Al Mohler before World Vision Reversed: Pointing to Disaster ”” The Flawed Moral Vision of WV

Richard Stearns has every right to try to make his case, but these arguments are pathetically inadequate. Far more than that, his arguments reveal basic issues that every Christian ministry, organization, church, and denomination will have to face ”” and soon.

The distinction between an “operational arm” of the church and a “theological arm” is a fatal misreading of reality. World Vision claims a Christian identity, claims to serve the kingdom of Christ, and claims a theological rationale for its much-needed ministries to the poor and distressed. It cannot surrender theological responsibility when convenient and then claim a Christian identity and a theological mandate for ministry.

Add to this the fact that World Vision claims not to have compromised the authority of Scripture, even as its U.S. president basically throws the Bible into a pit of confusion by suggesting that the Bible is not sufficiently clear on the question of the morality of same-sex sexuality. Stearns insists that he is not compromising biblical authority even as he undermines confidence that the church can understand and trust what the Bible reveals about same-sex sexuality.

Read it all.


Posted in * Culture-Watch, * Religion News & Commentary, Anthropology, Charities/Non-Profit Organizations, Ethics / Moral Theology, Evangelicals, Law & Legal Issues, Other Churches, Religion & Culture, Theology, Theology: Scripture

One comment on “Al Mohler before World Vision Reversed: Pointing to Disaster ”” The Flawed Moral Vision of WV

  1. New Reformation Advocate says:

    World Vision founder Bob Pierce would weep at how his legacy has been compromised. But perhaps he had already sensed that all wasn’t well with WV when he later founded Samaritan’s Purse.

    Al Mohler is right, of course, that the “operational” and theological aspects of ministry can’t be neatly separated into watertight compartments, as Stearns seems to suppose. It’s true that Christians of many different traditions can unite in serving the poor in Christ’s name without resolving many of their theological differences (thank God, or little would get done). But compassionate actions and earnest attempts to right social wrongs always presuppose some implicit theological underpinning, and there are limits on what Christians can agree to do together, and that would certainly include avoiding actions that contravene the clear and consistent teaching of Holy Scripture.

    Alas, in one sense, World Vision is a victim of its own success at enlisting the support of a very broad base of constituents.

    Bob Pierce famously wrote in his Bible, “Let my heart be broken by what breaks the heart of God.” Well, poverty and injustice certainly does that. But so does heresy and moral confusion.

    David Handy+