wfn.org | Commentary: Safe ground for dialogue?

[NewsDesk <NewsDesk@UMCOM.UMC.ORG>]

Jan. 25, 1999 Contact: Thomas S. McAnally*(615) 742-5470*Nashville, Tenn.
10-21-71B {036}

NOTE: A head-and-shoulders photograph of the Rev. Leicester Longden is
available.

A UMNS Commentary
By the Rev. Leicester Longden*

In recent years, I have heard increasing complaints from my colleagues among
the clergy. They lament the loss of freedom to discuss issues of moral
practice. This has been  especially true with regard to the hotly debated
issue of legitimizing homosexuality within the moral community of the
church. Contradictory claims within the denomination itself as well as
pressures from the surrounding culture have left many feeling confused or
silenced.
 
A series of events in recent years have revealed how The United Methodist
Church has been pulled back and forth on this issue. 

In 1997 the Rev. Jimmy Creech in Nebraska was tried and acquitted by a
church court for officiating at a same-sex union ceremony. While some people
wondered if the church had
changed its mind, the Judicial Council of the denomination ruled that the
ban on same-sex unions was still church law. 

Yet, loud protests came from some quarters of the church calling for acts of
ecclesiastical disobedience." Just this last month, over 90 United Methodist
clergy challenged the law  of the church by repeating Jimmy Creech's
offense.  Rev. Mel Talbert, the bishop of that area, said he would uphold
the law in his role as bishop but that he did not support the law and would
"continue as a strong advocate to change the position of our church." 

The terrible murder of a young gay man, Matthew Shephard, pushed the debate
to a new level of stridency. NBC, Newsweek magazine, and other prominent
news media have featured interviews and columns which narrow the limits of
acceptable speech about homosexuality. Indeed, pastors who try to lead
conversations in their congregations may feel caught on the horns of a
dilemma.

If pastors try to defend the church's teaching,  they are accused of
encouraging "hate" crimes, or at the very least, discrimination. If pastors
encourage people to lay aside the doctrine and discipline of their church in
matters of marriage and sexuality, they are in violation of their ordination
vows. Thus, they offend either society or the church. 

If pastors minister to those who seek healing from what Christian tradition
has called disordered and sinful desires, they are attacked for hating
"truly" gay people. On the other hand, if they accept the claim that sexual
orientation is a fixed and essential identity, they must turn away those who
want help and healing as bearers of a "false consciousness." 

Of course the dilemmas of pastoral practice are even more complicated than
the either/or statements laid out above, but they state where many pastors
have found themselves in recent years. 

Pastors have taken various approaches to facing these dilemmas. Some have
claimed the prophetic mantle. They accuse the church of outright bigotry.
Sometimes they base their claim on a new revelation which allows them to set
aside the church's traditional teaching. Sometimes they appeal to "new
knowledge" assuming either that "science" has given us the conclusive
evidence to set aside the moral judgments of centuries, or that the evidence
is enough for us to suspend moral judgment for the time being. 

Other pastors have steadfastly stood their ground in defense of the church's
traditional teaching in spite of ridicule and personal attack. (I am not
speaking here of the hateful pastors who picketed the funeral of Matthew
Shepherd.) A growing number of pastors are leading their congregations in
sacrificial ministries of help to those who experience sexual brokenness.
All too often they are vilified for their political incorrectness. Still
other pastors have tried just to muddle through by claiming a neutral or
middle stance.

Is there safe ground for dialogue within the church? One sign of hope is the
increasing attention being given to the published dialogue "In Search of
Unity." The General Commission on Christian Unity and Interreligious
Concerns of The United Methodist Church sponsored a conversation over the
last two years between "more liberal" and "more conservative" voices. The
publication of that dialogue has begun to filter down to regional and local
areas of the church. Groups of pastors and laity are gathering to  attempt
similar dialogues using the document as a model. 

One of the achievements of that model dialogue was its attention to the very
real questions of conscience for people on both sides of the issue. What
became clear as the dialogue proceeded was that "moral and theological
commitments about sexuality...are linked to deeper convictions about the
warrant for Christian moral behavior." This realization forced the dialogue
participants to look more closely at their underlying beliefs about the
authority of scripture and divine revelation. In the midst of partisan
struggles these beliefs are often overlooked.  

As a participant in both the national and local expressions of this
dialogue, I highly recommend it to those seeking to move beyond the current
stridency of debates over moral practice. It provides a better sense of how
our church deals with its inner conflicts than many of the press reports
which focus on protest and polemics. 

Copies of "In Search of Unity" are available from: SERVICE CENTER, P.O. BOX
691328, CINCINNATI, OH 45269-1328. Or visit the "In Search of Unity" Web
site
at http://www.gccuic-umn.org/search.htm. 

#  #  #

*Longden is senior pastor of Trinity United Methodist Church in Lansing,
Mich.  He is a clergy member of the West Michigan Annual Conference of the
United Methodist Church, where he serves on the Conference Board of Ordained
Ministry.

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
http://www.umc.org/umns/
newsdesk@umcom.umc.org
(615)742-5472