I've written previously about the coming time when the respective theological camps of our church will sign the papers, break up the house, and form their own new homes.
It may yet come to that.
And it may be the only way to prevent further harm.
But everyone must realize that "gracious separation," no matter how gracious it be, is still a separation, and, thus, a failure of love. We cannot love one another, and why it should be so is profoundly complex, I'm sure. But complexity aside, we cannot love one another.
Someone might said, "Oh, but of course, we can love one another. We just can't live together any longer."
But love is love - it's not just some distant sentiment - it's the enjoyment of one another, and the realization of mutual need; it's the discipline of staying together in the face of difficulty.
These thoughts are prompted by my reading this morning in Jacob Needleman's book, What is God?". On page 133, while discussing "rationalists" and "empiricists," he suggests that Kant's position helps these respective groups "find their own true place - a sure sign that a higher reconciliation has been achieved. The true reconciling force," writes Needleman, "never destroys, it always preserves and rescues the truth of both previous 'adversaries' [bold, mine].
Neither side compromises, but through a "higher reconciliation," each side finds its place, as each recognizes the inherent truth in one another.
Gracious separation and moving away, or some kind of in-house separation, with non-geographic Presbyteries or Synods, only demonstrates our inability to find ways to talk to one another and, perhaps, talk our way through.
Having said that, I'm clear that our current distress is more than just theological discourse, but practice.
As one conservative said to me, "We'd just like to have a place where we can hold to our theology."
I replied, "But it's more than theology. It's practice, and the heart of the practical question is ordination for GLBT persons, and for me, it's a question of justice."
There were those in the years leading up to the Civil War who wanted to maintain theological discussion, but there were others who saw the condition of slave-labor and said, "It must cease."
For me, discrimination against GLBT persons must cease!
For others, the bar against ordination of GLBT persons must remain in place.
How do our respective camps work our way through this?
Think again of the Civil War. Abolition for the Union, or States' Rights for the South?
Our nation fought a war over it, and we may yet sign the papers of separation and divorce.
Yet, we all must pause and think.
I have no answers, but to invite us to share together whenever we can and maintain mutual prayers.
TrackBack URI for this entry
Subscribe to this comment's feed
...
As one conservative said to me, "We'd just like to have a place where we can hold to our theology."
I replied, "But it's more than theology. It's practice, and the heart of the practical question is ordination for GLBT persons, and for me, it's a question of justice."
Each person articulated their bias/position in this exchange but there was no attempt on either part to explore the others' position in any fashion. The author instead of engaging the theological question of the 'conservative' just answers with his preferred arguments. That is how I would actually interpret the 'conservative', there is a sincere weariness in having a sexual agenda ceaselessly rammed down the churches collective throat by an over-represented minority with no real intention of listening or substantive dialogue. A 20% minority has 90% representation in our national offices and G.A. committee's but it seems this kind of injustice is permissible in pursuit of justice for GLBT person. Really? Enough.
Your comment to my note reveals how tired you are ... and the same goes for me, too.
There's been a lot of self-righteous posturing from all sides of the question, and if some feel put-upon by the liberal agenda, others feel equally put-upon by the conservatives. Ever since the passage of G6.106b, I've felt put upon by a relentless conservative agenda fueled by a lot of big money, cleverly derailing every effort at ordination for GLBTs, always threatening to leave if they can't get their way.
So, the sword cuts both ways.
I think we've done our theological work, and I think we've all spent a great deal of time listening to one another, and if there are "listening" issues, I suspect both groups share many of the same sins.
I've had some mighty fine conversations over the years, most with the same conclusion - we accept one another as Christians, but cannot accept our take on practice.
I wish there were a way beyond this, but it doesn't look promising.
We're all very tired.
Blessings and Peace.