Author: revnayte

Self-proclaimed expert on lots of things. Actual expert on very few.

The Work of the People

Colossians 1:3-6  We always give thanks to God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, when we pray for you.   We’ve done this since we heard of your faith in Christ Jesus and your love for all God’s people. You have this faith and love because of the hope reserved for you in heaven. You previously heard about this hope through the true message, the good news, which has come to you. This message has been bearing fruit and growing among you since the day you heard and truly understood God’s grace, in the same way that it is bearing fruit and growing in the whole world. 

If you look up liturgy on a dictionary website, you’ll get a bunch of stuff about a church rite. Which is mostly how that word is used, I suppose. But if you ask any church nerd, the word comes from words in Latin (which come from words in Greek) that literally mean “the work of the people.” Which is why we use it most often for the parts of a church service that are some sort of call and response; because the people are sharing in the leadership.

This last week was the annual meeting of the Texas Annual Conference of The United Methodist Church. No, it’s not a good idea to name a geographic area an “Annual Conference,” but we did it a long time ago and church folk hate changing names that are unhelpful once they’re used to them. But some really wild things happened that were just lovely and I wanted to write something about them.

Many of you know that last Summer I took a three month sabbatical, in which I was doing some deep reflection on my call, what service to God looks like, attending to my own spiritual practices and health, and generally unplugging from church world a bit. So I was more or less absent from our Annual Conference meeting, which was the first one since the season of disaffiliation/schism/nastiness. Which meant this was my first Annual Conference in the new world of the UMC. And it was weird.

For my first decade of ministry, Annual Conference was a room of political war games. Trying to figure out what different folks were trying to accomplish, trying to get things to work differently and better, trying to get folks interested in a shared and more inclusive future elected to key positions, and generally wheeling and dealing and running around and being “on” for 3 days. On multiple occasions this week, I walked into the sanctuary of First UMC Houston where we were meeting and instinctively scanned the room looking for some sort of place I was needed to talk tactics or convince someone to do something. And you know what? I never needed to do any of that. Like I said, weird. But also beautiful and wonderful and life-giving. But that’s all secondary to what I’m actually wanting to write about.

On the last day of our meeting, we came to a point in the day in which the floor was opened for nominations to serve on general church boards and agencies. If you are not deeply versed in United Methobabble, we have a bunch of committees and groups called agencies, and each of them is led by a group of United Methodists from around the country and world who help shape their work. For as long as I have been a part of the Texas Conference, who would be asked to serve in these places was a foregone conclusion, decided by a couple dudes in a room someplace. But that’s not how we do things anymore. In addition to all the folks who are a part of our delegation to General Conference, anybody else from our churches was eligible to be nominated to be considered to serve on these teams.

We probably didn’t need to nominate anyone, as we are unlikely to get more than a handful of people from our conference on these committees that include representatives from around the UMC world. But sometimes the right folks do manage to get onto those committees even if they aren’t already delegates to General Conference, so it made sense for us to nominate a few more people to ensure we had a nice broad pool of people for leaders to consider.

People poured down the aisles to the microphones and nominated over 50 people. They nominated clergy people and laypeople, youth and adults, queer folks and straight folks, rural people, suburban people and urban people, experienced leaders and people new to this world. They nominated their friends or people they admired. Was it the most strategic way to utilize this time? Maybe not. But was it the holiest way to utilize this time? Most definitely.

Because you see, for many years, every decision about who got to be considered in these sorts of roles was incredibly calculated and controlled by a handful of people engaged in a decades-long fight about who should lead the UMC. But this year, because of the spirit of the conference, the changes to who is around the table, and most importantly the work of the Spirit, we all felt like the table had room for us. So people rushed down those aisles to the microphones to say enthusiastically “this church is for all of us!”

Will all of the 50 people nominated get a seat on a board or agency? Not hardly. But they can. And that in and of itself is a beautiful, wonderful thing.

Have you considered piracy?

I have been an advocate for the full inclusion of LGBTQIA+ folks in the life of the church as long as I have been a follower of Jesus. As news broke of the changes to The United Methodist Church, a friend asked me how long I have been working towards this goal. I had to think, because this became something that I was committed to in high school. You see, when I began to deepen my faith and spirituality and develop the relationship with Jesus that has grounded my entire life, I realized something: I was very sure that using slurs for gay people as a way to insult my friends was a deeply sinful act, but that my aunt and her partner raising a family together was anything but sinful.

I have never been shy telling people that I have earnestly sought the full inclusion of LGBTQIA+ folks in the life of the church. Yes, that includes being honest with beloved members of the church I currently pastor and the church where I was previously an associate pastor who feel differently about the interpretation of scripture than I do. It’s always been important to me in my ministry to acknowledge that people do not have to agree to exist in community.

Because I am a happily married straight man, I’ve been able to advocate for a vision of an inclusive church from a place of privilege. Unlike the countless friends and mentors I’ve met in my life who had to leave the UMC, move across the country, or abandon their hopes of ordination or marriage in the church that they love, I was always safe, even if I was sad or angry.

But for almost twenty years, most of my decisions and work and life have been aimed at trying to get The United Methodist Church to look a little more like the vision of the Kingdom of God that God put on my heart when I started wrestling with a call to ministry as a teenager. It has shaped my relationships and work, it has caused me to often bite my tongue when I didn’t want to (shocking to many of you, I know), it has caused me to step away from writing here for a number of years and focus on other aspects of the work, and it has been the source of some of the most unexpected wonderful and horrible and beautiful and ugly moments in my life.

I have cried big, ugly tears these last couple days, as this work on formal institutional change has come to a wonderful end. As Sarah told our three month old son as I wandered around the house crying, “You have a dad with very big feelings about the world…and pretty much everything else.”

The United Methodist Church is not perfect, and because it’s a human institution, it never will be. I generally have a very low view of human institutions; I expect them to do poorly and am not surprised very often. But one of the most important things a large organization can do is get out of the way and let good happen. The changes made to the UMC, which allow for much greater autonomy internationally for churches to match their contexts and also pave a way for fuller inclusion of queer folks, include provisions by which churches and pastors are never asked to be inauthentic and do things they don’t believe in. That’s great! The changes also don’t undo the harm caused by our previous policies or the five decades of ugly and dehumanizing debate. But it’s over, so mission accomplished, right?

I thought I’d feel this way. I even shared a clip from my favorite movie with a few of my friends.

While Wesley suggests to Inigo that he consider piracy, that thought didn’t really cross my mind. Instead, I was struck by feeling like I was at the beginning of something rather than the end of something.

Some of the folks who have left the UMC and some of the trolls who love to comment on news articles on the internet anonymously point out that the mainline church is in decline, and that churches that have moved to full inclusion (including but not limited to The Presbyterian Church (USA), The Episcopal Church, The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, The United Church of Christ, and The Disciples of Christ) are all in membership decline in the United States. They seem to think that the reason we’ve decided to extend our welcome to queer folks is church growth. They are right in the sense that full inclusion does not magically create a church that will grow. They are wrong, though, because most of us engaged in this work have done it out of theological conviction rather than as a way to put some more butts in some seats on Sundays.

At least for me, I now have no excuses to keep me from fully living into my call. I can look into the eyes of my 3 month old and tell him that whoever he grows up to be, the God who loves him invites him to full participation in life and leadership in The United Methodist Church. Our church is not the General Conference or its policies. It never has been. It’s the people. Changing policies doesn’t create God’s preferred world, but it does make it all easier for us to do so. The growth of ministry depends on us seeking God.

I was never in the revenge business, but like Inigo I spent an enormous amount of time obsessively engaged in a particular task, and need some guidance on what to do next. I’m not going to be a pirate. As I have prayed these last couple days about what’s next, the still small voice of God has been pretty clear in telling me that I already knew the answer. God didn’t put on my heart changing words on a page, but rather connecting people to authentic community. The visions I see, and have always seen, of what the church could be doesn’t look like paragraphs and documents, but like people forming the Beloved Community. In a sense, we have more to do now than we ever have. For that, I’m grateful.

(I updated the title 5/3, which I thought I did before I published. Oops.)

Welcome home, Oliver Navgale!

You might know already that Sarah and I came home last night with our beautiful, perfect son, Oliver Navgale Lonsdale Bledsoe. He’s perfect. We’re over the moon, and we’re overwhelmed with all of the offers of love and support. So many people have asked how they can help, and we are so grateful for our village.

You might also know that we struggled with infertility for four years before we got to the point of starting the adoption journey and then bringing Ollie home.

You might also know that we are not particularly young parents, and many of you have been praying for weeks, months, or years for us to grow our little family.

You might also know that we have the two greatest sisters in the entire world, who both recently moved out of the baby phase into the toddler and young children phase, and who have showered us with pretty much all the stuff we could ever need. Throw in the hand-me-downs from some of our wonderful friends, and we are beyond blessed with stuff.

So here’s where it gets more awkward, because I am about to ask you for money. We chose to adopt through an agency called Cradle of Life in Beaumont. They’re wonderful, and provide loving, kind, and patient support to birth parents seeking to place children for adoption. They provide support connecting with doctors, getting healthcare, food, emotional support, counseling, postpartum support, and even parenting classes for folks who chose to parent rather than place. They do this work by charging placement fees to adopting families, and we think that it is money well spent.

In addition to our payment to Cradle of Life, we had to go through and pay for the home study process, where licensed professionals evaluate our fitness to parent before the adoption as well as in the time between placement and finalization.

Because of all these things, what would be most helpful to us is a financial gift to offset these costs. We have a couple different ways for you to give, and we hope that one of them will be convenient for you and speak to you. The first one is to just Venmo us! (Here’s a link to our Venmo page, or you can just go into the app and send money to @RevNayte) This is the easiest, there aren’t any fees, and we promise we’ll treat the donation with the care it deserves.

The second is to make a donation to our Adopt Together page. Adopt together is a 501c3 that is designed to help families like ours. You make a donation to them, they take a fee for their costs, and we then turn in receipts to receive funds. If you’re more comfortable donating this way — or want your gift to be tax-deductible — this is the route for you. (Here’s the link to our page on Adopt Together)

If neither of these works for you because you’re into Zelle, because you want more info, or whatever the case may be, reach out to me and we’ll figure something else out. Also, if you’re not in a position to give, we’ll take all the prayer and love and vibes we can get. Thank you for being a part of Ollie’s village, and ours. Bonus beautiful baby content below!

Love,

Nathan and Sarah

Change the world

I went to therapy Monday. Well, that’s not right. I had a videoconference therapy session from the comfort of my couch. I’ve never been shy about the fact that I see a therapist; it’s a healthy practice for me (and a lot of people), and I’m grateful for the insights she provides into my life.

Obviously, what with the whole “society is closed” thing going on, we had plenty to talk about. Near the end of our conversation, I  was asking the kinds of questions that a lot of us are asking, but not necessarily out loud and not in public.

“What if this goes on for months?”

“How are we going to handle all of our ordinary church things?”

“What’s going to change forever?”

So there’s something you ought to know about me. I have a bit of a flair for the dramatic. So after asking all of these questions, I made a statement.

“Everything is going to change.”

“Nathan, I’ve been seeing you for a couple of years now, and you spend a lot of time talking about how things need to change, don’t you?”

Busted.

I probably don’t have to tell you that, for the last 40 years or so (and especially the last 20), the role of the church, especially the “mainline” church, has been in steep decline. Fewer people are in worship, a LOT fewer people are in worship, financial giving is down, and we simply aren’t central to many peoples’ lives. When I’m feeling particularly cynical, I compare our situation to that of shopping malls and the remaining Sears franchises: we have a lot of prime real estate, but the stuff on our shelves isn’t selling.

Which is a real shame because a relationship with Jesus and an understanding that the God who created the universe loves you is life-changing. Because having a community of people who are interested in studying scripture together can give us tremendous perspective and peace in the midst of upheaval. Because remembering we are part of something larger than ourselves can help us to engage the world meaningfully and draw hope and fulfillment from actions we take to help one another.

Churches have an incredible opportunity right now to model good behaviors, to provide love and care, and to show people that the things we talk about are much more important than a weekly worship service or regularly scheduled activities. We can show people that what we’re up to is developing the kinds of beliefs and practices that sustain people when things are hard. We can model for folks that a relationship with Jesus makes a difference, and that our concern is deepening faith and empowering people to put it to use.

A friend of a friend was a pastor in the northeast during 9/11. She talks about how, in the days following the attacks, churches were filled to the gills with people. But after a couple weeks, they walked out the doors again, remembering why the left in the first place. Because the last time they walked around Sears, they realized they didn’t really need a new ratchet set and they didn’t really want a scratchy sweater.

So I get mad when I see things like groups of church leaders suing the county so the they can do things the way they always have. I’m heartbroken when the first thing I see churches doing is figure out how they can stay within the letter of the law, but do some facsimile of what they have always done.

Our first priority needs to be, “how do we help people follow Jesus?” We do that by loving our neighbors. Historically, Christians have been the first people to open hospitals, to run healthcare ministries for the poor and hurting, to “heal the sick,” because it’s what Jesus did and told us to do. You could tell who the Christians were in ancient towns, because they wouldn’t leave during plagues, they were too busy providing care.

The faithful thing to do is to live into our faith, even when it means not being able to perform all of our faith practices the way we are accustomed to. The point of a church isn’t the activities, it’s the relationship with Jesus. So we shouldn’t be looking for ways to skirt the law when the science says stay home, we should be finding ways to help people bring faith into their homes. Saying things like “God will protect us” when we do things we don’t have to is testing God, not expressing our religious beliefs.

That’s why the church I pastor won’t be hosting drive-in church services for Easter, even if the Governor says they’re technically okay. It’s why we WILL be doing things like thinking about how we can remind people that their faith doesn’t start or end in a building. We’ll be finding ways to offer grace and connection and hope and chances to serve. We’ll be making phone calls and sending texts and devotionals out and loving our neighbors, from a safe distance.

We are not making these adjustments because we are scared, but because we are hopeful. We have an opportunity to show people that we are more motivated by our faith than our activity. We have an opportunity to look deeply into ourselves and find opportunities to change ourselves, and maybe even change the world.

It’s just a watch

For the last few weeks, I’ve been wearing my grandfathers’ watch. He died in 1990 when I was still very young, and for many years it sat in my parent’s safe. A couple years ago, when I decided I was mature enough to actually have it in my possession, I got it and wore it for a couple of days, and it promptly had a couple of parts break, and then I put off fixing it, because, well…

IMG_8611

I wasn’t sure if wearing it would send the wrong message to people. Because it was made by one of those companies that cause some people to raise an eyebrow. It took me awhile to get over that. I’m really glad that I did.

In the periods of my life where I have been the most productive, I’ve worn a watch.  What’s the magical reason I’m more productive when I’m wearing a watch? Because if I’m not wearing a watch, I check the time on this thing:

apple-apple-device-blur-cell-phone-336948

You know what I also check when I check the time on that thing? FacebookInstagramTwitterEmailTextsGamesPlanningCenterSlackWeatherSnapchatCalendarGamecams. It’s…inefficient.

But that’s really not the point. I didn’t start wearing my grandfather’s watch to avoid the time suck of my cell phone, I did it to connect with someone I love who died when I was 4. I did it so that when I look at what time it is today, I can remember someone who was looking at what time it was on this day in 1975 on the same watch. And that’s really meaningful to me, even if somebody occasionally walks away and says, “Did you see what kind of watch that preacher had on?”

Confession: I’m always going to care what people think more than I should. Some of it is innate; I’ve always been wired to seek approval and I like attention. Some of it is a professional reality; a pastor who doesn’t consider what folks think about their actions is a pastor who spends a LOT of time apologizing, and they often end up pretty lonely. I think that’s why this decision was significant enough for me that I felt like writing something about it. And, maybe I’m wrong, but I doubt only pastors are people pleasers.

That’s the other nice thing about wearing this watch so far. When I start to think judgmental thoughts about someone, I’ve got something to remind me to cut that crap out. I spent years not doing something as simple as wearing a watch because I was scared of being judged, how can I know why someone else decided to do the things they do?

Is there anything meaningful to you that you’ve avoided doing because of your fear of what other people might think? On the other hand, have you ever thought or said something judgmental to someone without knowing their story?

Wear the watch. Do the thing.

Unity in Christ

 

(Post 5 of 5 in a series on Human Sexuality)

 

Following United Methodist General Conference 2019, several members of my congregation started asking me if I could make a presentation about my own beliefs on human sexuality. I’ve always been pretty open about believing that the Gospel is fully inclusive, but after the church’s relationship with LGBTQ+ people got so much press, traditionalist and progressive folks alike were interested in my perspective. So I’m going to break it into five fairly long blog posts and dump them here.

This is a reflection on all of Galatians 3. Here’s an excerpt:

 But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a custodian.

 You are all God’s children through faith in Christ Jesus. All of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek; there is neither slave nor free; nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. Now if you belong to Christ, then indeed you are Abraham’s descendants, heirs according to the promise.

Galatians 3:25-29 (CEB)

Jewish Christians were certain that gentiles needed to be more like Jews to really understand what it meant to follow Jesus Christ. That because Jesus was so distinctly within the Jewish tradition, it would not be possible to follow him without accepting culturally and biblically Jewish customs like circumcision and dietary purity codes. But Paul, in the letter to the Galatians, makes the case that gentile believers, like most of us who follow Christ today, are grafted onto the vine even earlier in God’s story than the Levitical codes. That we are heirs of God’s promise made to Abraham, because Jesus Christ is the one who was promised. Abraham was not in a covenant with God because of circumcision or the law, but instead because he loved, trusted, and followed God even when it was scary and costly. Even when God asked him to do things he knew were absurd or unreasonable. 

And for Christians who are gentiles, we are heirs not because of the law and not in spite of the law, but instead because Christ has fulfilled the law. The law, as described by Jesus in Mark and also in 1 Timothy, is good. But its purpose is to provide support TO humankind; that humans don’t exist to follow the law, but rather the law exists to help support humankind in following God. 

In Matthew 22, Jesus boiled the commandments down to this:

“You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your being, and with all your mind.  This is the first and greatest commandment.  And the second is like it: You must love your neighbor as you love yourself. All the Law and the Prophets depend on these two commands.” 

Matthew 22:37-40 (CEB)

And Jesus, Paul, and the early Christians took this radical message of love and used it to build a movement the likes of which the world had never seen. By promising life abundant and eternal through a relationship with Jesus, the early Christians developed communities that looked radically different than the world order. It was common for prominent women and slave men to come together in house churches across the Roman empire, worshipping God through singing, shared meals, and service to the sick and hurting in the community. 

I believe that Paul’s vision of the beloved community of a unity in Christ across deep and meaningful difference in life and understanding, is the vision we need to follow Christ in Houston Texas today, and it’s the vision of the Church that shows me glimpses of what heaven might be like. That all who earnestly love Christ and seek to know him more are truly one in Jesus Christ. It’s a passion for this vision of God’s beloved community and Kingdom that inspired me to say yes when I heard the Spirit calling me to pursue a life in pastoral ministry. It’s glimpses of this beloved Kingdom I see when I look at this incredible, multi-generational, God-and-neighbor loving community. And its hope for this future that compels me to dedicate my life to service to Jesus. 

Series Navigator

Part 1: My Quadrilateral

Part 2: A Case for Celibacy

Part 3: Who am I to deny the spirit?

Part 4: Love over law

Part 5: Unity in Christ

Love over law

(Post 4 of 5 in a series on Human Sexuality)

 

Following United Methodist General Conference 2019, several members of my congregation started asking me if I could make a presentation about my own beliefs on human sexuality. I’ve always been pretty open about believing that the Gospel is fully inclusive, but after the church’s relationship with LGBTQ+ people got so much press, traditionalist and progressive folks alike were interested in my perspective. So I’m going to break it into five fairly long blog posts and dump them here.

 

This section will be relatively short, but is of tantamount importance to me, because it’s where my beliefs for inclusion find their grounding in the witness of my own Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. You’ll see on your handout a list of passages out of the gospel according to Mark, but I could have easily made this list out of any of the Gospels. 

In many familiar bible translations, you could call this section of my presentation the “woe to you scribes and pharisees” section. Here’s a short excerpt from Mark 7 that’s the basic thesis of this critique Jesus makes: 

He replied, “Isaiah really knew what he was talking about when he prophesied about you hypocrites. He wrote, 

This people honors me with their lips,

but their hearts are far away from me.

Their worship of me is empty

since they teach instructions that are human words.

You ignore God’s commandment while holding on to rules created by humans and handed down to you.”  Jesus continued, “Clearly, you are experts at rejecting God’s commandment in order to establish these rules.  

Mark 7:6-9 (CEB)

Again and again throughout his earthly ministry, Jesus is confronted by devout and scripturally literate Pharisees and legal experts with some version of the question, “But how can you do this when the law clearly says otherwise?” 

Again and again, Jesus responds with some version of, “If your interpretation of the law causes you to miss out on God’s command to love your neighbor, you have misinterpreted the law.” 

To carry this further, to the legalist, sin is the transgression of a written rule. But to Jesus, sin is separation from God; having, as Isaiah says, hearts far away from God. Jesus sees separation from God and separation from neighbor as part and parcel of the same problem, and the legalists are using the law to increase separation rather than to remove it. 

As I stated at the beginning of this series, I believe that all of scripture is inspired by God and useful to help us to learn and to grow. I believe that deep and meaningful study of scripture has the power to transform us, to help us to serve God and be transformed in ways we never thought possible. The purpose of scripture, in my eyes, is not to function as God, but to point us towards a relationship with God. The Bible is the inspired and accurate text that points us towards the living, breathing Word of God, Jesus Christ. And Jesus spent a huge portion of his ministry critiquing the sorts of interpretations used to separate people whose lives and cultural practices seemed to be beyond the pale of acceptable religious life. 

It is because of what I believe about Jesus Christ rather than in spite of how I read scripture, that I believe that we are called to love and accept our LGBTQ siblings. That the picture of Jesus that I see is in the gospels is a God who stands with those that culture and custom called unclean and outsider. 

Because of my relationship with God through the person and life and ministry of Jesus Christ, and not in spite of what I read in scripture, I believe that God calls us to accept fully LGBTQ people. 

I also find that, even though he wrote some of the passages that are most difficult to deal with when it comes to acceptance of queer folks, Paul’s vision of the Church is a place where love takes us beyond the end of the law. 

For the final section of this presentation, we’ll look briefly at Paul’s letter to the Galatians. 

Series Navigator

Part 1: My Quadrilateral

Part 2: A Case for Celibacy

Part 3: Who am I to deny the spirit?

Part 4: Love over law

Part 5: Unity in Christ

Who am I to deny the Spirit?

(Post 3 of 5 in a series on Human Sexuality)

 

Following United Methodist General Conference 2019, several members of my congregation started asking me if I could make a presentation about my own beliefs on human sexuality. I’ve always been pretty open about believing that the Gospel is fully inclusive, but after the church’s relationship with LGBTQ+ people got so much press, traditionalist and progressive folks alike were interested in my perspective. So I’m going to break it into five fairly long blog posts and dump them here.

This is a reflection on Acts 10, the story of Peter and Cornelius. You can read it here. 

This is a story I find to be absolutely central to my understanding of the gospel. It’s impossible to understate the importance of the purity laws at this point in Jewish history; diet and circumcision were central to Jewish self understanding and to the faith of Jesus’ followers and all observant Jews. 

Peter’s vision is, in no uncertain terms, horrifying to him and to his friends. The idea of eating unclean animals and eating at a table that routinely serves pork and other non-kosher food is not simply impolite or jarring, but offensive to his sensibilities. But then Peter gets to know Cornelius and his family, and realizes something: 

These folks get it, and they’re following after Jesus. 

That this family, which looks very different than the one in which Peter was raised, that has different customs and attributes and does not subscribe to the laws contained in scripture, is still following after Jesus and living for God. That these bacon-eating uncircumcised gentiles are legitimate Christ followers. 

The last few verses are the most important part of this passage, which stands in a long line of biblical passages that disrupt and disturb the status quo. Pious and observant Jewish Christians, who have spent their lives following the law, are convicted by what they see: 

These people are believers, and they have the gift of the Holy Spirit. Their families are producing fruit, and who are we to deny what the Holy Spirit is doing in and through them?

The drumbeat of this sort of movement has marched through the witness of Spirit-filled Christians who fell beyond the dominant interpretations of the law ever since. 

For much of the history of the American church and in fact in churches all around the world, the Bible was used to defend a ban on interracial marriage. Passages in Deuteronomy and Acts that state that God created the races and set boundaries to their lands meant that many people had deeply held convictions that the Bible was supportive of this sort of racism.

There is an undeniable movement of the Holy Spirit in and through families that have people of different racial backgrounds. 

This one is a bit personal for me, because I grew up in a family with parents from different ethnic and cultural backgrounds. And I’m pretty glad I did. 

For the overwhelming majority of church history, a handful of passages and the dominant cultural voices denied women the right to preach or lead. But John Wesley, near the end of his life and ministry, began licensing women to preach because he could not deny that they had the fruit of the spirit in their preaching and teaching and lives. 

It took the actual denomination quite a bit longer to come around to the idea of formally ordaining women, but in 1956 generations worth of biblical scholarship, historical and biblical examples of great female leaders, and a more egalitarian understanding of humankind led the UMC to vote in favor of ordaining women as pastors. 

Because we believed that, in spite of the letter of the law, women demonstrated the fruit of the Spirit in their gifts to lead and exhort. 

So in my own experience and life, I have met a number of gay and lesbian people who have Spirit-filled relationships. I have met couples that provide each other with deep and powerful spiritual support. Who pray for each other and take care of each other and challenge each other and grow together. Who serve God and their neighbors, who raise children with strong Christian values, and who seek to help build the Kingdom of God on Earth. 

I imagine many of you have had relationships with same gender couples like this, too. Have you met couples that had relationships that produced good fruit? Have you known gay and lesbian people who earnestly sought from a marriage companionship and love and support? If so, could this be the work of the Spirit? 

Series Navigator

Part 1: My Quadrilateral

Part 2: A Case for Celibacy

Part 3: Who am I to deny the spirit?

Part 4: Love over law

Part 5: Unity in Christ

A case for celibacy

(Post 2 of 5 in a series on Human Sexuality)

 

Following United Methodist General Conference 2019, several members of my congregation started asking me if I could make a presentation about my own beliefs on human sexuality. I’ve always been pretty open about believing that the Gospel is fully inclusive, but after the church’s relationship with LGBTQ+ people got so much press, traditionalist and progressive folks alike were interested in my perspective. So I’m going to break it into five fairly long blog posts and dump them here.

Some Pharisees came to him. In order to test him, they said, “Does the Law allow a man to divorce his wife for just any reason?”

Jesus answered, “Haven’t you read that at the beginning the creator made them male and female? And God said, ‘Because of this a man should leave his father and mother and be joined together with his wife, and the two will be one flesh.’ So they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore, humans must not pull apart what God has put together.”

The Pharisees said to him, “Then why did Moses command us to give a divorce certificate and divorce her?”

Jesus replied, “Moses allowed you to divorce your wives because your hearts are unyielding. But it wasn’t that way from the beginning. I say to you that whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery.”

His disciples said to him, “If that’s the way things are between a man and his wife, then it’s better not to marry.”

He replied, “Not everybody can accept this teaching, but only those who have received the ability to accept it.For there are eunuchs who have been eunuchs from birth. And there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by other people. And there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs because of the kingdom of heaven. Those who can accept it should accept it.”

Matthew 19:3-12 (CEB)

In this passage, Jesus is criticizing the Pharisees using strict biblical interpretation to allow for divorce for trivial reasons. He posits an extremely high standard: anyone who is divorced for any reason other than adultery commits adultery themselves if they remarry.

This is clearly a higher standard than the disciples are used to; as they pipe up at this point by saying “if you’re that way, Jesus, it’s probably better for people simply to not marry at all!” 

Rather than saying, “don’t be ridiculous, Peter,” per his custom, Jesus instead tells the disciples that they’re right. In saying “not everybody can accept this teaching,” Jesus creates space for people to realize that their own experience of marriage and human relationship falls short of goals this lofty. But he goes on to say that people who “can accept” celibacy for the sake of building the Kingdom of God should do so. 

It’s important to remember that the dominant understanding of the Christian faith in the early church was that Jesus is coming back to reign and rule in this Kingdom of God he kept talking about, and that he’ll be doing that soon. There was a profound sense of urgency to the work and worship of the apostles and all the early disciples of Jesus Christ. We know that many of the apostles and other early Christians were martyred, and we also know that many of them chose not to marry. The decision not to marry, as we’ll see when we dig into Paul’s letter to the Corinthians in a moment, was largely based in a desire not to be slowed down in the work of spreading the Gospel. 

 I wish all people were like me, but each has a particular gift from God: one has this gift, and another has that one. 

I’m telling those who are single and widows that it’s good for them to stay single like me.  But if they can’t control themselves, they should get married, because it’s better to marry than to burn with passion. 

1 Corinthians 7:7-9

(it’s worth reading the entire chapter of 1 Cor. 7)

This passage has been used as the justification for celibacy for clergy in the Roman Catholic Church, and it has also been used in defense of the traditional view of marriage in many protestant churches. Because Paul makes a provision here in which he claims celibacy as a way of living in the world that is pleasing to God, and helpful in the mission of building the Kingdom. But celibacy, both to Paul and to Jesus, is clearly a choice and a gift. And it’s a choice that is not the right choice for everyone, because as Paul says, it’s better to be married than to burn with passion. 

I am a better person, leader, Christian, and pastor because of my relationship with my wife. She supports me in more ways than I could ever imagine, she’s my best friend, and my partner in building a life we share and love. I am confident in telling you that I do not have the gift of celibacy. I am a better person and Christian because of my spouse. 

I know that many of you have found incredible hope, love, and support in your spouses. I’ve met with couples who have only been able to survive difficult situations because of their faith in Jesus and their support for each other. I’ve met with widows and widowers who talk about the love and support their spouse provided them, about the joy their family has brought them, and how their faith has been shaped deeply by their husband or wife. 

The way I read both Jesus and Paul in these passages, the primary purpose of a relationship is not procreation. If procreation was the primary reason for marriages, celibacy would not be lifted up in this way. Rather, Paul seems to be asking the individual members of the church in Corinth, “Will you be better equipped to follow Christ as a single person or as a married person? If you should be married, get married.” 

One of the assumptions I’m making  relates directly to this point, so I’ll share it now: I am convinced that people do not chose their sexual orientation. I am convinced of this by my relationships with queer people who tell men they knew from the time they were small children that they were gay. 

I’m convinced of this by the fact that medical science again and again demonstrates that there are significant genetic components linked to same-sex attraction.

I’m convinced of this through reading I have done about the damage done through organizations that attempt so-called reparative therapy, it’s lack of success, and the fact that organizations like Exodus International have ceased attempting the procedure. People do not choose to be gay any more than I chose to be straight. 

So the logic I’m positing here is this: if sexual orientation is not a choice, and if most straight people are not called to celibacy, should we assume that most LGBTQ people are? 

People who are not called to celibacy but try to live as celibate suffer from a lack of fulfillment, loneliness, depression, anxiety, and more at an extremely high rate. To ask people who do not have a true calling to celibacy to remain celibate stands against the scriptural warning from Paul presented in Corinthians. 

The ultimate calling of a Christian person is not marriage or celibacy. Both of these ways of being in the world are good, and both are important, but they are both in service to our ultimate calling: to better know Jesus Christ, to lead lives in service to him, and to put our hope in life abundant and eternal today AND forever. 

How we determine whose lives and actions fit within this paradigm will be the focus of our next section.

Series Navigator

Part 1: My Quadrilateral

Part 2: A Case for Celibacy

Part 3: Who am I to deny the spirit?

Part 4: Love over law

Part 5: Unity in Christ

My Quadrilateral

(Post 1 of 5 in a series on Human Sexuality)

 

Following United Methodist General Conference 2019, several members of my congregation started asking me if I could make a presentation about my own beliefs on human sexuality. I’ve always been pretty open about believing that the Gospel is fully inclusive, but after the church’s relationship with LGBTQ+ people got so much press, traditionalist and progressive folks alike were interested in my perspective. So I’m going to break it into five fairly long blog posts and dump them here. Parts 2-5 will be reflections on particular passages, and part one will have more to do with how I read scripture more generally. 

Part 1: My Quadrilateral

This is a presentation about my own faith and interpretation of scripture, it is helpful I think to look at what our denomination’s official position actually is. So here is our statement, from the Social Principles of the United Methodist Church: 

Human Sexuality

We affirm that sexuality is God’s good gift to all persons. We call everyone to  responsible stewardship of this sacred gift.

Although all persons are sexual beings whether or not they are married, sexual relations are affirmed only with the covenant of monogamous, heterosexual marriage.

We deplore all forms of the commercialization, abuse, and exploitation of sex. We call for strict global enforcement of laws prohibiting the sexual exploitation of children and for adequate protection, guidance, and counseling for abused children. All persons, regardless of age, gender, marital status, or sexual orientation, are entitled to have their human and civil rights ensured and to be protected against violence. The Church should support the family in providing age-appropriate education regarding sexuality to children, youth, and adults.

We affirm that all persons are individuals of sacred worth, created in the image of God. All persons need the ministry of the Church in their struggles for human fulfillment, as well as the spiritual and emotional care of a fellowship that enables reconciling relationships with God, with others, and with self. The United Methodist Church does not condone the practice of homosexuality and considers this practice incompatible with Christian teaching. We affirm that God’s grace is available to all. We will seek to live together in Christian community, welcoming, forgiving, and loving one another, as Christ has loved and accepted us.  We implore families and churches not to reject or condemn lesbian and gay members and friends. We commit ourselves to be in ministry for and with all persons.

– United Methodist Social Principles

While there is a lot in this statement to be commended, I disagree with parts of  it. Namely, the way that I read Scripture leads me to understand that, “the practice of homosexuality,” as the discipline says, is NOT incompatible with Christian teaching. 

I believe this because of how I read scripture, not in spite of it.

I believe the way that I approach scripture is profoundly Wesleyan. The official means of biblical interpretation in the UMC is known as “The Wesleyan Quadrilateral.” 

I want you to hear me say that the Wesleyan quadrilateral is not a square or a parallelogram. Wesleyans, like the overwhelming majority of Christians, find the holy scriptures found in the Bible to be the primary source material for our faith. We believe that everything necessary to know in order to secure salvation is included within the Bible. I agree with these beliefs whole-heartedly. I also believe that everything in the Bible is inspired and useful for learning something of God and God’s relationship with humankind. 

However, like many of you, I do not think that everything in the Bible is exactly the same. It is a collection of ancient texts written by real flesh-and-blood people who were inspired by God at different times in different places for different purposes. Some of it was written as verse or poetry. Some of it was written as instructional story to teach people something about who God is. Some of it was written as narrative history. All of it tells us something about who God is, who we are, and why that matters. All of it also requires interpretation, because we are not the original audience. That’s where the quadrilateral comes in. 

I remember my own confirmation class being a place where I learned about this Wesleyan way of engaging the bible. We were encouraged to ask questions, to bring our full selves to biblical discussion, and to use these three tools of tradition, reason, and experience to better understand and apply the text. 

  • Tradition implores us to ask about how the church has functioned throughout history, and to trust, value, and use the wisdom of those who have come before us. 
  • Experience implores us to trust ourselves. To realize that we were created by God with minds and hearts and emotions and perspectives, and that we should use those to think about how we read the words on the page. 
  • Reason implores us to keep learning, and to think about others. Scholarly work in philosophy, theology, science, archaeology, and countless other fields deepens and expands our faith. 

A quick note: I’m not going to put a lot of work over the course of these 4 pots into disproving the passages that explicitly condemn homosexuality. Much work has been done on this topic, and it’s been done by much more accomplished scholars than me.

I’m interested in building the case for inclusion, rather than the case  against exclusion. But I will offer a couple of resources, wand I’m happy to provide more. There are many arguments to be made against these passages, which are known in the LGBTQ Christian community as the “clobber” passages, but most of them have some basis in the understanding that the sorts of sexual immorality that are described in scripture have little to nothing to do with the desires of faithful queer Christians who seek companionship and love in their lives. The Book “God and the Gay Christian” by Matthew Vines does a great job of clearly and concisely providing many of the arguments against reading these passages of scripture as condemning of contemporary gay and lesbian people.

Because of my own life and experiences and people I knew and loved as someone who grew up where and when I did, I did not start from the perspective that queer people’s desires or the people they loved were sinful. However, I knew that much of the tradition of the church taught that this was so. So I began a lifelong project of testing my understandings of this through the lens of Holy Scripture. In the posts that follow, I’ll be looking at the sexual ethic I see running consistently through the New Testament, the relationship between the law, the Spirit, and revelation, Jesus’ consistent critique of barriers to love, and the radically loving blessed community.

Series Navigator

Part 1: My Quadrilateral

Part 2: A Case for Celibacy

Part 3: Who am I to deny the spirit?

Part 4: Love over law

Part 5: Unity in Christ