I have just finished reading an article that was written based on content from a manifesto written by Dr. Dorothee Benz an LGBTQI activist from New York and is a founding member of MIND (Methodists in New Directions) and serves as its national representative. To say that I was taken aback by the tone of her writings would be a massive understatement. I know that sitting in the pew we are not always aware of these types of things going on in the church, after all why upset the troops so to speak. But the bitterness and the unsubstantiated thoughts, actions and statements attributed to our church which I have inserted here:

– “An anti-queer majority at General Conference, a combination of U.S. and international conservatives, led and whipped into a hateful frenzy by southern white Americans, has refused to consider our humanity,” contends Benz in her 2,000-word manifesto. “We are told we are prostitutes, pedophiles, murderers.”

-……, but at General Conference a tyranny of the majority is hellbent on denying our humanity,” Benz writes.

To my knowledge I have never heard of such actions from the church.

Along with the following begs to ask the question how is there no violence in the following statements.

-We must find a way to make it impossible for delegates to continue to step over our bodies, ignore our hymns, and stick to their schedules. It will take my body and yours – all of ours – to do this,” proclaims Dr. Dorothee Benz, an LGBTQI activist from New York, in an April 13 statement.

– According to the Love Prevails website: “The training will offer attendees direct action skills in a nonviolence framework while being clear about divesting from white supremacist interpretations of nonviolence.” (note what does this mean? Is it a vailed threat?)

-“If we do not disrupt business as usual, then nothing will change,” Benz concludes. “The money changers, the dove sellers, the discriminatory legislation, the foundational hate language in our Book of Discipline – it will all continue.”

This is a rather awkward attempt to ask a very difficult question. Going back to the blog title I have to ask. Why hasn’t the leadership of our church addressed this issue? So far, and I could be very wrong, I have not read, seen or heard any response from the leadership. Should we not defend the concept of peaceful assembly, orderly presentation and discussion of issues as also being part of the Methodist way? Are we not by our inaction endorsing the mindset that if you don’t agree with something you disrupt, ignore, disobey and refuse to allow others to be heard?

The leadership of the church needs to step up and do what they have been elected or appointed to do. Lead God’s people in a civil discourse of ideas that will bring to all people the word of God. You the leadership is by your inaction allowing a picture of our church as one of a divided house held hostage by bitterness, hate and disrespect for our brothers and sisters in the Faith. Loss of members, closing of churches and the division of leadership as to the intent of the gospel has made its way into the pew. We are watching and we don’t like what we see. We come to church to worship our God, share the word and to leave and go out to face the world as it is strengthen by the grace, guidance and love of our savior Jesus Christ. One last thought. How can anyone who has such hate and bitterness in their heart ever expect to have God’s ear or be led by the Holy Spirit?

It has been said that change is only hard for those who resist it. I suppose that is true but what is important to me is the type of change. There are some things that should never change because they are the very foundation of what we believe are God’s will and for the purpose of this blog what I believe to be the foundation of that belief. With that in mind let’s look at Webster’s definition of faith.

Simple Definition of faith

• :strong belief or trust in someone or something
• :belief in the existence of God: strong religious feelings or beliefs
• :a system of religious beliefs

In two of the dots above we see the word religious used twice in reference to feelings, beliefs or system. While this may be a bit radical and I know many will disagree but I view religion and faith to be two separate things. I believe that religious feelings and beliefs along with established systems can and will be changed from time to time. At the same time to me God’s will and word are the foundation of the “faith” and are not meant to be changed to meet the changing mores and social agenda of the politically correct. If you detect a bit of frustration with this, you are correct. I believe the Methodist church, which by the way is not the only denomination involved in this, is debating an issue that belongs in the secular world as I consider the gender question to be of a social type of thing. For lack of a better example give unto Caesar that which is Caesars and unto God that which is his. By faith we as Christians are charged to love everyone and welcome them to the fellowship. The key here is not to pre-judge. We are not bound by earthly laws to accept those things which God has rejected or amend the “faith” to meet the changing mores of the day.

If I am confusing you I am sorry but to me the path is clear enough. Those things that prevent people from living a holy life as God commanded, are not to ever be set aside using inclusiveness, relevance to today’s world and declining membership as reason for such a change in those things that are of the very foundation of the “Faith”. As a layman in the pew I can only go on what years of scripture study, guidance of the ordained elders and the statement of those things which we as Methodists have held to be the beliefs of our faith as taught by John Wesley. Each generation brings with it their own reasoning. Sometimes that reasoning is the product of study and debate about the issues of the day. What I am saying is when scripture says “and God said, or God told….” these are not policy items or doctrine that is open for debate. When I study scripture or prepare a Sunday school lesson I will read several different commentaries by respected scholars and seek a common thread among them to help me understand and share God’s word with the class. I have not burdened you with numerous scripture quotes but seek to keep it simple. As Methodists we are debating a number of issues which will soon come to a vote. The very nature of a debate requires that someone lose, and only one opinion can stand. I firmly believe that these issues are facing us because of societal pressures and those who seek to push the idea that our statements of faith are unfair to a segment of our society. I reject that reasoning. The foundation of our faith is not open to public debate, it is God’s word and can’t be changed to meet the needs of changing morals. I would say to these people what is said before every communion table; The Lords table is ready and all are welcomed to come.

I will welcome you, respect you, love you, pray with and for you and not judge you. I would hope you would understand that I try hard to live a Holy life as God has commanded me, do not ask me to do any less.

I also seek others comments and welcome them. You may reach me at kcarp4211@gmail.com

As the new movie God’s Not Dead Part 2 hits the theaters the usual chorus of discord can be heard from all sides of the religious spectrum as well as that of the unbelievers. People of faith over the last few years have been introduced to a kinder gentler vocabulary which can be misleading. Two words stand out to me in this battle for the very soul of the faith, “Inclusiveness and Tolerance.” I admit I am a layman and while I hold no office or committee posts in the church, I read, study and most importantly listen to those like me sitting in the pews. I have already written about inclusiveness in an earlier blog, as to tolerance, here is my view from the pew.

I’m sure most folks understand reasonably well the meaning of this word. I choose to not quote a lot of scripture, just keep this simple and to the point. Here is Webster’s definition of the word “tolerance”.

• 2a :  sympathy or indulgence for beliefs or practices differing from or conflicting with one’s own

b :  the act of allowing something :  toleration

I consider the very “soul” of the faith to be the word of God given to the prophets of the Old Testament, carried into the New Testament as spoken by his son Jesus Christ and the good news that the Apostles took to the world, which the believers embraced with their hearts, minds and in some instances their lives. Having said this, I believe that God has spoken to his people as to those things which by belief or practice are in conflict with his will. To be even more direct I find no justification for Christian tolerance or sympathy or indulgence for beliefs or practices differing from or conflicting with the word and will of God. Now here is where it becomes hard to be a Christian of the “faith” and defend the faith which has in the past been known to exclude and judge others harshly. Jesus said to love your brother as yourself and in Jesus’ ministry we see him time after time include all people in his mission. Now some would say that this is the very definition of “inclusiveness” and truth is you can’t argue with that. So what is my problem? Tolerance is a different matter altogether. Yes, Jesus did love all people but he did not tolerate those things which marginalized his father’s will for his people and disrespected the sanctity of his house and personage. We only have to look at the temple full of money changers and vendors to see his intolerance to such in his father’s house.

To sum up, our church is divided in many areas of our doctrine of faith. We should love and welcome all to God’s family but never allowing those things which God found unacceptable to be tolerated to the point of inclusion in the “Faith”. One last hard thing for all of us to grasp is that we are called to, whoa…. the word is commanded to love all. Judgement belongs to God.