Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

The Troubled Conscience of the Church

Expand Messages
  • U.M. Cornet
    CALLED OUT INFORMATION SERVICE Faith and Life commentary: The troubled conscience of the church June 30, 2000 News media contact: Tim
    Message 1 of 1 , Jun 30, 2000
      CALLED OUT INFORMATION SERVICE

      Faith and Life commentary: The troubled conscience of the church
      June 30, 2000 News media contact: Tim Tanton�(615)742-5470�Nashville, Tenn.

      A UMNS Commentary
      By the Rev. Phil Wogaman*

      Following the United Methodist General Conference in early May, much was
      made of the polarization of the church and the fact that the conservatives
      generally won. That was especially true of anything having to do with
      homosexuality, where the church's generally negative stance was reaffirmed
      by voting margins of nearly 2 to 1. That there were "winners" and "losers"
      seems clear enough.

      What may have been missed in the vote tallies was a certain loss of
      self-assurance on both sides in the conflict. A deeper level of
      soul-searching was especially evident in some of the things that were said
      in the Faith and Order Legislative Committee, where the issues were
      principally fought out. I was struck by the comments of one of the
      conservative delegates. He spoke with some eloquence about a close relative
      whose devotion to the extended family was what held them all together. He
      was deeply impressed by her obvious love of others and how much she had
      meant to all of them through the years. He then revealed that she was
      lesbian. Still, he believed he had to support the church's judgment against
      all homosexual practice because of the biblical statements. But he was
      obviously troubled by this conflict between his reading of the Bible and the
      undeniable grace at work in this lesbian relative's life.

      Similarly, when more liberal delegates spoke of their own experience with
      gay and lesbian people (including the winsome testimony of an obviously
      talented and morally committed gay man in the group), the conservatives
      acknowledged the force of what was being said. Still, they felt compelled
      to adhere to biblical strictures and the voice of tradition. While that
      became the majority view of the committee and of the General Conference as a
      whole, the conscience of the majority was expressed in a new statement in
      the church's Social Principles, adopted by nearly unanimous vote: "We
      implore families and churches not to reject or condemn their lesbian and gay
      members and friends." I suspect that it will not be too many years before
      the compelling human evidence of gay and lesbian Christians will bring
      further changes in the church's position.


      Meanwhile, the church's liberals have also had to deal with troubling issues
      of conscience. While they have been open to change and insistent upon
      greater tolerance of gays and lesbians, the liberals are clearer now that
      some forms of sexual practice are destructive. Not everything that feels
      good really is good. Sexual promiscuity, whether practiced by persons of
      homosexual orientation or by heterosexuals, is morally damaging to people.
      Recognition of that is why liberals in the church are so concerned that
      monogamous committed unions of gay or lesbian people should be given the
      church's approval.

      Liberals have also had to come to terms with the conservatives. At the
      General Conference the liberals invited conservatives to join in compromise
      statements acknowledging the differences of opinion. Overtures toward
      compromise were rejected, and yet it is clearer now that both conservatives
      and liberals are listening to each other in new ways.

      The deep reason why the church's conscience is troubled on the issue of
      homosexuality is that everybody has tried to fix church teaching
      prematurely. The evidence just isn't all in yet. We don't yet even know for
      sure why some people are homosexual while most are heterosexual. We haven't
      yet listened enough to the quiet testimony of people who have lived
      responsible Christian lives as gay or lesbian. We haven't struggled enough
      yet with how to interpret the Bible. Most United Methodists - including the
      conservatives - are not biblical literalists. But we all take the Bible
      seriously and need to think more carefully about how to apply its deeper
      teachings to the divisive issues at hand.

      In the end, the church's troubled conscience may be an invitation from God
      to new ways of discerning who and what we are.

      # # #

      *Wogaman, pastor of Foundry United Methodist Church in Washington, is a
      seminary professor of Christian ethics and author. He is a clergy member of
      the Baltimore-Washington Annual (regional) Conference..

      Commentaries provided by United Methodist News Service do not necessarily
      represent the opinions or policies of UMNS or the United Methodist Church.


      *************************************
      United Methodist News Service
      Photos and stories also available at:
      http://umns.umc.org

      ________________________________________________________________________
      Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.