Influential televangelist of the 700 Club, Pat Robertson, set off a firestorm of criticism last week when he made some controversial statements during an interview on the Christian Broadcasting Network (CBN). What was being discussed at the time was a single woman who had three adopted children of overseas origins, and who was having difficulty finding a man who wanted a long-term relationship with her because of the children being adopted. Pat Robertson’s response to the scenario and the woman’s predicament was as follows:
“A man doesn’t want to take on the United Nations, and this woman has all these various children, blended family, what is it – you don’t know what problems there are. I’m serious. I’ve got a dear friend, an adopted son, a little kid from an orphanage down in Columbia and the child had brain damage, you know, grew up weird. And you just never know what’s been done to a child before you get that child, what kind of sexual abuse has been, what kind of cruelty, what kind of food deprivation, etc. etc. etc.
So you’re not a dog, but you don’t have to take on that kind of responsibility. You don’t have to take on somebody else’s problems. I mean you really don’t. You can help people, you can minister to people – we’ve ministered to orphans all over the world, thousands of them. We love orphans, we love helping people, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that I’m going to take all the orphans around the world into my home.”
Pat Robertson has been no stranger to controversy and has made some curious and shocking statements in the past. He also isn’t a stranger to being rebuked for some of his statements and ideas either. In this case, The Southern Baptist televangelist’s comments were rebuked with striking force from Russell Moore, the professor, dean, and senior vice president at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary who wrote a lengthy response to Robertson, some of which is quoted here:
“Let me just say this bluntly. This is not just a statement we ought to disagree with. This is of the devil…
The issue here isn’t just that Robertson is, with cruel and callous language, dismissing the Christian mandate to care for the widows and orphans in their distress. The issue is that his disregard is part of a larger worldview. The prosperity and power gospel Robertson has preached fits perfectly well with the kind of counsel he’s giving in recent years. Give China a pass on their murderous policies; we’ve got business interests there. Divorce your weak wife; she can’t do anything for you anymore. Those adopted kids might have brain damage; they’re “weird.” What matters is health and wealth and power. But that’s not the gospel of Jesus Christ. For too long, we’ve let our leaders replace the cross with an Asherah pole. Enough is enough…
Christians are the ones who have stood against the prophets of Baal and the empire of Rome and every other satanic system to say that a person’s worth doesn’t consist in his usefulness. Christians are the ones who picked up abandoned babies, who wiped drool from the dying elderly, who joyfully received developmentally disabled children, and who recognized that our own sin has made us nothing noble or powerful. We’re all just dead and damaged and, well, “weird.” But Jesus loved us anyway…
I say to my non-Christian friends and neighbors, if you want to see the gospel of Christ, the gospel that has energized this church for two thousand years, turn off the television. The grinning cartoon characters who claim to speak for Christ don’t speak for him.”
In summary, Moore called Robertson’s statements to be from the Devil, essentially said that Robertson is a follower of the pagan deity Asherah, called him a grinning cartoon character, and said that he doesn’t represent Christ or the Gospel… pretty strong words.
Following the withering criticism emanating from virtually all religious directions, Robertson issued a clarification on his statements:
“Today, on live television, I misstated my heartfelt dedication and commitment to helping orphans. For decades, I have supported adoption, and have helped tens of thousands of children worldwide.
I wanted to say, but it didn’t come out the way I intended, that adoption is not for everyone.
The mother of three adopted children, who wrote in about her boyfriend’s issue with her children, did a wonderful, unselfish act to adopt and I respect her immensely. Yet, adoption might not be a fit for her boyfriend. If that is the case, she needs to find someone who better shares her passion for adoption.
Adoptive parents are taking on enormous responsibility, both emotionally and financially. Quite frankly, they need as much disclosure as possible about the child’s background and health to assure the best fit and be prepared.
In answering the letter writer, this is what I meant to say. If any doubt remains, I ask you to please look at what I’ve done over the years to help orphans.”
So that is Robertson’s defense, that he misstated his position and just meant to convey his belief that adoption is not for everyone. However, Moore preemptively prepared for any such a statement from Robertson. In the same response that was previously quoted, Moore also wrote a rebuttal to any defense Robertson or his supporters might try to put forward:
“The last go round, Robertson ‘clarified’ his statements on a man leaving his sick wife. Didn’t mean to say it was right, he said, just that the man’s got to have some companionship and a divorce is better than adultery. Please. Robertson’s defenders said to me in letters and calls and emails that Robertson is just not what he used to be mentally and that you ought to hold him to a lower standard. That would be true if people were tapping his phone, or going to his house and recording conversations. However, the man is on television, representing to millions of people what Christianity is about.”
So whether it was simply a matter of poor rhetoric as Robertson alleges, or whether his statements betray the much more serious issue of him having a deeply flawed worldview as Moore alleges, that determination will be left to you.
At any rate, Moore makes the valuable point that regardless of whether this was merely a mistaken choice of words or whether it betrays a demonic belief, the pertinent issue is that Pat Robertson is in a powerful position of influence and such mistakes/heresies (as the case may be) do not represent Christianity or its God and reflect very poorly on both.
No comments yet
Leave a Reply