Yesterday I became overly irritated with a local radio guy who posed a question I believe to have been transparently rigged. It was the kind of question you know how you should answer but also understand that reality will not permit you to do so. However, upon deeper evaluation of the question, I found myself irate with the audacity of this radio guy who was clearly setting individuals up to fail their answers on live radio. But I became even more irate upon realizing the answer he provided was inadequate.
As an aside, I’ve listened to this guy for the past several weeks growing increasingly irritated with the way he boasts his “ultimate authority” stature on all things biblical. But, I am aware that we all take a strong position on our beliefs and it would be unrealistic to expect his to be any less fervent. The majority of us, however, do not have a radio platform to shove our views down the throat of listeners who are sometimes allowed a 30 second slot to interject their views on the given subject – nonetheless, sandwiched between this radio guy’s sarcasm and disdain if not similar in position. Whatever – I’m still listening for some reason.
So yesterday when I was driving down the road and he asked:
Would your church hire a man who was homeless and single?
I was like, “Oh great. This should be embarrassing for anyone who chooses to subject themselves to this shamelessly baited question.”
And sadly, there still existed within me a glimmer of hope that someone out there possessed the capacity for a level of sophisticated thought that could answer his question somewhat intelligently. Yea right. So why didn’t you call in, Monica? You bet your sweet buns I tried – to no avail. Not that I possess the level of intelligence I am referring to.
So you’ve probably guessed the majority of individuals who were able to get air time said something like: Well…my church probably wouldn’t because it’s not a good example of lifestyle for a congregation if the pastor is homeless and single…and all the other obvious and fundamental responses radio guy’s question begged. Such as: It’s not really a good example of character. How did he end up homeless to begin with? It doesn’t really convey Godly success. (Whatever that means) A single man can’t teach on family and spousal values. Etc.
And perhaps the worst response of all, coming from a women, ugh: The church should not hire a homeless single man because the Church is not only a place to worship but also a business that needs to make money.
LOL WHAT?!?!? OMG. This was the one time I was okay with radio guys sarcasm which this women was unsurprisingly oblivious to as his commentary propelled her in a downward spiral of shameful, Christianese spectacle.
And yes, you’ve guessed it…radio Guy’s simple response to anyone else who demonstrated an eversion to the idea of their church hiring a single and homeless man as a pastor was as follows:
“Foxes have holes and birds of the air have nests, but the Son of Man has no place to lay his head.” – Luke 9:58
Was this idiot really using this verse as the simple solution to the question he posed? Seriously? Some of you reading this might even be confused as to why I am so up in arms with this. It’s true – the son of man had no place to lay his head and was never married. This didn’t hinder him from being regarded by the majority of humans as the greatest teacher of all time. Yes. All true.
But let’s think about this for one second. This radio guy seemed to have left out one crucial piece of the puzzle when lumping all potential pastors who are homeless and unwed into the “son of man has no place to lay his head” category…
Jesus was perfect.
The last time I checked there were no perfect people identified in the last couple thousand years besides Him. So when considering the perfect life of Christ – in relation to his homelessness and singledom – it seems obvious that those pieces had nothing to do with his ability to preach gospel and appeal to the masses.
However, when considering how flawed the vast majority of humanity really is – even pastors – it hardly seems fair to offer a simple solution to the dillemma of hiring a single and homeless pastor.
It’s true that a qualified individual shouldn’t be ruled out on the basis of their socio-economic/marital status alone. I mean, he could be living like a monk and of the highest ethical and moral stature – a real saint. But let’s be real – it’s highly unlikely. It’s possible that a candidate could have been dedicating his life to mission work – traveling here and there, like Jesus, with no real place to lay his head, never having married, and deciding to seek employment as a pastor…possible. But it seems unlikely that a qualified candidate for a average corporate church would be coming from a situation of homelessness and singledom unless their circumstances stemmed from the previously stated scenarios. So that if they were homeless and single it seems much more probable they have some underlying situation – which upon further investigation – might reveal an individual not possessing the appropriate character necessary to assume the role of pastor. For serious. This ain’t no fly-by-night gig. I’ll paraphrase:
Woe to you who be messing with my flock. -God
Whatever the case, I’m irritated by the simplicity of the response offered, nay, proclaimed as being the end all solution to a scenario far from simple.
Please Radio Guy. Please.
What do you think?