Today’s Scripture Reading (November
9, 2015): Deuteronomy 23
Tony Campolo
has become a bit of a polarizing figure in recent days, at least with some of
the people that I am acquainted with. The problem is his endorsement of gay
marriage and the inclusion of Christian gay couples within the church. Tony
writes this on his decision with regard to same-sex issues within the church.
As a social scientist, I have concluded that
sexual orientation is almost never a choice and I have seen how damaging it can
be to try to “cure” someone from being gay. As a Christian, my responsibility
is not to condemn or reject gay people, but rather to love and embrace them,
and to endeavor to draw them into the fellowship of the Church. When we sing
the old invitation hymn, “Just As I Am”, I want us to mean it, and I want my
gay and lesbian brothers and sisters to know it is true for them too.
Tony Campolo: For the Record, June 8, 2015
Christianity
seems to have become a religion of exclusion. In most denominations there is at
least some statement about who it is that is not invited into fellowship with
us. After all, the line has to be drawn somewhere – we can’t just let anyone
come in. In most modern fellowships that line is often drawn in terms of sexual
orientation, but there have been other places to draw the line throughout the
history of the church. Racial issues, places of residence, the faith beliefs of
the king and obedience to the will of the pope or church leadership have all
been used as ways of including people – or excluding them.
In the
modern church, the practice of exclusion probably just reaches back to the rule
of Christendom. In Christendom, everyone was a Christian – at least by name. So
we had to find some ways of discerning who the real Christians were and who the
pretenders were. Church attendance became an issue, but there was also the
elevation of orthodoxy or right belief over orthopraxy or right practice.
Practitioners began to be asked to sign contracts specifying that they believed
certain things or else they could not be included. There is an endless number
of things that I am asked to sign indicating that I believe in certain ways
about certain issues. If I can somehow get away with not signing, that is
usually my choice, because I think that the church needs to be more inclusive
then exclusive in its nature. Campolo’s words strike close to my heart – When we
sing “Just as I Am” I want all my friend’s to understand that the invitation
applies to all of us – equally.
For a model
of exclusion, we usually have to point at the Hebrew Bible. There is some
support for exclusion in the Christian Testament, but exclusion seems to be
clearer within the Mosaic Law. But it is also somewhat confusing. This might be
an example of that. Ammonites and Moabites were to be excluded forever from the
assembly of the Lord. The instruction seems quite clear. But biblical history
also provides us with a problem with this command. And the problem is found in
the book of Ruth. Naomi by Hebrew tradition was an Ammonite. Ruth by the text
of the biblical book which bears her name was a Moabite. Both should have been
excluded along with their descendants from the Assembly of the Lord. But the genealogy
at the end of the Book of Ruth provides us with an interesting problem. Ruth
was the great-grandmother of King David. David had Moabite blood and yet it
would be hard to imagine someone who could be more included within the Assembly
of the Lord than David. And David’s son would build the Temple in Jerusalem. Adding
to this is the idea that, according to the end of the book of Ruth, the line of
Obed, Jesse and David did not just possess Moabite blood, but was also
symbolically given to Naomi, the Ammonite.
So we have
to adjust this law just a bit. Apparently it was okay for Hebrew men to marry
Moabite women, but not the other way around. The reason might be a military
one. If too many Moabite’s became part of Israel, especially with the tribes
that had chosen to live on the other side of the Jordan River close to the
nation of Moab, then they might have been able to overthrow Israel and take the
nation in a different direction, essentially making it a pawn of Moab. But the
theory is a bit of a stretch because the Bible is also clear about the
influence that the ones that we marry can have on us – even when it is the
woman exercising the influence.
It might be
better to see this as an unprecedented act of grace, proving that the grace of
God has the power to trump the Law. Of course, it is this same genealogic line
from which Jesus emerged. He was a son of David – and therefore of Ruth and
Naomi. And all of this matches with one of the closing thoughts in the Book of
Revelation - The Spirit
and the bride say, “Come!” And let the one who hears say, “Come!” Let the one
who is thirsty come; and let the one who wishes take the free gift of the water
of life (Revelation 22:17.) This is inclusion and all are welcome –
just as we are.
Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading:
Deuteronomy 24
No comments:
Post a Comment