Living Theology
in the Metropolitan Chicago Synod
Volume 8, Number 2
Summer 2003
Human Sexuality in the ELCA:
Perspectives on the Struggle
A Conservative Case for
Recognition of Gay Relationships in the Church
So far, I have been very
dissatisfied with the discussion of the proposals for same-sex holy unions and
ordination of sexually active homosexual clergy in the ELCA. The discussion keeps being presented as a
debate between “liberals” and “conservatives” or between “progressives” and
“traditionalists,” with the former supposed to be in support of the radical
measures of holy unions and ordaining gay pastors, and the latter supposed to
be adhering to traditional Lutheran teaching and practice in rejecting those
innovations. As an active (albeit
fairly new) member of a theologically and liturgically conservative ELCA
congregation (Immanuel Lutheran in Evanston, Illinois), I believe that the
liberal/conservative, left/right framing of the debate seriously distorts the
issues. Indeed, I think such framing
injurious to the church.
Although some church people
support the so-called gay agenda as one part of a broader radical project,
there are good reasons for conservatives to support the inclusion of homosexual
persons in all aspects of the rights and rites of the church. It is indeed the case, especially in our
seminaries, that some people would like to celebrate holy unions and the
Eucharist in the name of the Creator, Redeemer and the Sustainer, throwing
out “patriarchal theology” along with
“compulsory heterosexuality.” But at
the grass roots, the drive to include homosexual persons adheres to much more
familiar values and ideals. I will
focus on two: upholding fidelity to persons and recognizing devotion to the
church.
In a time and place where
the bonds that link us one to another and each to all are chronically
vulnerable, where the value of individual liberty threatens to trump all other
values, voices in favor of lasting commitment should be encouraged. Promises made should be kept. Ties that bind should still be blessed. The effort and self-denial required to live
up to our professed intentions need support.
What does not need support in our society is the imperative of
heterosexuality. To put it mildly, the
prophetic voice of the church is redundant when it comes to the social
desirability of boys being interested in girls and girls in boys. Madison Avenue has made that message loud
and clear. Fainter are the voices
imploring us to put our loved ones first than the advertisements that insinuate
that each of us would best find salvation driving a high powered car down an
open road with no one, let alone a spouse or a child, in the passenger
seat. In the face of incessant
iterations of a “me first” morality, it is important, indeed prophetic, for the
church to teach “honor thy father and mother,” “he who loves his wife loves
himself,” and “let brotherly love continue.”
I am no theologian, but when
I reflect on God’s wondrous providence, I am inclined to believe that He
created us as sexual beings not so much to populate His earth as to motivate us
to keep one another’s company. To me,
“it is not good that man should be alone” speaks more to our condition than “be
fruitful and multiply.” Be that as it
may, I believe that the religious celebration of a union between committed
partners is more in line with Christian values than is the taunt that God made
Eve, not Steve, for Adam. By and large,
gay culture is not supportive of fidelity in relationships; by and large,
Christian, and especially Lutheran values are.
If instead of cudgeling our homosexual fellow Christians with the demand
that, in order to be one of us they must become something they are not–if
instead we welcomed them into our midst while encouraging them to be faithful
to their partners and bring them also to church, we would be making a positive
contribution to them, to ourselves, and to our society.
Homosexuals did not darken
the door of the church solely to protest exclusionary policies. In the church, the “gay movement” comes from
within, not without. The people asking
for recognition, whether you agree with them or not, are not outsiders; they
are our fellow parishioners. Students
of the church (of which company, as a sociologist of religion, I am one), know
that the church–all denominations, many local congregations–is full of
homosexuals. Many pastors acknowledge
that without the contributions of homosexual persons–deeply “closeted” as well
as proudly “out”–the church would crumble, or at least be crippled. As faithful parishioners, deacons, ushers,
and, yes, church musicians, gay folk make enormous contributions to the church,
contributions without which we would all be poorer.
One of the surprising things
about gays in the church that we (and here the “we” means my sociological
colleagues) have learned is that gay men are more religious (i.e., more
likely to attend church, more likely to say that God is important in their
lives) than “straight” men, although we don’t fully understand why. By contrast, gay women ("lesbians”) are
less religious, which is one reason they have less presence in the church. Speaking of the gay men whose religiosity I
have professionally studied as well as those whom my wife and I count as
friends, I make the following confident claim: they tend to be religiously
observant, devoted, Trinitarian Christians.
If you imagine that most of them are doctrinally a few inches this side
of neo-pagans, you are dead wrong. (One
irony is that theological liberals would have more to fear than us
conservatives from inclusion of gay men as full partners in the church, because
they would likely strengthen the forces of sacramentalism and scriptural
authority.)
Given that homosexuals
abound in the church and that the church needs and uses their contributions, it
is hypocritical, in fact exploitative, of us to include them only at the price
of their staying invisible. To be sure,
if the ELCA were to institute more inclusive policies, it would be wrong to
insist that any given person of homosexual orientation declare him or her self
to be a “gay” (or “lesbian”) Christian, to be one of the shock troops of the
new liberation, as if there were to be only one politically correct way to be
included in a more accepting ELCA. Many
will continue to keep their sexual orientation to themselves, as is their right. But to the many (would they number in the
tens of thousands?) who would welcome our gesture, we should be elated to say
something like this: “Welcome as you are.
If you wish to serve in the ministry, please be confident to tell us
your whole story. If you wish us to
meet your partner, please bring him/her to church next Sunday; perhaps we could
explore with you the possibility that our congregation might celebrate your
unity as a couple in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.”
Beyond “Left”
and “Right”
I do not claim to have said
anything new. I am only echoing fifteen
years of conversations about these matters with gay and straight
Christians. However, I do think I’m
bringing something new to the discussion within the ELCA, where too many
moderately conservative people of good will say, in effect, “if they get their
way on this one, it will just prove that modern culture has once again trumped
the Gospel.” I beg my fellow Lutherans
not to see it that way. If what you may
perceive as “my side” on this issue should “win,” it would not be a radical,
progressive or liberal victory. It
would simply mean that some members of the church have persuaded others that
they’re equally children of God.
R. Stephen Warner
Member, Immanuel, Evanston