Lutherans hope to address sexuality issues w/o tension? GOOD LUCK!
Bishop Mark Hanson hopes: "We can live with some ambiguity around these kinds of questions and not take the tensions they create as signs of a divided church". I sincerely wish them luck, but it's awfully hard to reconcile the competeing values represented in "the simmering cultural controversy over human sexuality", as Pioneer Press' Steve Scott writes.
The article offers that "..since his years as bishop of the St. Paul Area Synod, Hanson has questioned why sexuality should be a church-defining, church-dividing issue." Well, that's easily explained: it's because one side of this controversy keeps bringing it up!
According to Bishop Hanson, however: "There are two vocal positions, but...there is a continuum of positions in this church...I expect the continuum...to be reflected in Orlando, and not the two vocal ends.'' (emphasis added)
Well, we know what one of those positions wants, as stated before: a blessing ceremony for same-gender couples and ordination of gay and lesbian pastors. No big deal, eh?
What does the other position call for? Tying gays to a post at the edge of town and stoning them to death? Dragging gays behind a pickup to their death? Arson, abuse, and assaults on gays and their property? Open persecution of homosexuals? Any persecution? Criminal prosecution? Discrimination in hiring, housing, health care, education? Suspension of civil rights and civic participation? Excommunication from the Church? Disfellowshipping of gay members? Rude treatment even? Of course not!
What then?
How about, just.. oh, I dunno, ..maybe.. no ordination of practicing homosexuals as pastors, and no blessing ceremony for relationships that The Bible condemns. That's all.
Because, and remember that we're talking about the religious community (not secular society or our government) of the ELCA here- a supposedly Christian church, supposedly founded in and guided by God's Word, as the Bible proclaims:
God's condemnation of homosexuality is abundantly clear-He opposes it in every age.
In the patriarchs (Genesis 19:1-28)
In the Law of Moses (Leviticus 18:22; 20:13)
In the Prophets (Ezekiel 16:46-50)
In the New Testament (Romans 1:18-27; 1 Corinthians 6:9-10; Jude 1:7-8)
That list is from a respectful, lovingly reasonable article by John MacArthur on Crosswalk.com.
The Bishop says he's "hoping the 'diverse middle' of the church can call the left and the right to an acceptable stand" and that the first resolution on this issue up for a vote next month urges the ELCA to "concentrate on finding ways to live together faithfully in the midst of disagreements.'' Well, what is the position of "the right" on this matter? I would argue that it's the same position that the Church has always had. And always should. We didn't write "the rules", and we're not authorized to rewrite them. And we can't ignore them, either.
As Bishop Hanson soberly recalls, "Tension was a reality as that small band of followers of Jesus began to grow, and with growth came diversity, and with diversity came questions of who is welcome among us and on what terms.'' I would contend that the latter question is the true source of the tension. We're all sinners, of course, but within the Church we're called to repent, and to renounce our sin-- not wear it like a badge of honor.
Again, nobody's suggesting mistreatment of gays by the Church or it's followers, or even just the cold shoulder treatment- to say nothing of harm of any kind! (It's embarassing that I even feel compelled to have to state such an obvious point, but it seems that if you don't, activists tend to assign dark, unspoken motives to you.) In fact, those who keep pushing an agenda of "affirmation, acceptance, and full participation" of behaviors and lifestyles that are in direct defiance of God's clear message are the ones that risk dividing the Church by demanding acceptance of the unacceptable.
Brad
posted by Brad @ 6:30 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home