Monday, December 30, 2013

Reverend Gregory Crofford – “Nazarenes [and Methodist], let’s talk about homosexuality”

Reverend Gregory Crofford – “Nazarenes [and Methodist], let’s talk about homosexuality”
Father talking to teenage sonThe days leading up to Christmas 2013 were hardly "peace on earth, goodwill toward men" moments on my FaceBook feed. The controversy surrounding comments by Phil Robertson of the reality cable television program, "Duck Dynasty," in an interview with GQ magazine fueled a firestorm. On one side were those who thought that both the tone and substance of his comments was prejudicial toward the LGBT community. Others -while lamenting the insensitive tone - viewed Mr. Robertson as merely pointing out what the Bible had to teach.
Whether due to the fracas over "Duck Dynasty" or the high profile defrocking of a Methodist pastor for performing his gay son's wedding, denominations of a conservative theological bent - including the Church of the Nazarene - are faced with a conversation that we didn't choose, but that has been chosen for us. Historically, our denomination has been one of the via media, the theological middle way between extremes. This was certainly the methodology of John and Charles Wesley, the Anglican priests who founded the Methodist societies. Methodist congregations in America became the seedbed from which blossomed (in large part) the Church of the Nazarene in the early 20th century. But on this particular issue, we have been struggling to find a judicious middle way that honors the Scripture as our "rule of faith and practice" and simultaneously breathes a word of Gospel to gay individuals loved by God and whom we deeply love.
Logically, there are only three paths that the CoTN can take:
1. Radical rejection - This is the Westboro Baptist extreme, "God hates f***s" position. Let's be honest: Who other than Westboro Baptist is arguing for this position? A pastor in the Wesleyan Church received word that the body of a soldier fallen in Afghanistan would be repatriated and buried the following Saturday at a nearby cemetery. Alarmingly, the Westboro Baptist crowd had trumpeted their intention to picket the funeral. (In their warped thinking, fallen soldiers symbolize the judgment of God upon the United States for tolerating homosexuals). Immediately, the pastor mobilized the church and community. Hundreds turned out to join the Hell's Angels, rough-and-tumble motorcyclists who were riding to the rescue. Together, they cordoned off the road leading to the cemetery, and carried signs of support for the grieving family. What a picture of the loving Church in action! Our unwavering message is that of 1 John 4:8 (NIV)- "Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love."
2. Welcoming, but not affirming - This is the United Methodists' term. A better term would be "loving but not affirming." Here, same-sex attraction is viewed as a result of the Fall, a manifestation of human brokenness. Our attitude should be the same as it is toward any person encumbered by any sin: Jesus loved us in our predicament, so how can we act any differently towards the gay individual? Love will mean walking alongside the individual, encouraging, holding them accountable, and pointing them to the victory over sin that has always been a hallmark of the Wesleyan-holiness tradition. While it recognizes the power of temptation, it believes that same-sex attraction can be overcome, though it probably will never disappear entirely since temptation is part of the human condition. Like a recovering alcoholic may relapse and take a drink, or a person who has lost 100 pounds might put 50 back on, that doesn't mean we say: "Oh, well" and support that person's return to old patterns of life.
But what is most important is to realize that no one is alone. We are in this together, and must not treat any one category of sin as somehow more odious than another. It is here that the church has been guilty regarding gay individuals among us. We can and must do better, though "doing better" should not mean swinging to the opposite extreme and condoning what God does not condone. What it might mean is pointing individuals toward Christian counseling and even sometimes helping them pay for it. What expense is too great to help brothers and sisters, sons and daughters for whom we would lay down our lives?
3. Affirmation - Some teach that a growing walk with Christ and acting upon homosexual orientation is compatible, that God made gay individuals this way. And here the sparks fly.
The Church of the Nazarene does not exist in a bubble. We've seen other denominations walk down the "let's establish a study committee" path, and it's not pretty. The specter of a church split is never far away. When it comes to church growth, one would be hard-pressed to prove a direct correlation between "affirming" and "declining." Nevertheless, any organization has only so many corporate calories. If time, energy, and resources begin to be channeled into endless debates about this issue or any other, then surely we're taking our eye off-the-ball when it comes to fulfilling our mission. And if you think the debate will be a quick one, look at the experience of the United Methodist Church, discussing it for 30+ years and still no resolution! Do we really want to go there?
As a denomination, "doing better" is not about moving toward the third option (affirming), but to purposely and intentionally expand our commitment to the second option, "loving, but not affirming."
What does "loving, but not affirming" look like?
It will mean being pro-active on the issue instead of just knee-jerk reacting to trends in society. It might include as part of our denominational Sunday School curriculum around the age of 12 materials that frankly discuss God's plan for sexuality. It seems to be around that age that many of those who will later self-identify as gay begin to feel that draw. A pastor's wife I know saw this in one of the young teens in the youth group at her church. (She shared in general ways with me, ways that protect this boy's identity). She noticed that this particular boy's mannerisms were changing. He had begun to behave in ways toward the same gender that were not like he had behaved before. So she took him aside and asked him gently: "So and so, I need to ask you something. Are you struggling with your sexuality?' He tearfully admitted that he was, and she was able to rally some resources in the local church to help guide him back to the right path. The boy later thanked her for having cared enough about him to speak up!
Like Jesus, we must be full of both grace and truth (John 1:14b). It took only one individual whom this boy respected (the pastor's wife), who had credibility with him and whom he knew to be a caring person, to counteract messages in the broader culture, messages coming from shows like "Glee" and other media outlets. But how often are we willing to be like Jesus in the way that pastor's wife was like Jesus? Love takes courage, and sometimes it must be counter-cultural. As one of my theology profs at Eastern Nazarene College once put it: "We're upstream Christians in a downstream world."
I love the Church of the Nazarene. I'm a third generation Nazarene, dedicated at its altars as a baby, went to its Sunday School, VBSs and camps, was a Bible quizzer and hold two of my four academic degrees from a Nazarene-sponsored school. Are we perfect? Far from it, but we're family. Cyprian's observation - "He cannot have God as his Father who does not have the Church as his Mother" - resonates with me, and that "Mother" has always been the the CoTN. But are we beginning to see some early indications that we may be drifting in a direction that can only bode ill for our unity and effectiveness?
I know that some gay individuals are offended by prayers for them, particularly unsolicited, so I am not going to go there. Instead, I'm going to pray for myself, that God will fill me with the kind of love that won't quit, that won't give in to what's trendy, but will be courageous enough to learn from mistakes I've made in the past. I want God to make me part of doing away with the atmosphere in the CoTN that has made it impossible for young men and women among us who are experience attraction to the same sex to open up about their struggle, all for legitimate fear of rejection. God, please forgive us! Forgive me.
Secondly, I am going to commit to pray for my church, for God to give wisdom to its leaders in key positions (university presidents, pastors, district superintendents) as they navigate choppy waters on this social issue and others. We are at one of those cultural "tipping points," and as such, we will all need extra grace to resist the temptation to be harshly reactionary instead of lovingly proactive.
Thirdly, we should unite to make changes to Manual language that is too harsh, without changing to the "affirming" stance. Paragraph 37 wrongly uses the word "wrath," a term that Romans 1:18 employs in reference to sin generally and not homosexual acts solely. Such a modification would help steer us closer to a via media on this issue, and symbolize the kind of loving approach without compromise that we should seek in our churches.
Finally, I wonder: Do we really listen to the heart-wrenching stories of those who have unwanted attraction to the same sex, or are we too busy flipping in our Bibles to Romans 1? Do we still trust the Holy Spirit to do His work? But more importantly, are we still doing ours? Well has it been said: "Love's first duty is to listen." How likely is it that individuals who feel all alone in their same-sex attraction will seek our counsel if they've just read our latest insensitive status update on social media? We may have closed a door without even knowing it. Like the Psalmist, let us pray: "May these words of my mouth and this meditation of my heart be pleasing in your sight, LORD, my Rock and my Redeemer" (Psalm 19:14, KJV).
So where do we go from here? Let us resist the stampede on either side of the argument, giving in neither to harsh words that would make Jesus cringe nor a "sloppy agape" that solves thorny problems too easily by reclassifying them as non-issues.
-------
What happens if there is a 4th option in affirmation of marriage as a lifetime commitment between two people [one man and one woman or one man and one man or one female and one female] while supporting celibacy as an viable option for people who choose to remain single their whole life or after divorce occurs being able to function as a single and celibate elder or lay leader within the church? (Question from Gary Lee Parker).

-------

No comments:

Post a Comment