TRINITY SERMONS

Trinity Presbyterian Church

2200 North Bell Avenue # Denton, Texas 76209

Rev. Craig Hunter

March 22, 2009

A Place at the Table

Scriptures: Deuteronomy 1:46-2:8a; Galatians 3:23-24

An interesting article I read in this month's issue of The Atlantic magazine focused on Rowan Williams, the current head of the worldwide Anglican communion, known as the Episcopalians in this country. The denomination has been faced with the specter of a schism as it has struggled with the issue of the ordination of gays and lesbians.

Of course, the Anglican church isn't the only denomination facing this issue. They are just a bit further along than most. As Paul Elie writes in his Atlantic article, "More than the future of the [Anglican] church is at stake. The crisis over homosexuality and the place of gay people in the church is one of the bitterest disputes in Christianity since the Reformation. Christian leaders grasp its importance: that is why they are so agitated about it. But it is hard to tell positions from prejudices. The mainline churches -- Presbyterian, Congregationalist -- are at the front of the equal-rights parade. Evangelicals are happily against homosexuality, the black church uneasily against, the fundamentalists fundamentally against. The Vatican insists its teachings on homosexuality are settled doctrine; the Mormons fund ballot measures such as California's Proposition 8 against gay marriage. Ironically, many Christian leaders in Africa, the legatees of European missionaries, treat homosexuality as a dangerous import from the West." (see http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200903/archbishop-canterbury)

While I would question his assertion that Presbyterians are at the front of the equal-rights parade, the Presbyterians certainly haven't been immune from confronting this issue over the last few decades, and most of you know it has been one of the most important issues dominating denominational discussions. Various groups have formed. There is the More Light Presbyterians, devoted to the full inclusion of gays and lesbians. There is the Covenant Network, of which this congregation is a part, dedicated to work for ordination of gays and lesbians while at the same time covenanting to remain part of the denomination. Then there is the Confessing Church movement, which I believe is larger than the other two networks put together, which affirms traditional concepts of marriage it sees homosexuality as a sin. Finally, you have the vast majority of Presbyterian churches, which are somewhere in the middle.

Meanwhile, as our denomination has debated this issue, some gays and lesbians have left the church. At the same time, some congregations, convicted that homosexuality is sinful and concerned that the subject is even up for debate, have left the denomination, raising issues of property. The departure by both groups has further contributed to the ongoing membership decline in the denomination.

I take a detour from Lent today to raise this issue because of this upcoming Saturday's presbytery meeting. Last year, at the General Assembly of the PC(USA) denomination, the highest governing body of our denomination, a motion was passed that would amend the standards for ordination. As Presbyterians are one of the few, if not the only denomination to ordain elders, this would apply to both ministers and elders seeking ordination. The proposal would remove the current requirement, inserted a few decades ago, of officers seeking ordination "to live either in fidelity within the covenant of marriage between a man and a woman, or chastity in singleness." The amendment would replace this language with more general words by which officers pledge themselves to live lives obedient to Jesus Christ the Head of the Church.

In order for this amendment to go into effect, it must first be passed in a majority of the presbyteries around the nation. Over the last several weeks and months, presbyteries around the country have been voting. This Saturday's presbytery meeting is a special meeting called solely for the purpose of debating this motion. It promises to be one of the most intense and important, and perhaps controversial presbytery meetings in a long time.

Who cares? So what? Well, regardless of how you feel about the issue, it is hard to deny that much is at stake. For those who support this amendment, it will open the doors for gays and lesbians around the country to become elders and pastors. For many who oppose the amendment, its passage would raise fundamental issues regarding the faithfulness of the denomination to their understanding of Scripture. If this amendment passes, what has been a trickle of conservative congregations leaving the denomination would very likely grow in scale. The unity of the church would be under threat, with schism a growing possibility. As someone who, in my ordination vows, promised to support the peace, unity, and purity of the church, I do not take this lightly. All of which is to say that what is at stake is the unity of our denomination, our witness in the world, our Christian theology of vocation, hospitality, and Biblical interpretation. Etc. While I do think there are greater issues facing our church and our world, I certainly would not minimize the importance of this one.

What complicates this Saturday's presbytery vote is the recommendation from the Presbytery Council to take no action, but rather to set up dialogue groups to establish relationships among those who may disagree. Technically speaking, an abstention by the presbytery would count as a "no" vote, leaving existing ordination standards in place. This proposal indirectly comes from an article written by Dr. Barbara Wheeler, the outgoing president of Auburn Theological Seminary. While she personally supports the ordination of gays and lesbians, she wants to avoid a winner-loser split that a simple vote might produce. She feels that the costs of the battle will outweigh any possible positive results. On the one hand, many of those conservatives who might leave the denomination will go to more conservative denominations, while on the other hand, there are already, technically speaking small loopholes that can allow gays and lesbians to be ordained. Instead, she calls for ongoing discernment, writing " A yes-no vote on Amendment 08-B will not accomplish what remains to be done: reaching a theological consensus about norms for human sexual behavior." (see "Why not replace (or retain) G-6.0106b," in the Presbyterian Outlook, accessed online at http://www.pres-outlook.com/reports-a-resources/presbyterian-heritage-articles/8072.html) In other words, she takes the prospect of schism seriously and wants to be inclusive toward those with differing theological opinions.

This brings us to where we are today. I recognize that people of good faith can think differently about this issue. Indeed, my own opinion has changed over the years. But I would like to share with you this morning some of my own thoughts, both in the hopes that they might be helpful and because I want you to know why I will be voting as I will. They may very well be thoughts I share at the presbytery meeting.

The first two things that stand out for me are general principles regarding how to do theology. These principles apply not only to this issue but to all other issues as well. We tend to want to rush to the issue at hand, often failing to realize that the process itself is at least as important. And the first step in that process regarding this issue, and others, it seems to me, is one of confession and repentance. The first step is confession of our sin, and when I say, "our sin," I mean everyone, you and me, gay and straight, everyone. When we are talking about issues of human sexuality, we are talking about deeply personal, intimate relationships. We aren't just talking about sex, we are talking about how we relate to each other in our most intimate relationships. And who among us, in our relationships with our husbands or wives, our girlfriends or boyfriends, or partners, who among us in our singleness, is free from sin? Heterosexuals don't always treat each other as they should. Homosexuals don't either. No one is pure, no one is immune. The truth is, and we know it in our bones and in our heart of hearts, the truth is all of us are sinners. I think it is important to begin with this confession, because it lets just a little bit of the self-righteous air out of the debate, and there is a bit too much of that all around.

The second thing I have learned about how to do theology, on this issue and others, is that theology is best done with the largest table possible. In other words, everyone gets a seat and a voice at the table. Everyone. Just because they are at the table, just because I hear what they have to say, doesn't mean I have to agree with them. But they do have a right to be there, they have a right to be heard. That's part of what it means to be a child of God. Too often in the history of Christian theology, the outcome of the theological debate has been predetermined by the exclusion of those most affected. Women. Muslims. Slaves. Blacks. The Canaanites. One of the things that disturbs me most about this upcoming presbytery meeting is who won't have a voice there. Who won't be allowed to speak. Because gays and lesbians can't currently be ordained, their perspective, their voice, will be represented by a silence. What they might have to say, as important as that may be, isn't even as important to me as the disturbing fact that they won't be allowed to be there, the process itself excludes their voice. Whether or not the church body agrees with what they have to say, we are all diminished by the absence of their voice.

Beyond these first two how-to points, the issue being debated regards one's understanding of the gospel and of the role of the Bible. I confess that I see the Bible less as a reservoir of truths, and more as a true story of God's relationship with humanity. It is a story of God's redemption of humanity, a story of how God liberates us from our sin into more whole relationships with each other and with God. It is a story of how God reaches out to the excluded, the oppressed, the poor, the outsider, the other, not stopping, no matter what the cost, claiming all as God's own. It is the greatest story ever told, a story that changes lives, a story that shapes communities. It is a story that I pray continues to shape my own life and the life of our community here at Trinity.

The ordination of gays and lesbians does not threaten, or challenge, or diminish my understanding of this story. Quite the contrary. My relationships with gays and lesbians have given me a deeper appreciation of the depth and breadth of God's love. I think in particular of my best friend the first two years I was in seminary. Although I didn't know it at the time, because it was so personal he didn't share it with anyone, not even his best friend, he was struggling with his own sexuality and theology. He confessed to me a few years later that he is gay. I have seen his gifts for ministry firsthand. He has been serving churches since his ordination, the last one for almost six years now. He flies somewhat below the radar, not all in his congregation know about his sexuality. It is isolating enough being a pastor under any circumstances, I can't imagine what it is like for him while bearing that secret.

Personally, I see this issue facing our church as fundamentally one of justice and inclusion. The issue of inclusion if one of the fundamental hallmarks of Christ's ministry, appearing throughout his lifetime. Our passage from Paul's letter to the Galations is fundamentally a statement of inclusion. In Christ, there is no slave or free, no man or woman, all are included in the body of Christ. Thus, while I appreciate and can learn from Barbara Wheeler and others who are committed to the inclusion of those who think differently, I nevertheless intend to vote against the presbytery council's "no action" proposal. It seems to me that the price they are paying for the inclusion of those who think differently is the continued exclusion of gays and lesbians from ordained ministry, and that is a price I cannot pay. Furthermore, I don't detect in Christ's ministry a particular concern about what other people thought about him. He included the least, the excluded, even what that inclusion offended others. And in my theological reading, the excluded in our church and society are the gays and lesbians.

I was reminded this week of Martin Luther King, Jr's Letter from a Birmingham Jail. He wrote to white area pastors who were critical of his methods and were encouraging him to be patient. In response, he wrote, "For years now I have heard the word "Wait!" It rings in the ear of every Negro with piercing familiarity. This "Wait" has almost always meant "Never." We must come to see, with one of our distinguished jurists, that "justice too long delayed is justice denied." We have waited for more than 340 years for our constitutional and God-given rights. The nations of Asia and Africa are moving with jetlike speed toward gaining political independence, but we still creep at horse-and-buggy pace toward gaining a cup of coffee at the lunch counter. Perhaps it is easy for those who have never felt the stinging darts of segregation to say, "Wait." . . . [But] There comes a time when the cup of endurance runs over, and men are no longer willing to be plunged into the abyss of despair. I hope, sirs, you can understand our legitimate and unavoidable impatience." He goes on to share his frustration with "the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection (http://www.stanford.edu/group/King/frequentdocs/birmingham.pdf)."

I believe the time for opening ordination up to gays and lesbians is long past due. I don't know whether the amendment will pass in this presbytery, but it almost certainly will not pass in the denomination. Most presbyteries across the country have already voted, and the tally as of a few days ago was 51 for and 79 against. Of the 49 presbyteries left to vote, 40 of them would have to vote in favor for it to pass, while only 10 need to vote against it for it to fail. Therefore, it looks as if the current ordination standards will remain, and gays and lesbians will remain largely excluded from ordained ministry. Nevertheless, I see signs of hope. I see signs of hope in the fact that, compared with the last time presbyteries voted on this issue eight years ago, 23 presbyteries have changed their vote in favor of changing the standards. The tide is turning, and will likely continue to turn, especially as younger generations age. All demographic studies point to an increasing acceptance of gays in our society. But when current ordination standards are changed, and they will be changed, I will give primary credit to God, whose Spirit is even now guiding us through the wilderness of these years, leading us to the promised land, whose Spirit continues to work subtly yet tirelessly for the inclusion of the excluded. It is in that Spirit that we are called to place our trust.