ELCA and Homosexual Ministers

Martin Marty (Martin E. Marty is Fairfax M. Cone Distinguished Service Professor Emeritus at the University of Chicago, where he taught religious history, chiefly in the Divinity School, for 35 years, and where the Martin Marty Center has been founded to promote “public religion” endeavors) wrote a recent post at Newsweek here about homosexuality in the ELCA, which has recently become an issue.

i think he makes a very interesting point that i for the first time am understanding from his (and others’) perspective, i think. he says, “‘We’ used to support slavery because the Bible did. We (in ELCA etc.) accept pastors, bishops, and lay people who were divorced and are remarried in circumstances that both Jesus and the apostle Paul rule out. So why hold the line on this one point?”

he really raises a great criticism of the hypocrisy of homosexual issues versus other questions.

however, though i think i understand that position for the first time, i dont agree with it. here is why: we did used to support slavery, but this was something that God certainly did not praise, but allowed. just in the same way that God allowed Moses to allow divorce, but then Jesus came and pointed to God’s original intent. God’s original intent in marriage was for a man and his wife to become one flesh, therefore, what God has joined, dont let people separate. in many ways, i think Jesus’ teaching on divorce is highly pertinent to the question of homosexuality.

now, let us apply this to homosexuality. the first point, one could accept from Marty, is that God used to command something, now it’s okay because God allows it now in light of the New Testament. well, in light of the New Testament, Paul is quite clear about homosexual relations being sinful in Romans 1 as well as other places. and in Romans, like Jesus’ interpretation of the commandment about divorce, Paul also points to the “natural” or original intent of God in human relationships. so it isnt just an Old Testament commandment (which is an entirely separate issue about whether or not the Torah has been abrogated, amended or otherwise). it is something people within the New Covenant condemned as well.

of course, it isn’t just Paul who refers to homosexuality being sinful. Jesus, in speaking of divorce, makes it clear that God didnt intend homosexual relations to occur. Jesus taught that divorce was accepted by God for a time, but that in God’s perfect plan, divorce is not good. it is also relevant that Jesus quotes Genesis which says “a man” and “his wife”. Jesus is saying that this quote from Genesis was the intent of God’s creation for spouses. it is how God intended creation to be. this doesn’t show that homosexuality is sinful, but that for sure, it wasnt God’s perfect plan.

so even without Paul’s passages about the issue, and even without the Torah commandments, Jesus still shows that it was not the heart of what God desired in creation. so why would we choose to have a minister who has divorced? or who is actively involved in a homosexual relationship? or various other questionable practices?

you see, even if homosexuality isn’t a sin, the ministers are called to a higher standard than the rest of the Body. Paul says that elders must be a husband of but one wife and respected and having control over there own families, etc. his rationale is that an elder must be above reproach. can one really say that a minister who is in an active homosexual relationship is above reproach if God didn’t intend for such behavior when He created the world?

know that i am not trying to condemn anyone in this post at all. i am not trying to be bigoted or “homophobic”. i truly care for people in homosexual relationships, and desire God’s best for their life just as i do for all people. so i want your honest opinion. what do yall think?