News Archives

Commentary: Church should examine the reason for its differences

 


Commentary: Church should examine the reason for its differences

LINK: Click to open full size version of image
The Rev. J. Richard Peck

 
May 21, 2004  

A UMNS Commentary
By the Rev. J. Richard Peck*

The 2004 General Conference defeated a proposed statement for the United Methodist Church’s Social Principles that would have acknowledged that church members hold differing opinions on homosexuality.

Some conservatives acknowledged that the Social Principles statement declaring homosexual practice to be “incompatible with Christian teachings” causes pain in the homosexual community, and a few believe that it would be better to have an “amicable separation” rather than continuing to inflict pain on these people.

While a legislative committee approved (68-30) the acknowledgment of our differences, arguments from African delegates in a plenary session convinced a majority (527-423) that such a public acknowledgment could “give a mixed message to the world.” The plenary reversed the recommendation of the legislative committee and adopted (579-376) a minority report that adds a clause, “... and we will seek to live together in Christian community.”

The defeat of an acknowledgment of our differences does not alter the differences. Even the final action of General Conference to affirm our unity cannot erase the opinion chasm.

However, following General Conference and our declared intent to “live together in Christian community,” perhaps we will find it more helpful to focus on our differing attitudes toward Scripture that cause us to have differing views on homosexuality.

Conservatives view Scripture as a single entity. They believe every book in the Bible is the inspired Word of God. They quote Leviticus and the letters of Paul with equal certainty; they are likely to assert: “The Bible says ...”

A few conservatives also say the Bible is without error. They believe the Bible contains the words of God revealing the Word of God.

If a liberal notes that Jesus never discussed homosexuality, conservatives are quick to note that he never taught about child molestation, polygamy, pornography use or embryonic experimentation, but that doesn’t make these practices right.

Nearly all conservatives say the Word of God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. No scientific claim and no change in social standards can alter the fact that there is no passage in Scripture that supports homosexual practice, and every mention of homosexuality within that holy book is negative.

Liberals, on the other hand, view the Bible as a library of books with different levels of inspiration and truth. A quote from Leviticus carries almost no weight with liberals. They will dismiss any negative teaching about homosexuality from that ancient collection of laws as quickly as they dismiss laws from the same book calling for the execution of children who curse their parents (Leviticus 20:9), a law prohibiting the wearing of a garment with two different materials (Leviticus 19:19) and laws prohibiting eating ham (Leviticus 11:7) or shrimp (Leviticus 11:10).

Liberals are not as quick to dismiss the letters of Paul. They well know that Paul wrote some of the most insightful and inspirational passages in all of Scripture. At the same time, they know that he was a product of his times. Liberals place Paul’s teachings about homosexuality into the context of a time when lifelong committed homosexual relations were unknown. Liberals also tend to dismiss his teachings on homosexuality as they dismiss statements saying it is shameful for a woman to speak in church (I Corinthians 14:35) and a passage stating that all governing authorities (including, we assume, Herod Antipas, Adolf Hitler and Saddam Hussein) are instituted by God and should be obeyed (Romans 13:1–5).

While liberals value the words of Jesus above all other teachings, even here they will distinguish between the early writings of Mark and the later and more theological writings of John. If there were teachings by Jesus in any of the Gospels about homosexuality, liberals would find these compelling and debate might be ended.

Liberals may agree with conservatives that God’s Word is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. However, they believe the Word of God is contained in the words of the Old and New Testaments and one must use reason, tradition and experience to find that Word within the words. Liberals also believe that a living Christ offers new insights into God’s Word.

Perhaps discussions by United Methodists about the nature of Scripture should precede debates about homosexuality, for that is at the core of the debate.

* Peck is a retired clergy member of New York Annual Conference and former editor of Circuit Rider, Newscope, the International Christian Digest and the Daily Christian Advocate. He was on United Methodist News Service’s 2004 General Conference staff.

News media contact: Tim Tanton (615)742-5470 or e-mail: newsdesk@umcom.org.

Ask Now

This will not reach a local church, district or conference office. InfoServ* staff will answer your question, or direct it to someone who can provide information and/or resources.

First Name:*
Last Name:*
Email:*
ZIP/Postal Code:*
Question:*

*InfoServ ( about ) is a service of United Methodist Communications located in Nashville, Tennessee, USA. 1-800-251-8140

Not receiving a reply?
Your Spam Blocker might not recognize our email address. Add this address to your list of approved senders.

Would you like to ask any questions about this story?ASK US NOW


Contact Us

This will not reach a local church, district or conference office. InfoServ* staff will answer your question, or direct it to someone who can provide information and/or resources.

Phone
(optional)

*InfoServ ( about ) is a ministry of United Methodist Communications located in Nashville, Tennessee, USA. 1-800-251-8140

Not receiving a reply?
Your Spam Blocker might not recognize our email address. Add InfoServ@umcom.org to your list of approved senders.