Max Lucado’s Dilemma

Max Lucado found himself at the center of a controversy in the last two weeks. On February 7, he was invited to preach at the National Cathedral (Episcopalian) in Washington, DC on the topic of the Holy Spirit.

As a result, over 1600 people protested the invitation based upon a sermon and article he preached in 2004.

They point specifically to a 2004 article in which Lucado calls homosexuality a “sexual sin” and outlines a biblical argument against gay marriage while suggesting it could open the door to legalizing polygamy or incest (here).

The article had been published on Crosswalk and has been since taken down at Lucado’s request (here).

Lucado then wrote a response letter (here) in which he asks forgiveness for saying hurtful things, says that faithful people can disagree about the issue, and apologizes for how the church has harmed LGBTQ individuals and their families for years.

For evangelicals and fundamentalists out there who are frustrated about this, you should be. Max Lucado just threw you under the bus.

We have to get over wanting people to respect us, like us, or not hate us.

The Bible is clear in what it says about homosexuality and in how it defines marriage (we have made that case here often, I will not do it again in this space). The early New Evangelicals wanted academic respect from apostatized Christianity. All they ended up getting was a corrupt gospel. Now Conservative Evangelicals are fighting to get the gospel back. Today, we are in a fundamental disagreement with modern liberal theology and LGBTQ theology in what defines personal identity, marriage, and human sexuality. The Bible speaks clearly on these things.

It is in our hearts to be loving, but that will not be considered enough. We are being asked to affirm what we do not believe or be hated. This is not about how we behave, but what we believe. We are required by God to love all people, be kind to all people, and respect all people and we should do so willingly. However, we are also required by God to contend for the faith once delivered to the saints.

There are three key problems with Lucado’s apology.

It is not true. People who are being faithful to the text cannot disagree on the subject of marriage, sexual identity, and human sexuality. The hermeneutical gymnastics necessary to justify this new perspective are no less a denial of scripture than theological liberalism was 100 years ago or Neo-orthodoxy was two decades later.

It is ambiguous. Lucado states that “they are all beloved children of God because they are made in the likeness and image of God.” This statement is carefully intended to mean different things to different people. It is meant to make people who are not truly saved feel like they are accepted of God as they are, even though that is not exactly what he is saying. In our unsaved condition, we are ALL sinners and stand equally lost before a Holy God regardless of the particular category of sins that dominate our lives. Yes, we are all, every human being, created in the image of God. Likewise, we are all sinners, lost hopelessly in our natural condition. Jesus came to save us from that condition, not to leave us happily in it.

It is presumptuous. It is not Lucado’s prerogative to apologize for the church over the centuries. He does not represent those who have gone before (or for that matter all Christianity now) and he has no right to speak for them. They have already spoken for themselves. It is perfectly within his rights to renounce previous generations but not repent for them—and what he did was a renunciation.

He was trying to build bridges that should not be built. We need to live kindly and cooperatively with people who hold differing views of sexual identity and morality, just like we need to be willing to share our earth with people of various religious views. What we have no business doing is trying to create a false unity.

The 1600 protestors were right in that Lucado should have never been invited to the National Cathedral to speak, and if invited, he never should have gone. His presence communicated a sense of theological unity that those on both sides of the issue KNEW was false. In his effort to create a false unity, he actually created more conflict. Such efforts only agitate, they do not make for real peace.

In the end, Max Lucado betrayed Jesus, the Bible, and Bible believers of all generations by painting us all as unloving, unkind, bigots, who “need to do better.” The sad thing is that no matter how he responds short of renouncing his faith and the Bible, it will not be enough.

We must continue to love our neighbors as ourselves but we cannot concede our faith. That would not be loving to anyone.

Photo source:  https://www.flickr.com/photos/paullew/29915794105