Reflections on a Strange Silence
By the Rev. Vince Hart
About 25 years ago I submitted a paper at the Portland hearing of the UMC Committee for the Study of Homosexuality which had been authorized by the 1988 General Conference and was to report back to the 1992 session. The central point of my paper, reflecting my thoughts as I had followed the controversy, was my belief that at the core of the controversy, yet rarely if ever mentioned, were two distinctly different understandings of the true character of the Bible and the nature of its authority. This was not a deep “fundamentalist-inerrancy” view over against a “modernist-secular” view. But there was enough difference between the two perspectives that their views of “scriptural authority” were almost poles apart. Yet that issue seemed never to get serious discussion! A ”strange silence” indeed, given the central role of Scripture in all UMC pursuit of truth and God’s will.
Today I would frame the “unmentionable” core issue somewhat differently. The two starkly contrasting views of the nature of the Bible and its authority still confront us, never fully acknowledged or seriously explored. Yet the deeper (deepest?) issue concerns the nature and authority of the Bible as a revered but ancient text on the one hand and the nature and authority of our living God on the other! Yet our debates continue to focus on Bible texts or on broad issues of “justice” and “inclusion.”
Why are we not discussing the evidence of God’s present action?
I believe that the closest biblical analogy is found in Acts 10-11, the remarkable little drama of God’s utterly surprising acceptance of Gentiles (pagans) into the new community! The shock is hard to perceive or comprehend 2000 years later. The unconditional acceptance of Roman Cornelius and his whole household, as evidenced by the outpouring of the Holy Spirit just as it had come onto the Jewish believers on the day of Pentecost, was extremely controversial, stirring rebuke and great controversy For us, the hatred, the despising of Gentiles, the conviction that they were enemies of God, an instant source of ritual contamination, is so very far from our present awareness. After all, most of us are Gentiles!
The totally unconditional grace offered to Cornelius’ household, without any prior change of “lifestyle” was a divine act quite contrary to the tradition and much of the Scripture of Jews at that time. Today that same unconditional grace is evident in the lives of thousands of LGBTQIA persons, many of them United Methodist clergy! Those clergy in particular have been scrupulously examined as to whether they evidence the gifts and graces and fruits which we profess to be the essential evidence of God’s will for all clergy—and they have passed the test in Conference after Conference, at least until they “came out.” As in Acts 10-11, the test is, ultimately, whether God’s present action has revealed God’s present will for these persons. Thus, to reject the present evidence upon the basis of a very few somewhat obscure verses in an ancient text, however highly respected, borders on idolatry—granting divine authority to something created rather than to the Creator! Further, it risks “hindering” God (Acts 11:17).
It is time to break the strange silence on this issue!
The Rev. Vince Hart is a retired clergyperson from The Pacific Northwest Conference.
Thank you for your clarity. I hope that one by one all annual conferences will either vote to be in “non conformity” to the BoD or the Bod will be rewritten and it will remove the discriminatory parts and allow our LBGTQAI sisters and brothers full inclusion which means the right and rite, of ordination and and the ability to marry to the person whom they love, in the UMC. As it is now, there are six such annual conferences, and I am happy to say that my conference, the New England Annual Conference is one of those six.
It might be of interest to note that my husband was a graduate of Drew Theological Seminary, many years before your competent, and compassionate Bishop Karen Oliveto.
Methodists affirm the scriptures as the rule of faith and practice which is a postive affirmation of textual authority throughout history. If not the text what do we base our authority? In visiting other churches I have witnessed people looking into the eyes of other attempting to define if the there was a foul spirit inside, others have lain hands on members prophesying the future and what God wanted them to do as the Lord worked in their lives. Who and what has authority in the life of the church? Is it the Pope, a local bishop or maybe far away pastor? Are we a people who like Israel who at times did that was seems right to every man? Your arguement is, “it seems to be the work of God.” Throughout history the chruch has gone off into the “It seemed to be the will of God.” In the first chapter of Romans the Apostle says this kind of thinking leads men to reprobation. Hum, what that? It has been defines and coming to a place in ones thinking where a person believe deep in his heart that right is wrong and wrong is right. The allows us to call freedom of each christian as being what seems right right to him and that is not one of the pillars of the faith. Some obscure texts? This seems relegate christian morality as a utilitarian as a gamble of what seems right at the moment based on nothing but the dynamics of the situation.
As almost a native San FranciscanI have viewed the development of the situation for many years and from my own reprobate line of sight the picture is not all good. From childhood my friends have been mixed between same sex and and other views. These have been wonderful people, creative, smart and loyal. No christian would not allow them to participate in congregational life or withheld the sacraments from them nor humiliate them. When teaching in public education it is not appropriate to reveal ones sexual identity. One does not come out to his or her students as a heterosexual. It seems odd to me to have to come out. Remain just a pastor or a member who does one best to love and serve the Lord seems to be path less traveled. It seems coming out is the problem and where we sharpen out liberail swords and our conservative halibertons (forgive my spelling) and begin to create change in the church of God. At this point it becomes a matter of textual clarity as oppose to just working together and loving God’s church an each other
Many years ago I gave up titles and came out as Bill who is simply a child of God who serves in a pastoral vocation with no more than myself to present to the Lord and to his church. It is not necessary to Holler hey I am a heterosexual or as others to broadcast sexuality or gender identity. Just be who we are and do what we do … avoiding public scandal.
If people, gay, lesbian or straight do not harm what difference does it make? I do see your point, and it is valid, Suppose, some time in the future, you meet someone with whom you wish to spend the rest of your life, and he feels the same about you, what do you say to your congregation? Do you tell them that you and your partner wish to marry? Do you keep your relationship a secret? You should not have to keep a loving relationship a secret, because to me, love is love.
What would happen, if we just quit asking the question. It just seems asking the question is the base of our problems. If there are no orgies at Plato’s why not just let these people lead normal lives and carry out the business of the relationship or Family lives? As Fritz would say I am not seeking their approval I nor they seeking mine. If there is no public scandal let them live and carry out their profession. In my ministry who I married and who in my ministry who I married and who I decline from Mary has always been a pastoral decision. So if we leave who to marry up to the individual Pastor, where was the problem? Clearly it is in asking the question. And it’s asking the question that’s causing the division, or so I think.
Your friend, Bob, must have been an inspiration to you, and to many. He was a brave individual to have intervened on behalf of the protesters of the Vietnam War. What is sad, although, he seemed happy as the best pig farmer S. W., Iowa, the Methodist Church, was diminished by rejecting him as a pastor. He may have become disenchanted with the local churches’ “less than progressive view” of his theology, and then, left the full time ministry to become the pig farmer.
What was the reason for the church rejecting his gifts? Did he ever know, and did he tell you? If this was a confidence, I would not want you to break that confidence, even after his passing.
It was a bit late for the, now, UMC, to laud him, when they rejected his talents in 1962. My thought is that his progressive theology, which he could articulate, and articulate very well, was too progressive for the Methodist Church.
However, my husband was a full time cleric from 1960 to 1967, and at that time the Methodist Church’s hierarchy was more progressive than they are today. Being LBGT was not even “on the radar,” but they pushed for civil rights and the end of the Vietnam War I know as my husband was involved with both issues, and the local churches that he served did not “appreciate” his efforts. He, then, decided to use the degree he obtained, prior to graduating from Drew Seminary (a very progressive seminary), and return to being an electrical engineer, where he spent over 26 years, while, also, doing pulpit supply. Upon retiring from his career as an engineer, he served as an associate pastor of a UMC for seven years, returning as a consultant, on four occasions, for the engineering corporation from which he retired. He and I are now very happily retired, but preaches on rare occasions for the pastor of the UCC Church, where we now attend, I might add on rare occasion, as we enjoy just reading the Sunday paper and having that second cup of coffee. 🙂
Since you seem to be very progressive, I think that you would enjoy reading books by John Shelby Spong, a retired bishop of the Episcopal Church. We started reading his many books, in 1998 and he just wrote a fabulous book, which I read when my husband is not reading it. It is entitled “Biblical Literalism.” It is a lengthy book. A synopsis can be found by “Googling” John Shelby Spong Biblical Literalism. It contains an hour lecture and a fifty minute Q & A. Bishop Spong is 85 and still an active, cogent,brilliant human being.
We both read “Why Christianity Must Change or Die,” by Bishop Spong, in 1998 and it freed me from feeling as if I was a “heathen.” Especially, after I heard some UMC pastors preach. As a nurse, who studied science, I could not believe what I thought that I had to believe to be a “good Christian.”
Now that my husband is retired, his occasional sermons are very, very progressive, and he credits Bishop Spong’s excellent interpretations of the Bible.
Bill raises a vital point, thus a positive contribution to ending the “strange silence.” However, he does not grapple with the core issue I seek to raise into careful discussion: the contemporary evidence of the working of the living God in present experience of living people vs. clinging to debatable interpretations of ancient tests, however highly revered. Scripture itself offers some guidance in Paul’s reference to the role of prophets in the worshiping community (1 Cor. 14:29). Let those who believe they have insight from God speak it forth, and let the community test and discern. This breaks the silence. And it is just here that the genius of Wesleyan “conferencing” provides the way forward. As in the conflict about the admission of Gentiles into the infant church (Acts 10-15), let there be “much debate” (Acts 15:7), no matter how long it takes. Break the silence! Especially important is the testing of what we believe to be God’s will with those whose opinions differ from our own. Here lies the crucial danger of church splits: breaking into like-minded factions removes the vital corrective of honest and respectful debate, thus seriously reducing the potential of truly accurate and God-blessed discernment. Of course lengthy debate is tedious and frustrating; so we seek to avoid it. But that leads so easily to avoiding God and whatever “new thing” God may be seeking to reveal or do.
This raises some interesting questions. Just what is the final authority in my life? It sure isn’t the biblical text, the Discipline of the United Methodist Church or The Congress. Each of these have some authority over my life, but we are talking about the word “final” or “ultimate” authority. I prefer my conscience (hopefully informed), but even that can fall short of being “ultimate” in any sense of the word. Often I have sensed that something was terribly wrong, but I didn’t have the courage to be the “first” to say so. In my experience, those who did have such courage were crushed by the institutional system that was being challenged.
Example in my life time: removing restrictions on dancing, smoking, drinking. Finally the restrictions were removed and such things were left up to individual consciences. Given the examples of horrible restrictions based on race or sexual orientation or personal behavior, some hollering may be very appropriate, at least for awhile.
So well stated, John. I am going to be 80 very soon, and my husband and I recall the “no dancing,” but we danced. I remember the “no drinking,” but for years we enjoy a glass of wine with dinner. I even smoked for a while, and my husband smoked a pipe. However, Raynaud’s disease made me stop smoking, and quickly, and my husband found that it was too much trouble to keep that pipe lit, so he gave up his pipe.
I recall, too, when our African American pastors with predominately African American congregations were relegated to the “Central Jurisdiction,” no matter where the churches were located. This rule was disbanned in the mid 1960s.
So, too, the day will come when our LBGTQAI sisters and brothers will be granted full inclusion in all UMCs and until that day, I rejoice as one by one annual conferences vote to be in “non conformity.”
Carla, your comments reminded me of an experience at General Conference. Bishop Palmer was speaking about our beloved United Methodist Church in the Bishop’s address and for some reason he mentioned two individuals and had pictures of them on the monitors. Persons he thought had made a very positive impact on the church: Bob Williams and Thomas White Wolf Fassett. This got my attention for several reasons. Thom Fassett was one of my superintendents in Alaska, giving me my wonderful appointment to Sitka. Bob, on the other hand, was my seminary roommate my final year in school in 1962. Bob had a wonderful grasp of theology and because he shared that grasp wherever possible, he had some difficulty in relationships. He was one of the first to articulate the sin of our involvement in Vietnam. When the church rejected his gifts, he decided to be the “best pig farmer in S.W. Iowa and he succeeded. He attended the 1970 General Conference in St. Louis and when some Vietnam protestors were arrested in a St. Louis church worship service, he tried to intervene and he was also arrested. During the many years of his pig farming, a steady stream of Iowa Senators and Iowa Bishops made a point of spending some time with Bob on his farm. I would describe it as a pilgrimage. Do you get the contrast? Arrested and not serving a local church in 1970 and lauded as an example of a faithful Disciple of Jesus Christ in 2016. Is this irony? Bob is deceased now, but I made sure his widow got a copy of the Bishop’s remarks.