Healing and Restoration: Preaching against Abortion and other Sins

I used to believe that effective preaching should comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable. I still believe this but with a modification – we are all somewhat comfortable and somewhat afflicted. This means that effective preaching should afflict and comfort all of us.

How is preaching to afflict us? It must preach sin – not only the things that we do wrong but also the things that we neglect to do. We have failed to raise our voices on behalf of our persecuted brethren. Across the Islamic world, our brethren have become the objects of persecution, even of genocide. Tens of thousands of Christians are being routinely slaughtered, and many of our churches remain silent. But silence is culpable:

•  Rescue those being led away to death; hold back those staggering toward slaughter. If you say, “But we knew nothing about this,” does not he who weighs the heart perceive it? Does not he who guards your life know it? Will he not repay everyone according to what they have done? (Proverbs 24:11-12)

If we do not fulfill our responsibility in this regard, we cannot point the indicting finger against the governments, media, and universities of the West for remaining silent. Meanwhile, these institutions are asking, “Why is the church silent regarding their own brethren!” This is doubly tragic, because it is our loving concern for our brethren that is supposed to demonstrate the reality of Christ in our midst and consequently, draw the outsider to Him (John 17:20-23).

If we know to do right and don’t do it, we sin (James 4:17). Why then are our churches not preaching against evil and our failure to address it? In reference to the evil of abortion, World Magazine offers several reasons for the silence:

• Preaching on the issue might seem uncool or anti-intellectual.
• Preaching on the issue might discomfort church members or hurt women in the congregation who’ve had abortions. (Jan. 25, 2014, 42)

Effective preaching should discomfort so that it also might comfort! The Apostle Paul did not want to cause his churches sorrow. However, he charged them with sin so that they might experience real comfort and healing:

• Even if I caused you sorrow by my letter, I do not regret it. Though I did regret it—I see that my letter hurt you, but only for a little while— yet now I am happy, not because you were made sorry, but because your sorrow led you to repentance. For you became sorrowful as God intended and so were not harmed in any way by us. Godly sorrow brings repentance that leads to salvation and leaves no regret, but worldly sorrow brings death. See what this godly sorrow has produced in you: what earnestness, what eagerness to clear yourselves, what indignation, what alarm, what longing, what concern, what readiness to see justice done. (2 Cor. 7:8-11)

“Godly sorrow” produces real comfort, earnestness and healing. This should be the aim of effective preaching. However, such preaching must also provide the elixir of grace. Paul understood the sorrow of the Corinthian church within the framework of grace. The sorrow was what “God intended” in His mercy to produce the healing of repentance.

I think that we have lost our taste for the offensive – preaching to convict of sin. “Fire and brimstone” preaching has been broadly discredited, and is now seen/experienced as “politically incorrect.” However, this is the very thing we need.

Nevertheless, I must confess that I had utterly abhorred this type of sermon – the “try harder, do better” sermon. I would often leave church feeling like useless trash, incapable of doing better. I felt like a spiritual failure. Consequently, I resented the pastor and everyone else in the church who seemed to resonate to this kind of preaching. Instead, I wanted the grace-sermon – the sermon that would tell me that I was okay just as I am.

For me the works-sermon was a denial of grace, and the grace-sermon was a denial of works and the need for obedience. However, as I grew in my appreciation and assurance of grace, I began to understand that the two – grace and obedience – were actually complementary and not antagonistic. They worked together in supporting each other.

I now hope to be convicted of my sin and to see anew how unworthy I am of the grace of God. Why endure this grief? When I do endure it, it brings me back to something far sweeter – the reminder that God loves and forgives me, despite my unworthiness (Luke 17:10). How precious then is His grace, renewed for me through this kind of preaching! This process does not allow grace to become something stale but rather activates it to the point of tears. It brings grace before me as a living Entity – “He loves me; He loves me, and I don’t deserve a morsel of it!”

Pastor Mark Driscoll preaches an anti-abortion sermon regularly to a church where many have either had or encouraged an abortion:

•  “You men who have encouraged, forced or paid for the abortion, you women who have killed your own child, murdered your own child… The good news is that Jesus died for the murderers… You need Jesus, and you need him to forgive you for your murder, and he will.” (44)

World reports that one woman “began worshipping and weeping”:

• Then her four living children hugged her, supported by her husband. Eventually, she started comforting another post-abortive woman. (44)

Now that’s healing! World mentions another reason why pastors are reluctant to preach on sin, namely abortion:

•  Preaching on the issue might politically stigmatize the pastor or politicize the pulpit, scaring seekers off. (42)

Perhaps to the contrary - the seeker might see the healing, relief, and comfort that result from both the preaching of sin and grace and note the authenticity and sincerity of the community that emerges from such biblical preaching.

To Love is to Speak about Sin

It is not fashionable to confront others about their sins. It can even be dangerous as two street preachers recently learned as they preached sin at a gay pride event in Seattle.

Consequently, many want to keep the message positive – sanitized of anything negative. Sin is negative, but sin is inseparable from the Gospel. The Gospel of salvation is not complete without mention of what we have been saved from! Without an understanding of sin and punishment, the Gospel will seem meaningless, perhaps even foolish. Grace has no meaning apart from an awareness of our need for grace. Besides, if we don’t see our need for forgiveness, the idea that God will forgive us is offensive.

When the church was most Spirit-empowered, there was no hesitation to confront the sinner with his sin. In his first evangelistic sermon, Peter pulled no punches:

• “Therefore let all Israel be assured [in light of the miraculous and biblical attestation] and of this: God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Messiah.”

Why didn’t Peter keep the message positive? Why did he have to mention “Jesus, whom you crucified?” That would only turn off his audience or even send them into a violent rage, wouldn’t it? No! Instead, they were convicted of their sin, as Peter’s next words indicate:

• When the people heard this, they were cut to the heart and said to Peter and the other apostles, “Brothers, what shall we do?” Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off—for all whom the Lord our God will call.” With many other words he warned them; and he pleaded with them, “Save yourselves from this corrupt generation.” Those who accepted his message were baptized, and about three thousand were added to their number that day.

I think that we have a distorted view of love. Perhaps instead of enabling, the most loving thing we can do is to “cut [them] to the heart?” The results argue in favor of this.

Peter also informed his “cut” audience that they had to “Repent and be baptized.” However, people tend to think that they are good and deserving. Therefore, they think that there is nothing they need to repent from. Oprah claims:

• A mistake we humans make is believing that there is only one way…There are many paths to what you call God…There couldn’t possibly be just one way…Do you think that if you never heard the name of Jesus but lived with a loving heart…you wouldn’t get to heaven?...Does God care about the heart or if you call His Son ‘Jesus?’”  

Oprah, as do many other Western gurus, believes that God knows that we are basically good people who possess a “loving heart.” Result – the loving heart enters heaven!

Therefore, our preaching has to first demonstrate that we are not entitled by our allegedly “loving heart” to any of God’s blessings. As long as we think we are entitled, grace can no longer be grace but a payment that we deserve from God by virtue of our goodness (Rom. 4:1-12).

In his next sermon, Peter once again pounds his listeners about their sin:

• The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the God of our fathers, has glorified his servant Jesus. You handed him over to be killed, and you disowned him before Pilate, though he had decided to let him go.  You disowned the Holy and Righteous One and asked that a murderer be released to you.  You killed the author of life, but God raised him from the dead. (Acts 3:13-15)

Quite a heavy indictment! We don’t know the fruitage of this sermon, because Peter was immediately whisked away to court. However, before he was grabbed, he preached the only solution for their sin and guilt:

• Repent, then, and turn to God, so that your sins may be wiped out, that times of refreshing may come from the Lord. (Acts 3:19)

Peter understood faith (3:16). However, it seems that he wanted to emphasize the flip side of the faith coin – repentance. Faith and repentance are inseparable. In order to turn to the Savior – our new life - in faith, we automatically turn from the old life of sin. It is impossible to turn to God without also turning away from something else at the same time! Peter understood that in order to turn to the light, it was imperative to turn from the darkness, and the Jewish people needed to know that they were in darkness, even though they were children of the covenant.

Even before the Sanhedrin, he confronted the leadership with their sin:

• “It is by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified but whom God raised from the dead, that this man stands before you healed. Jesus is ‘the stone you builders rejected, which has become the cornerstone (Psalm 118:22).’” (Acts 4:10-11)

Peter was filled with the Holy Spirit. Consequently, he feared God and not men. I think that we need to always pray and examine ourselves. We need to ask God to reveal to us whether we are unduly concerned about the opinions of others at the expense of the opinions of our Lord. Peter brought this message home on his next visit to the Sanhedrin:

• “We must obey God rather than human beings!  The God of our ancestors raised Jesus from the dead—whom you killed by hanging him on a cross.  God exalted him to his own right hand as Prince and Savior that he might bring Israel to repentance and forgive their sins. (Acts 5:29-31)

According to Peter, even the Sanhedrin had to repent in order to receive the mercy of God. One pastor told me that Israel had their own covenant and therefore didn’t need Jesus. However, the entire New Testament demises such a notion. According to Peter, Jesus’ death and resurrection are essential to the forgiveness of all sins, not simply Gentile sins!

Stephen was also filled with the Spirit, but this didn’t lead him to preach a kinder and gentler gospel. He devoted a lengthy sermon (Acts 6 and 7) to show his self-righteous opposition what great sinners they were:

• “You stiff-necked people! Your hearts and ears are still uncircumcised. You are just like your ancestors: You always resist the Holy Spirit! Was there ever a prophet your ancestors did not persecute? They even killed those who predicted the coming of the Righteous One. And now you have betrayed and murdered him— you who have received the law that was given through angels but have not obeyed it.” (Acts 7:51-53)

In order to make his point, Stephen rehearsed the rebellious history of Israel, made plain by Scripture. With this he was preaching to the choir and the choir was listening. He was building a bridge to his ultimate point – that his protagonists were “just like your ancestors!”

All of this doesn’t mean I’m ready to wade into the midst of a gay pride event with a bullhorn. However, it does mean that preaching sin cannot be separated from the Gospel. Stephen’s sermon also suggests that it might be difficult to preach sin and repentance without first having established a beachhead – areas of agreement.

Peter’s and Stephen’s listeners all shared the same Scriptures. This made the accusation of sin easier than it would be at the gay pride rally. I think that this means that we must be in prayer about how and when we speak about sin, but not whether we will speak about it.