On the Way Forward

I received an email written by a good friend and fellow church member to our pastor on the subject of the upcoming special called General Conference of the United Methodist Church. Our pastor is a delegate from our Annual Conference to that meeting in St. Louis, Missouri. The email contained a screen shot from Christianity Today International that addressed the Bible’s stance on slavery.

I hesitated before responding because I really hate that this issue is so divisive, but also because as I consider it I am (perhaps like a lot of you) conflicted. But first —

Here is my response

I’m not addressing the main issue in your email, but I do have a quibble with the quote from Christianity Today International. The author asked why the Bible didn’t speak out against slavery. But then he quotes Galatians 3:28 which does speak out against slavery! He quotes the beginning of the final discourse in the Gospel of John but doesn’t follow up with Jesus’s expanding on the new commandment in the 15th chapter — “This is my commandment: love one another as I love you. No one has greater love than this, to lay down one’s life for one’s friends. You are my friends if you do what I command you. I no longer call you slaves, because a slave does not know what his master is doing. I have called you friends, because I have told you everything I have heard from my Father.” John 15:12-15 NABRe.

Paul, in his letter to Philemon, urges him to receive the fugitive slave, Onesimus, "no longer as a slave but more than a slave, a beloved brother—especially to me but how much more to you, both in the flesh and in the Lord.” Philemon 1:16 NRSV.

In the Old Testament, Israelite regulations freed slaves every seventh year (Ex. 21:2), commanded the death penalty for manstealing (Ex. 21:16), and generally sought to limit the institution through protection of the slave. Moreover, the “slavery” referred to in the Old and New Testaments was more similar to indentured servitude in which the servant or “slave” had rights (my ancestor, Thomas Wicker, came to America in the 1600’s as an indentured servant and much of what we know about him comes from the lawsuit he brought to enforce the end of his term). Exodus, Leviticus and Deuteronomy are replete with rules regarding the rights or slaves. So, yes, context matters — which is why a pamphlet published in 1845 could be written titled A Condensed Anti-Slavery Bible Argument By a Citizen of Virginia.

The same holds true for the ordination of women, sexual relations outside of marriage, and divorce (although those who persist in sex outside of marriage and/or divorce are not currently eligible for ordination if my understanding is correct). People can argue about these issues because there exists Scriptural authority that can be cited either way.

Again, I hesitated to actually meet the issue head on. My friend was certain in his conviction that the way forward was through the adoption of the “One Church Plan” in which each church could decide whether or not to allow gay marriage ceremonies or sanction gay ordination. Our pastor hasn’t concealed that he feels this would not be in keeping with Scripture. I’d prefer not to have to decide either way, but as we approached the General Conference I felt that I should at least explain why I was more inclined to agree with our pastor.

To continue

Okay, so I will address, but won’t resolve, the main issue in your email.

The problem with the advocates of gay marriage in the church or gay ordination is that there is practically no direct Biblical authority for the position. The problem with opponents of gay marriage in the church or gay ordination is that there is very little direct Biblical authority for that position and what does exist has been the subject of much earnest (and some not so earnest) debate with regard to interpretation.

I doubt you would have advocated a change in this position 40 years ago (you might have, but I doubt it). That’s because both our culture and our legal system have evolved since then. I say “evolved” although “changed” might be a better term because evolution doesn’t go backward, but sometimes law and culture do. In the context of Christianity I am not persuaded by changes in culture or civil law. I am not persuaded that we should say that Scripture should be re-interpreted based on changing historical, political, cultural or social circumstances. I do believe that good Christians should be guided by the "better angels" of our nature as revealed by historical, political, cultural and social circumstance, but I also believe that Scripture is a primary, if not the primary, source for determining what those “better angels” are.

I also believe that God, through the working of the Holy Spirit in Holy Conferencing, can reveal to us what Scripture’s message is and that divine revelation through Scripture can evolve (here, I use the word “evolve” intentionally, but with caution). In other words, we might change — we might even evolve — but Scripture itself does not and attempts to understand Scripture anew may be sanctioned, but attempts to change Scripture cannot.

There are two issues to consider in my opinion. One issue involves the Discipline and the wording of the Discipline. The other involves doctrine as defined by Scripture informed (but not controlled) by reason, experience and tradition.

On the first issue, I believe that the wording in the Discipline could be changed while the doctrinal position is maintained.

The wording in the Discipline is as follows —

“We affirm that all persons are individuals of sacred worth, created in the image of God. All persons need the ministry of the Church in their struggles for human fulfillment, as well as the spiritual and emotional care of a fellowship that enables reconciling relationships with God, with others, and with self. The United Methodist Church does not condone the practice of homosexuality and considers this practice incompatible with Christian teaching. We affirm that God’s grace is available to all. We will seek to live together in Christian community, welcoming, forgiving, and loving one another, as Christ has loved and accepted us. We implore families and churches not to reject or condemn lesbian and gay members and friends. We commit ourselves to be in ministry for and with all persons.”

¶ 161G, The Book of Discipline
of The United Methodist Church 2016

There are several other paragraphs of the Discipline that address ordination specifically, the issue of marriage, etc., but I quoted the passage above because many feel the language is too harsh in declaring this practice “incompatible with Christian teaching”, including some who are opposed to doctrinal change on the issue.

But back to my response

On the second issue, I have been persuaded but not convinced on the subject of change. On an issue as important as the primacy of Scripture, I set the bar at the higher level. I have prayed and will continue to pray for our Pastor, our church, our delegation and the United Methodist General Conference: that God will provide the wisdom and discernment for the way forward on this issue in a way that lifts up God’s ultimate commandment that we love one another as he has loved us.

In obeying that commandment we have to come back to first principles and the very first of these is that we don’t make the rules — God does. In reaching the decisions to be made in the next few days it is my fervent prayer that all the delegates will be guided by this first principle and not by their personal preferences, their feelings, the laws of their countries (whether here, in Africa or anywhere else), their culture or their politics. It is likely that there will be witnesses to the faith either way the decision falls. So be it — there have been witnesses before and will likely be witnesses until the final end comes.

Shalom, you are my brother,

So here we are

A couple of weeks ago I wrote about the “hometown people” of Nazareth, angered with Jesus, leading him up to the “brow of the hill” with the intention of throwing him off. They were angry because Jesus, having already begun performing miracles in Galilee, didn’t meet their expectations.

We aren’t that different from those “hometown people”. On both sides, we have expectations and pre-conceived notions of what is right and what is wrong and what should constitute the “way forward”.

I have many friends who are strong proponents of gay marriage and ordination in the United Methodist Church. I also have many friends who are just as strongly opposed to gay marriage and ordination in the church as not being supported by Scripture. Here are some links to views on the issue. This is not an exhaustive list, but one which includes the thoughts of good friends as well as resources recommended by friends on all sides:

Like most of us today, I have many gay friends who a generation ago would have suffered in secret due to the way society and our government treated them. I accept them as a matter of social norm, law and culture. How can I deny them marriage in the church and ordination as pastors?

I don’t. But then, the question is not what I sanction in this context, but what Scripture sanctions or doesn’t. Despite the church consisting of people, we don’t define the church — Scripture does.

In struggling with this issue I’ve had to confront the way I relate to my LGBTQ sisters and brothers (and others) in our culture versus how I relate to them in the context of Scripture as understood by and revealed to my church.

  • On the one hand my church affirms them as “individuals of sacred worth, created in the image of God.” And my church implores “families and churches not to reject or condemn lesbian and gay members and friends.” ¶ 161G Human Sexuality, The Book of Discipline of The United Methodist Church 2016.
  • On the other hand, my church holds that “self-avowed practicing homosexuals are not to be certified as candidates, ordained as ministers, or appointed to serve in The United Methodist Church.” (ibid. ¶ 304.3 Qualifications for Ordination). And my church supports “laws in civil society that define marriage as the union of one man and one woman.” (ibid. ¶ 161C Marriage).

I wish it were as easy for me as it is for those who see, without any doubt (or very little doubt) that “human sexuality” in Christian terms is defined as the relationship between a man and a woman. Anything other than that is incompatible with Christian teaching.

I wish it were as easy for me as it is for those who see, without any doubt (or very little doubt) that “human sexuality” in Christian terms contains the whole gamut of relationships within it as there are colors contained in God’s covenantal rainbow.

As set forth in my response to my friend’s email, I am of the firm belief that understanding Scripture anew may be sanctioned, but changing Scripture cannot.

I’m sure there will be people on both sides of this issue who will strongly disagree with me. I’ll continue forward with a mind open to all of the arguments. But if you want to convince me, base your arguments on Scripture, not culture or politics or law. I will welcome any cogent hermeneutics that will reconcile my understanding of Scripture with my understanding of societal norms.

The state (as in the United States) now recognizes gay marriage and some of the gay couples that I know have taken advantage of the opportunity to be wed, while others have not. Looking at the relationships of some of the gay couples that I know (whether married or not) I see commitment, care, nurture and love. Although I may not see Scriptural authority that supports gay marriage, I agree with Wesley Hill that —-

One of the key callings for Christians right now is not to demonize or vilify gay people or people who disagree with us about marriage. We can at the same time say that we don’t think this view of marriage contributes to human flourishing without doing down all the many virtues that so many gay couples exhibit – there’s so much patience, love and tenderness that a lot of gay people show to one another and I think that Christians don’t have to try to downplay that or ignore that as we uphold what we think the Bible teaches about marriage.

Similarly, we should not demonize or vilify gay people or people who disagree with us about the issue of ordination, but should look for ways to use the gifts and graces that each person has. Not everyone is called to ordained ministry, but all can serve in some capacity and our goal should be to strive for the “greater gifts” that build up and strengthen others before ourselves.

So here we are, once again on the brow of the hill. I pray that we learn from the example of the “hometown people” and set aside pre-conceived notions and expectations based on our own particular views and instead turn away from the precipice and follow where Christ leads.

I pray for the delegates to the General Conference as they discern God’s guidance. I pray that they bring open minds and humility to the task. I pray that the Holy Spirit descends on them like a mighty wind and that the delegates not only hear the sound of it, but are born into and with it — loving God and one another.