Tuesday, February 26, 2019

Tuesday Musings 2/26/2019


                Today in my Tuesday Musings, I would like to discuss my feelings about what is happening in the special called General Conference of the United Methodist Church. The General Conference is the only official body of the church that can speak to the order that we live by. The conference meets every four years to determine the rules of our Book of Discipline. In 2016, there was such a debate regarding human sexuality and what is accepted that the conference asked our episcopal leaders to form a Way Forward to help discern what we as a church would do regarding the inclusion of LGBT+ members and to reach out to all of God’s children. There was a committee formed from all over the world to present plans to then be voted on at the special called conference. The committee presented three plans to be considered. These included basically no change in the current thoughts, a one church plan, and a connectional plan. Later a fourth plan called the simple plan was added. The Council of Bishops felt the One Church planned seemed to be their choice, but it was still up to the general conference to vote on these four plans.
                Fast forward to the present day. In the process of legislative groups, the plan that was approved yesterday was the traditional plan with modifications. Rather than seen as a way forward, it was to maintain the status quo. At stake for many of the delegates is how we interpret scripture that would support maintaining the restrictions of disallowing ordaining clergy who live in a committed same sex relationship, allowing the clergy to perform marriage between same sex partners, and to punish clergy who violate the Book of Disciple (BOD).
                I supported the One Church plan which would allow local churches, annual conferences, and clergy to follow their own understanding of what God is doing in our world today. This would give room to those who oppose sanctifying same sex marriages whether at the church level or at the clergy level and for those who sought full inclusion. This would have addressed delegates from outside the USA to not have the feeling that they could not remain opposed to same sex relationships which in many countries carries a death sentence. Needless to say, that was not what happened. I don’t feel that this is a step forward but one step backwards and will lead to endless debates before the next General Conference in 2020.
                I know that there are many sides to this issue. There are many, who based on their understanding of scripture, feel that same sex relationships are an abomination and therefore cannot be sanctioned by the church. Equally there are many who look to their understanding of scripture and God’s grace who feel the opposite. The same concerns have risen over many of the issues in the past regarding slavery and women clergy to name a couple. I recognize the concerns of both sides and even if I support full inclusion of all people, I know many who do not. And you know that is okay. I am a follower of Jesus Christ.
                As such, I am reminded what Jesus had to say to the Luke 10:25-32 the parable of the Good Samaritan. The question that was put forth by a follower of the law (likely looking for an easy answer that would either test Jesus or support his view of the law) about inheriting eternal life. Jesus then asked him how he would interpret his understanding of the law and the scribe stated to Love God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and all your might, and with all your mind, and your neighbor as yourself. The follow up question was then who was his neighbor.
                The crux of the story was who is included and excluded to be loved. I would suggest rereading the parable. Here is how I look at it. When the priest and the Levite saw the injured man who appeared dead they walked right by him without offering aid. They did this obeying rigidly the laws of their faith. Touching a corpse, would have made them unclean. What they did was certainly understandable for them at that time. So who did offer aid? It was a Samaritan who was an outsider and not part of the law as understood by the religious thoughts of the time. The scribe had to reluctantly state that the Samaritan was the neighbor who showed love. Jesus then told the young man to do likewise.
                I see the concern that holding to law religiously can become heresy. The opponents of Jesus, the pharisees, were such a group. Their understanding of law was to be upheld without regard to the heart of the law. I believe in scripture that loving God and loving neighbor is not one over the other. I believe Jesus invites us all to the table. For me. the one church approach gave the flexibility to live one’s conscious as well as inviting all into the church. So, I lament. Will I leave the church, or will I stay to continue to raise the need for inclusion? I choose to stay.
                A side note. In reading the gospels, Jesus did not say one way or another regarding same sex relationships. He did talk about marriage but often it was in response to questions about divorce. He was certainly opposed to divorce and especially remarriage. Somehow, I don’t see the church splitting on this issue.
                Another side note. I had read that the One Church plan would redefine marriage. I don’t see where that idea came from. There could be a lot of debate what scripture says about marriage particularly having multiple wives and concubines. Actually, it is the state that defines marriage. The concern would be what one would find acceptable about that definition.
                There will continue to be debate regarding human sexuality no matter the vote today. I would hope that the continued dialog between us would help us continue to discern God’s Will. To close, I want to share what Wesley stated about the Good Samaritan. I found this in my Wesley Study Bible page 1257 in the footnotes. “Let us renounce that bigotry and party-zeal which would contract our hearts into insensibility for all the human race, but a small number whose sentiments and practices are so much our own, that our love to them is but self-love reflected. With an honest openness of mind, let us always remember the kindred between man and man; and cultivate the happy instinct whereby, in the original constitution of our nature, God has strongly bound us to each other” (Notes 10:37).
Peace to all
Eldon
               

No comments: