a formative aspect (nature AND nurture). Even at that, as I read somewhere recently, both our nature and nurture are devastated by the far-reaching effects of the Fall and both are subject to divine Providence so the exact source of the temptation isn’t all that important whether it’s alcoholism a tendency toward gluttony or SSA.
I do however believe that engaging in lust and actively embracing and engaging a homosexual lifestyle is not consistent with Scriptural understanding of sexuality and as such is sin. My concern is that we be careful that we extend grace to those fighting the very desires and affirm that they are no more “broken” than any of the rest of us.
I agree that homosexuality (and gay marriage) in their very essence undermine the image of Christ and His Bride, but aren’t divorce and infidelity and pre-marital heterosexual sex equally destructive? And still, we don’t react the same way. Please understand that I am not arguing for the normalization of homosexuality, merely for a heightened awareness of our own inconsistency in responding to it as something “worse” than other sins that undermine truth.
For me the greatest argument against homosexuality is that God designed men and women to equally and collaboratively reflect aspects of His character through the gift of gender. The nature of marriage and male/female interaction display things about Him that same-sex relationships simply cannot. At the same time, divorce and infidelity are wrong for the exact same reason that homosexuality is—they don’t tell the truth about God’s nature. When we, as His image bearers, act in ways that are inconsistent with His character (in this case, His loving faithfulness), we lie about Him and sin.
Discussion