Sermon:
April 25, 2004
Morning Services

Scripture:
Luke 5:33-39

When problems with short-term memory caused my mother to have less and less interest in television (given her inability to connect the first ten minutes of a program with the next ten minutes, or the last ten minutes), she continued to enjoy watching The Weather Channel. Its messages were short, repetitive and highly visual. Storms were of special interest, seeing as how she spent seventeen years in coastal Florida thinking about hurricanes. 

We have come a long way with “storm watches” and “storm warnings.” Although we preachers sometimes worry that things have gone too far. Lead stories about rain, snow or ice on Saturday night can kill church attendance on Sunday morning….even when blizzards turn out to be flurries and the predicted deluge is downgraded to a barely discernable drizzle. 

Still, where storms are concerned, it’s nice to have warnings. Children who are even the slightest bit perceptive learn how to read storm warnings in their parents’ marriage. Every marriage gives off signals when an argument is about to begin. In some homes there is an eerie calm before the storm. Things get real quiet. Too quiet. Voices, softer. Sentences, shorter. People are on emotional tiptoes, as if walking on eggs. Which they are. Brothers and sisters look at each other and figure they had better lay low or “get out of Dodge”….given their knowledge of what’s coming. 

While in other homes, marital arguments are preceded by bluster rather than calm. People talk louder….walk louder….live louder. The husband shuts the refrigerator door and the entire kitchen shakes. The wife sets the table and the plates bounce. A storm is coming, at or after dinner. Meaning that, if you’re a kid, it’s a good night not to be hungry. 

All of which is a prelude to my standing before you as your spiritual leader and telling you that a storm may be coming. Not so much here as in Pittsburgh. But its fallout may reach us from Pittsburgh. And probably will reach us from Pittsburgh. One hopes it will be a small storm….the kind that, when one happens here at First Church, Rod Quainton calls it “a little dust up.” But in the event it is a bigger storm, one hopes it will be a healing storm….a cleansing storm….a clearing-of-the-air rather than a clearing-of-the-decks storm. I could avoid mentioning it. But the newspapers are going to be full of it. So I have decided to say a word before it rather than after it (believing, as I know some of you do, that the best defense is a good offense). 

Starting tomorrow….and continuing for two weeks….Methodists from all over the world are gathering in Pittsburgh. The event is called “General Conference.” It occurs but once every four years. Its formal delegates number 998 (just two short of 1,000). But lots of others will descend upon Pittsburgh to look, learn, labor and lobby. Our two newly-appointed pastors, Lynn Hasley and Carl Gladstone, will both be there as part of a seminary class assignment, while Joan Benner, our wonderful Finance Administrator, is fulfilling a long-held dream by working the Conference as a page. Being a remarkably apolitical animal when it comes to the inner workings of great denominations, I will not be there. Nor have I ever felt a great desire to be there. But some do. So I’ll give them my thanks and my cheers. Our president and his wife, George and Laura Bush (Methodists from Texas), have been invited to address the delegates. But when last I heard, the White House had yet to say “Yes” (although it had yet to say “No”). 

Were you there when the Conference opens, you would be moved to tears and impressed beyond belief. Never will you hear such singing, praying and preaching. Delegates from all over the world will create a tapestry of color and sound, accompanied by banners, dancers, singers and drummers. The bread will be broken. The cup will be shared. Celebrating the Conference theme, “Water Washed and Spirit Born” (I love that title), participants will thrill to the visible diversity of our members and the passionate loyalty they profess to our Lord, Jesus Christ. All Christians should be in such a gathering once, lest they think that “church” is just a little building on the corner, where the organist struggles to play the hymns up-tempo and the treasurer struggles to pay the bills on time. 

When the delegates aren’t celebrating and worshiping, they will be debating and deciding some sixteen hundred pieces of legislation. Many of them weighty. A few of them frivolous. I am told that one of the petitions (submitted by a lay person from Texas) calls for a reinstitution of the biblical mode of punishment known as “stoning” for ministers brought up on charges. It doesn’t say what charges. It just says that the offenders ought to be stoned. I hope that’s one of the petitions in the “frivolous” category. 

But as concerns the majority of the business, you are going to hear next to nothing. Sure, there will be reporters there. But what reporter is going to file a story about a major reorganization of the United Methodist Board of Pensions? Such news might interest me. But it will be of no concern to you. I suppose someone could file a “puff piece” about all the wonderful work we Methodists are doing, and all the wonderful places we are doing it. But that kind of news, as they say in the trade, seldom sells papers. 

So what you are going to hear and read about is homosexuality. Trust me, that’s all you’re going to hear about. Because that’s where the heat is going to be. And, one hopes, that’s where the light is going to be. Although concerning a desire for light equal to heat, don’t hold your breath. This is where Christians of every stripe are grinding teeth, baring teeth and cutting teeth these days. But with all that teething going on, there is very little chewing (accompanied by more spitting than swallowing). Listening to friends on every side of the issue, it is clear we can no longer steer a course around the issue. But I cannot say I see an easy road through the issue. Oh, for a clear voice from the Lord or a fresh wind from the Spirit. Many, there are, who are certain we already have one. But others, looking at the same evidence, do not draw the same conclusion. 

But this powwow in Pittsburgh will be more focused in its treatment of the subject. Discussion of the gay issue will be centered on clergy….ordaining and appointing them. This is because, a little over a month ago, a jury of thirteen United Methodist pastors in the state of Washington ruled that Rev. Karen Dammann, pastor of First United Methodist Church in Ellensburg, Washington, was not guilty of violating church law by engaging in a lesbian relationship while under appointment to a local congregation. To which charge she openly admitted in a letter to her bishop in 2001, telling him she was indeed “living in a partnered, covenantal homosexual relationship.” As a result of the jury’s acquittal, she has had all charges removed and her pulpit restored. And protected by church laws concerning double jeopardy, she cannot be charged again under the same or similar statutes. Her acquittal was cheered in some parts of the church, vilified in other parts of the church, and noted thoughtfully, prayerfully and (to be truthful) anxiously in most parts of the church, as we collectively pondered what this might mean. 

Two things are clear. 

1. Our denomination has tried walking a tightrope. On one hand, we have said that homosexuality is “incompatible with Christian teaching,” while on the other hand, affirming that gays and lesbians are persons of sacred worth, to whom the ministries (if not the ministry) of the church ought to be extended, and the protective laws of the land, offered. Which is just an ecclesiastical way of saying: “We don’t condone the practice, but we do affirm the people.”

2. Language in our Book of Discipline clearly states that self-avowed, practicing homosexuals are not to be accepted as ministerial candidates, ordained as ministers, or appointed to serve in United Methodist churches.

So what happened in Washington? Clearly, that portion of the church wanted to send a message to the rest of the church. The jury argued that although language barring gays from the ministry was clear, other language in the Book of Discipline….language around openness, acceptance and inclusivity….called that prohibition into question, clouding its intent and rendering it unenforceable. 

In response to which the Council of Bishops….along with our bishop….have said: “This one acquittal does not alter the constitution of the church regarding qualifications for ministry, and any pastor wishing to test the ruling should expect to have similar charges filed against him or her.” So far, no one has tested the ruling. And now the scene shifts to Pittsburgh. So what’s going to happen? 

Well, when every quote you read contains words like “struggle” and “pain” (along with phrases like “tooth and nail”), it’s hard to put Pittsburgh in the category of a Sunday school picnic. I have heard words like “picket,” “lobby,” “protest” and “walkout” associated with the next two weeks, even as I recall civil disobedience and police arrests at the 2000 General Conference in Seattle (in response to the same issue). And even the few who salivate over division are afraid to do anything but whisper the word “schism.” It’s potentially that serious, my friends. That serious. 

Having spent my life in the practice of civil discourse, I plead for that. And having spent my life in the practice of prayerful discourse, I pray for that. Although I can tell you what will happen at the end of the day. Knowing how the votes will fall when the delegates leave Pittsburgh, the language concerning homosexuality will be toughened, the prohibition against gays in ministry will be stiffened, and the unintended backlash will further distance our denomination from Christians in the gay community. Which advocates for change will call “insensitive and cruel.” To which advocates for the status quo will respond: “You brought this upon yourselves.” Whatever else happens, I feel badly that a group all of us should care for deeply will have fresh reason to believe that they are nothing but “a problem” for the church of Jesus Christ. 

But being forewarned, you will at least be able to understand what you read. To which I would like to add some personal observations of my own. Call them “benchmarks” for future and further conversation. 

First, every denomination has gay clergy. I mean, every denomination. We have gay clergy. We have had gay bishops. As far as I can tell, their performance (ethically, pastorally and professionally) has mirrored the whole. No better. No worse. Obviously, they have not avowed or professed their orientation. As to whether they have practiced it….or lived celibately….I do not know. I haven’t asked. And they haven’t said. This is simply to tell you that gay clergy exist and have existed in every body of believers. At some point in your faith journey (unless you are brand new to your faith journey), you have listened to them preach, been the beneficiary of their prayers, benefited from their classes or received the sacrament from their hands. At this point in my manuscript I started to write, “They’re out there.” But they’re not….out (there), I mean. 

Second, regardless of how God leads us through this one….and I pray God will lead us through this one….I find myself wondering what the issue (as concerns ministry) will be in a quarter of a century. For the issue seems to change with time. I recall when you couldn’t be a woman and be in ministry. I also recall when you couldn’t be divorced and be in ministry. Were you to put those two rules back into effect tomorrow, we would lose forty percent of our clergy staff, just like that. Another thing history tells me is that there was a time when you couldn’t be a person of color and be in ministry. Today, my bishop….and a wonderful Christian leader she is….is black, divorced and female. But it wasn’t all that long ago that she couldn’t have been my colleague, let alone my bishop. 

Third, as concerns the Bible and the question of “fitness for ministry,” those churches which did (or still do) exclude women, divorced individuals or persons of color, do so because of what they understand to be biblical authority. They do not see it as a matter of race, gender or marital status. Neither do they see it as being liberal or conservative. They see it as being faithful to the Word. 

Fourth, while homosexuality does not appear to be a big issue in the Bible….a sum total of seven verses, none of which are in the Gospels….one must concede the argument that whenever homosexuality is mentioned, it is mentioned negatively. Some have argued that other passages soften it. While others have argued that the writers (in their time) believed everybody was straight, and that those who expressed themselves otherwise were simply acting out (rebelling, if you will….sinfully rebelling, if you will) against their straightness. But while there are ways to interpret (and perhaps downplay) the Bible’s negative words about homosexuality, there do not appear to be any positive words. So if you want to address the issue solely on biblical grounds, I think you have to ask: “Is every biblical word of God the last word of God? Or is God, through the inspiration and guidance of the Holy Spirit, coupled with the cautious and prudent interpretation of the church, speaking still? And perhaps speaking differently?” 

Finally, this really is about today’s text having to do with wine and wineskins. When is it the right time to adapt or amend, repair or replace old skins? I wish I knew. For this is not my cause. I have friends….good friends….good Bible-believing, Christ-adoring friends….who say it should be my cause. Along with others who say it had better not be my cause. I wouldn’t even be talking about this if people weren’t streaming toward Pittsburgh. I’m not about to lead anybody’s crusade. 

What I do know is that change is hard. And if you believe that, then even considering change is hard. I recall the document entitled “The Principle of Dangerous Precedent.” If memory serves me correct, it was written by the British academic who said: “Nothing should ever be done for the first time.” 

So what do I think? I think that eventually (if not now) sexual orientation will join race, gender and marital status as secondary rather than primary indicators of fitness for ministry. What then will be the primary indicator of fitness for ministry? “Likeliness of effectiveness” will be the primary indicator of fitness for ministry. John Wesley wanted to know, concerning all of his ministers: “Have they produced fruit?” Which, as I recall, is the same question Jesus asked of the fig tree. I do not believe that God calls people to the ministry unless God gifts them for ministry. So, first and foremost, we ought to ordain the gifted. 

I do not know Karen Dammann. The cynical part of me wants to believe she is politically motivated. Or the part of me that is even more cynical wants to believe that others….with political agendas….are using her. But the one thing I have heard over and over again is that she’s good….that her church loves her….and that her church wants to keep her. Which means that in the eyes of the denomination, she is the wrong person doing the right thing. 

Which leads me to an interesting scenario. Were you to give me a fistful of frequent flyer miles and tell me to spend the next four Sundays sitting at the feet of four preachers (of my choosing) who could enhance my faith and improve my sermons, one of those four would be a gay black man who has held his pulpit for over thirty years. Of course, his pulpit is in the center of Harvard. But the other three would include two white males and a white female, all of whom preach in the deep South. Which is not (how would you say it?) in the center of Harvard. I don’t know what any of these four think of the issue in Pittsburgh. Truth be told, only one of them is a Methodist. 

So why would I pick these four? I’ll tell you why. Because when you’re hungry….I mean, really hungry….you’re going to go where there’s food. Good food. 

Notes:  I am aware that the title of this sermon is nowhere reflected in the body of the sermon. Some of that has to do with timetables demanded by printers. The rest of it has to do with the shift in the sermon’s direction during the sermon’s creation. I had every intention of ending the sermon in a manner that would have incorporated the title. Then I changed my mind. Or the Spirit changed my direction. Rather than retitle my message, I decided to stay with the original, given that I really love the line “O Church, with all thy faults, I love thee still,” and believe it to be true of my devotion. Truth be told, the line comes from an 18th century English Poet, William Cowper who, in a moment of passionate patriotism wrote: “England, with all thy faults, I love thee still.” Then another of my heroes, David H. C. Read, late of Madison Avenue Presbyterian Church in New York, quoted it in a book entitled Unfinished Easter: Sermons on the Ministry. So now you know. 

I trust that I have captured the essence of Karen Dammann’s trial correctly. I relied on the usual sources which include The Michigan Christian Advocate, The Christian Century and Good News Magazine. No doubt there are legal subtleties that the reporters have missed, but what I have written is a sermon, not a trial brief. 

As concerns the broader issue of homosexuality and the church, I have read widely in recent years. Especially helpful has been a collection entitled Homosexuality in the Church: Both Sides of the Debate. For those wishing to deal directly with the seven biblical texts, essays by Richard Hays and Victor Furnish are especially helpful. Finally, I am indebted to the sometimes-polemical (but always insightful) reflections of William Sloane Coffin, especially those found in his book, A Passion for the Possible.