Jim Nelson
In this issue we didn’t report on many of the petitions submitted to General Conference that were rejected, resulting in no changes to the Book of Discipline. A few even had heated debates on the Conference floor, but still resulted in the Conference deciding to do nothing, and leave the Discipline unchanged.One that caught my interest dealt with the pastor’s authority in deciding who is and is not worthy to join the church. The petition was in response to a 2005 decision by the Judicial Council, which upheld a pastor’s decision to deny membership to someone whose lifestyle he disapproved of.
The majority report coming out of the legislative committee asked the conference to make it clear that pastors and congregations “are to faithfully receive all persons who are willing to affirm our vows of membership.” Whereas the minority report urged delegates to declare “pastors have the responsibility of discerning one’s readiness to take the vows of membership.”Both were rejected. But I found the report of the debate by the United Methodist News Service interesting. It stated that a member of the Georgia delegation speaking in support of the minority report said, “pastors must be good shepherds who care for their flock. Allowing anyone to come into the community could have unintended consequences.”
I’m confused. I thought we were all sinners, and none of us are “worthy” of the sacrifice of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. Besides, what I believe is a sin; you may not and vice versa. Some sins are out in the open; even in-your-face. Whereas, others are more subtle, in the dark, done behind closed doors. The Bible tells us that a sin is a sin, and no one is any worse than any other. Who decides what behavior is acceptable and what is not?If “unintended consequences” is a problem, I am more concerned about the sins I can’t see, than the ones I can. They are often more insidious and can cause much more damage. So how do we keep out those whose sins we don’t see?
A church is defiled not by who it lets in, but by who it keeps out. Jesus said he came for the sick, that those who are well have no need for a doctor. Our churches should be full of the vilest people so we can help heal them, and lead them to Christ. Plus, how do we know the unacceptable person wasn’t sent by God, led by the Holy Spirit? If we deny them membership, are we not then denying or blaspheming the Holy Spirit, the unforgivable sin? Maybe God sent them to us because God knew that once they become active in our church, and felt the love that surrounded them, they would change their ways and live a more righteous life. Or maybe God sent them to teach us something. The Bible is full of stories of God using unholy people for holy purposes.
Jesus tells us that as we judge so shall we be judged. And isn’t “discerning one’s readiness” really just a euphemistic phrase for “being judgmental”? I don’t know about you, but I want to make the standard I set for God to judge me to be as low as possible. Being “good shepherds who care for their flock” could mean not diminishing the lives of our congregations by denying them the opportunity to interact with someone God sent to live and worship among them. Is “open hearts, open minds, open doors” just a slogan or what we truly believe?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
As a parent is there a behavior that you have absolutely forbidden your child to do in your house/ home? (To you, the rule offers protection for the individual, the family and even the community.) Yet, you find out later that the child disobeys the rule. To you as parent, the rule is a good one; yet, your child does not want to accept the rule or your rationale. By the way, your love covers his/her disobedience. Your love is merciful. A key question is do you lower the standard? No.
Post a Comment