Some thoughts on homosexuality, gay marriage, etc. from my novel, Comfort and Affliction, to be published in Feb 2015.

This novel (80,000 words), a work of literary fiction, tells the story of the Rev. Eric Jameson, who has been assigned to the Aldersgate United Methodist Church in Vickery, GA, with the mandate to bring the congregation fully into the 21^st century. Most of the Aldersgate congregants and people in Alexander County, located in Northeast Georgia, adhere to fundamentalist religious and conservative political values. Eric carries out his assignment by comforting the afflicted and afflicting the comfortable within his parish. The sermons he preaches and his actions lead to revitalization and growth of the congregation but inevitably bring him into conflict with the Southern Restoration Movement. This organization employs violence, especially against blacks, to reestablish Anglo-Saxon political and cultural supremacy. In order to protect himself, his loved ones, and friends from the local leader of the Restorers, Eric must resort to the combat skills he employed successfully while serving in the U.S. Army in Afghanistan and for which he received the Medal of Honor.

CHAPTER 21

Sunday, 21 Sep

John Carlyle came to the front of the chancel after completion of the responsive reading. “Rev. Jameson requested the choir perform Hymn 548, In Christ There is No East or West, as our special music for today. The choir asks the congregation to join with us in singing verses three and four.” He gave a soft chuckle. “The choir will end the performance with a special Amen.” He started to turn away, then reversed himself. “If you are willing and able, please join hands with your neighbors as we sing verses three and four.”

The choir proceeded through verses one and two; the congregation joined the choir as directed with verse three:

In Christ is neither Jew nor Greek, and

neither slave nor free; both male and female

heirs are made, and all are kin to me.

In Christ now meet both east and west, in

him meet south and north; all Christly souls are

one in him throughout the whole wide earth.

Many of the congregants in the almost-filled pews held hands with their neighbors. Some people reached from pew to pew and across the central aisle to hold hands. Attendance at the morning services had increased steadily with Eric’s tenure. I wonder, he thought to himself, if we’ll have more or fewer people in the pews next Sunday?

Jackson Williams stepped to the small pulpit as the congregation finished singing. “Our Scripture for today comes from the Third Chapter of Galatians, verses twenty-six through twenty-nine:

Now before faith came, we were imprisoned and guarded under the Law until faith would be revealed. Therefore the Law was our disciplinarian until Christ came, so that we might be justified by faith. But now that faith has come, we are no longer subject to a disciplinarian, for in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith. As many of you as were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus. And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to the promise.”

Jackson, evidencing no indication that his direct participation in the worship service offended a decreasingly small segment of the congregation, left the pulpit to sit beside Miz Lizbeth. Eric rose to deliver the sermon. “As I’ve said before, being a minister often involves two major functions, comforting the afflicted and afflicting the comfortable. I’m not here to afflict anyone today, although some of you may be uncomfortable with this sermon. Such discomfort often arises because of a profound misunderstanding about what Holy Scripture actually says concerning the subject of this sermon.

“Today’s bulletin gives the sermon title as, Welcoming Brothers and Sisters into the Community of Believers. A more pertinent sermon title is, Welcoming Homosexuals into the Community of Believers.” A stir of unease swept through the sanctuary. George Hannover glared at Eric. Raymond Taliaferro and Charles Thomas, seated on the second row, smiled at each other. “Recent events in our church life--especially the unfortunate appearance of Biblical ignoramuses at the services we held for Master Sergeant Phillip Rollins and also the events in court last week involving some of our brothers and sisters--compel me to speak out on this issue.

“I will not delve into a scientific discussion of homosexuality, its causes or a misleading Biblical rationale for treatment of what most psychiatrists consider a normal variation in human sexuality. My justification for welcoming homosexuals into our fellowship rests upon more straightforward Biblical principles. I will preach the Bible today, while keeping in mind how our consideration of Holy Scripture requires application of the great gifts of intelligence and love that God bestowed upon us.

“Much of the unfortunate Christian hostility against homosexuals arises from a mistaken view of Biblical inerrancy. As typically postulated, Biblical inerrancy means Holy Scripture exists without any error whatsoever--theological, historical, or scientific. Obviously, in view of our current understanding of science, we must be extraordinarily careful when invoking Biblical inerrancy to explain all human knowledge and its application.

“I am well aware of Leviticus 20:13, which provides a false justification for condemnation of homosexuality: If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall be put to death; their blood is upon them. For some Biblical scholars and other discerning individuals, the Levitical prohibitions against homosexuality represent a Holiness Code originally pertaining only to the priestly class. Other equally astute scholars and individuals fervently believe these Levitical admonitions apply to all Jews as well as to all Gentiles.

“This debate continues and likely will not be settled to everyone’s satisfaction in the near future. We can, however, rationally circumvent this controversy of narrow versus general restrictions on homosexuality by delving deeper into Leviticus and other books of the Bible appearing to condemn homosexuality. These same books also contain prohibitions and extreme, even deadly, sanctions against behaviors we now consider either acceptable, deserving of only mild punishment, or downright silly: disobedient children, Sunday work, wives wearing coats made with cloth from two different types of threads, farmers planting more than one type of crop in a single field, women attending church services with uncovered heads, women speaking out or taking leadership roles in church, interracial marriage, birth control, discussing or naming a sexual organ, seeing our parents naked, and treatment of women as property.”

Miz Lizbeth said, “Preach the word, Rev. Eric! Peach the word!”

Eric went on. “While I’m on this roll call of Biblical imperatives we ignore, Holy Scripture not only allows, it insists upon sexual practices and societal conventions vastly different from our present understanding of normalcy and legality. To name a few:  execution of non-virgin brides, adulterers, and married couples who have sex during the wives’ menstrual periods; a widow of a childless husband must have sequential intercourse with the husband’s brothers until she bears a male child to inherit the husband’s estate; sex with prostitutes for husbands, although not for wives; slavery and sex with slaves; and marriage of girls eleven to thirteen years old.” Eric shook his head. “Faith-based intellectual honesty requires us to observe all of these prohibitions and approved behaviors, if we’re going to accept homosexuality as a sin. The idea boggles the mind, doesn’t it?

“Let’s consider the sin of Sodom, which all too many people confuse with homosexuality. Yes, ‘Sodom’ gives rises to ‘sodomy,’ another term applied to homosexuality. The prophet Ezekiel precisely defined the sin of Sodom: This is the sin of Sodom; she and her suburbs had pride, excess of food, and prosperous ease, but did not help or encourage the poor and needy. They were arrogant and this was abominable in God’s eyes. Ezekiel seems to inveigh against something other than homosexuality. Was he confused? I think not.

“The original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts of Holy Scripture do not contain a word for homosexuality in the present context because the authors did not understand sexual orientation. The concept of sexual orientation did not develop until the late nineteenth century. The word homosexuality first appeared in an English translation of Holy Scripture in 1958.”

 Several people seemed to be enjoying the sermon in contrast to the resentment showing on a few faces. “All of the preceding ideas aside, the most important factor for us to consider about these Old Testament ideas comes straight from St. Paul. His epistles and those attributed to him, such as Hebrews, thoroughly explain a fundamental thought for Christians: The so-called Biblical Laws, commonly thought of as Leviticus Codes, do not apply to Christians, either as means to salvation or as directions for behavior. The sacrificial life and death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ negated these former rules for Christians--for those of us who accept Jesus as the Messiah. Remember, the observant Jew, St. Peter under direct orders from God, ate foods Leviticus forbade.”

A shout of “Praise God!” came from someone in the rear of the sanctuary. Eric pressed on. “I spoke a few minutes ago about intellectual honesty. Some of you surely must be waiting for me to explain away St. Paul’s prohibitions against homosexuality. His pronouncements on this subject seem to be straightforward condemnations. As I outlined for the Old Testament, if we accept St. Paul’s condemnation of homosexuality, we also must accept his other condemnations about behavior, issues like the role of women in our church affairs.” Eric looked directly at Allison and Mother Elizabeth, “Some of our female members will be glad to discuss the sins of women speaking out and participating in leadership roles in our church. Interestingly, I don’t see many of our female congregants wearing hats today as St. Paul commanded.

“Church scholars currently debate exactly what St. Paul meant with the Greek words typically translated as homosexuality. Some eminent heterosexual theologians believe St. Paul’s words, or at least how they have been translated, provide an example of Holy Scripture not saying exactly what it means. We don’t need to explore such linguistic concerns. We also don’t need to engage in a discussion of how St. Paul was a product of his time and how human society has evolved since then. We can use a much simpler approach. While St. Paul experienced the power of the risen Christ on the Damascus Road, the great evangelist had no direct personal contact with the living Christ of the Gospels. Why I do I emphasize this point? Certainly not to negate the great impact St. Paul had on our theology.

“Importantly, neither the Old Testament prophets nor the Jesus of the Gospels left any recorded words condemning homosexuality. Some persons believe the purported sin of homosexuality for Biblical Israel was so obvious that the condition required no comment. Obviousness, however, did not restrain the Prophets and Jesus from forcibly preaching against other sins. If homosexuality merits the extreme condemnation received today in some circles,” Eric paused for effect before continuing in a louder voice, “why didn’t the Prophets and Jesus rail against it?” He continued in his normal pulpit voice. “Furthermore, homosexuality does not appear in the Ten Commandments, which many people in this county proudly display on signs in their front yards.

“Our consideration of homosexuality should include what many people regard among Jesus’ most important words when asked to define the greatest Commandment: You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength, and with all your mind; and your neighbor as yourself. I believe the New Testament meaning of neighbor includes heterosexuals and homosexuals, as well as prostitutes, tax collectors, and other sinners.

“From our beginning, the Community of Believers has welcomed all who profess belief in God as Parent, Son, and Holy Spirit, and who commit to living as best they can according to Jesus’ great commandment. All of us have sinned, homosexuals and heterosexuals alike; all are eligible for incorporation into the Community of Believers. No sin justifies exclusion or expulsion from the Community.”

Eric looked at his watch. “I must bring this sermon to a close. Some of you already are anxious about getting to Sweet Gum Barbecue and Fish Lodge before our Baptist and Holiness brothers and sisters. In the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Amen.”

John Carlyle motioned for the choir and congregation to stand. “We will close with verses one and six of Hymn 549, Where Charity and Love Prevail.”

Where charity and love prevail, there God is ever found; brought here together by Christ’s love, by love are we thus bound.

Love can exclude no race or creed if honored be God’s name; our common life embraces all whose Maker is the same.

Eric gave the benediction at the front of the chancel and walked along the central aisle to the front of the church. “Jackson,” Miz Lizbeth said in a firm voice carrying across the sanctuary, “wheel me behind Rev. Eric. We must stand with him.” Jackson did as instructed. Allison, Joseph, Raymond Taliaferro, Charles Thomas, and several other congregants followed to stand with Eric at the front doors of the church.

What, Eric asked himself, a protective buffer or a show of solidarity? Same thing, he realized.

Enjoying Christmas

I typed the first sentence of my Christmas column into the computer, Several aspects of Christmas perplex me. A soft blue light suffused the room, the clock stopped at 2:00 a.m., and a sharp knock sounded on the sliding glass door overlooking Gumlog Creek.

Troubling Doctrines

“What can I do for you, Sir?” I asked the visitor when he stepped into the room.

He answered, “It’s more what I can do for you.”

The visitor obviously possessed great power, although he did not seem immediately threatening. 

“Speak, Lord, your servant listens.”

“At least you got the words right.” The visitor looked at my computer screen. “Exactly what troubles you about Christmas?”

“The doctrine of the Virgin Birth.”

The visitor said, “I suppose you want to make the point that a theological doctrine and reality may not necessarily be the same thing?”

“That’s one thing I could write.”

“That subject,” the visitor chuckled, “doesn’t seem like a good topic for a column.”

“You’re probably right,” I conceded.

“So, what else bothers you?”

I replied, “I don’t understand why Jesus Christ had to live and die sacrificially for the forgiveness of our sins. After all, you forgave sins before Christ came to earth, and the Psalmist had already stated: The sacrifice acceptable to God is a broken spirit; a broken and contrite heart."

The visitor shrugged his shoulders. “OK, so you question the sacrificial model for salvation, which is more properly a subject for an Easter column, with the understanding that not many of your readers will be interested.”

Creative Enjoyment

“All right,” I said, “if you’re all-powerful and all-knowing, why wasn’t a one-time act of creation sufficient, including a mechanism for forgiveness of sins? It seems to me that you have to keep tinkering with what should have been a perfect creation.”

The visitor’s face became stern. “The formal terms, omnipotent and omniscient, apply more appropriately to my nature.”

A lightning bolt had not yet hit me, and I asked, “How can you be both omnipotent and omniscient, considering the evidence of reality?”

A great sigh came from the visitor. “Although one or two of your readers at most really care about that theological discussion, I will give you a hint. How long have you been writing these columns?”

“Since January of 1999,” I answered.

“Have you ever produced a first draft that you thought was good, even excellent on rare occasions?”

“Yes,” I stated.

“How many first drafts have you sent to the Madame Editor?”

“None,” I acknowledged.

“Why?”

“I thought my revisions would improve the drafts.”

The visitor smiled. “What gave you more enjoyment, writing the drafts or performing the revisions?”

“Both, in different ways.”

“Then,” the visitor asked, “using your own experience and keeping in mind that I made you humans in my own image with free will, have you ever thought that I enjoyed my first acts of creation and that I also enjoy my continuing acts of creation?”

“I hadn’t thought of that possibility,” I said.

The Command

“Now, I will ask questions and you will give answers, which must come from your heart, as well as from your mind.”

I said again, “Speak, Lord.”

“What have you really enjoyed about Christmas this year?”

“The Lions Club Christmas dinner.”

The visitor laughed, “Even though the seating was crowded and the food was not up to its usual high standards?”

“I enjoyed being with my brothers and sisters.”

The visitor nodded. “What else have you enjoyed?”

“Like I wrote in my last column, I thoroughly enjoyed the festivities as Lavonia celebrated Christmas.”

“What else?” the visitor persisted.

“I enjoyed decorating our memory tree with Andrea.”

“And?”

I continued, “I enjoyed the music of Christmas on WMMU and at our church - especially the Kidz4Christ program and the chancel choir’s Christmas cantata.”

“And?”

“I enjoyed being with our family.”

The visitor’s eyes flashed. “Cast your mind back to when you grew up in the Presbyterian Church, the time when you memorized and recited the Shorter Catechism.”

“I’m thinking.”

“Give me the answer to the first question: What is the chief end, that is, the primary purpose, of humans?”

I answered, “To glorify God and to enjoy Him forever.”

The visitor demanded, “Concentrate on glorifying me and enjoying Christmas by celebrating the great gift of my Son. Don’t concern yourself with questions you cannot answer at this time.” The visitor left.

Merry Christmas

Following through on the command, I wish all who read this column a Merry Christmas in which we enjoy God, the Christ Child, and the fellowship of believers, family and friends. Glory be to God.

HUMAN FREE WILL: A GREAT GIFT OR AN ILLUSION?

For the past several weeks, our adult Sunday School Class has discussed major elements of John Wesley's theology. I'm facilitating the class this Sunday, and will provide an extension of Wesley's ideas about Free Will and Predestination. I adapted the following material from my book in progress:  Chapter 2 in Through The Wilderness (http://traversingthewilderness.blogspot.com):

Holy Scripture presents two apparently contradictory and competing visions about how humans function within God’s created order – as creatures endowed with free will versus creatures limited by predestination (determinism, predetermination, pre-ordination, pre-selection, and pre-election):

I call heaven and earth to witness against you today that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Choose life · · · Deuteronomy 30:19

For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn within a large family. And those whom he predestined he also called; and those whom he called he also justified; and those whom he justified he also glorified. · · · Romans 8:29-30

In keeping with their implicit, if not explicit, acceptance of predestination, many sincere Judeo-Christians often express their faith with affirmations such as If God closes a door, he will open a window; We didn’t pray hard enough, so God didn’t give us what we asked for; and God has a plan for me. These types of expressions reflect an underlying trust that our all-powerful (omnipotent), all-knowing (omniscient), and everywhere present (omnipresent) God “sees” time - past, present, and future – as a unified whole or continuum in order to exert control at all levels of creation. We may, therefore, legitimately ask if humans actually possess the ability to act as free and autonomous beings? Put another way, do God’s designs preclude human free will, which at best could be only an illusion?

Reading “between the lines” reveals human free will as a constant theme throughout Holy Scripture: God tells us what is expected and says what will happen as consequences of our actions; but, divine edicts do not force us to select obedience or disobedience, good or evil.

* At our beginning, God permitted Adam and Eve the option, even when tempted by the Serpent, to eat or not to eat fruit from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil.

* God told the Israelites to choose life or death, blessings or curses, with respect to obeying the Ten Commandments.

* Jesus firmly proclaimed what God wants us to do (Love the Lord our God with all our hearts, souls, and minds. And · · · love our neighbors as ourselves.).

Yet, no evidence shows that we are coerced onto a specific pathway. God did not form us as mindless robots but implanted the capacity for free will within our genetic makeup.

* This last statement comes with full awareness of the continuing controversy over the relative importance of heredity versus environment (nature versus nurture) and the contention of some scientists that the codes in our DNA predetermine not only who we are but also what we think and how we act.

Many theological treatises and discussions have attempted to reconcile the two concepts of predestination/predeterminism and free will, including the proposition that human and cosmic realms are separate. That is, we have free will on some aspects of our existence so that we may, of our own choice, brush or not brush our teeth today whereas we cannot affect cosmic phenomena or God’s original judgment as to which individuals were pre-selected or pre-elected to receive salvation.

A simple approach cuts through the discourses that mask the real issue: If we do not have free will, we cannot make choices because all is predetermined; if all is predetermined, we have no accountability; without accountability, we have no guilt for our sins; in the absence of guilt, we do not need the saving grace of Jesus Christ; and, hence, the entire structure of Judeo-Christianity collapses. As John Wesley, a fervent of predestination pointed out, predestination precludes the obligation to preach the Gospel.

An additional simplifying consideration argues for human free will. Suppose an individual human being faces a decision about future actions limited to only two choices, A or B. If God has the ability to foresee the future and already knows the individual will choose A, then God cannot be all powerful because God cannot then direct the individual to make choice B. The only way God can be all-powerful (or, at least extremely powerful) requires that humans must have unrestricted free will to choose A or B. This line of reasoning argues that God cannot be (or, chooses not to be) both all-powerful and all-knowing with the ability to foresee the future. Accordingly, we can rationally accept that God embedded human free will into creation.

Where might the theological 800-lb gorilla be lurking in this argument?

God created and maintains the cosmos and all therein according to principles that, as our knowledge and understanding develop, we define as scientific laws. We may legitiamtely call these laws, “God’s Design or Plan”. As with Wesley, however, we should reject any notion that God violates the gift of human free will with a “program” that spells out in precise detail how we will react in every situation and, further, specifies our ultimate fates through foreknowledge and predestination.

Some Judeo-Christians experience traumatic insecurity when their belief that God minutely directs all human activities is challenged. But, can we contemplate worshiping a tyrannical, loveless, and merciless deity who fashioned us without free will? At best this deity would be indifferent to human affairs, much like the Creator envisioned by the Deists. Rather than anxiety-provoking, the preeminence of free will over predetermination should have a liberating, albeit sobering effect upon us.

Democracy and Capitalism foundationally incorporate and rest upon principles derived from the Doctrine of Free will. In these systems, humans have the right to make choices, hopefully informed ones, and must live with the outcomes of those decisions. Neither Democracy nor Capitalism can exist without freedom of choice. The Democratic Republic of the United States of America provides one of the best current examples of free will in the political and economic spheres. The US Constitution, a noble secular document, can be easily viewed as generating a political system designed to ensure that the will of the majority, with protection of certain minority rights, is carried out through fair elections. That is, the US Constitution, which is not a Christian document, is nevertheless consistent with a foundational principle of our faith - free will. As in the moral and theological arenas, participants in Democratic and Capitalistic societies have the right and responsibility to exert their free will, sometimes with beneficial outcomes and sometimes with less than desirable results. Free will rather than coercion (especially in the context of impeding fair elections and economic opportunity) should drive the process. 

An Inexorable Split In The United Methodist Church?

I was born into and raised in the Christian Community of Believers at the First Presbyterian Church of LaGrange, GA. Shortly after Andrea and I graduated from LaGrange College (a Methodist-affliated liberal arts institution) and were married in June 1960, I joined the United Methodist Church in Chapel Hill, NC. I have remained in the UMC because I resonate with most aspects of its theology and because I like the denominational emphasis on social action, a feature of the Methodist Church since its founding under the influence of John Wesley in the late 18th Century.

I characterize myself as a professing, albeit struggling, Judeo-Christian.

A Primer for non-Methodists (and some Methodists)

The UMC is organized at the international level. In the US, each state has one or more Annual Conferences presided over by a Bishop, always an ordained United Methodist minister. Each Annual Conference is divided into Districts, each headed by a District Superintendent, also an ordained minister. Individual churches, with one or more ordained ministers, compose each district. Each district sends it ministers and an equivalent number of lay persons to the meeting of the Annual Conference each year. These meetings take care of conference business and appointment of ministers to the local churches. The Bishop, with input from his council (District Superintendents, some ministers, and some laity), appoints ministers to the local churches.

Money, from collections and other sources, flows from the local churches to the Districts to the Annual Conferences and then to the General conference.

Every four years, the Bishops and elected delegates (ministers and laity) from each Annual Conference in the US and worldwide meet in an a General Conference, which elects new bishops and assigns all bishops to Annual Conferences.

The UMC is governed theologically and administratively through the Book of Discipline. All  ministers, at their ordination, swear to uphold the Book or Disciple, which can only be modified at a General Conference.

The Divisive Issue

The Book of Discipline states that homosexuality is incompatible with the teachings of Christ.

In the US, many local churches nevertheless welcome homosexuals into fellowship and membership. (This policy may not be a feature of many African churches.) Some US churches are more active in this welcoming endeavor ("Reconciling Congregations") than others. The idea is that all humans have sinned and deserve God's forgiveness and grace.

Importantly, the Book of Discipline states that no practicing homosexual may be ordained as a minister, and no United Methodist minister can officiate at a marriage or union ceremony between practicing homosexuals.

These prohibitions formed a focal point of intense discussion at the last General Conference in 2012; but, no changes were made to the Book of Discipline. At that conference and subsequently, a few Bishops have said practicing homosexuals (and LGBT persons in general) should be admitted to full fellowship including ordination. Many local ministers feel the same way. The problem is that all have sworn to uphold and abide by the Book of Discipline.

With the protean social changes underway vis-a-vis homosexuality, the issue is sure to elicit even more intense controversy at the next General Conference in 2016.

The US UMC split over slavery in the period leading to the Civil War. Administrative unity was reestablished relatively recently. We avoided a split over the issue of full ordination for women and appointment of women as bishops.

My assessment is that the US Southeastern and African Annual Conferences will not change their opinion on homosexuality. Other conferences will view changing the Book of Discipline with respect to homosexuality (1) will reflect a truer theological understanding about the Biblical prohibitions and (2) will pose a question of survival for the core of the denomination.

With strong opposition from the Southeastern and African Annual Conferences, the Book of Discipline will not be changed at the 2016 General Conference. I will be surprised if the UMC splits over the homosexuality issue between the 2016 and 2020 General Conferences.

I expect a ferocious debate about homosexuality at the 2020 General Conference. If the Book of Discipline is changed in 2020, I fully expect the US Southeastern and African General Conferences to split from the UMC to form independent versions of the Methodist Church. If the Book of Discipline is not changed in 2020, I fully expect many Annual Conferences outside of Africa and the US Southeast to split away to form their own version of the Methodist Church.

That is, baring the miracle of reconciliation, I see the split as inexorable. In my opinion, the split should come sooner rather than later: Until the Book of Discipline is changed, we are disenfranchising many of our brothers and sisters in Christ.