Creative Commons Image
Talk Balloons
During the United States’ Civil War, President Abraham Lincoln wrote: “The will of God prevails. In great contests each party claims to act in accordance with the will of God. Both may be, and one must be, wrong.” In the present discussion among United Methodists over marriage equality, we all desire to speak for what we understand God’s will to be. There are a multitude of voices and places along the spectrum. All the voices cannot be right because, based on the Biblical witness; God will not be simultaneously for and against the same thing. Some voices and some positions will have to be, at least, less right than other voices. As Mr. Lincoln noted, though, all the voices may be wrong. What are we to do as we strive to remain faithful, open to holy conversation, and see the church through this “great contest” still unified? Possibly Acts 10 has some guidance.
Cornelius, a soldier of Rome, a part of the occupation forces, a cog in the machinery of Empire is called “devout and God-fearing.” He is said to be (although the source may be biased) “…a righteous and God-fearing man, who is respected by all the Jewish people” (Acts 10:22). While the source of those words may be suspect, the account does say that an angel of God did give Cornelius instructions. The source of instructions for Cornelius suggests that he is accepted by God as a part of the increased family of God. Meanwhile, Peter is being set up to make just such a pronouncement.
Peter was granted a vision during a trance. Unclean animals were offered to him for food. Peter resisted saying that he had never eaten anything ruled out of bounds by the Law. God’s voice told Peter that what God calls clean, we are not to call unclean. Peter came to and, possibly, wondered if the vision meant that he could enjoy shrimp scampi. As he sought discernment as to the vision’s meaning, servants of Cornelius arrived and made their case for Peter to accompany them back to their master, the Roman soldier, the oppressor, the enemy.
Peter’s relationship with Cornelius moved through a distinct process. First, he listened to what had to be an unsettling message. The message was from a Roman centurion. A summons, even an invitation, for a Jew to go to the home of such an enemy was a threat. Would this be a shake down, arrest, or even execution? Still, Peter calmed himself and invited the messengers in for rest and refreshment and to stay the night. Peter first listened. Peter listened to his upbringing, the words of Scripture he had heard all his life. He listened to the challenging word brought from Jesus of Nazareth who welcomed so many people who had been excluded in Peter’s earlier life. He listened to the experience he had most recently had with God’s vision. Peter’s experience of life, then, grounded in faith, shaped in the shared life with Jesus and the other Disciples, gave him what he needed to listen honestly to these messengers. Peter listened honestly.
Second, he tolerated the “other.” Peter travelled to the place of his perceived enemy. When he arrived, Peter entered the home of the enemy. Peter reminded those present that as a God fearing Jew he had no business being in the house of a Gentile. At that point, though, he was willing to tolerate those with whom he had legitimate grievances. Peter told them why he would be tolerant. ‘You yourselves know that it is unlawful for a Jew to associate with or to visit a Gentile; but God has shown me that I should not call anyone profane or unclean. So when I was sent for, I came without objection.” (Acts 10:29a). This second step was toleration of those whom we view only across a great divide.
Rome and Jerusalem were at odds. The everyday law of the faith community forbade Jews to associate with Gentiles. That is not toleration. That is one step away from throwing stones or hurling insults. Toleration gets you in the door, however. Toleration gets you a hearing. The last phrase of Acts 10:29 has Peter ask a simple and honest question, “Now may I ask why you sent for me?” What is your position? Who, behind any label, are you? This takes us to the third step in Peter’s process, acceptance or embrace of one thought to be wholly other and unacceptable, into the full life of the family.
Cornelius was, by the world’s standards, an enemy of the Jews. He was an enemy of Peter. He was an occupier, an oppressor, one of ‘them.’ How could he be acceptable to Peter, a Jew, a member of the faith community, an heir of the covenant of Abraham? Only by the grace of God, working a new creation couild these two men, these two peoples be reconciled. “Then Peter began to speak to them: ‘I truly understand that God shows no partiality, but in every nation anyone who fears him and does what is right is acceptable to him.”(Acts 10:34-35)
Peter saw that God is not willing to have even the enemies of his people be left out of the new creation. Peter was the first Disciple to be the apostle to the gentiles. Others would follow. Peter set the stage for a gospel life that looks to how we may embrace and work on a basis of equality with even those whom we have profound differences. Peter’s process was to listen honestly, to tolerate the other, and to accept that God was moving us to a new way of acceptance. Those steps led Peter to embrace someone whose life was far outside Peter’s own. Peter embraced Cornelius as a full member of the family of faith.
Cornelius was a part of the Empire. Cornelius, I have no doubt, used his position to, if not extort money from the locals, then certainly to live above his station by the “gifts” farmers, merchants, trades folk offered to man who held over them the power of life and death. Cornelius was still called an “…upright and God-fearing man.” Is it possible for us today to welcome, embrace and fully include with equality, people whose piety and behavior we deem suspect? Is it possible for us to live in community with those who hold views we find incomprehensible? Is it possible for us to receive the sacrament from a person who behaves in ways we cannot fathom? We already do. Do we have any guidance about living with such differences even if they extend to sexual behavior? We do.
In Mark 10 Jesus speaks to the matter of divorce. He rejects divorce without exception. In Matthew 19 Jesus offers one reason that might legitimate divorce, unchastity. In 1 Corinthians Paul denies the morality of divorce not on his own authority but as a direct word of the Lord. In spite of these directives, United Methodists have long since come to terms with these passages and with divorced and remarried people in the church, even though Jesus pronounces that situation as adultery(Mt 19:9).
Divorced and remarried persons, even those divorced and remarried multiple times are allowed to serve as Conference, District, and Church Lay Leaders, Chairs of Church Councils, and all other groups official or unofficial in the life of congregations. Divorced and remarried people, even those divorced and remarried multiple times hold positions of Pastor, Superintendent, possibly Bishop. There is no prohibition against any person who has divorced and remarried from serving in any capacity, order or fellowship within the United Methodist Church. Again, this is so, in spite of Jesus’ clear words that to divorce and remarry is to commit adultery.
Does the status of divorced-remarried people exclude them from full embrace in and participation in the life of the Church? No. Does their status prevent non-divorced people from having close ties to, loving relationships with and taking supportive action for divorced people? No. As Peter says of Cornelius, “I truly understand that God shows no partiality, but in every nation anyone who fears him and does what is right is acceptable to him.”
The Reverend Dr. Maxie Dunnam has indicated that the issue at hand is not really about sexuality. He suggests that the issue is over the interpretation of scripture with sexuality being the presenting issue. Here, then, is my interpretation of Acts 10, drawing on my study of the Bible, the best of the tradition of the Methodist movement which, eventually, does reach out to embrace all “devout and God-fearing” people, cautious application of reason tested in conversation with trusted friends some of whom agree and others of whom disagree with me, and 30 years of pastoral experience.
We need to embrace the process of Peter. First, we will remain open to even unsettling messages from those who are known to love the Lord; even if that means that what God calls clean may appear to change over time. Second, we will meet with those whom we see as different, even wrong. We will meet with willing hearts. Third, we will allow our experiences to shape our attitudes toward people not the other way. And we will pledge to God that if, during this process, we are convicted to change our positions, we will accept that as a word from God and do so without regret.
The Reverend Doctor Brad Gabriel is an Elder serving in the Memphis Annual Conference at St. Mark’s UMC in Memphis, TN. He is married to the Reverend Linda Gabriel who is Associate Pastor at Emmanuel UMC in Memphis, TN.