Martin Luther King, Jr. once wrote from a Mississippi jail cell to his clergy colleagues, explaining why he would not, why he could not, agree to their pleas that he delay acting upon his convictions. In his letter which was later published under the title, ‘Why we Can’t Wait,’ King shows that he understands the reasons that his colleagues have chosen to still their activism, to silence their own voices, presumably in hopes of achieving a social stability that mollify the majority on both sides of the segregation and equal rights controversy, and would substitute for true peace. He then explains why this simply won’t do for himself in light of his calling to represent Christ to both his friend and his enemy, alike.
Here we have the same reason, I believe, that those of us on the so-called ‘liberal’ side of the controversy over gay unions and gay clergy must no longer remain silent, presumably respecting those who disagree with our position, and apparently pursuing a specious unity at all costs, including the sacrifice of the integrity of our own convictions. Some of us have talked a good game, speaking out for our gay and lesbian kindred in Christ when we knew full well that there was little reason to think that we could actually change the status quo, and, when as a consequence, we clergy knew there was little to fear in terms of negative impact upon our “careers” in the Church. However, as the debate and its outcomes have become consequential, and as those of the so-called ‘conservative’ camp have become more vocal and staunch in their convictions, the once prophetic courage that fueled the liberal fringe in this diocese and in this Church, has seemingly withered in the face of the possibility of punitive effects upon careers, and the threat from the ‘conservatives’ that if the liberals don’t capitulate, they’ll be angry with us and leave, and they’ll try to take the Church with them. Somehow, this combination of threats has persuaded many a formerly vocal liberal to give in and allow the ‘conservatives’ to hold the Church hostage.
It’s time we social liberals got of our phobia around disagreement. Especially we who are theologically orthodox, morally conservative, and socially liberal know that discord is not inherently a sin. Fueling needless discord is, but so also is willfully turning a blind eye to the wrong that being done to those within the Church as well as those outside it by fellow Christians. Presumably, the money-changers in the Temple in Jerusalem thought they were doing proper and God-fearing work, but they were wrong. And Jesus didn’t seek to be of one accord with them, to dialogue with them, to compromise and capitulate in hopes that they wouldn’t leave in a tiff. He dumped their equipment and chased them out of God’s house. Jesus didn’t address his theological opponents among the Pharisees by commending them for their efforts to be faithful to God, however errant he humbly believed them to be; he didn’t back off under their hostility toward him or modify his fellowship with those whom the Pharisees reviled. Instead, he drew nearer to himself tax-collectors, beggars, prostitutes, gentiles, and all manner of ‘sinners.’
Someone will point out that Jesus would tell them ‘Go and sin no more,” though he says this only once. The point is well taken that his forgiveness of their sins, his cleansing of their ills, and his fellowship would typically elicit a conversion, a change of heart and mind in those whose lives he integrated with his own. However, Jesus never made conversion a prior requirement, a litmus test, for his fellowship. Rather, Jesus spoke the plain truth of the Gospel, that God’s Kingdom, the Reign of God who is Love has come. It has displaced the reign of evil, of money, of power, of fear, of hate. This good news was the message he proclaimed. Where it found a home or took root in a person, its implications would change in that person what needed to be changed in order for him or her to realize his or her own participation in that Kingdom. For some, it meant leaving behind a life of sexual promiscuity. Good! For some it meant surrendering the self-appointed authority to judge the religious righteousness and spiritual fitness of others. Good! In every case, it disturbed whatever stood between the person and the Love of God and Love of neighbor. Some responded positively, transformatively, to this disturbance; some resentfully, hatefully, murderously.
The Church has come to a point, I suggest, that it is no longer possible honestly to believe that the transformative or prophetic truth of the Gospel can be spoken in the hushed tones of conciliation and capitulation to those who are simply and plainly wrong. People who believe that God sends people to hell because they are gay, or more specifically because they act out on their gay sexual orientation, need to be told that they are simply and plainly wrong. To delay telling this truth acting upon it is also wrong. And because they know it to be the truth, those who are willingly muzzling it may be guilty of the greater wrong, for they are doing a disservice to those for whom they should be speaking up, and to those whom they should be willing to refute. It is a greater wrong because to remain silent and still any longer can only be self-serving. The rigid ‘conservative’ is not going to be persuaded by polite ‘liberal’ wishy-washiness. Either ‘liberals’ believe in what they claim to believe, or they are simply leaves in the wind, unprincipled and undependable.
Jim +
No comments:
Post a Comment