"The Message" Author Eugene Peterson's Retraction of Same-sex Marriage Support: Where do we go from here?

Eugene Peterson is the author of "The Message" paraphrase of the Bible, who recently stirred controversy due to his support of same-sex marriage, which he retracted one day later.

 

 

Interview and retraction

In an interview with Jonathan Merritt of Religion News Service published on 12 July 2017, "Best-selling author Eugene Peterson changes his mind on gay marriage", Peterson stated that he would perform a same-sex wedding ceremony.

 

After recounting experiences with "several women who were lesbians" in churches where he was associate pastor, and the employment of man who applied and was employed as a music director that identified as being gay, he added:

I wouldn’t have said this 20 years ago, but now I know a lot of people who are gay and lesbian and they seem to have as good a spiritual life as I do. I think that kind of debate about lesbians and gays might be over. People who disapprove of it, they’ll probably just go to another church. So we’re in a transition and I think it’s a transition for the best, for the good. I don’t think it’s something that you can parade, but it’s not a right or wrong thing as far as I’m concerned.

 

Meritt asked Peterson as a follow-up, "If you were pastoring today and a gay couple in your church who were Christians of good faith asked you to perform their same-sex wedding ceremony, is that something you would do?" Peterson replied with a one-word answer, "Yes."

 

A day after the publication of the interview with Merritt, Peterson retracted his views, stating, "To clarify, I affirm a biblical view of marriage: one man to one woman. I affirm a biblical view of everything."

 

Peterson said, "I’ve never performed a same-sex wedding. I’ve never been asked and, frankly, I hope I never am asked."

 

He apparently blamed Merritt for asking the question in a hypothetical, and then claimed that he was "put on the spot" by Merritt: "When put on the spot by this particular interviewer, I said yes in the moment. But on further reflection and prayer, I would like to retract that. That’s not something I would do out of respect to the congregation, the larger church body, and the historic biblical Christian view and teaching on marriage. That said, I would still love such a couple as their pastor. They’d be welcome at my table, along with everybody else."

 

"I regret the confusion and bombast that this interview has fostered," he said. "It has never been my intention to participate in the kind of lightless heat that such abstract, hypothetical comments and conversations generate."

 

Merritt responded to Peterson's allegations, that his questions were pointed, "as any serious journalist’s should be. They were respectful and in no way pushy." He added, "It is possible Peterson felt he had been placed on the spot and offered an answer that doesn’t reflect his true conviction. But it is also important to note that in the week prior to the publication, there was no attempt to clarify or change his answer to these questions." ("Eugene Peterson backtracks on same-sex marriage", 13 July 2017)

 

Was Peterson's retraction genuine?

In thinking about Peterson's position on same-sex relationships, I have found Russell Moore's reflection on World Vision's 2014 change of course on same-sex marriage quite instructive.

 

For one, I find that Peterson's claim that he was "put on the spot" by Merritt to be an irresponsible act of blaming another person for his own error (if he does truly believe it to be an error), in an act of self-justification, quite similar to many of the public (partial) apologies that we see these days. It is part of the sinful human condition.

 

We have seen such examples in the Bible. Adam infamously pointed the finger at "the woman [God] put here with [him]" when God confronted him about his sin (Genesis 3:12). When Moses confronted Aaron about the golden calf, Aaron blamed the people instead, "You know how prone these people are to evil." (Exodus 32:22)

 

Secondly, in his response, Merritt suggested that Peterson retracted his views due to pressure from "conservatives":

The condemnations from conservatives were swift. LifeWay, America’s largest Christian book chain, threatened to ban his books if he didn’t affirm a traditional view of marriage. The heat rose quickly, and then Peterson retracted his remarks, claiming he was put on the spot. While he said a same-sex couple would be welcome in his church today, he would not perform a same-sex wedding “out of respect to the congregation, the larger church body, and the historic biblical Christian view and teaching.”

I find there to be quite some merit to this view (no pun intended). 

 

Despite Peterson claiming to affirm a "biblical view of marriage" and a "biblical view of everything", this seems to be based less on the authority of the Bible per se, but out of mere deference to "the congregation, the larger church body, and the historic biblical Christian view and teaching".

 

Entire congregations can fall into error, the larger church body can be mistaken, and Christian view and teaching however historic or historical are no substitutes for the actual Word of God. As Christians, we are taught to obey God rather than man (Acts 5:29). Quite regardless of whatever people may say, our conscience and duty are owed to God, and God alone.

 

It would follow that, if God approved of or is neutral towards same-sex relationships or marriage, Christians ought to stand for these regardless of what people think. The same is true otherwise. And on this point, the Bible is amply clear in its affirmation of marriage between a man and a woman, and disapproval of all other forms of sexual behaviours outside that union, including homosexual behaviour.

 

Unfortunately, therefore, Peterson's retraction does not appear to be a genuine, Biblically-based retraction, but one made out of mere deference to the wider Christian body at large.

 

Where do we go from here?

Peterson's departure from the truth of marriage probably began way before the interview, and this interview was merely a symptom or a culmination of that earlier departure. (See Jonathan Merritt's article on "Eugene Peterson had this to say about same-sex issues in 2014", 13 July 2017)

 

It is important to recognise that Church (not just any denomination or congregation, but the wider body of Christ) is meant to be a place of accountability. Leaders and ministers are not exempt. Indeed, those who teach will be judged more strictly (James 3:1).

 

Russell Moore's reflections on World Vision’s change of course in 2014 are equally applicable here:

We need to watch and to hold every Christian organization and ministry accountable. That’s what the Bereans did when they judged everything that the apostles were saying according to the word of God. They searched the scriptures to see if these things were so. We need to do that all of the time because every human authority is fallible, and every human authority can make mistakes. And so we need to be constantly watching that.

 

Especially on issues as controversial as sexuality in our modern age, we may find not just many churchgoers, but also pastors, leaders and ministers being swayed by the spirit of this age to fall into error. On this, James' exhorts us:

My brothers, if one of you should wander from the truth and someone should bring him back, remember this: Whoever turns a sinner from the error of his way will save him from death and cover over a multitude of sins. (James 5:19-20)

 

Since Peterson's retraction was apparently made merely out of deference to the wider Christian body at large, it would be an error to merely take his retraction at face value and assume that he has turned from error. To do so, would merely enforce conformity with doctrine without genuine conversion to a Biblically-centred faith or, worse, the fear of man rather than God. 

 

It would also be wrong to accept his self-justification and blaming of his interviewer for putting him in a spot, since such denial of personal responsibility stands in the way of true faith and repentance.

 

Instead, the wider Body of Christ should actively reach out to Peterson to bring him back not only to a sound Biblical understanding of marriage, sexuality and human nature, but also and ultimately, a renewed relationship with the Creator Himself.

Gospel Witness in an Age of Outrage

In the lead up to, during and after the recent Pink Dot event that has been taking place annually at Hong Lim Park around this time of the year, I found a good number of Christians around me reacting with sheer outrage.

 

There were many reasons for their outrage, much of which was quite understandable. They were outraged at the fact that some people who professed to be Christians supported Pink Dot and the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) movement. They were outraged that people, groups and companies had been enlisted or characterised (sometimes falsely) as supporting Pink Dot. They were outraged at the fact that other people who professed to be Christians were utterly indifferent or nonchalant about Pink Dot as well as its supporters. They were outraged at Pink Dot itself.

 

This reminded me of a 2015 message by Russell Moore, titled "Marriage On The Line - Preparing Your Church For A Same-Sex Marriage Culture", where he recounted an incident which he witnessed during the US Supreme Court arguments over same-sex marriage:

I was walking around the corner the day of the Supreme Court arguments over same-sex marriage. On my way there to be at the Supreme Court, as I was coming around the corner from my office, I heard somebody on a bullhorn yelling angrily. And I immediately turned to some friends who were with me and said, "Please don't let that be one of us."

And as I came around the corner, I saw someone standing there with Bible verses on placards and with the bullhorn screaming at the protesters on the other side and the people who were gathered on the other side. This person was yelling, "You're condemned. You're self-condemned. You're going to hell."

And as he was yelling this through the bullhorn a group of men dressed as Catholic nuns with all sorts of garish makeup calling themselves the "Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence" were dancing along in front laughing about the message that's coming over the bullhorn.

And I winced when I heard this man on the bullhorn acting as though he were speaking for Jesus Christ, saying, "You're going to go to hell and don't expect me to cry for you when you do."

That is not the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

But we live in a world right now in all of the fractures that are going on, especially around issues of sexuality, where it seems so often in many of our communities and neighborhoods that we have the "Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence" versus the "Brothers of Perpetual Outrage".  

And yet we have been called to be a people of the Gospel. And we have been called to be a people of both truth and grace, of both conviction and kindness, in a world that is often fearful and angry.

 

In an issue as controversial and politicised as sexuality in our modern times, it is easy to lose sight of what we are ultimately warring against. It is tempting to see only the political agenda and thereby perceive the activists or their supporters as enemies, or to see only the behaviours of the people involved and see them as villains. 

 

But Paul reminds us in his letter to the Ephesians that "our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms" (Ephesians 6:12).

 

The real battle, then, is spiritual in nature. It is a war against sin. And our weapons are not carnal.

 

The victory, as a result, is neither necessarily political nor necessarily moral; these are only consequences or outflows of the real victory. The real victory is when sin and death are conquered, and the sinner is restored to life. It is a victory already won at the cross of Jesus Christ.

 

The call is a call to the Gospel, a call to faith and repentance, a call to leave a life of sin and follow Jesus Christ. And the Bible teaches that it is God's kindness that leads us to repentance (Romans 2:4). It is not a "kindness" that turns a blind eye to sin or distorts the truth. Indeed, even as Paul wrote that "love is kind" and "is not easily angered", he also wrote that love "does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth" (1 Corinthians 13:6).

 

Certainly, there is room for righteous anger, as Jesus displayed most vividly when He cleared the Temple (John 2:12-22). But James the earthly brother of our Lord also warned that "man's anger des not bring about the righteous life that God desires" (James 1:20). The difference lies in being outraged at the right things. Just as the peddlers were corrupting the Temple by making it a marketplace, it is sin that corrupts every human heart, for Jesus said:

"For from within, out of men's hearts, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance and folly." (Mark 7:21-22)

 

The Gospel witness is a gentle witness, a ministry of reconciliation seeking ultimately the reconciliation of all things to God in Jesus Christ. It is not a witness that blares out with bullhorns, much less one that seeks in anger to condemn others to hell, but one which is "quick to listen, slow to speak and slow to become angry" (James 1:19). In an age of outrage, it is our kindness that will ultimately point people to the place where love won: the cross of Jesus Christ.

 



The Primal Cry of “Abba! Father!”

Many Christians would be familiar with the passage in Paul's epistle to the Romans, where he wrote to the church, "For you did not receive the spirit of slavery to fall back into fear, but you have received the Spirit of adoption as sons, by whom we cry, “Abba! Father!”" (Romans 8:15, ESV)

 

One of the best illustrations of the meaning of the primal cry of "Abba! Father!" I have heard to-date comes from a message preached by Russell Moore, "Primal Scream Theology: The Call and Response of the Abba Cry", originally preached on Sunday, 3 May 2009, at Highview Baptist Church in Louisville, Kentucky, where Moore recounts part the story of the adoption of his two sons from a Russian orphanage:

[The] creepiest sound I ever heard in my life was nothing at all.

My wife Maria and I were walking into a Russian orphanage on the first of two trips to the former Soviet Union to meet two boys to whom we had been directed to adopt as our sons.

We'd never seen them; we didn't know all that much about them, but when we walked into the doors of that orphanage, the thing that struck us right away was not the stench, although it was overpowering; I had to resist the urge to walk outside and vomit. It wasn't the squalor of the walls cracking apart and the dilapidated building although that was awful.  

The thing that struck me right away was the silence.

I said to Maria, "Will you just listen for a minute?"

The place is completely still and quiet and there are babies everywhere. As you walked up and down the halls of that orphanage, room after room after room of toddlers and infants, but there was not a cry. It was almost like the Christmas carol that we sing, "all is calm, all is bright", no crying any of them made.

And it slowly dawned on me that what had happened was that you have an institution full of babies without mothers, without fathers, who are learning that when they cry, no one is going to respond. And so a baby learns if he is hungry or distressed or alarmed, that when he cries out, when she calls out, if that happens enough, they will stop crying.

And so all that you heard in this orphanage is the sound of cribs rocking and hitting against the walls as infants comforted themselves in cradles.

And every day, for a week, my wife and I would walk into a room where we found these two little Russian boys. And every day we would play with them and read with them and tell them - even though they couldn't understand us - that we would come to get them and they would be our children soon. And every day we would leave, and we would leave to silence.  

Until the last day of that trip.

Maria and I were told, "It's time for you to go, you're going to have to leave these boys behind, and you're going to have to go back to the United States and you'll have to wait for all the paperwork to be done, and you're going to have to leave now."

We said, "Can we have five more minutes with these boys?"

They said, "You can have five more minutes."

And we hugged on them and we kissed them, and I said, "We will not leave you as orphans. We will come to you." And we walked out of the door.

And as soon as we walked out of the door, one of those little one-year-old boys - little Maxim, whose name now is Benjamin - fell face-first into that crib filled with excrement and screamed.

It was the most beautiful sound I have ever heard.  

Not because of his agony, not because of his sense of abandonment, but because in that scream he recognised us as his parents. He knew that we would hear.

That is exactly what the Apostle Paul says is happening in the life of the believer in the Lord Jesus Christ, when through the Holy Spirit you cry out "Abba! Father!"

 

This is our primal cry to God when we cry out "Abba! Father!" It is a cry with the knowledge that we have a God who will hear us. As the Psalmist writes, speaking from God's perspective, "He will call upon me, and I will answer him; I will be with him in trouble, I will deliver him and honour him." (Psalm 91:15)

 

This is the spirit of adoption, the spirit of sonship, that we receive through God's beloved Son, Jesus Christ.

Strength to be who He truly wants us to be

Something interesting caught my eye in the papers today. It was an article about Cassandra Thng, a transgender woman, which the Sunday Times says it means "she identifies with a gender different from the one she was born as". In other words, Cassandra Thng is biologically male, but identifies as female.

 

Cassandra Thng held a sign which said "I am trans. Will you take a photo with me?" at the shopping belt from Bugis to Orchard, seeking to raise awareness on the Transgender Day of Visibility from 5.30pm to 10pm on 31 March 2017.

 

 

(From Cassandra Thng's Facebook page)

 

The Sunday Times reports in "Hostile stares and friendly words on the streets" (16 April 2017):

But while Ms Thng did receive some hostile stares, she also found support on the streets. 

"The most interesting thing that night... was three Christian girls asking to say a prayer for me - and they prayed that I may have the strength to be myself, and have the labels not put on me by God to be cast off. 

"I really experienced the kind of extremes that faith can bring people to that night," she said.  

"I could not have asked for things to go better."

 

The account of the three Christian girls is indeed beautiful and fitting especially in light of this weekend with Good Friday and Resurrection Sunday as we remember the death and resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ. Assuming the account is correct, I'd affirm their prayer with a firm "amen".

 

Yet, I believe that Cassandra may not have understood the thrust of the prayer made by the three Christian girls.

 

Indeed, in God's eyes, we are created "male and female" in His image (Genesis 1:27). Likewise, Jesus taught that "at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female'" (Matthew 19:4).

 

From God's perspective, every single human being has inherent worth and dignity as His image-bearer. Our biological sex is not an accident of nature nor a social construct, but is of divine design. Male and female are made complementary, equal but different. Who we truly are is truly who we are in Him. 

 

No matter what labels that society may place on us or what labels we may place on ourselves, what truly matters is how God sees us.

 

Every human being is an integrated unity of heart, soul, mind and body (cf. Mark 12:30). Our bodies are not our enemies or our prisons, and we are not trapped in the wrong body.

 

I once prayed for a number of transgendered persons at the red light district in Singapore. My prayers were very similar to what the three Christian girls prayed for Cassandra Thng. In my prayers for them, I prayed that God would reveal Himself to them and show them who they truly are in Him, and that they would have the courage to be who He wants them to be.

 

There is no denying that people who identify as transgender feel strongly that their bodies are not part of who they are.

 

But as Jesus died to reconcile to God all things by making peace through His blood shed on the cross (Colossians 1:20), my prayer is that Christ's ministry of reconciliation can be brought to everyone, to reconcile everyone to God and give us strength to be who He truly wants us to be - His sons and daughters. And may every label that does not come from God be cast off.

Sex is a gift, but no substitute for the Giver

At the 2014 Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission (ERLC) National Conference on "The Gospel, Homosexuality, and the Future of Marriage", Sam Allberry spoke on the topic "Is God Anti-Gay? Answering Tough Questions About Same-Sex Marriage".

In his message, he addressed four "biggest ground-level questions" that are commonly raised:

1. Did Jesus even mention homosexuality?
2. Can't we just agree to differ over this issue as Evangelicals?
3. Isn't a same-sex partnership okay if it's faithful?
4. Isn't the kind of traditional Christian position on sex and marriage deeply harmful to people?

The responses given by Allberry on these questions are deeply insightful. Given that he is himself same-sex attracted and has been for "pretty much [his] entire adult life", his sharing is not purely theoretical, but practical as well, sharing his personal experiences in the issues and questions.

The final question that Sam Allberry addressed was: "Isn't the traditional Christian position on sex and marriage harmful?" This is the objection that says that the traditional Christian position is the cause of acute mental health problems even suicide among gay people.

As part of his response to this objection, Allberry hit the nail in the head on the allegation that the Christian position was driving same-sex attracted people to commit suicide:

Next thing to say on this issue; on my understanding and in my experience, we Evangelicals are not the ones who say sex is everything. We are not the ones who say that a life without sex is no life at all.  

And the idea that, the assumption behind that, the kind of challenge that celibacy is in itself harmful means that sex has become an idol. If life without sex is not conceivable for you, it is very clear what is really 'god' in your life.

A friend of mine Andrew Wilson back in the UK once a recently spoke on the issue of "Why does God care who I sleep with?" And a part of his answer was to turn the question around and say, "Why do you care so much who you sleep with? Why is that where you draw the line and object to following God? Why is that your one non-negotiable?"

It strikes me that it is our culture that is making sex into an idol, and therefore is saying to people when your sex life doesn't work out your life hasn't worked out. It is not the Evangelical Church but our society around us that is putting the stakes up that high.

And my question is, which perspective is most likely to make someone feel that their life is not worth living: the perspective that says sex is everything and if it's not fulfilling then there's no point - life without sex is no life at all? Or the Christian perspective that should be saying sex is a wonderful gift from God, but it is but a gift and is no substitute for the Giver?

We are not the ones who say that a lack of sexual fulfilment is a lack of human fulfilment. So friends, I don't deny that the church has been the cause of ungodly and unwarranted pain and abuse for people over the years and we should not be slow to confess that and to repent of it. But I want to challenge the culture around us to say, I think it has blood on its hands as well, in making sex the centre.

This is certainly the unfortunate result of the Sexual Revolution and the culture wars of our modern times. It is not exclusively limited to homosexuality, but certainly does include it.

 

With the message on the one hand from the sex-driven culture that sexual relations are a core part of one's identity or an integral part of human fulfilment, and the Christian message that the only acceptable form of sexual expression is in the context of marriage between a man and a woman on the other, it is no stretch of imagination how this may lead those struggling with their sexual desires (same-sex or otherwise) to feel sandwiched between two impossible alternatives, thus leading to despair.

Taken together, these two messages present a same-sex attracted person with the (false) dilemma of either embracing one's "identity" and being "true to oneself" by giving in to one's sexual desires or of following God's commands and therefore denying one's "identity" and thereby giving up perceived human fulfilment in this lifetime.

How should the Church respond then?

Despite how political or theological debates are often about whether homosexuality is right or wrong, acceptable or otherwise, the real issue at its core is a concept of identity.

Modern culture attempts to define human identity based on one's sexuality, thereby defining people as either "gay" or "straight", "homosexual" or "heterosexual", or some other form of "gender identity" or "sexual orientation". Perhaps even some Christians may be tempted to adopt these definitions and labels.

However, this is not how God defines or sees us as human beings. The Bible teaches us that our identity comes from being made in the image of God, male and female (Genesis 1:27). If one is a Christian, one's identity comes from being a child of God and, through the Spirit, we are able to call out as children to God, "Abba Father" (Galatians 4:6).

As Sam Allberry said earlier in the same message, "my same-sex attraction is not who I am. It's part of what I feel, but it's not who I am."

Indeed, in Christ, our identity comes from being the children of God. Like Jesus at His baptism, God looks down upon all who are in Christ, and what He said to Jesus He says also to us, "You are my Son, whom I love; with you I am well pleased." (Luke 3:22)

And as children, we are able to look to God for every good gift that the Father intends to give us, be it the gift of marriage or singleness, just like any other good gift that the Father deems fit to give His children.

At all times, it is worth remembering that sex remains a gift, but is no substitute for the Giver, from whom all good things come.

"Sisters of First Century Christians" in the Soviet Gulag

Nobel Prize winner Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn's classic, Gulag Archipelago, recounts the horrors of the Soviet forced labour camps where "political" offenders (referred to as "politicals") were imprisoned and subject to brutal forced labour on account of various "political" offences which ranged from the ridiculous to absurd, as were other prisoners who were jailed for other offences. 

Among those imprisoned for "political" offences were Christians. In Solzhenitsyn's book, he records the best and worst of their responses to persecution. Of these were a group of believers, simple people with a simple faith, that shone in the darkness of the Soviet Gulag: 

And not only socialists were now politicals. The politicals were splashed in tubfuls into the fifteen-million-criminal ocean, and they were invisible and inaudible to us. They were mute. They were muter than all the test. Their image was the fish. 

The fish, symbol of the early Christians. And the Christians were their principal contingent. Clumsy, semiliterate, unable to deliver speeches from the rostrum or compose an underground proclamation (which their faith made unnecessary anyway), they went off to camp to face tortures and death - only so as not to renounce their faith! They knew very well for what they were serving time, and they were unwavering in their convictions! They were the only ones, perhaps, to whom the camp philosophy and even the camp language did not stick. And these were not politicals? Well, you'd certainly not call them riffraff. 

And women among them were particularly numerous. The Tao says: When faith collapses, that is when the true believers appear. Because of our enlightened scoffing at Orthodox priests, the squalling of the Komsomol members on Easter night, and the whistles of the thieves at the transit prisons, we overlooked the fact that the sinful Orthodox Church had nevertheless nurtured daughters worthy of the first centuries of Christianity - sisters of those thrown to the lions in the arenas. 

There was a multitude of Christians: prisoner transports and graveyards, prisoner transports and graveyards. Who will count those millions? They died unknown, casting only in their immediate vicinity a light like a candle. They were the best of Russia's Christians. The worst had all... trembled, recanted, and gone into hiding.

For these blessed believers, perhaps "the world was not worthy of them" (Hebrews 11:38), and certainly "God had planned something better for [them]" (Hebrews 11:40). 

They may have died silently, unknown and unrecognised by the world; but on the side of eternity awaits a crown of righteousness which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will award to them on that day of His appearing (cf. 2 Timothy 4:8).

Faith Without Action is Dead: The cowardice of a pastor in the face of Nazi terror

"What good is it, my brothers, if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds?" (James 2:14)

It is often only in times of testing when the rubber hits the road and when faith is put to the test that we truly see whether one's faith is a living faith accompanied by action or a dead faith.

The Bible records numerous accounts of heroes of faith, well-known and relatively unknown, who have stood against evil even when it cost them dearly. The genocidal impulses against the Hebrews or the Jews have always been strong and, on many occasions, godly men and women stood against the tide. For example, there were the Hebrew midwives Shiphrah and Puah, who disobeyed Pharaoh's order to kill the Hebrew newborn boys (Exodus 1). There was Esther, who stood against Haman's edict seeking to exterminate the Jews.

The pastor, from the film The Hiding Place (1975)

In our own not-too-distant history, the evil one has not relented in his efforts to destroy God's people. In her book, The Hiding Place, Corrie ten Boom records an account where she was looking for a place where she could hide a Jewish mother and child from the Nazi secret police, the Gestapo. With the scourge of Nazi Germany and its genocidal impulses, arrest would almost certainly mean death:

And the very next morning into the shop walked the perfect solution. He was a clergyman friend of ours, pastor in a small town outside of Haarlem, and his home was set back from the street in a large wooded park.

“Good morning, Pastor,” I said, the pieces of the puzzle falling together in my mind. “Can we help you?”

I looked at the watch he had brought in for repair. It required a very hard-to-find spare part. “But for you, Pastor, we will do our very best. And now I have something I want to confess.”

The pastor’s eyes clouded. “Confess?”

I drew him out the back door of the shop and up the stairs to the dining room.

“I confess that I too am searching for something.” The pastor’s face was now wrinkled with a frown. “Would you be willing to take a Jewish mother and her baby into your home? They will almost certainly be arrested otherwise.” Color drained from the man’s face. He took a step back from me. “Miss ten Boom! I do hope you’re not involved with any of this illegal concealment and undercover business. It’s just not safe! Think of your father! And your sister – she’s never been strong!”

On impulse I told the pastor to wait and ran upstairs. Betsie had put the newcomers in Willem’s old room, the farthest from windows on the street. I asked the mother’s permission to borrow the infant: the little thing weighed hardly anything in my arms. Back in the dining room I pulled back the coverlet from the baby’s face.

There was a long silence. The man bent forward, his hand in spite of himself reaching for the tiny fist curled round the blanket. For a moment I saw compassion and fear struggle in his face. Then he straightened. “No. Definitely not. We could lose our lives for that Jewish child!”

Unseen by either of us, Father had appeared in the doorway. “Give the child to me, Corrie,” he said.

Father held the baby close, his white beard brushing its cheek, looking into the little face with eyes as blue and innocent as the baby’s own. At last he looked up at the pastor. “You say we could lose our lives for this child. I would consider that the greatest honor that could come to my family.”

The pastor turned sharply on his heels and walked out of the room.

So we had to accept a bad solution to our problem. On the edge of Haarlem was a truck farm which hid refugees for short periods of time. It was not a good location, since the Gestapo had been there already. But there was nowhere else available on short notice. Two workers took the woman and child there that afternoon.

A few weeks later we heard that the farm had been raided. When the Gestapo came to the barn where the woman was hidden, not the baby but the mother began to shriek with hysteria. She, the baby, and her protectors were all taken. We never learned what happened to them.

Such was the cowardice of the pastor. Indeed, faith without action is dead.