Become our Friend on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
Font Size: +A -A RESET
2009 Covenant Network Gathering: Achtemeier charts spiritual journey on homosexuality at Covenant Network gathering plenary PDF Print E-mail
Written by Leslie Scanlon OUTLOOK national reporter   
Friday, 06 November 2009 17:54
CLEVELAND – Mark Achtemeier, an evangelical theology professor from Iowa, is in many ways an unlikely candidate for radical change. He’s a white, middle-aged Presbyterian father and husband who grew up in the church, the son of theologically-inclined people. He’s most often seen wearing – of all things – a button-down shirt, coat and tie.

            But Achtemeier, to his own surprise, has made a trek through uncertain land over the last eight years, a journey from life-long certainty that homosexuality is “a kind of destructive addiction” to what he is today: a man who sees the Holy Spirit leading the church to “a new and better place,” and who thinks that gays and lesbians should be able to marry and be ordained.

            In the kick-off plenary of the 2009 Covenant Network of Presbyterians gathering — which has brought about 300 people to Cleveland Nov. 5-7 to consider the theme of change in the church — Achtemeier gave his testimony, telling the story of his journey in the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), from a man who grew up sure that homosexual practice was wrong to one who now sees God working in the committed relationships of his gay and lesbian friends and in the faithfulness of their lives.

            Yet some things have not changed.

“If there is one thing I want to emphasize above all else in this testimony, it is that this journey has not involved any kind of retreat or qualification of my strong commitment to the authority of Scripture, the Lordship of Christ, and the belief that God calls people to lives of personal holiness,” Achtemeier told the Covenant Network. “I come to you today as an out, self-affirming, practicing conservative evangelical.”

            But Achtemeier, who was a member of the PC(USA)’s Theological Task Force on the Peace, Unity, and Purity of the Church — told of a journey both personal and theological, and to him deeply surprising.

            “I cannot get around the fact that it was a God thing,” he said during a question-and-answer period.

            It began in the days immediately following the Sept. 11 terror attacks in 2001, “when everybody in the country was talking to everybody in the country,” Achtemeier said. For him, those days led to new conversations with people, and, as it turned out, some of those people were gay Christians who over time began sharing stories of their lives and their faith.

            “I started out very sure and very settled and very content with seeing exclusion (of gays and lesbians from marriage and ordained office) as God’s will for the church,” Achtemeier said. “Like many, I had succumbed to the temptations of an ecclesiastical tunnel vision: I read authors I agreed with. I talked with people I agreed with. I hung out with people I agreed with. I was exceedingly comfortable holding the position I did, I was supported in it, I was popular. And I had absolutely no reason to question any of it.

            “But God had other plans. Out of the blue, opportunity opened up for serious conversation and friendship with some quite remarkable gay Christians. This was new for me. When you are a firebrand exclusivist, hurling thunderbolts and belching fire against the opposition, gay people with any sense tend to avoid your company, or at least they avoid telling you they are gay.”

So his knowledge of gays and lesbians up until then “was pretty much defined by the authors I agreed with, and flamboyant stereotypes presented in the media.”

His new friends, however, began sharing their faith with him and discussing with him the church’s teachings – “a remarkable gift of grace,” Achtemeier said, considering that “a lot of what they heard from me was unwittingly insulting or offensive.”

And through those conversations, “I started to realize the extent to which the church’s traditional teaching functioned like a sign over the sanctuary,” telling gays and lesbians they would not find anything for themselves there. “And that is not the gospel,” Achtemeier said.

He also found his own expectations and assumptions about homosexuality challenged by the lives of the friends he was getting to know.

First, Achtemeier had always assumed — had always been taught — that homosexuality “was a kind of destructive addiction,” sort of like alcoholism. “And having never questioned my selective and somewhat superficial interpretations of the Bible’s teaching on the subject, I assumed that a gay lifestyle must certainly involve a fairly casual attitude toward Scripture and an inclination toward personal self-indulgence.”

Because he thought this way, Achtemeier said, the arguments of progressives calling for justice and equal rights for gays and lesbians had never made sense to him – basically, they have “absolutely zero traction among traditionalists,” he said.

 “The reason is that no one in their right mind would argue that the cause of justice and equality was served by affirming the right of addicts to pursue their self-destructive behaviors. Human beings do not possess a God-given right to harm themselves.”

In his conversations, however, “what I found instead were devoted Christian believers, filled with grace and a loving concern for the downtrodden that frequently put me to shame. I was surprised to discover that they were deeply engaged in spiritual disciplines, acutely aware of their own sins and failings, and eager to bring these faults to God for healing. These were devout, spiritually self-aware people who were not the least bit hesitant to confess their failings to God.”

But these friends also said that it made no sense to them to view a life-long commitment to a partner as a matter of sin or failing. They spoke of their committed relationships in terms of love and sacrifice and joy — in exactly the kind of terms that Achtemeier would use to describe his own long heterosexual marriage.

Achtemeier was cautious because “as a good, neo-orthodox evangelical, I have on many occasions delivered myself of the standard speech about the terrible dangers that result if we allow personal experience to trump the Bible’s witness. Such a move threatens to set our own personal authority above that of Scripture; it undermines the ability of Scripture to challenge and correct us. I continue to believe that. I hold firmly to the reformation principle that Scripture alone is the highest authority for the church. … So when you start using experience to veto the message of Scripture, I and my evangelical colleagues will simply have to get off the bus.”

But Achtemeier also began to reconsider what the Bible does say about homosexuality and about God’s relationship with people.

He used as an example a sermon that St. Augustine preached in the fifth century, that those who abide in Christ “ought to walk in the same way he walked.” Augustine asked whether that meant that people should try to walk on water, because Jesus walked on water. Augustine’s suggestion is Biblical, but we know — based on our experience – that that doesn’t make sense and doesn’t work, Achtemeier said. So we look for another interpretation that takes the passage seriously but better matches our experience — one interpretation being that Christians should follow the path of righteousness and charity that Jesus followed.

“There is a vast difference between vetoing what the Bible says on the basis of experience, and looking for understandings of the Bible that make powerful sense of our experience.” Achtemeier said.

As a result, “when we find ourselves in a situation where our understanding of the Bible collides regularly with the lived experience of Christian believers, we don’t take that as a license to ignore Scripture. But it certainly ought to make us ask whether we’ve correctly understood the Bible’s teaching.”

Achtemeier also was coming to understand, through his conversations with gay friends and through study of the subject, that when gays and lesbians embraced the abstinence that evangelicals called them to adopt, or even tried to turn towards heterosexual marriage, that path often turned out to be destructive rather than life-giving.

“Once I started paying attention, I began running into more and more instances where devout gay Christians, following the church’s traditional counsel, failed to find the life-giving liberation one would expect if the alcoholism analogy were true. Instead, their heroic efforts at faithfulness led to results that were spiritually and psychologically crippling.”

Some did marry in heterosexual relationships that ended badly, causing great pain to themselves, their spouses and children.

One very devout person “had struggled since high school with same-gender attraction, had for years prayed fervently for healing and strength and help in dealing with this compulsion. After years of courageous prayer and struggle, doing exactly what I and the church would have counseled, the result was a broken person, overwhelmed by despair and anger, ready to renounce the faith and give up on God, seriously contemplating suicide.”

Achtemeier said he did hear accounts — in part in testimony before General Assembly committees — of people who turned from homosexuality to healing heterosexual relationships.

But “nearly all of them involved moving away from situations involving either promiscuity or abuse,” he said. “Not a one of these testimonies told a story of being involved in a loving and healthy same-gender partnership, which the person then decided to leave as an expression of Christian commitment.”

Achtemeier began to consider, based on the account in the second chapter of Genesis of God creating people intending for them to be in intimate relationship with one another, whether same-gender relationships might be a variation of that.

As he put it: “What if same-gender orientation, than being a disease of some sort, is simply (an) alternative form which this gift takes from time to time? I’ve had so many gay friends tell me, `I would not choose all the trouble and controversy that goes with being gay, but I was never asked. Heterosexual marriage just isn’t a possibility that is open to me.’ So isn’t what we’re dealing with here an alternative form of God’s gift of life created for communion with another, with a life-partner?”

And he considered the criticisms of Reformation theologians such as John Calvin of the practice of mandatory celibacy.

“Marriage is given to us, not just in a form that responds to our need, but also in a way that is positively sanctifying and life-giving and permeated by grace,” Achtemeier said. “If, as Calvin insists, it is foolish and rash for individuals to turn their backs on this divine gift and calling, how much more so when an entire church acts to withhold this gift from a whole class of human beings?”

Achtemeier said he knows that many evangelicals “hold their positions compassionately, with the best and most godly intentions.”

But he also contends that “if the Bible’s teaching does not help us make powerful sense of life and experience, if Biblical faithfulness is not life-giving, that is a sure sign we have not understood our Scripture properly.”

As word of his work on the theological task force and his growing open-mindedness on what the Bible teaches on homosexuality began to get around, he also began hearing from other evangelicals having doubts about the church’s teachings as well.

“I am not the only one who has been led by the Spirit to a new and better place,” Achtemeier said. “I believe an expansive catholicity that fully embraces gay and lesbian believers is coming sooner rather than later to the Presbyterian Church. …

“Week in and week out I am encountering a growing company of conservative, evangelical Christians who quietly confess to me that they no longer believe exclusion is faithful. The reality of Jesus’ love for God’s gay and lesbian children is self-evident enough, it is palpable enough, that the ranks of ordinary faithful are embracing it more and more with each passing day.”

 

 

 
Trackback(0)
Your Responses (20)Add Comment
Response from Carolyn R., December 10, 2009
Richmond, VA
in response to Jeffery Winter's comment: "How was your relationship with your same-sex parent?, Did you experience sexual abuse as a child?, What was your home life like?, Were there any traumitizing events in your life?"

Jeffery, as a Presbyterian Lesbian, I thought I would go ahead and answer your questions...

My relationship with my mother and my father are good, as they were when I was growing up.

I did not experience sexual abuse as a child.

My home life was pretty normal and enjoyable-- we ate meals together, read together, gardened together, worshiped together.

The only traumatizing event in my life was when a pastor, after telling me how terrible it was for me to be a lesbian, offered me sperm--disgusting, ridiculous, and totally inappropriate.

Do you ask all heterosexual people these questions as well? I figure you need a control group. I think you also need to expand your horizons and be in conversation with more LGBTQ Christians before coming to the conclusion that people are queer because of some traumatizing issue in their past that they have not dealt with.
Response from Paul J.. Masquelier Jr., November 17, 2009
San Jose, Calif.
I read, with interest, both Leslie Scanlon's article about the speech Professor Mark Achtemeier delivered at the Covenant Network Gathering, and the text of the speech. Since Dr. Jack Rogers changed his views on ordination, Mark has been one of the most respected and thoughtful spokesmen for Presbyterians committed to the exclusion of gay and lesbian persons from leadership positions in both congregations and church governing bodies.
Reading his speech gave me new insight into the thought process that led him to his formerly strong support of the process of exclusion. More than that, the speech gave me insight into the thought process that has led him to a new understanding or how God may, in fact, be calling persons into leadership positions, who the church would have in the past excluded.
For Professor Achtemeier to have made this speech is both a demonstration of the theological integrity of the manner in which he has always carried out his pursuit of theological truth, and an act of extreme courage. I, for one, thank him for daring to seek what Scripture calls us to do in response to this deeply controversial issue. I also thank him for daring to speak what he understands to be the truth, in the full knowledge that doing so will result in his having to endure angry attacks upon the conclusions he has reached, and upon his own personal character. Sadly, many of those attacks will come from persons who supported and applauded his previous work and his conclusions, without question.
Mark Achtemeier deserves our thanks and our prayers.



Response from Marie Finch, November 12, 2009
Norfolk, VA
Kudos to Mark for his courage.
Amen to Tony Awtrey for his comment. If we had put half as much effort into caring for the "least of these" as we have over arguing about homosexuality for the last 30 years, The Church might actually have shown the love of Christ to the world.
Response from C Cole, November 11, 2009
Jacksonville, FL
God, in his unending mercy and grace, is awesome! I love it when I hear and see the light of God shining through my brothers and sisters. Thank you Mark for sharing your struggles. I think our denomination would be so much better served if we all had the courage to ask ourselves the difficult questions, hold those questions up to the Holy Scriptures and then let the light of the Holy Spirit shine through.

The longer I'm on this journey called life, the more convinced I am that I am only called to live and love others with tolerance, grace and mercy. The rest is God's business - not mine.
Response from James Black, November 11, 2009
Jacksonville, Fl
So...it all comes down to this: glasses and asses. Interesting. All the comments reflect scholarship and devotion. This is commendable. It goes to show that the whole process of this conversation reveals that we are always being reformed by the Word of God, I suspect. Still, the old nature/nurture controversy and the whole classical form of interpretation and/or experience issues continue on and on. This is how God chooses to work in history it seems. As such, with so many of us having the Word of God for each of us as "Truth", it is little wonder that there will ever be any sense of Peace, Purity and Unity in the Church. I guess we can best sum it up with trying to continue to love the Lord our God with all our hearts, minds, souls and strength and our neigbor as our selves...as our particular glasses lets us know what this means and how to do it. I suspect God will accept this out of us. At least, I pray so.
Response from Dorothy. Villesvik (Dottie), November 11, 2009
Marysville, WA
Mark, I experienced deep joy when I read about your sharing at the Covenant Network Conference! I konw that this has been a very deep and long journey for you, as it has been for most of us. Thank you for being willing to share! Those of us that are heterosexual also have a struggle when "coming out" to our friends and the church. It took me over a year before I was willing to "come out" when coming to the same conclusion after watching a loved one who struggled for many years over her "gender identity". But I finally came to the conclusion that we have been called to "follow Jesus" who is the Living Word, and the more I look at Jesus, I see love, compassion, inclusiveness, grace and mercy. There are times when I wonder if we haven't made the English translation of the Bible an "idol" because of the way we latch on to certain words or verses that prove why we should believe a certain way or hate someone.

The "litmus test" that I've chosen to adopt in my faith journey has been to follow the voices of love, joy, acceptance, grace and mercy, and to turn away from the voices of judgement, accusations, exclusion, hatred, and yes violence.

As I continue in this journery, I must admit that "For now, we (I) see in a mirror dimly, but then we (I) shall see face to face. Now I know only in part, then I will know fully even as I have been fully known..." (I cor.13:12)
Response from Tom Eggebeen, November 10, 2009
Los Angeles, CA
Amen and Amen!
Response from Nathaniel Grubbs, November 10, 2009
Raleigh, NC
@Response from Jeffrey W. Winter, November 10, 2009

I wasn't going to comment. What can be said seems to have been said. I would like to say that though I applaud your willingness to accept homosexual Christians on limited terms, you seemed to have missed Achtemeier's statements regarding his conversations with homosexuals and former homosexuals. I agree with you (and I think he would too) that some people have been damaged by trauma resulting in unnatural attraction. These people are often helped by curative methods. However, not all homosexuals have experienced such trauma, and those who have not cannot be 'cured': “Once I started paying attention, I began running into more and more instances where devout gay Christians, following the church’s traditional counsel, failed to find the life-giving liberation one would expect if the alcoholism analogy were true. Instead, their heroic efforts at faithfulness led to results that were spiritually and psychologically crippling.” Considering the number of conversations he has had and the number of years having those conversations, praying and studying, I would think he would have found the very thing you are expecting, were it there to be found. Whatever else you may choose to believe, for most homosexuals, their same-sex attraction is not a symptom of some disease or trauma. Perhaps if you had those very conversations you are asking of Achtemeier, you mind find your own stance changing.

I would also applaud Achtemeier's bravery in not only sharing his new perspective, but also for being willing to look into the depths of his own soul, and ask himself the hard questions, even if it meant changing his once firm stance.
Response from Maria Kettleson Anderson, November 10, 2009
Yorba Linda, CA
I have been so grateful for Mark's talk and the articles on him. I identify personally with the struggle to be faithful to scripture and faithful to the the Evangelical community that has nurtured me in living abundantly. Matt's message is one that I have heard consistently, and have had to process thoroughly by now.

I also affirm my loyalty to scripture as God's word to us for today -- but have come to understand the complexity in sorting out our own cultural and ideological biases from what any passage meant to the original readers. I love the efforts among lovers of scripture in so many theological traditions to make accessible to me the TRUTH from scripture that God intends me to read when I study or meditate or read devotionally.

Anyone who desires to fully understand any passage has many resources available to him or her today, and most of us are well-educated enough in how to do that research that we can come to our own conclusions as we converse with others doing the same deliberate application of scripture to our own lives. We can reject ideology, and seek after God's own TRUTH. And scripture itself promises the active guidance of the Holy Spirit in that, and our own Book of Order promises the active support of clergy in this kind of education of laity.

I challenge anyone who is coming from the position that Matt describes to take this on as a research project themselves, and to read the arguments "of the other side" thoroughly enough so that you know how they deal with every issue and every scripture passage that relates to the whole subject -- and then also understand the whole picture of sexuality and integrity and salvation and ministry that you would plug this smaller issue into.

We all claim to be thinking clearly and to position ourselves on this issue out of a full understanding of scripture and of God's intentions in human sexuality. I came to understand that that was a lie for me when I only knew the "conservative side" thoroughly and the "liberal side" as talking points to argue against. As I went about fixing that, I also found myself changed, and felt very isolated.

I am so grateful to Mark and to the Outlook for publicizing Mark's journey. He speaks so clearly that I no longer feel like I cannot speak my own conclusions in Evangelical cirles without whispering.
Response from Liz Dyer, November 10, 2009
Keller, TX
I have had a journey similar to yours - conservative, evangelical Christian who sincerely believed homosexuality was a sin, to questioning that belief, to discovering that the belief (as far as I can tell) doesn't have a firm scriptural foundation and seems to conflict with God's word to believing that it is unjust to deny same sex marriage. Thank you for having the courage and integrity to speak out about this very important subject. I have friends and family that have been and continue to be hurt by the church. I believe there are a lot of Christians who are afraid to speak out concerning their doubts about traditional teaching/beliefs about this issue - I urge them to speak out as their silence encourages the oppression and exclusion that is hurting the LGBT community.
Response from Mary Robinson-Mohr, November 10, 2009
Bellingham Washington
Dr. Achtemaier, I appreciate your soul-searching journey. Thank you for sharing it. I certainly affirm what you have grown to understand. I also started out as a rather conservative Christian, but have been humbled repeatedly by the journey of life that Christ has shown me. I know it is Christ's leading, as He has taken me to places and shown me things that I would not choose, left to my own thoughts and decisions. I have found help with the struggle of Scriptural fidelity and "experience" in John Baillie's "The Idea of Revelation in Recent Thought." Yes, it's "recent" thought comes from 1956, but I find it a helpful discussion. Just how is the Holy Spirit to have any inbreaking into our world if we don't include some form of "experience"? Jesus would think we are pretty dumb if we don't pay attention to the issues that he brings straight to our eyes and ears. I know it took me quite a while to catch on to this, but I have never felt closer to the Living God than when I walk "with the Bible in one hand and the New York Times in the other." Blessings to you!
Response from Dean Strong, November 10, 2009
Everett, WA
I too have gone through a similar journey over the past four years. I am not ready to say that gay marriage is God's intention, but it may be God's redemption.

If a person is born without legs, we don't say that is God's will. We don't blame that person, or the parents, for such an unfortunate disability. We don't tell them that legs are the only form of mobility that a person can use, and that wheelchairs or artificial limbs are a perversion of God's created order. Instead, we do everything we can to help that person become whole, as God intends. We ask for God to redeem a difficult situation. I play tennis with a friend with no legs. He plays in a specially build, lightweight sports chair. He beats me.

What if committed same sex relationships are God's redemption for people who, for whatever reason not of their choice, are unable to enjoy the wholeness that God intended? By simple observation, it appears to me that some of my gay friends live out their committed relationships in a way that provides a much stronger witness to the Gospel than so many Christians I have seen make a travesty of God's gift of marriage.
Response from Franklin Oakley, Jr., November 10, 2009
Boiling Springs, S.C. 29316
Resistance to accepting homosexuals has been caused by words that were written in historical times that was based on the beliefs of mostly Old Testament people. These people knew mostly nothing about the teachings of Jesus.

It is hard to convince people of today that the biblical beliefs of the Old Testament were mostly formed without the leading of the Holy Spirit, because Jesus initiated the Holy Spirit at the end of his human life. Hard core Fundamentalism has been at the base of human misunderstanding for some thousands of years. Scripture is evolutionary in this way. Jesus brought a New Religion that was not accepted during his life (by the Jews, nor has it been fully accepted today because of Fundamentalism.

The Bible is important to study as a historical book, but the power of God comes to us through the Holy Spirit. The Churches have put the Holy Spirit in prison and is almost useless because of Church Doctrines that control the thoughts of individuals.

By claiming that God is a Trinity and saying that Jesus is God, the Church can claim the power to deny entrance to heaven since God gave Peter this authority. This results in a power grab by the Churches to control the Kingdom of God. We should all know that Jesus and God the Father are the only ones to control the Keys to Heaven, the Kingdom of God, and to the knowledge that only comes from God.

The Churches have controlled interpretations of scripture far to long. We should all be in the loop of the Churches in order for the Holy Spirit to work. No one can speak with authority unless they have been "tutored" by the Seminaries and become professional "minister" to guide the ignorant Lay people to heaven. The Holy Spirit will lead us to treat people with compassion and love. The Churches are failing today because the mininster have been politically inclined as a greedy politician.

It is time for the Church leaders to study the New Testament that they claim to follow and leave Jewish history where it belongs in some oblivious place just as the New Testament demands us to do. Jesus said that love and compassion was the answer and this surely has not been activated in the modern Church.
Response from Jeffrey W. Winter, November 10, 2009
Martha's Vineyard MA
I have many relationships with gay and lesbian people. They have shared with me their personal stories of having same sex attraction at a very young age. These men and women have painfully explained to me how they have gone to ex-gay ministries, had counseling and therapy, attended prayer services in order to be free from their same sex attraction. Nothing has "worked" for them. And so, they have embraced their homosexuality as God-given and are living with great freedom in their spirit. As often as I have heard these stories I still don't believe that God created these people homosexual. I feel there are unresolved family of origin and growing up issues that need to be addressed and dealt with. I know too many courageous ex-gay persons that worked very hard at dealing with difficult family and social deficits to believe that in God's design of humankind He created some to be heterosexual and others to be homosexual. I would encourage Mark Achtemeier to ask hard questions of those gay-identified persons who have led him to believe they were actually born a homosexual. Questions such as, "How was your relationship with your same-sex parent?, Did you experience sexual abuse as a child?, What was your home life like?, Were there any traumitizing events in your life? The reasons for someone to affirm a homosexual identity are numerous and complex. Mark Achtemeir needs to step aside from his academics, listen well and ask the hard questions of those who believe they are gay and lesbian. He may move away from his present position of affirming homosexuality.
Response from Rev. Ms. Fairy L.Caroland, November 10, 2009
Memphis, Tennessee
It is always a brave thing to make a stand of love and support, when knowing that it will not be accepted by all. Kudos to Rev. Mark.
Response from Mark Stoddard, November 10, 2009
Pleasanton, TX
In response to Matt Ferguson, November 07, 2009 (regarding Mark Achtemeier’s position)

What they are reading is not God’s Word speaking to them, but simply a distortion of God’s Word, distorted by the lenses they have chosen to put on. You see an example of this when you find such folks either ignoring completely or playing down crystal clear texts on a topic while lifting up texts which now have new meanings being read into them that cannot be supported through any classic method of interpretation.

In the above paragraph many problems arise.
a)Neither I, nor anyone else, but God, is in a position to judge whether something is or is not God’s Word speaking to someone else. I may or may not feel that the position agrees with my faith driven understanding of God’s Word to me, but I cannot say that God cannot speak to anyone in any manner He chooses. Any distortion felt by someone else is their own response, but I cannot claim to know whether or not God chooses to speak to someone else in a way unlike how He speaks to anyone else.
b)Define a “crystal clear text”, please. Have the original autographs been found and translated without distortion from their meaning when set down by their authors originally? Have the words used in the original texts been transmitted without error through the millennia to us today? Are there words that are untranslatable, in modern terms, that we attach meanings to, that further distort original meanings since we can’t translate what we don’t know?
c)Which “classical methods” are we talking about in interpretation? Does being “classic” improve the interpretation? Is Martin Luther’s interpretation of Romans preferred over Barth’s, since it is more “classic”? Is Geldenhuy’s understanding of Luke better than Fitzmyer’s or Calvin’s or Craddock’s or Schweizer’s or Ken Bailey’s? Use of allegory is a “classic” method, so are interpretations using allegory to be held as a gold standard? As with the discernment of God’s Word issue, God has given us the capacity to think and reason and interpret His Word though study, prayer, and listening to His Spirit communicating to us. I may disagree completely over someone’s interpretation of God’s Word, but it is a human interpretation that will be judged by God at the final time. I can choose not to agree with someone’s interpretation, but I am not the final judge. I can learn and add to my own interpretation through reading/hearing other’s, without agreeing completely with their interpretations. And my interpretation is just that, my understanding of God’s Word to me at this time and place. Anyone and maybe everyone can disagree with me, but no one can say that it is not what God has spoken to me at this time.
d)We all have lenses that effect the distortion of our vision and understanding. Sometimes, the addition of additional lenses sharpens what we are trying to see, as with telescopes and microscopes. But they also lose something in the image produced. It is also not proper to use someone else’s lens as your own. Our minds and eyes are specific to ourselves, as God made us. The lenses we use are God given as well, provided to us specific to the need He has for us, specific for us to attempt with His grace to discern His Truth.

I am open to God's movement in my and other's lives. I thank God that I can know His Love, through the gift of His Son for us. I thank God for the possibility to share His Word so others can come to love Him too. And I thank God for the ability to hear His call to me to serve Him in whatever way He wants me to, however He lets me know about it.
Response from Anthony Awtrey, November 09, 2009
Orlando, FL
I don't know why Achtemeier is surprised by sinners being "devoted Christian believers" because, after all, there are no sinless Christians in the world. The very idea that some sinners, even those that claim to be unrepentant, are somehow "worse" than the rest of us seems like a pointless issue to me. I believe God can use anyone He chooses to work His will in the world, even those that orthodoxy might find unacceptable. This hairsplitting is just the 21st century version of medieval arguments about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

I'd rather judge by the fruits of the labor rather than the character of the laborer. I'd rather work together with anyone who professes faith (regardless of their particular sin burden) to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, comfort the needy and to bring Christ to those who have never known Him. God will work all things out for the good, even if we can't manage to put all the bits into neat little orthidoxical boxes. Then, after Christ returns, after all the hunger and want in the world is gone, when we find ourselves sitting around His throne in praise, we can just ask Jesus what He thinks about these issues... instead of raging away about which particular sinners are acceptable to lead our dying churches and our dying denomination.

Tony
Response from Lynn Calhoun, November 07, 2009
Seabrook, TX
Matt,
Be careful of pointing out the blind spots of others. Are you truly suggesting that even our ancestors of orthodoxy were free of lenses through which our historic positions were discerned and subsequently handed down to us? Are you saying that who we are in the community of faith have not been both defined and refined by relationships with godly kin?

Mark, Jack (Rogers), and a growing number of other scholars, pastors and laypersons have come to a different conclusion regarding this issue, a conclusion that runs counter to our long-held convictions. Most are approaching conversations with their evangelical friends with humility and grace. To characterize another’s decade long study as putting on toy glasses of distortion seems to me grace-less and disrespectful. This is the point where we are all called to “walk humbly with our God” and with each other, especially with those with whom we disagree.

I personally am very grateful for Mark and Jack. Their years of both study and service to the PCUSA and the US evangelical community deserve better than you offered in your response, alleging purposeful distortion.

Respectfully,
LC
Response from Dave Moody, November 07, 2009
...
Amen. Especially Matt's last paragraph. May God grant us the grace love people as like Jesus loves people (us)- a love full both grace and truth. No dissembling, no condemning- but a grace and truth that free's people from the tyranny sin.
Response from Matt Ferguson, November 07, 2009
Hillsboro, IL
Achtemeier's blind spot

Mark Achtemeier claims in his pronouncement at the Covenant Network, “Does that mean we’re elevating our experience above the authority of Scripture? Of course it doesn’t.” This comment reveals the large size of his blind spot in this area.

When seeking to understand God’s word to us (interpreting the Bible) one must become aware of the “lenses” through which we are reading. Any beginning class covering Biblical interpretation will teach you the reason you are to become aware of your “lenses” is so you can work to overcome the distortion your lenses can cause in your reading / understand of the Bible.

The core problem with Liberation Theology, which has led to its widespread rejection by any faithful exegete (including the banning of its use within the Roman Catholic faith) is how Liberation Theology teaches you to put on additional “lenses” when reading the Bible. When you put on these additional lenses it makes certain texts standout and diminishes the prominence of other texts. This leads you to coming up with some distorted readings of Biblical texts. Remember, these additional lenses are being put on over the lenses through which you are already reading the Bible.

Choosing these additional lenses is allowing the reader to find ways to distort the Bible, making it a moldable into the shape the reader wants. Think of those disposable glasses with clear cellophane colored lenses from your childhood. Remember how when you put on those toy glasses, the colored lenses would make some letters in a word puzzle stand out so you could now read the secret message within the word puzzle which had been hidden until you looked through those lenses.

Achtemeier, in his coming out announcement, is simply another example of someone who claims to be orthodox evangelical in faith who has come to put on the additional lenses of personal relationships with gay friends. Instead of seeking to understand how such a new lens will distort ones reading of the Bible unless you acknowledge it and work at not allowing it to happen, those like Achtemeier, and Jack Rogers before him, embrace the new lenses the new insights and understandings that come about by reading those them.

What they are reading is not God’s Word speaking to them, but simply a distortion of God’s Word, distorted by the lenses they have chosen to put on. You see an example of this when you find such folks either ignoring completely or playing down crystal clear texts on a topic while lifting up texts which now have new meanings being read into them that cannot be supported through any classic method of interpretation.

As faithful Jesus followers we need to be in loving relationships with all people, including gays and lesbians. But we must be careful not to allow the lens of a loving relationship with others to color and distort God’s Word, for God’s message contained in the Bible is the most loving message we can share with anyone and we must share it fully, honestly, and with as little distortion as we can muster. And this is best done by understanding what lenses we bring to any text and seeking to overcome how our lenses may lead us to distort God’s word. And we must faithfully stand against those who do just the opposite, who seek purposefully distort God’s message by putting on additional lenses that only serve to hinder and distort God’s truth.

Write a Response
smaller | bigger
NOTE: Your response to an article will be reviewed by staff before it is made available to the public for reading. The delay may be a few minutes or it may be as long as 24 hours.

busy