First the Episcopalians, Now the Lutherans

Last Friday the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) became the second BIG church in the US to take a supportive yet controversial stand on gay clergy. In many ways for mainline denominations this issue outranks even abortion as a dividing line in our internal politics. Passions and opinions and arguments abound on both sides. It is not an easy one to work on. In fact, some people (like myself) have strong opinions but find ourselves torn between our support and love for the church's future and strength and a need to be faithful. Even that need to be faithful gets divided on both sides of the issue.

(Note: My own denomination, the Moravian Church in America, Northern Province has been on a 7-year moratorium on the issue. That may come to an end next June when our every four year Synod meets in Bethlehem, PA. Considering that we are in full communion with both these denominations may have an impact on our deliberations. Nothing said here should be construed in any way, shape or form as a position of the Moravian Church. It is all mine! And I will not be voting delegate next June.)

On one side is the issue of Biblical authority, interpretation and faithfulness to that ancient and powerful witness. I put this first since it truly is the heart of the matter for many. Even with my "liberal" opinions on the issue I still have that troubling place in the corner of my soul that says, "What if....." It is hard to go against 2000+ years of a Biblical witness on an issue that is so emotional.

On the other side is the awareness of the cultural boundaries and issues that are deeply embedded in the Biblical witness. Many of these we regularly ignore or interpret in ways that ease our felt need to "obey" the Bible word for word. Neither the fundamentalists nor the liberals are innocent of this. Each side just picks different passages and issues on which to be willing to be bound. In the end most of us in this area are not consistent. Why don't I have the same troubling place in the corner of my soul when I eat pork or lobster or get a tattoo?

Those two sides are not easily reconciled. Even when we know we ignore some of these ancient stands on a regular basis-

• we do not justify slavery through Biblical passages
• we do not justify a ban against interracial marriage
• we do not insist that if someone steals your coat you should give him your shirt too
• we are willing to accept divorce
• we justify the wealth we put away while ignoring many who are poor and suffering
  
• and on and on and on.

But this is about one of those SEX issues which always have a lot of baggage. It is almost as if we have to hang on so tightly to the Biblical "commands" as a way of attempting to keep ourselves in control. What's more, we often look on sex as "dirty" thanks to Augustine and others who developed the theology that Original Sin is passed on through sexual relations. To cheat on your income tax or ignore the homeless- that's okay.

I have heard preachers go to great lengths to justify why their overwhelming reaction to sexual issues is the right way. It becomes a greater sin- and they will even use that phrase- than other sins. It's like- well, here are Ten equal Commandments, but one is more equal than the others. Then add the homosexual word to it and you have the abominable sinner.

Then on another side is the issue of ministry to all people who need it. Very few, of course, will say that a gay person cannot join their church or that they don't deserve being ministered to. There are some who take that stand but they are not in the mainstream at all. The problem becomes in judging the behaviors and persons- and they become outcasts.

But we also have the issue of "Calling." It's been almost 35 years now that my denomination has ordained women. The same Biblical issues were raised then as now. Some denominations still feel that women should not be in any position of authority. Even with a deep awareness of the cultural baggage of patriarchal bias some cannot accept that change. Who can truly say that God has not called a particular person?

Another issue for me is that in many ways the incredible rift that happens over this issue has had a sad impact on the overall life of the church. It has divided us into warring camps at times. It has led to name-calling and angry words. It has taken energy away from our tasks of witness and ministry. It would be easy to point at the "other side" from which you are on to blame. But in truth we have not been able to find a good and healthy way to deal with the conflict. It is tough when both sides can be as "convicted" of their opinion.

In the end I come to that trite but difficult question-

What would Jesus do? [or]
What would Jesus want us to do?

Easier asked than answered. For me, though, it starts with the idea of grace and is filled with the promise of love as Jesus showed in His own ministry.

But that's for another time and place, but I have a hunch that is the place where these decisions have come from. At the least, I am impressed by the move of both the Lutherans and Episcopalians. I have a hunch they have made a brave move in an uncertain time. I know it will cause them problems in other parts of the world as well as here at home. But it may be that they are taking a step into an unknown future with faith and trust in God and Jesus as their Lord.