Mediaboss Marketing

Even though Ive dwindled down my Facebook time to almost nothing, its easy to see folks have been in a bit of a frenzy concerning Mike Pence and his practical application of how best to love and be faithful to his wife. When I say folks, I am speaking of all folks, Christian and not Christian. But since this is the Patheos Evangelical Channel, and since I am particularly saddened at some Christian responses to the situation (as I believe Christians should support rather than tear one another down), lets discuss Christians only.

What is the right response, the Christian response, to hearing the news that Mike Pence will not dine with women to whom he is not married?

Romans 14 talks about Christians judging other Christians. More specifically, how they shouldnt judge when it comes to eating or not eating meat offered to idols. In the Pence case, we are talking about eating with a woman who isnt a spouse vs a woman who is a spouse. But though the situational specifics are a little different, the command is the same:

Dont judge.

There is a time for making judgment calls. For instance, we are told we will know Christians by their fruits, and there are situations where it is necessary to judge whether someone is truly in the faith. But then there is a time to allow for Christian liberty. In the case of Mike Pence choosing to abstain from all evil and guard his heart with all diligence, it is not time to judge. Its time to allow a fellow brother in Christ to make his own choices about whether to abstain or not abstain from eating with a person of the opposite sex, which we can only assume has been chosen as a safeguard in response to thorough and thoughtful self-examination.

Are there better ways? Should the Vice President choose, as Karen Swallow Prior noted in her article, virtuous living over living by a set of man-made rules? Perhaps! But what if Pence recognizes within himself a significant lack of virtue in the area of sexual purity? What then, is he supposed to do? Put on a show as though he is virtuous and dine with women with whom he is not wed? Or enforce a man-made rule in an effort to do what God has commanded (that is, to remain a one woman man)?

Virtue, as Prior noted, is the better practice. Rules say dont be bad and do not touch when virtue says be good and touch what is good. So we are looking at a negative reinforcement of sorts versus a positive reinforcement of sorts. But if theres anything my forty four years of life and twenty-six years of parenting has taught me, its that different types of reinforcement work for different types of people, personalities, and temperaments. Perhaps Pence responds best to negative reinforcement rather than an encouragement to do what is right out of a sincere, virtuous heart.

Christians should eventually get to the point at which virtue rules in their hearts (and therefore actions), rather than rules determining their actions. But each Christian is in a different place in their sanctification. And Pence is in a different place than the rest of us, in that he has been placed one notch down from the highest political office in the country, which no doubt comes with an excessive opportunities to ignore virtue and follow ones own heart (which is not a virtuous practice, as the world would have us to believe). So who are we as fellow Christians to judge another by what boundaries he has set up to protect the sanctity of his marriage? If the boundary has been established because he recognizes a lack of personal virtue and cannot see any way but a rule to help guide and protect him, who are we to say Chuck the rule. Grow up! Be virtuous!

If he is in a place where rules help him best, then so be it. Or if he simply wishes to not have the added burden of temptations to the already rigorous demands of political office, then so be it. He is at liberty to flesh out the command to be a faithful husband however he and the Lord choose.The Bible is adamant about what we should do when sexual immorality becomes a temptation. It says to flee. Run! Find the nearest EXIT sign and scram. So while Mike Pence, according to some, should not have the need to flee, the fact is that clearly, he does have a need to flee. And we should not despise him for it.

To be clear. Karen Swallow Priors article was a helpful clarification of the differences between rules and virtue, and what the more noble option is when dealing with sexual temptation. There was no judgment being passed, and I appreciated her excellent effort to clarify the differences between virtue-based and rule-based obedience. I am simply adding that for those of us Christians who cannot, for whatever reason, bear Pences methods of ensuring fidelity, Romans 14 instructs to not judge a fellow Christian:

As for the one who is weak in faith, welcome him, but not to quarrel over opinions. One person believes he may eat anything, while the weak person only eats vegetables. Let not the one who eats despise the one who abstains, and let not the one who abstains pass judgment on the one who eats, for God has welcomed him. Who are you to pass judgment on the servant of another? It is before his own master that he stands or falls. And he will be upheld, for the Lord is able to make him stand.

It would seem that no matter what stand a politician takes regarding sexual morality, frustration and anger are expressed. But I say if a man is being faithful to his wife, he is to be commended and honored. Pence is in the process of practically working out his own salvation. As am I. As is every Christian. We should be allowing him the freedom to do that, even if it doesnt mirror the practical working out of our own salvation. The Lord is helping us to stand, and hes helping Mike Pence to stand. Pence may require a bigger (or different) crutch than we do, but there is no sin in that. There is, however, sin in belittling a fellow Christian for using a different type of crutch than our own. Or for using one at all, until he can walk without constant assistance.

Being a virtuous person will always be better than being a person who simply knows how to follow rules. But rules, and the obeying of those rules, can and often does pave the road to genuine virtuous living. Once a man has remained faithful for any length of time, it would not be uncommon for that man to see the value in remaining faithful, to reap the positive benefits from it, and to eventually be motivated out of virtue to continue in marital faithfulness.

Ill close with this:

Rule keeping for the sake of rule keeping is not a place we want to stay, or where we want to see our brother stay. But rule keeping is a better place to be than say sleeping around or having emotional affairs with someone other than ones spouse. The heart of the matter is always a matter of the heart. But if ones heart is not in it, its still better to do the right thing for the sake of doing the right thing than to not do the right thing at all.

Additionally, who is to say that Pence, though he still follows the Billy Graham Rule, does not also obey out of virtue? Its possible he is indeed virtuous, and yet chooses to practice the Billy Graham rule by way of doubling up on safeguards, because he knows that pride goes before a fall, and to trust in his own virtue would be disastrous.Man sees the outward appearance, but God sees the heart. (I Sam. 16:7) and we would do well to recognize that though weve seen some outward appearances, we dont know the Vice Presidents heart.

I commend him for doing the right thing, whatever his reasoning. I also pray that, at some point, virtue may rule in his heart (if it is indeed absent), more than the Billy Graham rule. Still, if I was his wife, Id be grateful for his sheer determination to remain faithful, no matter the method he uses to attain that faithfulness. Karen Pence is blessed. For she has what too many American wives, and especially American wives of politicians, do not have: a husband willing to do whatever it takes to remain faithful.

Continue reading here:
The Proper Christian Response to Mike Pence's Safeguards - Patheos (blog)