Readings for Lent IIIC:
Exodus 3:1-15, Psalm 103, I Corinthians 10:1-13, Luke 13:1-9
March 11, 2007
The Rev. Karen Faye Siegfriedt
St. Jude the Apostle Episcopal Church, Cupertino, CA
Today’s gospel is about repentance; a common theme addressed during Lent. [See Luke 3:1-9] The reading is divided into two sections: the first about the nature of suffering and the other about second chances. The question that is posed to Jesus is why particular people suffer. This question assumed that there was a direct correlation between sin and suffering. Jesus challenges the traditional wisdom of the day and denies this correlation. He dismisses the popular but unworthy theology of retribution that was held by the Jewish people and many of their prophets over the centuries. If human beings die by the sword, by accident, or by natural disaster, it is not because God has arbitrarily chosen to punish them for their sins while sparing others. However, this idea still persists, especially among fundamentalists who believe illness, poverty, loneliness, and death are punishments for our sins. Try as we may, none of us can protect ourselves or those we love from every danger such as disease, traffic accidents, crime, emotional disorders, or random violence.
The second point that Jesus makes is in regard to second chances. Using the metaphor of a fig tree that does not bear fruit, Jesus invites us to take a closer look at God’s mercy. God’s mercy is always greater than God’s justice. In this parable, Jesus challenges John the Baptist’s theology. John declared that the ax lay at the root, poised to strike. Any tree that did not bear fruit would be cut down. This was John’s understanding of how God works. But Jesus sees God in a more merciful way. In today’s parable, the gardener pleads to give the fig tree another chance and is granted one more year. Jesus’ interpretation errs on the side of mercy and love. Maybe Jesus was an Anglican at heart.
If you look at the history and practice of the Church, you will notice that it has reinterpreted the Scriptures and changed its theology many times. Jesus was the most radical reformer of tradition and re-interpreter of Scripture, breaking many purity codes, hanging out with the impure and outcasts, and erring on the side of inclusivity, generosity, compassion, and mercy. In his Sermon on the Mount, he turned the traditional wisdom of the day on its side in regard to who is in and who is out; who is blessed and who is cursed.
Today, we still struggle with these questions of inclusivity as we have done for hundreds of years. It is nothing new; nothing to be fearful about. For instance, during the 17th and 18th centuries, most of Christianity in America took for granted that women and blacks were cursed by God, promiscuous, and inherently inferior. It was believed that they could not be trusted to take care of themselves and thus needed to be dominated. Begun by cultural assumptions and supported by verses in the Bible, these prejudices extended the practice of slavery and the oppression of women.* It is within this context of cultural assumptions and proof-texting that I would like to use this sermon time to address the current relationship between the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion.
There has been much press about the recent “Primates” meeting in Africa that took place in February. A primate (in this context) means the presiding or head bishop of a national church. These primates have given the Episcopal Church an ultimatum either to shape up or ship out of the Anglican Communion. At the core of the situation is the increasing theological divide between two groups. The first group wants the Church to adhere to the strict, traditional interpretation of Scripture and traditional ethical mores in regards to human sexuality. The second group wants the Church to strive for justice, human rights, and the dignity of every human being even if it means that the tradition of the Church needs to be reformed. What is at stake is centuries of deeply held purity codes verses a passion for social justice.
In order to satisfy the African primates who insist on maintaining more traditional purity codes, the Episcopal Church is being called to change the decisions it has made over the past four years. These so-called “unfaithful” decisions were made at our General Convention by lay and clergy deputies and by the bishops in accordance with the Constitution and Canons of the Episcopal Church. The democratic process of the convention resulted in the affirmation of the consecration of a gay bishop living in a committed homosexual relationship. The convention did not forbid the blessing of same-sex relationships. And it elected a female “primate” who is now the presiding bishop of the United States. In many countries, there is no democratic process within the Church. Most of the decision-making power is placed in the hands of the bishop and some clergy. Even in England, the Archbishop of Canterbury is selected by the Queen. We do things differently here in the states and because of this, we are being criticized, denied full participation in the Anglican Communion, and pressured to change our ways.
Let me give you an analogy of how this dissention is being played out. As a citizen of the United States, what do you do when a person has been freely elected as president, according to the Constitution, and you don’t like that person? Or a law has been passed with which you disagree? Do you demand to have a second president represent you? Do you pledge your allegiance to a president from another country who agrees with your political stance? Do you insist on seceding from the union while reaping all its benefits? Do you persuade your family, your community, your state to disobey the laws and create your own? These kinds of reactions are occurring in the Episcopal Church today among a minority of churches and dioceses over the issue of the full inclusion of women and gays in the Church. It is certainly not a typical or an appropriate Anglican response!
What are we to do? Next week, the bishops of the Episcopal Church will meet to discuss the communication that many of the Primates in the Anglican Communion signed last month. The ECUSA “house of bishops” is not of one mind. I don’t know what they will decide but the authority to make decisions on behalf of the national church does not rest with them alone. The decision- making process in the Episcopal Church rests with the entire convention, which includes the laity and clergy deputies. My hunch is, that the bishops will delay any serious decision-making until the next General Convention which will gather in 2009. Will this satisfy the Primates? Probably not! What will they do in response to this delay? I just don’t know. Maybe the Episcopal Church will not be invited to the Lambeth Conference next year. Will this be a tragedy? I don’t think so. I would rather us be cautious and err on the side of democracy and mercy than to be bullied into conformity on issues that require more careful attention. Many of you have asked me where I stand on all these issues. Here is my response to you.
1. I have taken a vow to solemnly engage to conform to the doctrine, discipline, and worship of the Episcopal Church. I will stand by this vow. And if it ever comes to the point where conformity to the doctrine and discipline goes against my conscience, I will not try to persuade you or others to leave the Church. I will take the consequences of my personal convictions and step down from parish ministry.
2. As rector, I will continue my welcoming posture: “Whoever you are, wherever you are on your journey of faith, you are welcomed here.” This includes people of color, mixed marriages, singles, gays, theological and cultural diversity, sinners, doubters, and those who are broken.
3. Unless forbidden by my bishop, I will bless same-sex couples who have committed themselves to a life-long relationship characterized by fidelity, monogamy, mutual affection and respect, careful, honest communication, and the holy love which enables those in such relationships to see in each other the image of God. I will require this same standard for heterosexual couples who come to the church seeking God’s blessing. The Church allows me to bless tarantulas, battle ships, stuffed animals, and inanimate objects. The Church allows me to bless couples who have been previously divorced, even though Scripture forbids remarriage in most cases. Why does the Church allow this? Because the Episcopal Church errs on the side of mercy and compassion rather than on the side of rigid rules and purity codes. To tell you the truth, only one same-sex couple has ever asked me to bless their relationship in my 14 years of priesthood. Many gay folks have lost faith in the Church as being a proponent of justice. I want to assure them of my baptismal promise to strive for justice and peace and to respect the dignity of every human being.
4. I will lift my voice to defend the current polity of the Episcopal Church which was modeled on the Constitution of the United States. We purposely did not want to copy the hierarchical structure of the Catholic Church where unity means uniformity. After freeing ourselves from the tyranny of English rule, the ECUSA limited the power of bishops, by allowing the laity to have voice and vote in the decision making process, and by empowering rectors to oversee their own congregations.
5. I will continue to pray for wisdom and faithfulness. Knowing that all human beings have an incredible capacity for self-deception, I will pray for the guidance of the Holy Spirit. I will pray for the well being of the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion. “Prayer is responding to God, by thought and by deed, with or without words.” Discernment needs to come out of deep prayer rather than cultural assumptions. I hope you will join me in this spiritual discipline of prayer.
6. Finally, I have written to Bishop Romero about my position and have asked him not to be bullied into sacrificing justice in order to appease some foreign Primates. A copy of this letter is posted on “Ward’s Board” in the parish hall. I often wonder where the African Bishops get the money and time to address issues of sexuality in our country when they should be addressing issues of poverty, AIDs, and the tremendous human suffering in their own countries.
I know the Church is not of one mind on the issues of human sexuality, marriage, ethical morality, and the full inclusion of women and gays. It has never been (and neither is the Bible). But the Church’s mind has continued to change over the years as it has found it necessary to re-interpret Scripture in order to include more people at God’s table. We tend to project 21st century issues onto the biblical text to support our positions. But we must be very careful. In regards to the issue of marriage, the Bible speaks volumes about a very different institution than what we know today. Our forefather Abraham had two wives. He threw one out and allowed the other one to be raped to save his live. Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines. Jesus did not marry, did not have a biological father, and his parents were unmarried at his conception. St. Paul said it was better to remain unmarried and that only those who could not contain their lustful passions should get married. Marriages in biblical times were arranged and viewed as a property exchange. A woman held no status until she bore sons. But today, we look at marriage differently; to further our own psychological and emotional growth: “For mutual joy, for the help and comfort given one another in prosperity and adversity; and when it is God’s will, for the procreation of children.” [BCP 423]
In today’s gospel, Jesus offers a new spin on the theology of suffering. He challenges John the Baptist’s preaching. Because of his radical interpretation of the Word of God, the hierarchy of the Church eventually killed Jesus for trying to reform the tradition. Before he died, Jesus said to his disciples: “I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth.” [John 16] May the Holy Spirit of God guide us into all truth, grant us courage to do what is right, and enable us to grow into the likeness of Christ.
{*See Jack Rogers, Jesus, the Bible, and Homosexuality: Explode the Myths, Heal the Church; 2006}
| Updated 03/12/2007 |
|