Scripture: 1 John 3:1-3
Most of you know I have just come back from spending a week in Kansas City, where new church pastors gathered for a few days and then the UCC General Synod met. Because the Disciples of Christ were also holding their General Assembly, this was something of an extravaganza, with all sorts of things going on from early in the morning to late at night—great, good, bad, and indifferent. And since there were also 13,000 people present, sometimes this could all be a bit much for an introvert like me.
I’ve been back from Kansas City almost a week now, but I’m still trying to process some of the experiences and still suffering from sensory overload. I don’t want to use the sermon to just give a report, but I do feel a need to process at least one concern out loud with you.
What I need to process with you is our identity as an open and affirming denomination. There are some people who think that identity is pretty clear and pretty secure. Fred Phelps is one of those people. Fred Phelps is the minister who travels all over the country showing up with a message of hate at places such as Matthew Shepherd’s funeral. Fred Phelps showed up on a street corner across from the convention center where the General Synod was being held. He and a small group of followers were there every day holding signs that said things like “Fag Church”. (That was the nicest of the signs. The others were uglier and I can’t bring myself to repeat them out loud.)
There are some people, not just Fred Phelps but people within the UCC, who think that as a denomination we are pretty clear where we stand on all questions relating to the full participation and inclusion of lesbian and gay people in the church and in the society at large. There are people who think it is clear where the UCC stands, and they don’t like it. I wish I were as clear as they are. I wish I could feel that our witness in this area is as unequivocal as others seem to think it is.
Let me say quickly that there are a number of things that I am proud of in the UCC in this regard. There are a number of things in the life of the UCC that have earned us the reputation of being “out front” in the inclusion of gay and lesbian people in the church and advocacy on their behalf in the larger society. To some extent we come by our reputation honestly.
In 1969, two months before the Stonewall uprising that many take as sort of the symbolic beginning of the modern gay and lesbian rights movement, an agency of the UCC took a public stand against all laws making homosexuality a criminal offense and against the exclusion of gay and lesbian people from military service. In 1972, almost thirty years ago, an openly gay man was ordained to the Christian ministry in the United Church of Christ, and in 1973 the governing body of the UCC said that sexual orientation should not prevent anyone from being ordained in the UCC. In 1975 the UCC General Synod went on record to oppose all laws that discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation. Before AIDS was known as AIDS the UCC was calling for a compassionate response and more money for research. In 1985 General Synod called on local congregations to engage in a process of study and prayer leading to declaring the local congregation “open and affirming”. So far over 300 congregations have done so. From one vantage point, especially from the vantage point of comparing our record to that of other denominations, there is good reason to be proud of “who we are” as a denomination committed to open and affirming policy and practice.
But…there are some significant “buts” that also need to be said and that I have been struggling with. My roommate at this conference—also my roommate at last year’s conference—was Doug Long. Doug is the pastor of North Raleigh United Church, which is the congregation, many of you may remember, that we lifted up in prayer over this past year because they were refused standing in the UCC by their association in North Carolina because of their being an open and affirming congregation.
I’m not worried about Doug or about North Raleigh United Church. I know from Doug that some ugly and hurtful things were said in the process. Those who were around when Sojourners was applying for standing through the Shenandoah Association can probably imagine something of the atmosphere. Some ugly, hurtful, outrageous, and ridiculous things were said about the North Raleigh congregation and about the people of that church. I’m saddened by that, and I pray for a healing of whatever wounds have been inflicted. But I’m not worried about the North Raleigh congregation. My sense is that they will be fine. My sense is that they are strong enough as a congregation to absorb the wounds, support one another, and not give up the fight. And especially so since they will continue to receive the prayers of congregations in Maine, Alaska, Oregon, Oklahoma, Florida, and many other places including Charlottesville.
But I am concerned about the UCC. Here is a denomination that presents itself and prides itself on having an open and affirming posture. At least sometimes in some places we have taken stands and have gone on record that way. Enough to give detractors evidence for their accusations. Enough to justify the pride some of us have in the UCC and what it has done.
But then over here we have a situation where a congregation that is open and affirming is excluded from the UCC. A congregation that stands for what the UCC claims to stand for is left on the outside while those on the inside contradict what the UCC claims to stand for. This is painful not just for the North Raleigh congregation. It is painful for me because it makes me less able to be proud of my denomination. It makes me less sure of what the UCC does stand for. It makes me less able to tell others what we stand for. And, I’m sure it gives pause to those congregations who have not yet gone through that process. Some of them are new open and affirming churches coming to life in places that are not necessarily sympathetic. Some of them are congregations that have left, or been forced to leave other denominations because of the stance they have taken. Will the UCC in fact turn out to be a place that will welcome them, and where they will be at home, and where they will find strength and companionship in their journeys? I wish I could answer that question with complete assurance and a whole-hearted “YES”. But my “yes” I find cannot be completely assured. My answer is a “yes”, but it is something less than whole-hearted. And I am sad about that.
The North Raleigh situation of course was not new news, but being together with other new church pastors and then in General Synod made me process this in a new way. I need to say that I have enormous admiration for many of the women and men who are engaged in new church starts. Some I have met at these meetings over the last two years. Some I happen to know of who have not been at these gatherings, for whatever reason.
For instance, two women in Chicago who began a church called Church of the Open Door. They quit their jobs and gambled their life savings on their dream of a church that would be open to all, but would especially make clear that they welcomed people of color who were gay and lesbian, bi-sexual and transgendered. They were not drawing upon some large inheritance, just a couple of modest bank accounts which allowed them to eat, pay rent, buy some candles and Bibles, a few office supplies, and keep up a car. Theirs was a work of faith. They began with no promises of support from anyone, no benefactors, no members of means, just a few people who needed this kind of church and who, not finding it in the world around them, had to make it for themselves. The faith was not just in the fact that they assumed that eventually they would find a means of support, though of course they had to make that assumption. The faith was in the conviction that what they were doing was in response to a calling of God, and that it needed to be done regardless of any calculations about the likelihood of success, and in spite of the fact that it placed people who already did not occupy a secure place in society in an even more vulnerable position.
Being with people, many of whom are in a much more vulnerable position than I am or than Sojourners is, probably more vulnerable than Sojourners has ever been, being with people who are living the risks of being faithful and loving, brought home again to me these questions that tug at me constantly. How firm is our identity as an open and affirming denomination? Some open and affirming churches can feel pretty lonely and pretty vulnerable even in the UCC.
John Thomas is the president of the United Church of Christ. He came and spoke to us one day. He gave what I thought was a very good short speech about what the UCC stood for. I had not heard it before. Others told me later that it was his stump speech, the speech he gives whenever he is called on to “say a few words” to a group like ours. No matter. I didn’t care how often he gave it. I thought it was good. He described the UCC as a place of extravagant welcome, of early truth-telling, that is taking positions that have been out front in our culture, and of having a passion for reconciliation. He spoke of the Amistad, of the whole movement to abolish slavery, of the ordaining of women, and of the very early development of open and affirming stances. And then he was asked in the question and answer period about the North Raleigh situation, and he said in response that there were other values we need to hold on to, that we need to be open to differences of opinion, that the church cannot gather around a single issue and insist that everyone agree, and that he believed that if we kept on working and talking that eventually North Raleigh United Church would be received into the UCC. He did not say that what had been done was wrong. He did not suggest what we might do in such a situation to reaffirm our commitments to being open and affirming as a denomination.
I understand, I think, what John Thomas was saying. I even agree with it…a little. You don’t just write off people who understand the Bible differently from you, have a different understanding of faith from you, see the world differently from you. There has to be room in the church for disagreements, and sometimes various parts of the church will take actions that are deeply upsetting to me, just as the church will sometimes take actions that are deeply upsetting to others. The important thing is to keep talking, stay in relationship, keep the process going, and trust that we can talk our way and work our way through difficult issues. I understand that approach.
And I understand when people say they are tired of talking about homosexuality in the church. Few people enjoy conflict, me probably less than most. I understand when people say they are weary of fighting and ask if we can’t just agree to disagree and move on to something else? Can’t we concentrate more on what we do agree on and less on what divides us? I understand that kind of feeling. For years I have based my life in the church on those assumptions, and I continue to. I do not refuse to talk to, associate with, work with, care about, or pray for people who I know have a stance on these matters that is far different from mine.
I happened to run into someone in Kansas City who I supervised as a student in field work and whose ordination I preached at. I hadn’t seen him in many years and as we got together to catch up and I told him about this wonderful church I was serving and mentioned that, among other things, it is open and affirming, I could tell right away that he was in a different place than I was and it wasn’t long before he told me so. It maybe strained our conversation some, but it will certainly not end our friendship. I understand the desire of many for the UCC to be a church family that can tolerate major differences among us, just as we do among friends and in our personal families.
Still, I am troubled. I am troubled that in the name of respecting differences of opinion and for the sake of trying to keep peace in the family and in the hope of keeping as much of the family together as we can, that the open and affirming stance we have committed ourselves to as a denomination is much less clear and much less strong than it needs to be. This is not a minor issue, or just one issue among many. This is not the same as allowing room for people to disagree about tax cuts, school vouchers, faith-based initiatives, or the policies of the International Monetary Fund. There are an endless array of issues that we can agree to disagree about. But how can we agree to disagree about whether all people are precious children of God? How can we agree to disagree about whether all people deserve to be treated with respect and dignity? How can we get weary and go on to something else when such basic issues of justice are involved? Is an open and affirming stance a fundamental commitment, a core value, of the United Church of Christ, or is this a matter that’s under discussion, and that we will just have to agree to disagree about? From where I sit, our identity as an open and affirming denomination is not completely secure. While I know there are many who think we have already gone way too far, from where I sit we have yet a long way to go.
But then so do I. Karen Roddy and I were talking about this service and maybe bringing in the quilts to show them as works in progress and she made a nice statement about how we are all as people works in progress. We decided that would be a good theme for the service, and what I at first thought I would do in the sermon is talk about a number of ways that I observed and felt the UCC to be a work in progress, and then talk some about how we are all works in progress, unfinished creations of a God who continues to fashion each one of us into an ever evolving work of art.
I didn’t get to much of what I might have said. I found that more than I realized the question of our open and affirming identity, and our need to be firm and to become more firm, in that identity was and is weighing on me. More than I would like it to be, on this issue anyway, the UCC is very definitely a work in progress.
But then as I say, so am I. More than I would like myself to be I am a work in progress, my faith is a work in progress. I do not do, none of us do works of faith so much as we are works of faith, works being constantly made into the image God has in mind for us, being shaped constantly, mysteriously by the hand of God, the eye of God, the heart of God. Like the UCC I am sometimes—I hope—I pray—with the help of God and by the grace of God—sometimes I am a strong voice. Sometimes, much of the time, it needs to be stronger. It is always stronger when I know I am among friends. If the fabric of my faith is like a quilt, then sometimes I know there are squares missing, or whole sections missing from the quilt. Sometimes the pieces have been stitched on but not too firmly, sometimes the squares don’t fit together neatly or look good together. Like the UCC this work of faith is not where I want it to be. And so all I can do is to offer up the life of my denomination and myself in prayer, today using the words you heard earlier…
“…So come, Lord, into my brokenness.
Resurrect the cluttered pieces of me into a stronger, somewhat whole
And make me brave to dream anew, to hope the kingdom in,
To share the bit of truth I am toward some sweeter saving end,
To love us creature fools hard, yet with a merciful and knowing heart.
Grace then, to fear not the shadows, but to heed the ripples of light forever breaking in, bidding me rise and follow toward brothers, sisters, the promised day, and you. (Ted Loder, “A Nightlight Against the Darkness”, in Wrestling the Light, LuraMedia, San Diego, 1991, p. 2)
So writes Ted Loder. So pray I. Amen.
Jim Bundy
July 22, 2001