God and Darwin, again

It wasn’t until I made it to Furman on Monday morning to prepare a final exam that I learned of the latest controversy to hit campus–the vandalism of a display detailing the geological history of the lake. Apparently the placard depicting the “descent of man” was stolen and others that described the natural history of the earth in terms of millions of years were defaced. You can read the story (and comments) here. The comments are not terribly edifying, but they do make clear how virulent the opposition to the scientific world view is. Oh, and don’t worry, although I’ve not seen it personally, I doubt there’s anything in the display that this member of Furman’s Religion Department would take issue with (I won’t presume to speak for my colleagues).
The other fascinating news is the opening of the Creation museum in Kentucky. There was a wonderful article in the NY Times about it but since that won’t remain available for non-subscribers, I will link to the Yahoo News post. The most fascinating tidbit for me–the presence of dinosaurs on Noah’s ark. The museum gets high praise, even from secularists and scientists for the technology and art in the displays, but I’ll confess that in one of the photos I’ve seen, it looks very much like a dinosaur is in a nest of giant golf balls, not eggs.

My journey toward full inclusion of Gay and Lesbians

Having mentioned in my last post that I think conversations about and with Gay and Lesbian Christians are important, I thought it might be informative if I said something about how I arrived at the position I currently hold with regard to homosexuality.

I first had to confront the reality of Gay and Lesbian Christians in the early 1980s when I began my studies at Harvard Divinity School. Getting to know gays and lesbians as classmates and then as friends shaped my later experiences. I was a member of the Board of Directors of Ministry to the Homeless, which sought to provide a pastoral presence to homeless men and women on the streets of Boston. Its director was gay; he was also an ordained Disciples of Christ minister. I saw Michael’s gifts at work in Boston, changing the lives of homeless people, and the attitudes of other people. Michael later died of HIV/AIDS, a legacy of his life before he came to know the life that we have in Christ.

I remember a conversation I had with an old and very dear friend who was a graduate of the Mennonite Biblical Seminary. We got together at some point in the mid-80s, and our conversation turned to gays and lesbians. I recall quite clearly that my friend was advocating same-sex blessings while I was deeply opposed. As a single person at the time, it wasn’t clear to me that relationships needed the church’s blessing (this was long before I became Episcopalian). Since then, I have maintained friendships with gays and lesbians and I am aware of couples who have been together as long as Corrie and I.

The point is that my theological and pastoral understanding of homosexuality is rooted in my experience of individuals and families. When people ask me about the biblical verses that seem to reject homosexual behavior, my first response is not to try to interpret or explain those texts but rather to begin with experience. My reasoning goes something like this:

1) There are people who for whatever reason (is it biological, cultural, tied to their personal experience?) can find fulfillment in relationships only with members of the same gender

2) God has created us as sexual beings and as beings who live in community

3) God, the Trinity, is a relational being, and being created in God’s image, we also are relational

4) While I do believe some people are called to celibacy, denying one’s sexuality and sexual being is potentially very dangerous (the recent scandals in the Roman Catholic Church prove that)

5) The gift of love between two people is a gift from God. It is also fragile and needs the support of a wider community for it to flourish

6) Given all that, the Church has a responsibility to work toward the full inclusion of gays and lesbians in its life, and ultimately to find ways of recognizing and blessing the love that gay and lesbian couples share.

I am well aware that many people of faith would disagree with what I have said here, but I would encourage everyone to think about what I have written. It is my conviction that most people’s attitudes towards homosexuality are not based on biblical or theological grounds. Rather, most people have an attitude for which they seek supporting arguments in scripture and theology. I woucld encourage people to reflect on those underlying attitudes—where do they come from? On what are they based? Better yet, talk to your gay and lesbian neighbors, coworkers, and fellow church members. Ask them about their experiences and about their lives, and ask them as well about their faith journeys.

Invitations to Lambeth

Have you received your invitation to the Lambeth Conference in 2008? No? Well, neither have I, for which I give God thanks. It is bound to be an exciting time. By then we will have a better idea of the future of the Anglican Communion. There is already considerably noise in the press about which bishops received invitations and which did not. The Right Reverend Gene Robinson did not receive an invitation. But of equal interest is that Martin Minns, who was consecrated a bishop by Archbishop Akinola of Nigeria, for CANA, the Nigerian Anglican Church’s offshoot in the US, was also snubbed. There are sound canonical reasons for excluding bishops like Minns; such reasons don’t exist in the case of Bishop Robinson. There the question is homosexuality. But the Archbishop of Canterbury has also stated that homosexuality will be on the agenda of Lambeth. I find it odd that the one openly gay bishop in the Anglican Communion has not been invited to participate in those discussions.

It is clear that the Archbishop of Canterbury wants to keep people at the table, talking to one another, but that is quite difficult when one group refuses to sit down and talk with others. Bishop Henderson has expressed much the same sentiment. The last Lambeth Conference of Bishops committed itself and the Anglican Communion to a Listening Process that would try to understand and learn about the experiences of Gay and Lesbian Christians. That process was commended and encouraged by the Windsor Report and by later Primates’ Meetings. The Listening Process was intended to take place on a Provincial and Diocesan level. I do not know whether our diocese has made any such attempt, but it seems to me that conversations beyond simple acknowledgment of the presence of Gays and Lesbians in our Church are important.

Don't be anxious

The Bishop’s pastoral letter which Father Timothy read in service on May 13 was fully in keeping with the Bishop’s actions and statements since General Convention 2003. I appreciated his candor and the thoughtful, deeply-felt words in which he expressed himself. His commitment to both the Anglican Communion and to the Episcopal Church is remarkable, and the honesty and integrity with which he speaks and acts is commendable. I might disagree with some of the things he said in the letter, but I thank God that he is our bishop, leading our diocese.

I will take issue publicly with one thing he wrote, that the clergy, to a person, are anxious. I am not anxious. I have faith in God that in the end God’s will will be done and the Episcopal Church will be a community faithful and committed to God’s work in the world. Of that I have no doubt. There may be significant change, but I am certain that God will continue to be present in those changes, whatever they may be.

While Fr. Timothy read the letter, and while we worshiped at St. James, I was mindful of events taking place only a couple of miles away, at St. Francis. St. Francis is experiencing enormous changes; they will be commemorating their final (English language) service in June. But last Sunday, there were over 350 people present for the Spanish language service. The Bishop received into the Episcopal Church or confirmed around twenty adults. In addition, more than twenty children made their first communions. That is remarkable growth in a very short period of time. God is doing great things in our Church. Change can bring anxiety with it but, as we say in congregational development, change is going to happen, the question is, what kind of change, and how will we manage or approach it?

Leftover thoughts from this morning's sermon

I struggled more than usual with today’s sermon, in part because I had preached Maundy Thursday on that portion of John 13, and I didn’t want to repeat myself more than usual. In addition, I had a lot going on this week, so I wasn’t able to focus on the texts to the extent I usually do. That led to two thoughts that could have been included in the sermon. In the first place, when I heard the lesson from Acts read at the early service, I knew immediately that I could have made the connection between the diversity of the city about which I was speaking and the diversity in that text, the Gospel being extended to Gentiles (I could also have made another joke about shrimp, because they are among the unclean foods).

But secondly, I realized as I preached that in the back of my mind as I was preparing was the PBS program on Mormonism that aired this week. One of the themes of that program was the idea of celestial marriage and that families exist in eternity. In fact, that idea competes within Mormonism with a strong impulse to create the New Jerusalem. Mormonism began in apocalyptic fervor, eagerly awaiting Jesus’ second coming. That theme was downplayed, even ignored in the program. But what is interesting to me is that in its current form, Mormonism seeks to inscribe the family as an eternal institution. That is a radical departure from the New Testament. Jesus said in reply to the Sadducees “In the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven” (Mt. 22:30), and Paul in I Corinthians expresses a clear preference against marriage.

My point is not that marriage and the family are wrong or un-Christian. Rather, early Christianity saw itself as creating a new kind of community, one based not primarily on kinship, but on connection to Christ and to one another. Given the realities of family life in the world today, we do well to remember that most people do not live in traditional families any more, given the rates of divorce, and changing marriage patterns. That’s partly why I see the image of the city, or indeed an image like the body of Christ to be much more powerful for creating the bonds of community in the church.