Am I wrong? If so, please correct me. (#campusministry #dminlgp)
I'm human, obviously, and thus able to make errors in judgment and mistakes. I always hope they are few and far between.
This past week, my previous blog post drew some sharp criticism. Part of it may be from my failure to communicate clearly, part may be from an error on my part, and part may be due to the extreme sensitivity of the topic: homosexuality.
I received an email from trusted friends and supporters, questioning one of my recommendations given to campus ministers to find a GLBT person to co-lead a Bible study on campus with you.
My friend suggests that this act would communicate that the campus minister would be condoning the gay lifestyle.
I certainly see the point my supporter is trying to make.
First, let me be certain to communicate with you where I stand...I believe homosexuality is a serious sin, and should not be condoned. I believe God abhors sin of any kind, and I also believe that the sin of homosexuality is explicity condemned by God in Leviticus. To me, it is very clear in those straight-forward words that God absolutely abhors the homosexual act. My position is that in the act of homosexuality we are willfully spurning the design of God, acting in extreme pride and arrogance against God. God always hates it when we, as His creation, do not give Him the glory that He is due.
Setting my beliefs aside, my point was to encourage campus ministers to engage the GLBT community as a member of God's kingdom by taking steps to "live among" the GLBT community. This is a "mission field" on our college campuses that is in need of our presence. I will remind us all that the purpose of this blog is to stretch our thinking, as campus ministers who serve in the context of the university.
Whether we recognize it or not, students are already engaged in the conversation with their friends (this is a fact of the social context of the university), and we need to find ways to allow Spirit-led dialogue to exist. We should lead the way for them in this. So, with this in mind, my thought was that if we could gather both the GLBT community and Christian campus ministries together, this would allow room for the Holy Spirit to lead through the study of scripture.
Whenever we engage with others, we in a sense, I believe, have to allow them to "lead" with us (or perhaps the term should be to "walk" with us along the path to Christ-likeness). It is very difficult to simply walk into someone else's home and tell them you are going to lead them in a Bible study. Instead, we have to commit to a dialogue, and to the possibility that they might have something to teach us, approaching them in humility. When we do this, we give the Spirit the opportunity to work among us--He is, afterall, the One who convicts of sin and who leads us into righteousness.
When I lived in Africa as a missionary, I learned so much from the people who I served. To this day I reflect on the lives of some of those men who sat "under me" in Bible study when I think about a visual image of "God as a loving father".
Learning to love people, all people, means that we love them no matter their lifestyle. We can find ways to love people without condoning sin. My point in this is that the Church often has not loved the GLBT community, and that we need to find ways to bridge new relationships for the purpose of allowing the Spirit to work in us, and through us.
But, even saying all of this, I submit myself to the greater Body of the Church, and to correction. If there is an error of which I am to be corrected, please correct me, and keep me from falling into sin. This is YOUR role, as my brothers and sisters in Christ...to hold me up, and to keep me on the path, as I walk this journey of faith.
May He be glorified in me, and through me.
Posterous_api Comments (4)
Over the course of the day, I have already been encouraged by the words and prayers of many friends. One dear friend, a life-long mentor of sorts, spent a significant amount of time with me today. In that dialogue, I learned several things, not least of which is that when I present "ideas" to the public, speaking to many who look to me as a leader, I should do so in humility, and thoughtfully, looking for input from others. This is definitely what I believe this blog should be about.In regards to my specific recommendation to allow a member of the GLBT community to "co-lead a Bible study" on the topic of homosexuality, I would have been wiser to present the idea, asking for conversation on what that might look like in practice. It was a bold statement, and as such should be given careful attention. An activity like I have suggested is obviously not something that should be undertaken without a great deal of prayer and forethought, and seeking the counsel of others. Engaging in dialogue, as a Christian community, over this suggestion would undoubtedly lead to identifying good approaches, and dangerous pitfalls.Again, conversation within this public space is my hope. I do not presume to have all of the answers, and I understand that I am able to make mistakes. This is not a blog to be consumed, but a forum through which to engage others.Thank you, to you my friends, who are so willing to love me in the midst of the most difficult moments in life.
I received permission to post the thoughts of my dear friend, mentor, and fellow brother in the faith. His thoughts are very good, and the post is rather lengthy, so I may need to divide it into several comments. Here it is, without any edits of my own:__________Thanks Bill. I just read through the 3 posts. I tried to ask myself how I would have reacted to reading the leadership proposal innocently without having had our earlier conversation today. I don't really know if it would have caught my attention. I am pretty much a skim reader looking for the underlying concept and thought, and perhaps the heart. I might have accepted the idea without concern.Having been heightened to the concern of others gets me to read more critically. It is a bold idea, and probably a questionable idea so simply stated. It needs a lot of teaching on how to do this and in what setting before taking action. You might have asked as the preface for the idea that others would think about such an idea -- i.e., would it be a good idea and a helpful idea, etc. This would allow for dialogue which might have tempered the suggestion. That is all hindsight, of course ;).I think there are too different settings for this. As you say, the topic of homosexuality is in the minds and lips of young people today. They do not know what to think. They are usually led more by peer issues than by wanting to be right before God, especially if they are fringe believers or not yet even at the fringe. In this setting they may not be as interested in your teaching as much as the discussion of ideas. By the same token they would hopefully be no more interested in the teaching of a co-leader as much as the discussion that would be introduced by him/her. If you teach dogmatically they may be turned off and probably abandon attendance. If you allow them to think then the Holy Spirit will be working and they will go in what ever direction their heart leads them -- hopefully their heart will be open to the Holy Spirit but we cannot control that. At least the Holy Spirit would have had a chance. If they don't come to your study they will be left alone and empty on the subject.The other setting would be a study involving believers who are seeking to know and love God's word more and more. They will be critical thinkers as well but they will automatically be more willing and desire "teaching". Having a homosexual "co-leader" would probably send the wrong message to these students. Having a homosexual "guest" to share the what and why of their position might allow for dialogue without sending that wrong message.The idea that a homosexual can actually be a "believer" is difficult to accept. It has occurred to me that there are very few of what I will call "major sins" that believers will disagree about. There is no disagreement on the idea that murder, rape, stealing, etc., are all major sins. Not one of us would allow that someone still pursuing a life of murder, rape or theft could in actuality be a "true" believer. For the most of us in this position we believe that homosexuality is equally a major sin and that someone still pursuing a life of homosexuality cannot in actuality be a "true" believer.Probably one of the things that is a bit offense for many of us in your post was the idea that there could be a homosexual believer. That mere idea was probably the hot button more than the leadership idea. Given of course the idea that there could be no such believer then how could you suggest that someone "masquerading" as a believer could be a co-leader of a Study in any setting. PS, I'm not necessarily posing my feelings, by trying to put myself in the position of other believers reading your post.Could you have a co-leader in a study on sin in general who was "masquerading" as a believer while still pursuing a life of murder, rape, or theft? There are of course the "lesser" sins -- perhaps things like gossip, lake of self control, sexual promiscuity, etc. Our teaching leader in my men's Bible Study Fellowship talks about how he once was addicted to pornography -- if I understand correctly he is saying that he was addicted long sense he became a believer. He is pretty candid about this. He has been our TL for several years and I have the sense that this addiction prevailed even during his earlier years as our TL. He tells us that he has broken the practice of this addiction. He tells us that when he is out of town he won't even turn on the TV in motels anymore. He avoids bookstores or any stores where there are porn magazines on the shelves. I have the sense that his view of this addiction is like our common view of alcoholism -- i.e., that once an alcoholic always an alcoholic -- one step away from falling off the wagon -- the only way to remain "cured" is by strong self discipline, constant prayer, and open candid support from family and friends (including we in BSF).As a past smoker (dare I suggest still a smoker -- i.e., once a smoker always a smoker?) and even with 38 years since I have touched a cigarette (or any other source of tobacco) I know that if for some reason I decided to give in to the idea that I could have a cigarette without it affecting me, then I would fall off the wagon so quick it would make my head spin (pun intended ;). Funny how before a person became addicted to smoking this falling off the wagon could not happen -- a "non-smoker" could have a cigarette and it could end there -- they could even have another one and it could end there, and on and on, but at some point they would cross that line into addiction and then they would no longer be able to "take them or leave them". This idea was in fact the idea that I credit God for planting in my head that broke the habit for me. When I had not smoked for a couple of weeks due to pneumonia and was about to stop for cigarettes on my way back to my first day of work this thought occurred to me -- "why, a non-smoker doesn't need cigarettes" -- so I didn't stop and every time I wanted to borrow or purchase cigarettes for the next several days, weeks, months, I would always think of that idea and it would stop me. If I for some reason my think that I needed/wanted a cigarette at this point in my life I would think back again to that idea. I haven't had such a thought for probably 35+ years, but I respect the possibilities. I praise God that he sent this miracle to me -- it worked.I will say that I was lucky -- I did not have the kind of habit that caused physical reaction when "missing" a cigarette -- it was all mental, or emotional, or psychological. I have had friends with more of the physical reaction and it has been much tougher for them.Anyway, sorry for the digression, but it confirms the point about addiction of any kind, I think. I know that "once addicted, always addicted" -- to whatever.So it can be with porn, etc. Non of us are offended by the addiction expressed by our BSF leader. But, he is not pursuing a life of addiction to this horrible sin. We can accept him as a believer and a leader because he has definitely repented of this sin. But what about that time when he had not yet repented? I wanted to quit smoking. Is that repentance? The BSF leader probably wanted to quit pursuing the porn. Is that repentance? What about the period before the "wanting to quit" -- did that make me or him any less of a "true" believer?With the porn and the smoking and alcoholism, it is easier for me accept the authenticity of the believer than with homosexuality. But is that just my perspective? What is God's perspective. When do we cross that line into salvation while yet giving in to sin's temptation? Does it have anything to do with the practice of the sin? I don't think so. I think we cross the line when we accept Jesus as Lord and Savior in spite of the sins we practice. Until we cross that line we have no power to avoid the sin. Once we've crossed we have infinite power -- we just have to allow it to work. It takes time. At the time I became a believer I may not have yet felt that smoking was a sin, it might have taken sanctification for me to eventually understand this. Actually, smoking may not be a sin. We know it is not good for us. The real sin is putting something, anything, in our lives as a crutch when God should be our only crutch. What that thing is doesn't probably really matter except for the power of the thing itself.So, is the practicing homosexual an authentic believer? Does he want to be different. From the two things mentioned in Marin's book about the background thoughts of the young beginning homosexual I'd say that they probably did not really want to be a homosexual. So are they on the same ground as me, the smoker, or our BSF leader addicted to porn?All these questions are what you suggest We the Church need to be willing to explore. And we need to be willing to accept the homosexual as an authentic believe as much as any other who has testified of their faith. We must allow them to speak and not condemn them any more than we condemn the others.Or should we? Again, is homosexuality on the same plane as murder, rape, theft? Can we do it there?Another thing making homosexuality difficult is that it is a relationship sin. The question could be, "does it hurt anyone" that I would be a homosexual?. Obviously murder, rape, theft, hurt other people. They hurt God. Practicing homosexuality hurts God. Does smoking hurt anyone (yes) -- does it hurt God? Does pursuit of porn hurt anyone (yes) -- does it hurt God. I suggest that homosexual behavior hurts another person as well as God because it at least condones the practice for the homosexual partner, and it uses them for it. The partner may actually be more opposed to it but cannot break away from it. This whole arena of thought is what I talked about on the phone today, because it of itself is sexual promiscuity. We know that God abhors sexual promiscuity of any kind. sexual promiscuity hurts other people. It hurts God.Can we allow someone openly involved in heterosexual promiscuity to be a leader? I'm quite sure that most of us would allow that they can be an authentic believer, but we'd certainly question openly their behavior. We would not accept them as a co-leader in a discussion of sexual promiscuity.So, I think this is where I'm coming to. We cannot really offer for a practicing self acclaimed homosexual to be a co-leader. We can accept them as a believer with much sanctifying work yet to be done in this particular area, among others. But we cannot put them in a "teaching" position to be suggesting that their behavior is acceptable, and as long as they are "practicing" that is what the are going to be saying -- unless there testimony is that they want to stop, but they can't or don't know how! This is the same for the murderer, the rapist, the thief -- they cannot "lead" if they are still practicing.If you agree, you may want to find a way to put your thoughts back to those who were offended -- both in your blog as well as directly (for those who have "complained"). If you don't agree, I understand. These are a lot of untested quickly written thoughts -- they are "suspect" ;) ;).Love you Bill. Love your family. May you hear God's wisdom -- not my wisdom as you seek reconciliation with those who have been hurt, including yourself!Praise God!
#dminlgp The need for healthy dialog is not the same as condoning or agreeing with a person's different view on a topic. As an Australian who lived in the US for 7 years, one of my observations is that culturally, it is very difficult to have an intellectual or spiritual journey that is different to those you hang out with, especially in evangelical circles. I also experienced this firsthand. It seems that you must be either Left or Right, Black or White, Democrat or Republican, and if you are a Republican there is no way you can be a Democrat! This position is extremely contrary to the life that Jesus modelled. Without his willingness to engage the 'fringe', the Samaritan prostitute would have continued to live in shame, lepers would not have been healed, an adulterous woman would have been stoned to death, a tax collector would have remain steeped in corruption. Every day, even in our churches, we see the cost of hidden sin or sin that is considered to be less serious. Herein lies the contradiction of the Christian life and how it is different to what we saw in the life of Christ. Mahatma Ghandi had the same issue. He loved the life of Christ, but could not reconcile it with his experience of the church.
Thanks Glenn. Good words...and the way you conduct your life makes those good words hold weight.
Comment on This Post