This Month's Colloqium

Colloquia Archive

Therefore I am not in disagreement with Larry in the following:

1. God did create us male and female.

2. The scriptures are clear that marriage is the context for sexual union and procreation and hence male/female relationships. In addition, the physiological design of the reproductive organs and the process for procreation are clearly something that we humans did not design and obviously reveal the creativity of our God. As I have pointed out many times, every gay or lesbian was created and born through this creative process that God designed.

3. The "cause" of homosexuality is unknown. Is homosexuality an aberration of the creation, or is it a part of God's design? Is one's sexual orientation something that one discovers, is it the result of relationship issues with parents as one grows through childhood, or is it a choice? (The issue of choice seems dubious, for who would "choose" to be homosexual given the pressures of the Church and culture?)

Because of my upbringing in the Church, I as a pastor find myself in tension as I feel called to reach out to those who are gay and lesbian and at the same time be faithful to the Church's teachings.

I don't like living with this tension that comes when one is at odds with the Church. I don't like the division that I have experienced from my fellow pastors because I serve a congregation in which gays and lesbians are openly accepted. I don't like being a minority and walking in an area where I can't be CONFIDENT that I'm right and correct. But at the same time, I can't in good faith and in Christian love feel comfortable with the way the Church has excluded or "kept in the closet" those who are gay or lesbian. The current stance of our church has in fact discouraged open conversation and discussion with gays and lesbians and often their families. As a result gays and lesbians and frequently their families have felt like "second class citizens" in the Kingdom of God or even worse excluded from the Kingdom all together.

Consider divorce. Although Jesus says nothing about homosexuality, he does speak of divorce quite openly in Matthew 19. According to the words of Jesus, we as a church should not allow anyone who has been divorced (except on the grounds of unchastity) and remarries to serve as a pastor of the church. He (Jesus doesn't say anything about "her") is committing adultery every time he has sex with his new wife. We allow pastors who are divorced and remarried to continue in sexual activity with his/her new spouse and to continue as ordained pastors of the Church. Is homosexuality a greater "sin" than adultery? Granted, we don't celebrate "divorce" in the Church, but we do celebrate "remarriages." Is that not the church's tacit blessing to the sin of adultery?

At the core of the issue for me are the following questions:

1. If we differentiate from the ORIENTATION and the ACTION and thereby welcome gays and lesbians into the Church and support them AS LONG AS THEY ARE CELIBATE (a gift) or CHASTE (a choice/decision on whether they ACT on their orientation), then what does the Church say to (or even more so, how does the Church discipline) a gay/lesbian member who is baptized but who continues to be sexually active? Does the Church respond differently, depending on whether the sexual activity is in a committed relationship or multiple relationships.
2. What do we say to gay couples who are living in a committed relationship when they express a desire to join our congregation? Do we welcome them into membership as a couple? Do we try to split them apart? Do we ask them to continue to live in a faithful relationship but "just don't do sex." [It is clearer when a gay/lesbian comes as a single person - we simply encourage them to be celibate/chaste. But what if they are living with a partner who is NOT a member of the church? What is our pastoral guidance?] What if any of these gay/lesbian members are nominated and elected to serve on the Congregation Council.
3. Is there room in the Church to offer gay/lesbian couples support for their living in a committed relationship, . . . as opposed to absolute repression of any sexual activity? Since the church has said to gays and lesbians, "Doing sex your way is a sin," if a gay/lesbian is sexually active, the church has in essence condemned them to Hell, excluded them from the fellowship and leadership of the church, and/or left open no option for sexual expression. Is this the best guidance and support our church has to offer? Do all heterosexuals always "do sex" by the book? Can heterosexuals, because they are male and female, have the option of "doing sex" anyway they want simply because they are male/female (the RIGHT order) while gays/lesbians are excluded from any sexual activity whatsoever because they "do sex" WRONG?
4. Are homosexual relationships ONLY PHYSICAL SEX? Is it possible for those who are gay/lesbian to long for companionship, love, support, security, intimacy, closeness, and all the other aspects of a relationship that a married couple enjoy beyond the sexual experience? Why do we see homosexuality ONLY in terms of doing sex? As the scriptures define love and relationships, it is much, much more than just sex. Is the prominence of our focus on the sex act in our discussions of homosexuality a result of the fact that we have such a preoccupation with sex in our culture because we have not been able to talk about sex openly and in a healthy way?
5. Where on the following continuum is the Church willing and able to go and still remain faithful to God? What should the posture of the Church be toward those who are gay/lesbian?
   a. CONDEMNING
   i. Both orientation and action
   ii. Action alone ("Love the sinner, hate the sin.")
   b. TOLERATING - "Don't ask, don't tell!" "Keep it a secret, in the closest." "Everybody knows, or at least some do, but nobody says anything except in 'safe' circles" with those you know who agree with you."
   c. ACKNOWLEDGING - Openly recognizing that gays/lesbians are members of the congregation, but the congregation has a variety of opinions on homosexuality and homosexual relationships.
   d. CONDONING - to forgive, pardon, or overlook an offense. Open to welcome gays and lesbians, and acknowledging that they are no greater sinners than anyone else.
   e. AFFIRMING - Recognizing gays/lesbians, accepting their relationships, and welcoming homosexuals into the full fellowship of the congregation, including leadership positions.
6. Can we as the Church offer to gays and lesbians a public affirmation of their relationship (allowing us to lift up life-long faithfulness and fidelity and providing the support of the church to hold them accountable to each other - as we do with marriage) while at the same time NOT calling it "marriage?" How do we continue to hold up marriage as the God created NORM, . . . but allowing for a "union" as an option for those who are oriented to the same sex to have the opportunity for the Church to encourage faithfulness and fidelity to gay/lesbian couples? How does the church respond when a gay couple adopts, or when a lesbian couple has artificial insemination to bear and give birth to a child? These are issues that are being faced in our congregations. Is there room in the church for these "families" and the children that grow up in them? What is the message of Jesus to them and how does the Church communicate that message?
7. What is our FEAR about homosexuality? Are we afraid that to condone and affirm homosexual behavior (as we do with adultery in divorce) will threaten the holiness of marriage? Or that it will open the "option" of another life style so people will have a choice? Do we fear that if the Church approves these two proposals that a "flood gate" will open and who knows where we will end up? Do we fear that there is an "agenda out there" that is being fostered upon the Church in an organized and concerted way? What is the difference between an "agenda" and a "concern?"

Clearly, in the two issues before the Church, they must remain together. To ordain a gay or lesbian who is living in relationship without first of all defining what that relationship is will open up great potential for pain and hurt for the pastor as well as the congregation s/he serves. The definition of and boundaries for a "same sex union" is an essential prerequisite before we can consider ordination for gays/lesbians who are living in a relationship.

Finally, my biggest concern right now is the process that the ELCA has set in place. When we have pastors and congregations moving immediately to a defensive posture, we are not honoring the process of discussion that the Churchwide Assembly put in place in 2001. It is one thing to do the discussions and studies and then decide that we cannot make these changes in our polity. But to react immediately with polls and surveys in our congregations, without any serious and intentional study and discussion, without any conversations with those who are gay or lesbian in our church (and their families), without any additional study of scripture and tradition, without allowing time for listening to the Holy Spirit . . . seems to me to short-circuit the process our Church has set in place. The date was set for 2005 to give us 4 years to focus on a topic that has been "on the table" for at least a decade. Without a time frame for a decision, the issue will continue to "hang out" there. The time frame is only to give us a target. It may take LONGER than 4 years. We can extend the study, and I suspect we will, if we hope to have the kinds of discussions that are needed. But let's talk, let's dialog, let's respect the process the ELCA has set in place, even if we disagree, even if we feel this topic should not even be on the table, . . . for it IS on the table and has been in the lives of many of the members of our congregations.

Now is the time to bring the issue out of the closet, to have loving, candid, honest, faithful face-to-face conversation with each other, even though we all experience God, the world and life differently. We are the Church, and it falls upon us in this age to have these conversations and dialog as we seek to discern whether or not God is doing a "new thing" or calling us to see something that has always been with us in "new or different way." We all know what our tradition has taught us. We all have our unique perspectives and interpretations about what God wills. But we also follow a Jesus who died for ALL sin, who prayed that "all may be one," and whose life, death and resurrection opens the Kingdom of God to all who believe because we could not "get it right" on our own.

What does it mean for us, the Church, to be faithful in our conversations and deliberations on the issues before us? What the church will decide is NOT YET DETERMINED. Granted, the questions before us suggest a change in our current policy, but the Church Assembly might very well choose to make no changes. My prayer is that we will honor the process and use this time in such a way so that whatever decision our Church makes will be faithful and reached through a process of discernment that appropriately reflects the love and compassion of our Lord (Creator, Redeemer, and Sustainer) for all people.

Shalom!
Richard C. Little