Recently, I was asked to explain why the United Methodist Church affirms the ministry of clergywomen. Those who argue against clergywomen point to a passage in 1 Timothy. However, there is much evidence in Scripture that supports women as spiritual leaders.
My wife, Susan, is pastor of St. James UMC in Newport, NC and under her leadership the church has grown tremendously and has recently completed a 1.5 million dollar Community Life Center. And, our associate pastor here at Ann Street UMC in Beaufort is Anne Sims, herself an uncommonly gifted pastor.
The following are the notes of a lecture I gave on the subject.
Reasons for Clergywomen
What does it mean to accept the authority of Scripture? How does Scripture, the written Word of God stand in relation to Jesus, the Incarnate, Living, Word of God? How do we begin to decide if this or that stance is in keeping with God?
Example: fifty-year old widow loses everything in a hurricane. She comes to the church asking for food and clothing. Do we help her? What is our Scriptural justification?
1TI 5:3 Give proper recognition to those widows who are really in need.
1TI 5:9 No widow may be put on the list of widows unless she is over sixty, has been faithful to her husband.
What truth in Scripture is conditional: that is, only for a certain time and age, and what truth is eternal, that for all times and places?
For instance, the dietary laws of the Old Testament are no longer followed.
And there are exceptions to the prohibition of working on the Sabbath.
And today we would not consider the New Testament cure for stomach and other illnesses to be mandatory, although in those days it made sense, knowing what we do about bacteria in water. 1TI 5:23 Stop drinking only water, and use a little wine because of your stomach and your frequent illnesses.
Example: the issue of slavery. New Testament gives slaves status: 1 Cor 12:13 For we were all baptized by one Spirit into one body--whether Jews or Greeks, slave or free--and we were all given the one Spirit to drink. Galatians 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
Yet, Bible accepts the reality of slavery: EPH 6:5 Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ.
And yet brings a new dynamic into the equation: EPH 6:9 And masters, treat your slaves in the same way. Do not threaten them, since you know that he who is both their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no favoritism with him.
As Christian people who regard slavery as wrong, we point to Scripture as at least pointing us in the right direction. We accept that Scripture deals with reality (which at that time said that slavery was legal), and the Spirit leads us to where Scripture begins to point: that if in Jesus slave and free are of equal value, then slavery itself might be wrong.
Jesus: never ordained and never gave the church guidelines.
So, we look to Scripture and we seek truth from Jesus Christ, the Incarnate Word of God. And we listen for the whisper of the Spirit as we seek to find God’s leading.
Does Scripture point us to women as spiritual leaders? Yes
Exodus 15:20 speaks of Miriam, the prophetess. Numbers 12:4 makes it clear that Miriam is counted, along with her brothers Moses and Aaron as a spiritual leader. Micah 6:4 reiterates this point: MIC 6:4 I brought you up out of Egypt and redeemed you from the land of slavery I sent before you Moses, Aaron, and Miriam.
Then we have the judges. Now judges were legal, political, military, and spiritual leaders. Judges 4 and 5 speak of Deborah as a judge and military leader.
It is the prophetess Huldah who in 2 Kings 22:14-19 is asked to validate the book found in the temple now known as Deuteronomy.
New Testament: Let’s think of the context of Jesus’ ministry as being more and more inclusive. He eats with sinners, hangs out with lepers. Allows women to be a part of his ministry. Expands his ministry not just to Jewish people, but to all.
More precisely, in Luke 10 we find the story of Mary and Martha. Martha is gently chastised for taking on the traditional (for that time) role of a woman, while Mary is honored for sitting at Jesus’ feet... which by the way was the accepted position of a disciple.
John 4:39 tells us that many believed because of the testimony (preaching) of an unnamed women forever famous as the Woman at the Well.
The Easter story tells us that the story would not be told, except that the women spoke the truth of Resurrection to the disciples. Matthew 28:7 tells us that an angel himself commanded the women to tell the disciples.
Romans 16:3 speaks of Priscilla: Greet Priscilla and Aquila, my fellow workers in Christ Jesus.
And Acts 18:26 has Priscilla teaching Apollos , even correcting him presumably (“they explained the way of God more adequately.”)
1 Corinthians 11 speaks of women prophesying and praying. So, in Corinth, it was OK to have women preachers.
In this Chapter we also have an example of Christ leading us beyond societal norms. Paul has spoken of an inferior position of women to men. That was indeed true in his society. However, he then writes this: 1CO 11:11 In the Lord, however, woman is not independent of man, nor is man independent of woman.
And of course we have numerous references in Scripture that in Christ there is no longer male nor female, Jew nor Greek, slave nor free. Of course there are differences, some biological (men/women), some societal (slave/free), other ethnic (Jew/Greek). However, in Christ, all these differences dissolve at the spiritual level.
In Christ, slave and free, man and woman, Jew and Greek, are all equally called, all equally allowed to participate fully in ministry.
If one would deny women ordination, then one has to cast aside much Scripture and, I think also the witness of Christ himself who empowered women to proclaim the truth of his Lordship, and in the case of Mary, explicitly commended her taking the position of a disciple.
We also have to take seriously what it means to be the Body of Christ, guided by the Holy Spirit. Women are in ministry because the Spirit has given them that call. Many women, my wife among them, faced obstacle after obstacle, yet still persevered.
And with all due modesty about my family, I would submit that the ministry taking place at St. James in Newport is a validation of the Sprit’s call upon my wife’s life. And I daresay the ministry of Anne has been a blessing to this congregation as well.
You know, when Peter preached a new thing, about Christ, many wanted him put to death. But a wise rabbi defended Peter in the Sanhedrin and said [Acts 5:38] Therefore, in the present case I advise you: Leave these men alone! Let them go! For if their purpose or activity is of human origin, it will fail. 39 But if it is from God, you will not be able to stop these men; you will only find yourselves fighting against God."
Can we truly argue that Susan’s calling is not from God? Or Anne’s? How could their ministry bear fruit, except that it is from God?
I would submit that a view that denies women ordination is contrary to the new life proclaimed in Jesus Christ. Are there Scriptures that would seem to speak against women clergy? Yes. And then it is up to the church to decide which truth is eternal and which statements were valid only for a certain time and place.
Yes, because of cultural conditions back then, there were places where women were silenced. But what right do we have to call these situations normative? Why aren’t the many places where women are given a pastoral role normative for us?
The Case of 1 Timothy 2:11
Another thought. It is ironic that 1 Tim 2:11 is lifted up as a definitive and final statement on the matter. Here’s what it says. 1TI 2:11 A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. 15 But women will be saved through childbearing--if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.
We might surmise that the situation to which Paul writes is in fact specific to a certain time and place. And we know that Timothy is in Ephesus (1Tim 1:3), which as it turns out is the center of the cult of Diana. Her temple was one of the Seven Wonders of the World. Acts 19:27 speaks of how popular Diana and Diana-worship was. Spiritually, males were in danger of being completely marginalized.
Paul is in effect saying “Women, shut up and listen. Learn about Christ.” He is arguing against a pagan view in Ephesus in that day unique in the Roman Empire, that women were in charge. And so, to defend against a point of view that says, “males, you are inferior, for after all, sin came through Adam”, Paul says, wait a minute, Eve isn’t so innocent herself, for she was the one deceived. It’s important to note that elsewhere, Paul regards sin as coming not through Eve, but Adam (Romans 5:12). But in Ephesus, Paul does not want women to create a society that makes males irrelevant, so instead counsels women of their more traditional role as mother.
And a final comment about this passage: Even if we lay aside the historical background of the Cult of Diana (even though it is explicitly mentioned in Acts), we still do not have a prohibition against clergy women. For one thing, if women can’t be clergy because “they must keep silence” then logically this would not apply only to clergy women, but to all women. Do we really believe that Paul demands women not speak, ever, either at home or in church? If we use this passage to argue against clergywomen we must also realize with equal validity this passage could be used against any woman who even speaks at church. And finally, let’s look carefully at what is written. Paul does not say “God demands women not teach or have authority.” He only says “I do not permit.” Paul does not say “God does not permit.” Yes, in Ephesus, at that time and place, it made perfect sense for Paul to say “I do not permit women to teach or have authority.”
But it is the same Paul who accepts women prophets at Corinth, regards Priscilla as a fellow worker. And it is the same Scripture that tells us this same Priscilla taught, with authority, Apollos at another time and place.
Folks, we are free to say women must not be pastors. But I would argue it is more valid, to find a case for clergywomen in Scripture. I thank God we live in a time and live out our faith in a denomination that dares to let women to respond to the call of the Holy Spirit in their lives. Yes, back in Ephesus in Paul’s time, it might not have been such a good idea to have a clergywoman there. But we’re not in Ephesus any more.
Wednesday, January 17, 2007
Wednesday, January 10, 2007
The Church and Gays
Beyond Condemnation or Agreement
Romans 1:18-2:4
The Gay issue. It would be easy simply to condemn gays and be done with it. It would be easy to accept the lifestyle and be done with it. My perspective is that neither decision would be in keeping with what Christ expects from Christians, and his church. Yet within Christendom we see an emerging polarization at both ends of this spectrum.
The "simply condemn" group sometimes to Sodom and Gomorrah. But the sin there is not homosexuality itself, but rape. And they point to the clear words of Leviticus: LEV 20:13 " `If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death." But if we know nothing else of Jesus Christ, we know that God’s word to humanity, to sinful humanity, is not just condemnation, but the offer of new life. Jesus himself implicitly overturns the capital sentence upon all sexual offenses by defending the woman caught in adultery. She was under sentence of death, but Jesus said, "Let the one without sin cast the first stone." "Is no one left here to condemn you? Neither do I."
And, if we’re going to follow Old Testament capital law, we must account for this: LEV 20:9 " `If anyone curses his father or mother, he must be put to death." I daresay we would want more leniency than this.
So, if we are Christian, I don’t think that simple condemnation is the answer.
Now, those Christians today who believe in simple agreement with committed gay relationships make the following arguments.
Homosexual behavior is explicitly condemned only four times or so in the Bible, and never by Jesus himself. And, in Leviticus, the prohibition of homosexual practice is included in a list of many other sexual practices, many of which we still disapprove today, but some of which we find tolerable. And elsewhere in the Old Testament birth control is regarded as evil, (the story of Onan in Genesis) but now is considered almost a necessity as our world’s population skyrockets. So, there is room for not following the letter of the Levitical law.
Jesus himself, as noted, did not condemn the woman caught in adultery. However, against this point of view of absolute acceptance of gay relationships, we need to note that nowhere does Scripture approve of such relationships, and, in the case of the woman caught in adultery, it is not just that Jesus refuses to condemn her; he also explicitly tells her to live a transformed life: "Go and sin no more."
So, where does this leave us? I will deal with our passage from Romans in due course. But before we go there, let me point out that in the Bible, there are many people who commit sexual sins, and these sins, both those repented and unrepented, do not necessarily render one unfit to offer service to God.
Abraham passed his wife off as his sister and gave her to a king, so he could have safe passage. King David, the beloved King David, honored as the ideal king, basically stole Bathsheba from a brave and honorable army general, because he lusted after her because she looked cute when he saw her taking a bath.
Read Ruth carefully, and you realize that she and Boaz spent the night together before they were married.
Rahab was a prostitute, both before and after and Israelite scouting party came into the land. She helped them. Was honored for it. In fact is mentioned in Jesus’ genealogy. And is honored as one who helped God’s people.
God managed to use all these folks for his purposes, despite their sins, sexual and otherwise.
And we know that other people have fallen short in the area of sexual morals, yet have left this world a better place. Tchaikovsky was gay, yet left us a magnificent legacy. His 1812 Overture adds sparkle to 4th of July celebrations, and his Nutcracker Suite adds enchantment to every Christmas. And Mozart, Mozart left us some of the most magnificent music, both sacred and secular that the human mind can imagine. I think his 21st Piano Concerto might be the most beautiful, haunting work of music I have ever heard. He wasn’t gay, far from it, but he had quite a reputation with the ladies before finally settled down and got married.
You might have noticed that I am lumping all sexual sins together, but I think this is appropriate. Nowhere does the Bible place gay sexuality in a special category as being especially heinous, nor in fact that sexual sins are worse than others.
And I dare say there might be more than a little hypocrisy among those who in God’s name so eagerly and vehemently would cast gay people into the outer darkness. Bless his heart, Pat Robertson finds gay people to blame for all sorts of things: "Evangelist Robertson says gays bring about earthquakes, tornadoes, bombs" is how one newspaper described a speech he made. [That’s a lot for one group to do!] Yet on the day Pat Robertson got married, his wife was already pregnant. Now, this is no problem for most Christians: we understand about sin and redemption and giving in to desire, but when we seek grace for ourselves and demand fire and brimstone upon others, we are in a bit of a Christian predicament.
So, then what might we learn from our passage in Romans, where homosexual activity is specifically regarded as ungodly. Let me set the context. Paul is arguing with two different groups about salvation, reminding them both of their need for the transforming love of Jesus Christ. The first group is the Gentiles, whose wild and carnal and secular ways left them no time to think about the spiritual.
And the second group is the Jewish people, the leaders of whom were so self-absorbed in their own self-righteousness, that they failed to see that they too fell short of God’s expectations for them.
Paul confronts the Gentiles: God’s power and expectations are clearly seen, so we are without excuse. But folks neither glorified God or thanked God, and as a result their foolish hearts were darkened.
Now follows a litany of moral failings of the gentiles who instead of following God, worshiping idols of man and birds and animals and reptiles, who worshiped created things, and even themselves instead of God, and gave into shameful lusts and depravity.
Among these were men who committed indecent acts with other men, and women with other women.
But then having mentioned homosexual behavior as an example of sin, Paul now lists many more examples of the depraved life: gossip, slander, arrogance, boasting, disobedience of parents, being heartless, being ruthless, and doing all sorts of evil.
It’s all written, not to condemn gays, but to make us realize our need for redemption in Jesus Christ. Gays are not a special category, but an example among many of those who live God-denying lives. Cast out the gays? Well, OK. Along with those who gossip, those who are sometimes ruthless in dealings with others, and those who are arrogant, and those who disobey their parents. . .
Pretty soon, who would be left in the Kingdom? And that’s Paul’s point. None of us, except for the grace of Jesus Christ.
Now the objection to this thinking is: but aren’t Christians, once saved, supposed to put their sin aside? A good point, and we will return to it in due course.
Now, a Jewish person back then, especially a Pharisee who meticulously kept all laws, might read the diatribe against the Gentiles and, in the words of the ‘60s say, "Right on. Paul, you tell those sinners all about their sins." But then, in this second chapter, Paul turns the tables. "You who judge others have no excuse either, because when you judge the other, you are condemning yourself."
Why? Because of another sin: you are showing contempt for the riches of God’s kindness, tolerance, and patience. (Kindness, tolerance, and patience... Paul’s words, Scriptural words, not mine.)
Because it is God’s kindness that leads to repentance.
The church needs to find a way to continue to regard homosexuals as people who need the redeeming love of Jesus Christ, not as enemies to be destroyed. Yet I had a pastor write to tell me I am evil for even suggesting such a thing. Here’s the background.
Conference at Lake Junaluska... many called for absolute acceptance, which I don’t find supported in Scripture. But we’re Methodists, we wrestle, we pray, we seek. A Joseph Swank [a pastor in Maine] regards any such talk of how to accept gays in the Christian faith as demonic. In an article, he dismisses them all as people who don’t care a twit about Christ. [I think he meant "whit," but no matter] I wrote him an email, challenging his point of view, because I know many gay Christians who wrestle with what is in fact right and wrong given their relationship with Christ. Here’s what I wrote:
Dear Sir, as a United Methodist pastor who has more than a little sympathy for your point of view, I must say I think the tone of your article can, in its own way, also be injurious to the cause of Jesus Christ. Homosexuals are people too, who, even if wrongly, do struggle with issues of faith. I think some do actually care "more than a twit" about Jesus Christ. And, perhaps we should not forget that we are all sinners who fall short of God’s expectations for us. Homosexuality is not the only sin, nor the most important sin, mentioned in Scripture. As we seek to uphold Christian standards within the denomination, it strikes me that compassion and mercy are also standards worth affirming. Sincerely yours, Eric Lindblade ...his reply:
you leave me no doubt that YOU are a part of the problem / evil. Repent.
I sought to talk about mercy and compassion, and he could do nothing but call me evil. If this makes me evil, then I’ll just have to be evil!
I wrote him back: I’ll repent if you will. I assume you have at least a few sins yourself. He did not respond.
Folks, Gay people will not destroy the church. A spirit of hatred will.
How then might we respond as a church? Perhaps we could . . . . .
Practice radial hospitality. All are welcome, because all stand in need of Jesus’ forgiving love. And God wishes that none of his children be lost. Our arms must be open wide to all people, even those whose sins aren’t ones we usually tolerate. Our calling isn’t to determine levels of sinfulness, our calling is to welcome all sinners to new life.
Emphasize that Christ leads us to a life of holiness. A life in which we put behind us all unhealthy passions, be it greed or gossip or hard-heartedness, of self-righteousness. We must do more than condemn.
Yet, we must do more than simply accept behavior that falls short of holiness. We must invite people to live holy lives. Not force, not coerce. But continue to offer Christ’s transforming love, and offer it in a kind and compassionate way.
Am I saying that it is better for gay people not to live out their sexuality? Well, yes, just as I am saying that it is better that no one live out their sexuality outside the bonds of marriage. Not because to live out one’s sexuality casts one out of the Kingdom, but because to live such a life might deprive one of knowing a deeper blessing, of knowing a deeper blessing that comes from living as holy a life as possible according to Christ’s highest ideals.
Does this stance deprive people of sexual fulfillment? Yes, and this is a high price, for sexuality is one of God’s good gifts. But at the same time, to live this way, is to have hearts opened for greater, spiritual blessings.
What about urging Gay people to leave that life behind and marry someone of the opposite sex? It might seem to be an obvious answer, but studies have shown consistently that efforts to change one’s sexual identity hardly ever succeed. Even ministries that offer such programs, and offer retreats with counseling and prayer and Bible study, find their success rate discouragingly low.
But what of gay Christian people who live out their sexuality with a partner they love? I would counsel them that they would have a greater blessing if they did not do so. But at the same time, the calling of the Christian community is to love such people, and care about such people, and reach out to such people, even as other people reach out to us in the midst of our sins.
Folks we all are sinners. It’s just that some sins are less acceptable and some are more tolerated by the conventional religious establishment.
And in the meantime, let’s remember what God said about patience. Sometimes we come to Christ quickly, but it takes a while for us to leave all our sins behind.
I’m reminded of the story of John Newton, a blasphemous slave trader. [I can’t think of a more sinful occupation than to be a slave trader] One day a great storm came upon him at sea, and in the midst of the storm, he was saved. He accepted Jesus Christ as the Lord of his life. But guess what? It took him a few years to leave the sinful slave trade business.
In an instant, he accepted Christ. But it took a while for him to leave all his sin behind. Eventually he became a pastor. Eventually, he wrote a hymn called Amazing Grace. But he was able to do all that because God was patient with him in the midst of his sins, before and after he accepted Christ.
And so may we be as loving and welcome and patient of all those, who, like us, find that sin still clings on our journey. Affirming the holy standards of conduct, sexual and otherwise. And offering in Christ’s name, welcome to those who fall short, even as Christ has welcomed, and redeemed us, despite our sins.
May we continue to acknowledge our faith in Jesus Christ, who sets such a high standard of sexuality, so high in fact that even to look at a person with lust, is at some level in fact adultery.
May we continue to acknowledge our faith in Jesus Christ, who set such high standards, yet was unfailingly so merciful and accepting and forgiving of those who could not yet meet them.
It’s not a question of condemning. It’s not a question of agreeing with a lifestyle. It is a matter of welcoming, of welcoming with the radical welcoming of God’s forgiving love made known on the cross, Jesus who died for us while we were yet sinners, Jesus who is unwilling that even one of God’s children be lost, no matter what the nature of our sin might be. Amen.
Romans 1:18-2:4
The Gay issue. It would be easy simply to condemn gays and be done with it. It would be easy to accept the lifestyle and be done with it. My perspective is that neither decision would be in keeping with what Christ expects from Christians, and his church. Yet within Christendom we see an emerging polarization at both ends of this spectrum.
The "simply condemn" group sometimes to Sodom and Gomorrah. But the sin there is not homosexuality itself, but rape. And they point to the clear words of Leviticus: LEV 20:13 " `If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death." But if we know nothing else of Jesus Christ, we know that God’s word to humanity, to sinful humanity, is not just condemnation, but the offer of new life. Jesus himself implicitly overturns the capital sentence upon all sexual offenses by defending the woman caught in adultery. She was under sentence of death, but Jesus said, "Let the one without sin cast the first stone." "Is no one left here to condemn you? Neither do I."
And, if we’re going to follow Old Testament capital law, we must account for this: LEV 20:9 " `If anyone curses his father or mother, he must be put to death." I daresay we would want more leniency than this.
So, if we are Christian, I don’t think that simple condemnation is the answer.
Now, those Christians today who believe in simple agreement with committed gay relationships make the following arguments.
Homosexual behavior is explicitly condemned only four times or so in the Bible, and never by Jesus himself. And, in Leviticus, the prohibition of homosexual practice is included in a list of many other sexual practices, many of which we still disapprove today, but some of which we find tolerable. And elsewhere in the Old Testament birth control is regarded as evil, (the story of Onan in Genesis) but now is considered almost a necessity as our world’s population skyrockets. So, there is room for not following the letter of the Levitical law.
Jesus himself, as noted, did not condemn the woman caught in adultery. However, against this point of view of absolute acceptance of gay relationships, we need to note that nowhere does Scripture approve of such relationships, and, in the case of the woman caught in adultery, it is not just that Jesus refuses to condemn her; he also explicitly tells her to live a transformed life: "Go and sin no more."
So, where does this leave us? I will deal with our passage from Romans in due course. But before we go there, let me point out that in the Bible, there are many people who commit sexual sins, and these sins, both those repented and unrepented, do not necessarily render one unfit to offer service to God.
Abraham passed his wife off as his sister and gave her to a king, so he could have safe passage. King David, the beloved King David, honored as the ideal king, basically stole Bathsheba from a brave and honorable army general, because he lusted after her because she looked cute when he saw her taking a bath.
Read Ruth carefully, and you realize that she and Boaz spent the night together before they were married.
Rahab was a prostitute, both before and after and Israelite scouting party came into the land. She helped them. Was honored for it. In fact is mentioned in Jesus’ genealogy. And is honored as one who helped God’s people.
God managed to use all these folks for his purposes, despite their sins, sexual and otherwise.
And we know that other people have fallen short in the area of sexual morals, yet have left this world a better place. Tchaikovsky was gay, yet left us a magnificent legacy. His 1812 Overture adds sparkle to 4th of July celebrations, and his Nutcracker Suite adds enchantment to every Christmas. And Mozart, Mozart left us some of the most magnificent music, both sacred and secular that the human mind can imagine. I think his 21st Piano Concerto might be the most beautiful, haunting work of music I have ever heard. He wasn’t gay, far from it, but he had quite a reputation with the ladies before finally settled down and got married.
You might have noticed that I am lumping all sexual sins together, but I think this is appropriate. Nowhere does the Bible place gay sexuality in a special category as being especially heinous, nor in fact that sexual sins are worse than others.
And I dare say there might be more than a little hypocrisy among those who in God’s name so eagerly and vehemently would cast gay people into the outer darkness. Bless his heart, Pat Robertson finds gay people to blame for all sorts of things: "Evangelist Robertson says gays bring about earthquakes, tornadoes, bombs" is how one newspaper described a speech he made. [That’s a lot for one group to do!] Yet on the day Pat Robertson got married, his wife was already pregnant. Now, this is no problem for most Christians: we understand about sin and redemption and giving in to desire, but when we seek grace for ourselves and demand fire and brimstone upon others, we are in a bit of a Christian predicament.
So, then what might we learn from our passage in Romans, where homosexual activity is specifically regarded as ungodly. Let me set the context. Paul is arguing with two different groups about salvation, reminding them both of their need for the transforming love of Jesus Christ. The first group is the Gentiles, whose wild and carnal and secular ways left them no time to think about the spiritual.
And the second group is the Jewish people, the leaders of whom were so self-absorbed in their own self-righteousness, that they failed to see that they too fell short of God’s expectations for them.
Paul confronts the Gentiles: God’s power and expectations are clearly seen, so we are without excuse. But folks neither glorified God or thanked God, and as a result their foolish hearts were darkened.
Now follows a litany of moral failings of the gentiles who instead of following God, worshiping idols of man and birds and animals and reptiles, who worshiped created things, and even themselves instead of God, and gave into shameful lusts and depravity.
Among these were men who committed indecent acts with other men, and women with other women.
But then having mentioned homosexual behavior as an example of sin, Paul now lists many more examples of the depraved life: gossip, slander, arrogance, boasting, disobedience of parents, being heartless, being ruthless, and doing all sorts of evil.
It’s all written, not to condemn gays, but to make us realize our need for redemption in Jesus Christ. Gays are not a special category, but an example among many of those who live God-denying lives. Cast out the gays? Well, OK. Along with those who gossip, those who are sometimes ruthless in dealings with others, and those who are arrogant, and those who disobey their parents. . .
Pretty soon, who would be left in the Kingdom? And that’s Paul’s point. None of us, except for the grace of Jesus Christ.
Now the objection to this thinking is: but aren’t Christians, once saved, supposed to put their sin aside? A good point, and we will return to it in due course.
Now, a Jewish person back then, especially a Pharisee who meticulously kept all laws, might read the diatribe against the Gentiles and, in the words of the ‘60s say, "Right on. Paul, you tell those sinners all about their sins." But then, in this second chapter, Paul turns the tables. "You who judge others have no excuse either, because when you judge the other, you are condemning yourself."
Why? Because of another sin: you are showing contempt for the riches of God’s kindness, tolerance, and patience. (Kindness, tolerance, and patience... Paul’s words, Scriptural words, not mine.)
Because it is God’s kindness that leads to repentance.
The church needs to find a way to continue to regard homosexuals as people who need the redeeming love of Jesus Christ, not as enemies to be destroyed. Yet I had a pastor write to tell me I am evil for even suggesting such a thing. Here’s the background.
Conference at Lake Junaluska... many called for absolute acceptance, which I don’t find supported in Scripture. But we’re Methodists, we wrestle, we pray, we seek. A Joseph Swank [a pastor in Maine] regards any such talk of how to accept gays in the Christian faith as demonic. In an article, he dismisses them all as people who don’t care a twit about Christ. [I think he meant "whit," but no matter] I wrote him an email, challenging his point of view, because I know many gay Christians who wrestle with what is in fact right and wrong given their relationship with Christ. Here’s what I wrote:
Dear Sir, as a United Methodist pastor who has more than a little sympathy for your point of view, I must say I think the tone of your article can, in its own way, also be injurious to the cause of Jesus Christ. Homosexuals are people too, who, even if wrongly, do struggle with issues of faith. I think some do actually care "more than a twit" about Jesus Christ. And, perhaps we should not forget that we are all sinners who fall short of God’s expectations for us. Homosexuality is not the only sin, nor the most important sin, mentioned in Scripture. As we seek to uphold Christian standards within the denomination, it strikes me that compassion and mercy are also standards worth affirming. Sincerely yours, Eric Lindblade ...his reply:
you leave me no doubt that YOU are a part of the problem / evil. Repent.
I sought to talk about mercy and compassion, and he could do nothing but call me evil. If this makes me evil, then I’ll just have to be evil!
I wrote him back: I’ll repent if you will. I assume you have at least a few sins yourself. He did not respond.
Folks, Gay people will not destroy the church. A spirit of hatred will.
How then might we respond as a church? Perhaps we could . . . . .
Practice radial hospitality. All are welcome, because all stand in need of Jesus’ forgiving love. And God wishes that none of his children be lost. Our arms must be open wide to all people, even those whose sins aren’t ones we usually tolerate. Our calling isn’t to determine levels of sinfulness, our calling is to welcome all sinners to new life.
Emphasize that Christ leads us to a life of holiness. A life in which we put behind us all unhealthy passions, be it greed or gossip or hard-heartedness, of self-righteousness. We must do more than condemn.
Yet, we must do more than simply accept behavior that falls short of holiness. We must invite people to live holy lives. Not force, not coerce. But continue to offer Christ’s transforming love, and offer it in a kind and compassionate way.
Am I saying that it is better for gay people not to live out their sexuality? Well, yes, just as I am saying that it is better that no one live out their sexuality outside the bonds of marriage. Not because to live out one’s sexuality casts one out of the Kingdom, but because to live such a life might deprive one of knowing a deeper blessing, of knowing a deeper blessing that comes from living as holy a life as possible according to Christ’s highest ideals.
Does this stance deprive people of sexual fulfillment? Yes, and this is a high price, for sexuality is one of God’s good gifts. But at the same time, to live this way, is to have hearts opened for greater, spiritual blessings.
What about urging Gay people to leave that life behind and marry someone of the opposite sex? It might seem to be an obvious answer, but studies have shown consistently that efforts to change one’s sexual identity hardly ever succeed. Even ministries that offer such programs, and offer retreats with counseling and prayer and Bible study, find their success rate discouragingly low.
But what of gay Christian people who live out their sexuality with a partner they love? I would counsel them that they would have a greater blessing if they did not do so. But at the same time, the calling of the Christian community is to love such people, and care about such people, and reach out to such people, even as other people reach out to us in the midst of our sins.
Folks we all are sinners. It’s just that some sins are less acceptable and some are more tolerated by the conventional religious establishment.
And in the meantime, let’s remember what God said about patience. Sometimes we come to Christ quickly, but it takes a while for us to leave all our sins behind.
I’m reminded of the story of John Newton, a blasphemous slave trader. [I can’t think of a more sinful occupation than to be a slave trader] One day a great storm came upon him at sea, and in the midst of the storm, he was saved. He accepted Jesus Christ as the Lord of his life. But guess what? It took him a few years to leave the sinful slave trade business.
In an instant, he accepted Christ. But it took a while for him to leave all his sin behind. Eventually he became a pastor. Eventually, he wrote a hymn called Amazing Grace. But he was able to do all that because God was patient with him in the midst of his sins, before and after he accepted Christ.
And so may we be as loving and welcome and patient of all those, who, like us, find that sin still clings on our journey. Affirming the holy standards of conduct, sexual and otherwise. And offering in Christ’s name, welcome to those who fall short, even as Christ has welcomed, and redeemed us, despite our sins.
May we continue to acknowledge our faith in Jesus Christ, who sets such a high standard of sexuality, so high in fact that even to look at a person with lust, is at some level in fact adultery.
May we continue to acknowledge our faith in Jesus Christ, who set such high standards, yet was unfailingly so merciful and accepting and forgiving of those who could not yet meet them.
It’s not a question of condemning. It’s not a question of agreeing with a lifestyle. It is a matter of welcoming, of welcoming with the radical welcoming of God’s forgiving love made known on the cross, Jesus who died for us while we were yet sinners, Jesus who is unwilling that even one of God’s children be lost, no matter what the nature of our sin might be. Amen.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)