By Rev. Peter L. DeGroote
Three reports tumbled my way last week.
First, Leland Spencer’s June 24th post on this blog alliteratively described the “Perplexing Paradox of Pride Protest Placards” in Cleveland. I didn’t see any placards in Washington, probably because I wasn’t in the parade. This was the first year I did not walk with a group. Instead, I watched with Ralph and Michael as it passed Dupont Circle. Walking and watching are very different experiences.
But we did have a protester. We were facing outward toward the street, backs to the circle. Behind us a lone voice with a megaphone rehearsed the usual ritual of condemnation and sinfulness. The noise of parade and crowd largely drowned him out. About half-way through he gave up.
Leland had thought about talking with the holders of those hateful placards but didn’t. He shared with us what he would have said but he also knew they wouldn’t listen. I had a similar, fleeting thought about our shouting protester but also knew that there is little chance of communicating with a megaphone.
The second report was on the Religious Beliefs & Practices of the American people from the Pew Foundation. They found that most of us have a “non-dogmatic approach to faith.” Among those affiliated with a religion, most do not believe theirs to be the only spiritual way and they believe their own religious teachings can be interpreted in different ways. Significant variations of opinion are found within different religious, age, and ethnic groups, but the willingness of most to accept variations in matters of religious belief and practice was encouraging.
Neither Leland’s placard protesters nor our lonely shouter are among that majority. Pew did find a sizable number in all faith traditions with rigid ideological stands that also translate into conservative political views. That was illustrated by the third report of the week.
Tom called to tell me about a TV interview in which some religious leaders expressed alarm with Pew’s findings. In particular, they were dismayed by the willingness of some Christians to acknowledge that other faith traditions offered other ways to salvation, heaven, etc. They concluded that the churches are failing. My reaction: That kind of failure needs to be encouraged.
It is a sign of spiritual health when church members are open to understanding the beliefs and experience of others. Unfortunately, there is often a difference between being a follower of Jesus and a Christian. Followers of Jesus have an agenda, but they also have a community of open discussion. When the discussion becomes closed the shortcomings of the church begin to emerge.
The agenda for Jesus’ followers is the rule of love: Love God, love others. The two are inseparable. John Wesley was right to ask people not to tell him of their love for God if he couldn’t see it in the way they treated others. The rule of love is the energy source for Jesus teachings, it is the energy source that brings about reconciliation.
Much can be said about the definition of love but it is safe to say that those condemning by placards and megaphone are not practicing the kind of love that Jesus taught. The condemnation of others is not an attempt to live in harmony with God and others but a demand that God and others live in harmony with them. The result is a rule of church unity that overshadows the rule of love.
The uniformity so often demanded by the church arose early. The New Testament reveals many points of view, often energetically expressed. But a demand for conformity emerged as Christianity became a religion of Empire. The community that taught an alternative way of living in the world of Roman imperial power became a partner in the exercise of that power—even to the extent of imprisoning, torturing, and killing those who disagreed.
One can understand why monasteries began during this time—those who sought to follow Jesus could not do so in that environment. We are beyond that, but the church remains stuck in some of those ways. Likewise, some always want to return. We criticize those Muslims who would impose a rigid religious rule on their societies but often overlook the danger from those among us who would do the same. Some complain that immigrants bring new ideas and practices into our culture but are little concerned with the same complaints from other peoples resentful of the imposition of our ways on them. And, like Rome, we do have the power to do that.
When trying to apply the rule of love, most have discovered that awareness of God’s Presence is involved in any human encounter we have. The other person might not be aware of it, or might even reject the idea. But that is not our immediate problem. Our problem is maintaining our awareness of God and, when dealing with another person, we can only do that by seeing that person as a creation of God worthy of the same honor and respect that God has for all of God’s creation, including us. Human differences and disagreements do not alter God’s embrace of all humanity.
How do we maintain awareness of God’s Presence when others are condemning us? That conundrum is unraveled by discovering the mystery of what happens to us when we follow Jesus’ teachings—and sometimes what happens to others when we do so. Leland and I both decided to enjoy, contribute to, and draw strength from the celebration of the community—the community those others were condemning. It seemed the right thing to do.
In doing so, I realized a mystery. We no longer call it a gay pride march, now it is a gay pride parade, a community celebration that included all sorts of glbt groups, political leaders, corporations, main-line churches, and others. I am glad. When it was a march it sometimes seemed like so much work that just had to be done, a lonely, defiant work surrounded by many more placards and megaphones. But as a parade I felt permission to watch, to celebrate, to realize what has happened to all of us. And it seems to be affecting others as well.
Reconciling Ministries Network mobilizes United Methodists of all sexual orientations and gender identities to transform our Church and world into the full expression of Christ’s inclusive love.
