BELIEVERS WITHOUT BORDERS; MATTHEW 21:23-32; SEPTEMBER 25, 2011; THOMAS H. YORTY; WESTMINSTER PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "BELIEVERS WITHOUT BORDERS; MATTHEW 21:23-32; SEPTEMBER 25, 2011; THOMAS H. YORTY; WESTMINSTER PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH"

Angelina Carson
5 years ago
Views:

1 BELIEVERS WITHOUT BORDERS; MATTHEW 21:23-32; SEPTEMBER 25, 2011; THOMAS H. YORTY; WESTMINSTER PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH One week from today, we will conduct a wedding here in the sanctuary. It will be like most of the weddings that have ever been conducted here. It will follow the Book of Common Worship for the ceremony. There will be a procession; readings from Scripture; the couple will pledge their vows to one another, give rings, and light a unity candle. We will pray, sing two hymns, say the benediction then all go to the reception. Yet, this ceremony will be very different from all other wedding ceremonies that have taken place in this sanctuary for over 150 years; because the partners united in holy matrimony that day will be of the same gender. Lest we think we re on the cutting edge, I note that same-gender weddings regularly take place in the United Church of Christ and Unitarian denominations. Not to mention the recent sea change by the Pentagon accepting gay and lesbian soldiers and sailors; the American Association of University Professors insuring pension and medical benefits for same sex partners of AAUP members; and the American Psychiatric Association which removed homosexuality from its lexicon of disorders decades ago. We re not exactly blazing a trail here but we are doing something very important. We are participating in the transformation of the Presbyterian Church. And the Presbyterian Church occupies a critical slice of the spectrum of contemporary America we are largely middle class and mainline but we still have one foot in the old world of institutional bias and bigotry against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people. Yet, my sense is we are raising that foot to bring it alongside the other one into the modern world; a world free of prejudice against LGBT folks. The tipping point has been reached. Just this past year from 2010 to 2011 there was a 9% shift among adult Americans in support of same sex life style. That is statistically huge and represents for the first time a slight majority of the population open to including these previously shunned neighbors. I am not suggesting, however, that our efforts to strike down the prohibitions to full participation of gay and lesbian people in the life of the church should occur because a poll indicates support. What I want to explore with you today, or, perhaps better, reaffirm for most of us is why this is the right thing to do and the right time to do it. Removing the ban to ordination of LGBT people took nearly 30 years. Reconciling Church law regarding marriage to that recent victory will take, I trust, less time. There is an inherent contradiction in saying to someone your sexual orientation is not a bar to your ordination but it is to your wedding. This inconsistency is a function of the democratic process in the PCUSA. We make amendments to the Church Constitution one at a time. Removing the barrier to ordaining LGBT people was the first step, taking away any perceived prohibition to marry will be the second.

2 As our Clerk John Horn and I said in a letter sent to you a few days ago, it is possible that someone will file a formal complaint against us for conducting this wedding because we will be violating the Book of Order otherwise known as the Church s Constitution. What I d like to talk about this morning is why we are willing to face such a charge, what we think the Constitution says and, finally, what more light the Gospel and Jesus shed on the subject. Perhaps the first thing that needs to be said is neither the Book of Order nor Gospel of Matthew even contemplate same-sex marriage. The Book of Order is a 220 year old document, the Gospel of Matthew 2,000 years old. Same sex, life-long partnership was not known in those times or practiced in those societies. Therefore, whatever we or anyone claim the Constitution or Bible says about the subject will be a matter of interpretation. I mention this because the argument against gay rights is often couched in some monolithic biblical or theological façade. As if wisdom on this matter was written by God herself and recorded on some block of granite that fell to earth from interstellar space. Rather, what the founders of our church, John Calvin and John Knox and the Westminster divines said was that human beings discern the will of God and purpose of life in consultation with the Scripture, with the wisdom of the church through the ages, and in collaboration with one another all in a posture of openness to the Holy Spirit and prayer for its guidance. This is why we are Presbyterians after all. There is no pope or oligarchy or leader of state who tells us what to believe and do. But there is the Holy Spirit who guides us in the ways of righteousness and justice; and the Holy Spirit is best discerned, heard, and followed as the body politic--the church and its elected leaders--wrestle with and map out a path on a given issue. There could be nothing more American because this is precisely the system of governance our civil polity is based upon: Presbyterians were practicing representative democracy long before the Boston Tea Party. The notion that we would choose not to struggle with change, with new understanding, with advances in fields of study and human knowledge is a bludgeon to our freedoms in this country and to God s expectation that we would use our brains to figure out our lives. So, what does the Book of Order say? It says first, helpfully, that marriage is a gift God has given to all humankind for the well-being of the entire human family. When it later refers to marriage as between a man and a woman it reflects the social norms of the day. There was no other kind of marriage then but that between a man and woman. This designation is thus descriptive not definitive. It follows that the Book of Order would be silent on same sex weddings; and it is. But times change; slaves are set free; women are given the right to vote. Social norms typically and unavoidably become codified even in the best efforts to draft a church constitution or confession of faith. We are finite and flawed. We see on this side of paradise dimly until the momentum of change gathers credibility or the voice of a prophet calls a nation or church to a new way of life. Then, constitutions are amended and new confessions written.

3 But in addition to the silence on same sex marriage and therefore ambiguity, at best, on the subject, the spirit in which the Constitution was written invites ongoing revelation and change. We re talking about a guide for living not a rule book. Indeed, the opening lines of the Directory for Worship say this directory has been written in an intentional effort to listen to the Spirit speaking in Scripture and to be guided by the Book of Confessions. [i] A rich heritage of traditions and diversity of cultures, it goes on, are reflected and encouraged by this directory. It is not a book with fixed orders of worship but suggests possibilities for worship invites development in worship, and encourages continuing reform of worship. [ii] This directory uses language about worship which is simply descriptive. [iii] Yes, the Book of Order sets important boundaries and procedures but its intention and purpose is also to guide, to guard diversity and to reform. Otherwise we d be worshipping like early 18 th century Presbyterians today singing no hymns, permitting no organ or other instrument to be played. To date, a handful of same sex weddings have been performed in Presbyterian churches in California and Massachusetts states where civil marriage of same sex couples is legally sanctioned as it now is in New York. Complaints filed against some of those churches and clergy have been argued in the courts of the Church. A potentially precedent-setting case will come up to the highest court in the Church this February. Since the language of the Constitution regarding same sex marriage is non-existent and only by bending the existing language into legal arguments rather than accepting them for the pastoral and theological guides they are, the highest court of the Church has so far been loathe to rule that those who have officiated at such weddings are guilty of violating the Church s Constitution. So your Session and I conclude that from a Constitutional standpoint, there is nothing prohibiting a clergy person from performing same-sex weddings; and, given the historic latitude allowed clergy regarding when and where and how to conduct weddings, and given our recent change in state law, and given that we are a More Light church, and given the prevalence of same sex couples in this church and community, we conclude that performing a same sex wedding at Westminster is most appropriate. You could say that this is a test of Presbyterian polity and it is. But our Session and I have enough faith in the soundness and process of Presbyterian polity to be confident that it not only can but needs to stand up to a test on this issue. And as someone else said this is a Rosa Parks moment in the life of our Church. How much longer must gay and lesbian persons endure partial acceptance at best and condemnation and bullying at worst for who they are? Some of us are tired gay and straight and have decided to sit down in the front of the liturgical bus; now. But transcending all of the legal and theological interpretations is a higher authority: Jesus. In matters of controversy and conscience Christians have always asked themselves what Jesus would do; how he would respond; and what, therefore, our response should look like. Today s story from Matthew answers those questions.

4 It is striking how the pre-selected reading for the day so often speaks to us right where we are and right where we struggle. The setting for the story is the day after Palm Sunday the entry to Jerusalem. Jesus is making his way back to the temple. He is accosted there, after chasing out the money changers the day before, by the religious authorities. They press him; they want to know by what authority he does these things. He responds by asking them to tell him by what authority John the Baptist performed his radical, rock-the-boat ministry. If they say by human authority, they will be criticized by the crowds who loved John; if they say by divine authority, they will acknowledge that John was righteous and therefore criminally imprisoned and killed. So they say, We do not know. Jesus then tells them a parable to smoke them out from their pretended ignorance. He tells a story of two sons both told to work, one who says he won t and does, the other who says he will and doesn t. Which did the will of his father asks Jesus. When the religious leaders say the one who said he would not act but did they unknowingly identify themselves with the other son, the one who said he would do his father s will but doesn t. Jesus then lowers the boom, so will the tax collectors and prostitutes go to heaven before you. The religious authorities alternate between shock and rage. What they are blind to is that by propping up a system of religious rituals that claim allegiance to God but are at odds with their disdain for those who do not belong to their rarified club, they fail to act as God s representatives in the world or, simply put, to do what God has asked of them. They have mistaken their complicated rules and rituals for God s will. Rules and rituals that exclude, alienate and condemn women, children, the sick, those of other religious traditions, and society s outcasts: tax collectors and prostitutes. Yet, these are the very ones, says Jesus, who will be welcomed into heaven first and he lists them beginning with the outcasts. It was as clear a judgment of their infidelity and unfaithfulness as he could offer. When we have texts like this from the pioneer and perfector of our faith, when we have a Constitution that seeks to avoid the fate of blind and prejudiced religion by inviting reform, when we have an entire community of people cast out by the church, and still bullied in society, there is no choice but to live into the new church rather than to wait for it to arrive. It is interesting that when faced with the truth of recognizing God s authority in the ministry of John the Baptist, the religious authorities cunningly and calculatedly pretended to be ignorant: We do not know they said. But when the Constitution of our Church does not prohibit, and the teachings of Jesus encourage believers to ignore all borders and welcome all of God s children into the full life of the church; and when some in our society reject and threaten gay and lesbian children and adults, we will not say we do not know, and we will not claim to be ignorant, especially when we know perfectly well what is right and just and true. Amen.

5 [i] Book of Order, Preface to The Directory for Worship, a. [ii] Ibid., a, b. [iii] Ibid., b.

Bishop s Report To The Judicial Council Of The United Methodist Church

Bishop s Report To The Judicial Council Of The United Methodist Church 1. This is the form which the Judicial Council is required to provide for the reporting of decisions of law made by bishops in response