As I read the gospels and watch Jesus' interactions with people, I will always, always, err on the side of inclusiveness and non-judgment...perhaps to a fault, but I'm willing to take that risk. I have no doubt that the Bible understands homosexual behavior as a sin...and divorce, and judging others, and taking care of yourselves while others suffer. I know that people on both sides of the ordination debate are loving, caring people. I know both sides believe passionately they are right.
But here's what I also know. Regardless of "right," we are human. Even our best "right" is sometimes wrong. I remember in high school becoming aware of Americans providing infant formula to babies in Africa in an effort to prevent starvation. Good, right? How is acting to prevent infant death due to malnutrition a bad thing? Except, African mother's didn't have clean water to mix with the formula; they didn't have enough money to purchase the amount of formula they needed. Infants continued to die...from parasites introduced from the water or from malnutrition as their mothers added a bit of extra water to stretch the formula.
That was the first time I recognized that good people don't always make good decisions, even when they think they are. We are not God. We cannot see every contingency, predict every reaction, anticipate every problem. We are human...created good in the image of God...but not God. And as not-God, we must live in great humility.
For 30 years I have been on the losing "side" of this gay ordination issue. Before that, I was on the losing side of women being ordained in ministry. Skin color, culture differences, we can always find something to fight over. When we moved from Houston, a tangle of different cultures and colors, to Nebraska where everyone looked the same, we learned very quickly that people divided themselves along economic lines. They were proud that they were not like those "southerners" who owned slaves and discriminated against blacks. They were wrong in thinking they didn't practice the exact same prejudice--they just used different dividing lines.
I believe we are moving in the right direction following the slow, deliberate, consensus-building work of the Holy Spirit. But I want my brothers and sisters who are now on the "losing" side to see my hand stretched out in communion...in hope of living together with Jesus as our head even when we disagree... coming together in the humble knowledge that we are all sinners...trusting that God's purposes cannot be thwarted.
Whether we agree or disagree, we live in covenant with each other. Robin Meyers (Saving Jesus from the Church) says "...we must recover a theology of conscience and reject the dominant and heretical theologies of personal 'victory.'" He suggests we are "defined by how we relate one to another and how well we keep our promises"...true...but he goes on to challenge us specifically as Christians because we have an even stronger call to relationship...a different kind of call. Meyers says:
When a covenant is a religious one, another dimension is added to the idea of an agreement, even one that is freely entered into. That dimension is a transcendent quality based on religious values. A religious covenant is not a contract, which we enter into and follow mostly for self-protection or to force compliance. In contracts, if one party fails to live up to the agreement the agreement is voided. Not so with religious covenants. THEY ARE BOUND BY THE PARAMETERS OF FORGIVENESS AND PATIENCE AND CHARACTERIZED BY A KIND OF TRANSRATIONAL TENACITY. (emphasis mine)
The covenant itself and what it makes possible are considered larger and more important than the benefit to either party...they are grounded in faith and are entered into in the belief that reciprocity and mutuality are transformational...Religious covenants are long-term voluntary commitments in which some of the individual's autonomy is lost--surrendered on behalf of the covenant itself.My son has asked me for years why I didn't leave the church because I disagreed with our rules about this issue and others. Why didn't I just start my own church and do what I knew was right? The answer is this "transrational tenacity" that requires us to live and be "bound by parameters of forgiveness and patience." As difficult as that demand is on time and psyche, it is foundational to our living as the body of Christ in the world. If we do not live in this way, how are we different from the world around us...a world focused on its own safety and well-being over the redemption and reconciliation of others.
I don't know how life together will play out with this new rule. We might have a new openness and acceptance; we might have more vitriol and hatefulness as we struggle with each other. Likely we will have both. What I do know is that living in this relationship of "transrational tenacity" will allow the Spirit to work in us and in others. We will never do it perfectly. I assure you, I get very fussy with people who are judgmental and narrow-minded...who (in my opinion, of course) are not interested in learning and conversing and problem-solving, but in excluding and assuming and protecting themselves from all threat, real or imaginary.
But I see the power of this covenantal relationship...of this "transrational tenacity" that Jesus lived. I see marriages damaged by betrayal heal and strengthen when both partners fight for their covenantal relationship. I see addicts in recovery from their addiction because someone is willing to practice a transrational tenacity. I see congregations meeting needs and experiencing new life because they have stopped trying to protect themselves and have chosen covenant relationships with those inside and outside their walls.
The world expects the PC(USA) to explode all over itself. They expect infighting and hatefulness and splitting and separation. May God give us the strength to give them, instead, a transrational tenacity as we choose to be bound by parameters of forgiveness and patience.
No comments:
Post a Comment