Our opinion on the United Church of Christ's controvertial advertisement

Great Debates
1

In this thread, an issue was mentioned regarding a controversial advertisement by the United Church of Christ that a TV network/some TV networks refused to air. This advertisement was regarding how the UCC was welcoming of types of people that other churches weren’t (specifically gay people). Instead of hijacking that thread, I thought I would open up a new one wherein to state my (useless and irrelevant) opinion on that issue.

If I saw that ad, I must admit, I would be highly offended. My nostrils flare in indignant opposition as I think about it. Characterizing other Churches as using bouncers to determine who will or will not enter the church is extremely offensive to other Christian organizations, not to mention a false characterization of them. No church I have ever been to has turned away anyone for any reason whatsoever. Even a scantily clad women at a Latter-day Saint (who are notoriously conservative) service was not treated with scorn, disrespect, or disdain. Such characterization of other Churches, even if not explicitly named, is very, very un-Christian. I would have hoped that Christian denominations were above attempting to publicly point fingers at one another.

I think it’s a very cheap shot to use such a controvertial issue - one which has engaged many Churches in great debate, discussion, thought, and searching - to get more people. I reject any statements stating that the true Christian response to homosexuality is clear. It is far from not, particularly since so many factors must be considered.

Amongst my reactions when I read about this advertisement, which I read some time ago, was, “Is this Church really that desperate for money?” To be honest, I have only seen the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints do commercials on television, so when another Church jumps onto that bandwagon, I question their motives. However, even the abovementioned Church promotes the Book of Mormon or the Holy Bible - but makes no statement about the goodness or lack thereof of other Christian organizations.

Now, if the UCC’s message was that they are the only good and true Church around (thereby meaning that all other Churches are un-Christian), and that a central tenet of the Church is welcoming homosexuals, then this ad would be fine.

But when I am at church, I prefer to focus on God. Not on who is holding hands with whom, or who has sex with whom. I understand this is their attempt to look inclusive and all-embracing - but they should have said so instead of mis-characterizing other Christian organizations. Christian organizations try their very hardest to fulfill what they see as their Christian mission. This ad is a slap in their face. It is hardly the demonstration of Christian love we ought to show for one another.

All this ad says to me is: “Look! We think we’re better than your Church! You should be here!” Almost a holier-than-them-all approach. If inclusiveness were there goal, there are more subtle, less controvertial, and more Christian ways of portraying this. In trying to look so tolerant, they come across to me as being intolerant and judgmental.

WRS - remember the words about judgment, motes, and beams. Thus We have spoken. Although no one really cares, and to no one does it really matter. But We have spoken nonetheless! Mwahahahaha! Okay, off to go to sleepy-sleepy. Excuse my spelling mistakes.

2

I saw that advert. I thought it was fine. I got the general impression they were saying “what would jesus do? Why, he’d let anyone in the church and not give them shit. That is what we do.”

3

What’s your religious affiliation Wes?

4

First of all I want to say I’m glad they seem t have switched from the bouncer ad to the “Here is the Church and here is the steeple…”. I did think the bouncers were rather heavy handed. And, yes, devisive. After all no Church actually has bouncers (that I know of).

But I would point out something. If these other Churches were in fact as you characterize them, and no one was being made to feel excluded, that ad would have no point. And no audience. As far as it’s intent is to drum up “new business”, it’s directed at people who have been made to feel uncomfortable at the Church they attend. (And possible for many other reasons than homosexuality, even though that has become the focus regarding the ad.)

5

No, I’ve never seen a church with bouncers exactly…but I found out about ‘closed communion’ instead of the open to everyone type when I was stopped by the Pastor at the front of the line and turned away for not being the right type of Christian. I was attending services with a friend to watch her kids’ sing, just got up with the rest of my pew and followed along like a good little sheep, when in Rome, right? Then the Pastor stopped, asked me my name and what church I normally attend and informed me that I wasn’t welcome to partake and could I please step to the side.
It wasn’t heartbreaking, had I known the rules beforehand I could have just stayed in my seat, but it was rather shocking, y’know?
In the Baptist church I grew up in, rather fundamentalist as opposed to the free will flavor, a classmate that had an illegitimate child was informed that she’d sinned against the entire church by bringing shame upon us all, and was required to make a public confession and apology if she wanted her baby baptised and entered on the church roll.
I was long gone from that church by then, but staying in touch with the girl and was amazed that she agreed to do so. Demanding that she address the entire congregation from the pulpit and apologize to them for some rather unfortunate events in her own life in order to be allowed to continue worshipping at the church we’d grown up in…that seemed rather exclusionary, no? Then again, my sister had been invited to leave the same church a few years before when she insisted on bringing her black boyfriend to services.

Bouncers, no of course not. But exclusionary practices? Yep, what else could you call it?

6

The ads are fine with me.

Christian tenets, as I have learned them:

  1. We are all children of God.

  2. We are all sinners. Yes, even you.

  3. If you believe in Jesus,

a) Your sins will be forgiven, and

b)You will have everlasting life.

Some churches tack on a lot of sub-clauses about who is not a child of God, and “We don’t allow certain kinds of sinners here.” The national convention of the Church Of God ruled that they won’t even allow Masons! I don’t know what to call those policies, but I can’t call them Christianity.

If you don’t allow sinners, you’ll have an empty church. (See number 2, above.)

7

I guess then, that you’ve never been on the receiving end of the judgementalism in most other churches. You know the churches that say you’re incompatible with Christianity. Maybe the target is those of us who have been made to feel unwelcome elsewhere. Could it be that you recognize your own church’s bouncer and it hits too close to home?

8

(bolding mine) Just because they don’t stand at the door pointing fingers saying “You, you, and you come in, and you can’t” doesn’t mean they don’t make you feel unwelcome in 1001 other ways.
I thought it was refreshing to have a church cut to the chase and just say “You are ALL welcome”.

Christianity in my experience has been one of the most insular religions ever. With one hand they tell you, “Come in, be saved,” and with the other, “But only if you’re my type of person.” Churches & congregations can be very judgemental.

9

I finally saw the ad. I am absolutely amazed that anyone could possibly think this was in the least bit controversial. (Some networks won’t even air it!)

A very nice ad.

10

I would have to say that your friend is at fault in this case for not telling you in advance that her church had closed communion.

Also, in the Catholic (and, I believe, the Greek Orthodox) Church, someone who isn’t eligible to receive communion can still approach the altar and ask the priest for a blessing. Don’t know what denom your friend’s church is, but, having determined you weren’t eligible to receive, if he didn’t offer a blessing, he is an asshat.

Now, back to the UCC ad.

I was as much offended by the idea that unrepentant sinners (the gay couple holding hands) would demand entry into a church that teaches that their lifestyle was sinful as I was by the false portrayal of churches using bouncers to deny people entrance into God’s house. Remember, after Jesus rescued the adultress from her accusers, he told her to “go, and sin no more”. If you don’t agree with your religion’s moral teachings, then you should find a religion that has moral teachings that coincide with your own moral beliefs and lifestyle.

Most of the major denominations teach that sex outside of marriage is a sin and this would include homosexual sex. The Catholic Church would most likely refuse communion to someone who was an openly practicing homosexual (but they would still allow them to attend services.) However, the ad also shows the bouncers refusing to allow a black family to enter the church. I can’t think of any church, outside of some whacko Identity Christian churches, that does not allow blacks to attend services.

11

I can smell a religious ad a mile away. I must have seen that commercial ten times & just tuned it out. When I finally happened to notice two guys who were obviously a couple I thought, “cool!” Way to go church!

Definitely not offensive to me. I thought it was clever. Do most churches have bouncers? Of course not. I’m pretty sure Geico insurance doesn’t really have a talking gecko either. But most christian churches are exclusive and they don’t accept gays & lesbians unless they’re there to repent their sins & quit actually doing anything homosexual.

To be fair though, I happen to know there are Catholic and Jewish churches/synagogues where gays & lesbians are welcome & accepted and able to fully participate in their respective religions. You just have to look a lot harder to find them.

12

Mango, just wanted to point out that not all Christians think homosexuality is necessarily a sin. Not that this is the place to get into that, of course. Just saying.

I haven’t seen the ad, but I’ve read the script of it, and I quite like the message.

13

Most definitely, my friend was embarassed and would have told me beforehand if she’d known. She’s taken other friends and relatives to church before but I guess I just didn’t look Lutheran, shoulda been carrying a bowl of jello salad, I guess. :wink:

Not to get too incredibly deep, I’ll willingly grant that you’re more of an authority on this stuff than I am, but are you advocating that no homosexuals can ever be Christian then? You’re contending that most Christian denominations teach that homosexuality is a sin so just screw them? They can’t believe in JC, can’t follow the principals, can’t ever go to heaven, etc?
Even if we go with the idea that the bible says being gay’s a sin, we allow all the other sinners in, right? How’s someone supposed to be repentent for who they are, didn’t God make them too?

14

More than one church has closed communion. I know of one church at least which explains the concept of closed communion (you must be baptised in that particular church) very nicely in the church program, then goes on to say that everyone is welcome to attend services, etc. etc. I don’t see why this would be offensive—churches are entitled to have their own rules. It would be emarrassing if visitors didn’t know about closed communion before trying to partake, but once they’re told, I see no reason for offense.

As far as the ad in question, haven’t seen it, can’t comment.

15

Moving this from IMHO to Great Debates.

16

It wasn’t capital O Offensive, not for me at least. I truly don’t remember if it was addressed in the church program, I tend to think not since it came as a surprise to the friend I was attending with.

Of course churches have every right to set their own standards, but as to the question of whether those standards feel exclusionary or not…well it seemed topical.

17

What about married homosexuals? Oh wait, most denominations don’t want that either.

What are they to do?

18

Say, do you think it might be helpful if you watched the ad before regaling us with your critique?

19

You can see the ad here:

http://www.stillspeaking.com/resources/index.html

I am a non-Christian, but I do say I find it offensive. The ad shows a number of people other than a gay couple turned away, with no obvious reason why. Assume these people shown in the ad (and, I) are sinners. How many Christian churches won’t even let sinners in the door? How else could sinners learn what the Bible teaches, and repent their sins, if Christian churches didn’t even let them in the door? For those who argue that unrepentant sinners shouldn’t be welcome in a church, should someone have to repent first, even if they don’t know what Christianity is about? This ad is depicting Christian churches turning away people period. While I am sure some such churches must exist somewhere, I sure haven’t found one yet.

20

I’m torn. On the one hand, I’m for inclusion. But on the other hand, I’m for anything that keeps people out of church. The end result of this would seem to be that the moderation in overt stupidity will obfuscate the underlying stupidity.