AD CLERUM - May 2004 |
My Dear Sisters and Brothers in Christ
The other day I came across a most disturbing article in a magazine. Its title was innocuous - something like 'The Anglican Communion: An Update' - but there were a number of things about the article that I found deeply distressing. It was not the number of inaccuracies that bothered me, though that alone was cause for concern. Nor was it that it represented a different theological position; we all need that breadth of perspective that forces us to re-examine our own positions in the light of the gospel. No; what really bothered me was its tone, which was divisive and polarising.
In his book "Reveille for Radicals," Saul Alinsky talks about how selective information and ridicule can be used to polarise situations and force people to take your position. And that exactly describes the article. Everything was divided into 'us' and 'them', 'right' and 'wrong'. The 'us', of course, referred to all those who accept the authority of scripture and wish to remain faithful to the gospel of Jesus Christ and the teachings of God's Church. 'They', presumably, do not accept the authority of scripture, have no desire to remain faithful to the gospel of Jesus Christ, and have no desire to "keep the faith." I know which side I want to belong to; I don't want to be numbered with the ungodly. There it is; I have taken sides - and there is division within the church. And Satan, who sows dissension and discord, rejoices.
Closely related to the divisive tone was a sense of triumphalism. Not only was it 'us' versus 'them', but 'we' were winning. There was almost a sense of glee at the woes that had befallen the church because of 'them' and an equal sense of satisfaction that 'we' were excluded from those woes. Nowhere in the article was there any note of sadness or regret over what has happened, nor was there any sense of empathy towards those who might be hurting. And Satan, who destroys love, rejoices.
I have deliberately used the same polarising technique, not to be divisive, but to highlight just how easily our reactions can sow discord, making us a part of the problem rather than part of the solution - unwitting instruments of Satan even while we seek to serve God. Divisiveness is never a fruit of the Spirit. St Paul is clear that enmities, strife, anger, quarrels, dissensions, and factions are all the behaviour of our sinful nature (Gal 5: 19-20). The reality is that a divided church is a defeated church. There are no winners, only losers.
That is why I cannot agree with the writer of the article who scathingly dismissed the bishop who said that heresy was preferable to division. The bishop was not giving licence to immorality, but urging us to take the unity of Christ's church very seriously in the face of our biblical and theological certitude. Jesus' last prayer before his arrest was for unity and a love for one another that would mark us as his disciples.
The history of the church is filled with too many examples of Christians disregarding that prayer in favour of certitude, often with terrible consequences. In the name of Christ we have justified genocide, racism, apartheid, and slavery - and defended them from scripture. Time and time again we have been proven wrong, and yet we still continue to insist that our position alone has divine sanction. In the name of truth we have killed each other and so divided the Body of Christ that we view each other with deep distrust, opposing each other almost as a matter of principle. And in doing so, we have deeply undermined Christ's credibility in the world.
The issue of homosexuality is not the place for rigid certitude. It raises the question, not so much of the authority of scripture, but of the interpretation of scripture. Some interpret it literally, believing the simple meaning to be the true meaning. Others accept that simple meaning, but believe it must be interpreted in the light of a very different world from that in which it was written, and that to be faithful to scripture sometimes requires a shift in meaning (as has been the case with the remarriage of divorcees). Some believe that the simple meaning as we understand it today is a mistranslation. And all of us are faithfully seeking God's truth.
There is also the complexity of socio-cultural differences to consider. A closely knit, patriarchal community in rural Transkei, for example, sharing common values and believing that evil spirits affect the course of our daily lives will read and understand the scriptures very differently from a post-modern social activist living in pluralistic Johannesburg who believes evil to be individual and systemic rather than spiritual. The one is not better than the other, but their world-views will significantly shape their reading of scripture.
Then there are political considerations. The resolution of Lambeth was as much a revolt against the domination of the church by a first-world minority as it was theological. That reaction was actively fuelled by USA conservatives from the USA whose agendas were much broader than the issue of homosexuality. And there is growing evidence that the current conflict is fuelled and funded by peoples outside the Episcopal Church for reasons rooted in USA political power struggles, and who are seeking to split the Episcopal Church in order to reduce its influence.
The issue confronting us is complex and not the place for certitudes, which is why I strongly oppose the suggestion in the article that people take sides and join a particular group. That serves only to support structures that are legitimating and encouraging division and, ultimately, promoting schism. We should never join any group that is so fixed in the certainty that they are right that dialogue is no longer possible. Divisions and factions do not belong to life in the Spirit. What we need is a process which will help us to open ourselves to being formed by the Holy Spirit so that, in the words of Archbishop Njongonkulu, we can be brought out of our "corners of conviction" into an honest grappling together with painful issues.
That same magazine also had an illustration that I loved. It showed the stone in front of the tomb being hurled violently away from the tomb by a power that came from within the tomb - the power of the resurrection. That, for me, is what it is all about - the power of resurrection life that makes all things new.
May God bring us all out of our "corners of conviction" into the glorious power of resurrection life.
+ Brian