I really fail to see why the second alternative is so problematic. There are any number of issues on which the UCA has no official opinion, and this does not stop people from expressing clearly that “Christians differ on this and the UCA has no official position but that I/our church/our Presbytery/our Synod feel strongly that x is the case for these reasons...” This would seem to me to be a position of great integrity. The truth is of course that what I say to someone newly welcomed into my church will depend vastly on my own theology and will vary enormously from one UCA member, one UCA church, to another. We may say different things to that newcomer about the nature of God, salvation, the church, the sacraments, the Bible etc, etc. Why is it so discomforting then, to imagine that what we say to that newcomer about christian sexual ethics might also be different?
Most (not all) of the ''evangelical'' people I meet are determined to welcome homosexual people into the church, and prepared to make considerable sacrifices to do this. The question is, what will the church tell them? In particular, will we say that homosexual practices are equally valid in God's sight to heterosexual practices? Or will we say that Christians differ on this, and that the UCA has no official opinion, which seems to be the current position?
Neither of these positions are acceptable to most evangelicals. Both represent a radical change to the traditional position on homosexuality which, rightly or wrongly, many UCA members believed to be the position of the church to which they belong.
Let me put this very clearly – this is an issue of power and control. Resolution 84 is an invitation to trust my brothers and sisters in other Presbyteries and Congregations to listen to and hear the voice of God as they make decisions regarding candidature and placement. Those who oppose 84 do not trust their sisters and brothers and are determined instead to impose their will on other Christians.
I have no idea how you can say that. Certainly every item of official information I have read and passed on to my congregation has made this crystal clear. And those in my congregation who oppose 84 are absolutely clear that they are not doing so because of a fear that a homosexual minister will be forced on them. Their concern is that there may be homosexual ministers in other churches. I quote, “What if you visit another church on holidays with your grandchildren and there’s ‘one of them’ in the pulpit?”
I think there is a great deal of fear among UCA members that they *will* be forced to accept a homosexual minister. I'm very sorry to say that I don't think there has been any meaningful attempt to address this fear.
1. Regulations could be introduced or clarified so as to make it impossible for anyone to be forced to accept a gay minister. I can't see this happening, and if I'm right about this, this gives credence to the fear. There seems no reason that the regulations should not address this, unless some have the intention that somewhere down the line a gay minister will be forced on parishioners who don't want one, which I think is the case.
These regulations are already in place, as 84 reminds us. Do we need to individually specify everything possible factor or combination of factors that might lead a congregation to decline a particular individual?! Why pick on gender orientation specifically? To me this would simply confirm the opinion of an agnostic friend of mine that the Church is a bunch of old people who can’t have sex so they spend all their time legislating about it!
2. Serious theological work could be done and communicated to develop up a contemporary theology of sexuality. This of course challenges a taboo, still existing in much of our society and our church, against talking about sex. I can't see that happening either. Part of the problem is that this taboo prevents many people from even admitting that such a taboo exists, let alone discussing it.
I have no problem at all with this. But in the end, their will be people who will never hear, who will never change their minds, nor acknowledge that someone may come to a different point of view with integrity. I do not wish to stop being prophetic in order to placate those people.
Cheers
Linz
Macintosh -- because they just WORK!
--
Rev. Lindsay Cullen
Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
An old(!) website... www.lindsaycullen.com
