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
My Bible belt town sadly doesn’t have a Chik-fil-A it though the chain has a place in my heart though as the place me and my wife had our first official date at the one nearest to where we live. My employer served Chik-fil-A in the cafeteria on appreciation day but I work the night shift so missed that. I though agree 100% with Dan Cathy, what he said, and the stance Chik-Fil-A chooses to hold. I’ve got failings as I do watch movies where people unmarried live together on occasion or it is hinted at they had sex outside marriage. I don’t buy that it is at all the same thing to be the consumer of a movie that teaches sin and someone that commits open sin in celebration. One movie I watch which was given to me along with many old VHS tapes is the “Money Pit” which stars Tom Hanks another is “Forrest Gump” also with Tom Hanks. In both movies you have people unmarried having relations and examples of sin. If we throw out these movies we might as well not watch any movie that isn’t Christian based then you have to worry about theology another set of issues.
You said:
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.
Response:
- It was a conservative response but
- The church (for those who participated) was just a small part of it (disclosure … I did not as I am not in a Chick-Fil-A market area)
- The larger movement:
- A free speech … freedom of expression movement
- An anti-thought police (overlaps above) movement. Anti-political correctness
- A Pro-family (not necessarily anti-gay) movement
- An anti-fascist politician movement (anti Chicago / Boston mayor & Philly councilman)
- A pro-business movement …. particularly small business!
Not that it was a bad thing … but it was not a gospel movement! An analogy would be when Reagan beat Carter. The Moral Majority was pro-Reagan but the Reagan election was a conservative movement.
But kudos all around on your article and I appreciate you
Just to clarify, I don’t want to suggest that Christians cannot watch movies that portray sin—a lot of that question rests in how the sin is handled, whether or not it is glorified, the maturity of the audience, etc.
Instead I wanted highlight a tendency that I’ve noticed. It’s very easy for us to accept certain types of sin while we react strongly to others. In this particular case, we have become so culturally accustomed to heterosexual couples living together that we hardly even think about it anymore, and yet we object strongly when the same industry portrays same-sex couples. Neither situation is consistent with a biblical definition of family, but we seem to get agitated by only on one of them. To me this is inconsistent and (perhaps in a stretch) prejudicial.
[handerson]Instead I wanted highlight a tendency that I’ve noticed. It’s very easy for us to accept certain types of sin while we react strongly to others. In this particular case, we have become so culturally accustomed to heterosexual couples living together that we hardly even think about it anymore, and yet we object strongly when the same industry portrays same-sex couples. Neither situation is consistent with a biblical definition of family, but we seem to get agitated by only on one of them. To me this is inconsistent and (perhaps in a stretch) prejudicial.
All sin is not equal, contrary to popular belief.
“Abomination” is a categorization of particularly grievous sin. Basic heterosexual immorality is not classified as such. Now, that doesn’t make the entertainment value of depictions of shacking up any more acceptable, but it does explain the normal, and expected, revulsion of the spiritual mind to those things abominable.
Lee
I agree with you completely that this was not a gospel movement.
My referencing the “conservative church” was more in respect to the sociological entity than the theological one. And, like you, that is a significant part of my concern: the “conservative church” (aka, the conservative religious demographic of our society) seems more often concerned with political statements than with the gospel itself. This religion of “Americanism” walks hand in hand with conservative Christianity and it’s very difficult for the person in the pew to differentiate between the two.
Perhaps the real trouble is that there are a lot more things that are also abominations to the Lord beyond homosexuality.
Case in point,
“These six things the Lord hates, yes, seven are an abomination to Him: A proud look, a lying tongue, hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked plans, feet that are swift in running to evil, a false witness who speaks lies, and one who sows discord among brethren.” (Proverbs 6 : 16-19)
I agree that certain sins have deeper ramifications than others and that certain sins show the depth of our falleness more than others. But we have to be very careful about categorizing other people’s sins in a way that is distinct from ours.
Responding to:
[handerson]… the “conservative church” (aka, the conservative religious demographic of our society) seems more often concerned with political statements than with the gospel itself. This religion of “Americanism” walks hand in hand with conservative Christianity and it’s very difficult for the person in the pew to differentiate between the two.
Answered:
- If I support Chick-Fil-A on Aug 1st as a conservative. That’s good motivation.
- If I support Chick-Fil-A to propagate the gospel … that’s a misunderstanding of the Gospel
- If the church did not promote the Chick-Fil-A appreciation day (my church did not but then again we are not in market area) … well then it is not an admixture of church and conservative movement.
- Question and response to “it’s very difficult for the person in the pew to differentiate between the two”. Q: Did your church or do you actually know of churches who supported C-F-A day? Response: church should not promote movements like this. Same thing with politics / politicians. What it should do
- Teach principles … vote your principles. (eg … abortion is murder … know where the candidate stands … incorporate that knowledge in the voting process. (it gets complex if both candidates have the same position.)
- Teach principles … live principles.
- But don’t tell us how to vote or don’t promote movements (thinking of the folly of the Moral Majority)
By the way … my plumbing company is run by a Christian and has many Christian plumbers. I found them when we had a squirting valve spraying all over the basement. Starting at 7:00 a.m. I called plumbers. The first one that picked up the phone happened to be this company. I did not choose the plumber because they were Christians. I found that out later. The company: Weld Plumbing.
About chicken. I don’t care how Christian Chick-Fil-A is … if they didn’t do chicken right, I would not be a customer
that I’m simply relying on my personal experience to understand how conservative Christianity and political statements overlap. Among my circle of friends, neighbors, etc., the people most vocal about supporting Chick-Fil-A were conservative Christians who were tying it directly to their Christianity—both in terms of standing for a biblical definition of family AND their religious freedom. My secular and libertarian friends were not strongly energized.
And just as a anecdotal example, my husband went to buy a truck from a family up the road on Saturday. As they were talking, it came up that he was a pastor. The very next question was “So did you eat your Chick-Fil-A on Wednesday?” In the culture where we live now (a generally conservative faith-based community), supporting Chick-Fil-A was most definitely seen as an expression of Christianity.
It’s an ancillary point but…
“Abomination” is a categorization of particularly grievous sin. Basic heterosexual immorality is not classified as such.
This is a widespread misunderstanding. The truth is that all sorts of things are called abominations in the Mosaic law, including eating certain things (Deut. 14:3) which are then declared “clean” in the NT (Acts 10:15). Abominations included giving dirty money in offerings (Deut. 23:18) and remarrying a woman after you have divorced her and she has been married to another (Deut. 24:4) and dishonest business transactions (Deut. 25:15-16).
So, as a category, “abomination” is not all that special. And very, very sobering things are said of heterosexual sin in the NT (Matt. 5:28, 1Cor.6:15 and 18, for example).
But homosexuality is special in a couple of ways:
- Specially self-degrading (this is the point of “dishonor” and “vile” and “against nature” in Rom. 1:18ff)
- Specially indicative of cultures in deep decline (e.g., Sodom and, Gibeah - Judges 19:22)
In the case of “gay marriage,” what’s also special is that what’s aberrant is being used to denigrate an important social institution—it’s an attack on a fundamental norm of civilized society.
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 was thinking the other day about why Christians tend to have such a visceral reaction to homosexuality when we don’t respond as aggresively toward other sins.
Some of it I do believe is the result of cultural conditioning like I mentioned earlier. We often read Romans 1, not as an expression of the spiraling degredation of humanity as a whole, but as a progressive listing of sins. When we do this, we end up identifying homosexuality as the “ulitmate” expression of depravity and by consequence, end up categorizing people who struggle with ssa as somehow farther gone than those who don’t.
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.
On the note of being disgusted by some sins and not others- Personally, I think some of the hysterical reactions to ssa and homosexuality is less that people are horrified by sin, and more that they are afraid if they aren’t vehement enough, someone will think they are soft on the topic, and thus will think that maybe they are gay.
It’s like high school, only with gray hair, wrinkles, and second mortgages.
And I think many who have this reaction live in a straight cocoon.
[Susan R]On the note of being disgusted by some sins and not others- Personally, I think some of the hysterical reactions to ssa and homosexuality is less that people are horrified by sin, and more that they are afraid if they aren’t vehement enough, someone will think they are soft on the topic, and thus will think that maybe they are gay.
It’s like high school, only with gray hair, wrinkles, and second mortgages.
Hoping to shed more light than heat..
We don’t have Chik-Fil-A, but I lusted in my heart after one…
Jim McLeish Plymouth MN
I have family members who hold management positions in CFA stores on the east and left coasts. There were homosexuals in line on Wednesday to support the store and said so on TV interviews. And CFA hires people without discrimination. You’ll find employees who are atheists, muslims, homosexuals, Mormons, Roman Catholics and even Christians.
"Some things are of that nature as to make one's fancy chuckle, while his heart doth ache." John Bunyan
[Ron Bean]I have family members who hold management positions in CFA stores on the east and left coasts. There were homosexuals in line on Wednesday to support the store and said so on TV interviews. And CFA hires people without discrimination. You’ll find employees who are atheists, muslims, homosexuals, Mormons, Roman Catholics and even Christians.
And, since it is fast food, you will find plenty of hires with a zero work ethic. Not sure what that has to do with the discussion, but I didn’t want anything left off the list. :)
Lee
Discussion