A Cause for Celebration!

AmsterdamOost

Sometimes I get nothing but good news. A friend of mine from the Netherlands shared this beautiful image with me. Yesterday, 12 July 2015, Ronald Bar and Gertjan Nicolaas, who are gay Salvationists (and in uniform no less!), received a blessing by their corps officer (similar to a pastor) at the Amsterdam East (Oost) Corps (Church). They have been in a committed relationship for 25 years. Not only did The Salvation Army acknowledge this, but celebrates this as well!

I could not believe this great news. I am so happy that this may be done in the Netherlands. I hope some day that this will be able to be acknowledged and celebrated all over The Salvation Army world. We speak about comforting the marginalised. The Netherlands has shown us the way!

Moge God zegene de gelukkige paar! (May God bless the happy couple!)

7 thoughts on “A Cause for Celebration!

  1. Thank you for this posting this. I am a Salvation Army Major in the USA. I have been married for 25 years. And I am also bisexual. My wife is aware of my sexuality and has been since before we were married. Besides my wife, only one other person knows. He is my closest friend and he is also an officer. I understand your desire to remain anonymous. I have been living in fear that someone would some how find out and I would lose my ministry. I hope and pray that someday our Army will change and embrace those who have been cast aside. I wish you well and many of God’s blessings.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. So great to hear from you, Mark! Know that you are not alone. I have the same fears, but at the same time, I am hopeful for the future. I never want to lost that hope.

      Like

  2. I stumbled upon your blog through Facebook in a discussion thread. And this post drew about a conversation among my peers that we have had concerns about for years.

    You see – the back door appears to be the favored way for people of the LGBT to operate in order to advance an agenda that does not agree with Christian orthodoxy. I hate to break it to you but this “celebration” of uniting two same-sex couples in a Salvation Army corps is not sanctioned by our organization which makes it a rebel cause. Celebrating sin in the church is not relative to the cause of Christ which is to set men and women free from it.

    I would not expect you to permit my response to your blog because it disagrees with your views. And your being anonymous suggests you are timid with confrontation in regards to this subject. I may be assuming here, but I’m just looking at the trend.

    But isn’t that just like darkness and the devil? To hide in the shadows and promote sin in secret in order to captivate those who are drawn to darkness rather than light? You may think it is great in the eyes of the world to look upon such things as worthy of celebration, but when the Lord comes to judge the quick and the dead He will deal with these acts the same way He has dealt with them through all the pages of human history – with justice and Truth.

    I’m sure I’m not the only salvo who has brought this to your attention. Your anonymous gesture would suggest you are not a fan of defending views which run counter to the authority of God’s Word and the standards of holiness found within the Army. If you really want to celebrate liberty – then repent from the sexual sin and the celebration you have for it, that you might find the peace that syrpasses understanding. Otherwise you will only find yourself fighting alongside the enemy and against the Lord and His children.

    Like

    1. It’s so-called “loving” responses from people like you which have kept me in the closet. You may assume all you want. However, there are many more Salvationists and ex-Salvationists who exist. They have been ridiculed, marginalised, and judged. Coming out of the closet is difficult enough as it is. I certainly won’t be coerced into doing so by the likes of you who assume that orientation is a choice. (This actually goes against the Army’s official Position Statement.) Why should I reveal myself? What purpose will it do in such a context except to cause me grief. The Salvation Army does not have a method to discuss differing opinions. If there were (and I could do so without repercussions), I would.

      Like

  3. You can’t call for equality in marriage without granting that same equality in marriage to other people’s sexual orientations. Not to do so would make the arguments for same sex marriage null and void. If we are talking equality- then why should marriage be limited to just homosexuals and heterosexuals? Should it not under “equality” include other sexual orientations? That is the current momentum from other groups in the U.S and other parts of the globe to have their sexual preference included in the definition of marriage as well -and if it is lobbied hard and long enough it will eventually happen. But if you are for same sex marriage because of the call for “equality and love” – then you shouldn’t have a problem with other sexual orientations being included in the marriage act as well- after all their love would be just as genuine they would argue- ít is equality being called for isn’t it?? Equality means ALL people – not just a select two groups (heterosexual and gay) What about a bi-sexual who wishes to marry two people or a polygamist who wishes to marry two wives? Isn’t their call for equality and love just as valid? You can’t have equality and only confine it to hetrosexuals and gays. That is the case being pushed now. Have people really thought about this? Marriage is between a man and a woman – that is the definition- if it is to change to include gay people under “equality” then it needs to include all. And this will happen if the can of worms is opened. Marriage need not be redefined for people to love one another. The problem is people want Christianity on their own terms clearly ignoring crystal clear teaching in the bible, and if it is not on their own terms then they scream discrimination.

    Like

    1. First of all: Understand that your use of the term “homosexual” is offending to those in the gay community.

      Secondly: Polygamy was sanctioned in the Bible. The only restriction placed on marriage in the New Testament was for bishops, who should only have one wife. The definition you bring for marriage (that it is between one man and one woman) is relatively new. There are still many cultures that practice polygamy. However, marriage in most societies is a legal institution, not a religious one.

      However, I think you are confusing the situation. Bisexual people do not necessarily wish to marry more than one person. I am bisexual and I would only wish to marry one person. My orientation is not discriminating between male or female. Just because I am bisexual, this does not mean I want to marry more than one person or that I am polyamorous.

      Who defines marriage? In this case, the various legal institutions and governments do since marriage is largely a tax issue. In most European countries, one is not married legally unless one does it in a civil ceremony. If one gets married in a church, this is not legal and the couple have no legal status.

      As much as we would like to try to force Scripture to our whims, we cannot. There is no “Biblical” definition of marriage. One can take all sorts of Scripture passages out of context, but bear in mind that Scripture is merely “inspired” by God. It is not inerrant, nor is it infallible.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s