“If We Don’t Talk About It Maybe It Will Go Away” (we say in denial)
Of the hundreds of people who have read the posts in this series very few have commented directly. The most vocal comment has been “this is an open and shut case, there is no point in discussing it. Why are you bringing this up?” The subtext of that is “bringing this up and talking about it may lead to a change in norms (I spy an implicit progress/regress narrative beneath this fear, but more on that later) so let’s keep the lid shut tight.”
The CRC Synod in recent years has received repeated requests for more “study” (code word for CRC talk and possible/hoped for/feared change). Each time Synod agrees that we need to talk but doesn’t want to talk too much lest norms slip (I spy that progress/regress narrative again!). See the CRC Position page on Homosexuality
“You Religious Neanderthals, Evolve or Face Elimination!”
On my Facebook feed I posted an article from the Atlantic about how the Mennonite community is struggling with this issue. One of my friends commented “Good grief, as we STILL talking about this? Most of us got over it decades ago. Grow up, everybody. It’s not about the gay people. It’s about the rest of you that insist on fussing over gay people.”
Religious conservatives are like Putin, on the wrong side of history. “Change or be excluded from the conversation!”
Turtles In the Middle
So here’s the dynamic. My friends on the right say “shut up, we’re not changing this norm!”
My friends on the left say “Sheesh, the norm has changed, will you give it up already?”
Many in the middle turtle up. Pastors shut up about this, keep their cards close to the vest because they know that whatever they say or do they will get shot at from one side or the other. This is how polarization happens. The safest thing is to become a culture warrior so then at least you only have to get shot at from one direction. Then at least you can find a clear, supportive community and immerse yourself in living a clear-cut “us vs. them” life.
I’m not ready to settle for this. Capitulating to social pressure in either direction is a recipe for self-righteousness which is, in my opinion, more dangerous than the emotional comfort of embracing either side. On this famous non-affirming, PCA complementarian Tim Keller and an anonymous liberal blogger can agree.
Longing for a New Community Not Broken By Death
My friends on the right and the left may come to me with an implicit threat. “If you don’t side with me on this I will call you names, liberal, bigot, compromiser, worldly, hater, homophobe, etc.”
I can’t stop people from labeling me, speaking ill of me or deciding to break bonds with me. I can, however, decide how I will treat them. I believe my Jesus asks me to love neighbors and enemies and it’s sometimes hard to figure out how to do that well.
I am not going to choose which tribe of culture warriors I’m going to love. I want to love them both. I love my friends on the right and my friends on the left. I also long to see all my friends, right, left and otherwise participate in a community that I believe will transcend this present age and death itself. I believe the Lord of that coming existence feels how I do about my friends. I may be wrong. This may be a deluded projection of my own wishes, as some of my other friends tell me, but I don’t care.
Third Way or No, I’m going to Talk About It and Hang with the Turtles
I don’t know that there’s a third way on this issue. I’ve seen some noble attempts at finding it (Generous Spaciousness) but I’m not convinced. Neither have I yet been convinced by the “affirming” faction in my CRC tribe. (More on why later). I noticed that the City Church SF didn’t use the “A” word in their letter. I predict they will be hounded by both sides to come out as either affirming or non-affirming, or join the explorers looking for the elusive “third way” which few seem to really buy.
I will also NOT give up on loving my friends and neighbors on both sides of these lines. I will resist polarizing this subject (real life is less binary than politics) and I will refuse to give up, for my part, on trying to keep bonds and ties with people on both sides of the debate. How this shakes out in terms of bounded-set institutions going into the future none of us know.
I will stand with the pastoral turtles in the middle and encourage them to let us know what they think and participate in this conversation. We will try to learn to speak with generosity, respect, courtesy and kindness to both sides and we will do what we can to try to keep the body of Christ from fracturing further.
I will also try to keep writing about these things. Writing helps me process. Will my own ideas “evolve” and which way? Who can say? People famously change directions in life for lots of reasons.
What this means in this case with City Church San Francisco is that I’m not going to tweet “farewell” to them nor will I tweet “welcome”.
I can enjoy the turtle comfort of knowing that since they’re RCA I won’t have to vote about them in any upcoming CRC assembly. I have the discomfort of knowing that since I’m a chatty blogger I will get pegged as something or another, the plight that turtling tries to avoid. I do wish, however, that our community processes these issues. We need to talk, to listen, to pray, to work. In case you haven’t noticed this has been the theme of this series and others. I do not wish to see of die of neglect and apathy. We must teach the turtles to talk.
