A note on recent news about a pastor/preacher’s conviction for preaching the Gospel in an abortion buffer zone. We need to be clear about a couple of things.
1. The conviction isn’t about freedom to preach the Gospel. It’s about actions within a buffer zone perceived as intended to intimidate those going to a clinic
2. There is a strong case for arguing that the buffer zones are disproportionate and wrong, a curb on freedom of speech.
3. Some people may consider it wise and best to respect the buffer zones whilst disagreeing. I would be in that camp. I would counsel against the kind of doorstep protests without them. Some people see thus as necessary as it might save one life. Whilst I don’t agree, I can respect the position. I understand and respect the position if CBR UK too whilst disagreeing with it.
4. If you are protesting about abortion then I don’t think it is wise or healthy to use prayer or Gospel preaching as a means to that. I suspect that this happens in some cases. That’s virtue signalling and s misuse of those things.
5. I think in some cases and probably in this case there is a genuine desire to offer good news if forgiveness. That’s different to above. Again I’m not convinced that you get a hearing and it confuses messages. But I understand.
6. We can hold all of the above and again at the same time regard Pastor Clive’s conviction as a grievous injustice. A man has been punished by the letter of the law when his desire was to do good, to protect life and not to harm it. That’s what it means to live in a culture of death when we belong to the culture of life.
Faithroots 