How Should a Church Decide Whether to “Welcome and Affirm?”

Last updated on: June 23, 2014 at 9:27 am by Roger E. Olson

How Should a Church Decide Whether to “Welcome and Affirm?” 2014-06-23T09:27:48-05:00 Roger E. Olson

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

In my immediately preceding post I asked whether men and women tend to approach the controversy over whether to welcome and affirm practicing gays into churches as full members and leaders differently and, if so, why. Here I will offer some thoughts about how a church (or denomination or Christian organization) that is not already “welcoming and affirming” should go about making that decision.

Often these matters are complicated by failure to make the issues clear. First, a church ought to be clear about what it is deciding. Many churches have no problem permitting practicing gay people, that is same-sex couples who are engaging in genital sexual intercourse or simulations of intercourse (let’s be blunt in order to make the issue clear) and who do not consider that sin, to attend and worship. The main controversy taking place in most churches that are facing it is whether that practice is, indeed, sin, and, if so, whether such people should be admitted to full membership with all the rights and privileges that entails including becoming candidates for church offices.

Second, for most churches that do consider such sexual activity sin, the issue is not whether homosexual sex (as described above) is a “special sin” but whether the persons engaging in it regard it as sin at all or whether they are determined to continue practicing it and defend it as not sin. In other words, most reasonable people in such churches would agree that gluttony, for example, is also sin but draw the line with people who are proud of practicing gluttony and defend it and refuse to recognize it as sin (and therefore seek to overcome it with God’s help and the help of the congregation). Very few churches are “welcoming and affirming of gluttony.”

Third, churches facing this controversy and decision ought first to discuss among themselves, and come to agreement, insofar as possible, what kind of decision this is and how it should be made. Is it a theological decision? If so (and I would argue it should be), what sources and norms should be appealed to? What weight do they carry?

So, just to be clear, the first decision is whether same-sex genital sexual activity is sin. The second decision, if it is sin, is whether people practicing it without considering it sin and repenting of it and seeking help to overcome it should be admitted to full membership and possible leadership. (Presumably if a church decides it is not sin, the decision about membership is thereby made.) The third decision is what kind of decisions these are and, if they are considered theological, how to go about making them.

As an evangelical Christian, I consider Scripture the supreme norm for all theological decisions. I also consider tradition a norm, but not equal with Scripture. In such matters tradition gets a vote but not a veto. Scripture gets a veto. But, of course, as we know, Scripture must be interpreted. I also consider reason and experience theological norms, but not with the same authority as Scripture. They are tools for interpreting Scripture and tradition.

It seems to me best in all theological decision-making to attempt to set aside personal bias, preferences, as much as possible and seek to interpret Scripture as objectively as possible—acknowledging all the while that this is never entirely possible and that the Holy Spirit speaking to a congregation ought to be a guide—when Scripture is not clear. (Presumably the Holy Spirit would not contradict Scripture.)

That means that both men and women ought to strive to set aside emotion, feelings, prejudices and personal preferences, and seek the “mind of Christ” on the matter through careful biblical exegesis and prayerful listening to the Holy Spirit’s guidance.

That means that men and women ought to set aside, as much as possible and with God’s help, any homophobia that may hinder an objective examination of Scripture and hearing the voice of God. That means that women and men ought to set aside, as much as possible, feelings of compassion and desire for inclusion that may hinder an objective examination of Scripture and hearing the voice of God.

Part of this process, if it comes to the point where a congregation must decide, ought to be careful listening to both sides of the debate by hearing from thoughtful, reflective, devoutly Christian proponents of both inclusion and exclusion of practicing gay people with regard to membership. The church’s leadership should make sure that the best spokespersons for both sides are heard and that the strongest possible cases are made for the entire congregation to hear and consider. As Karl Barth rightly said, “He who knows only his own side of an argument knows little of that.”

Only after everyone is satisfied that the strongest cases for both sides have been heard should a decision be made by a vote of the ruling body of the congregation or denomination. The decision should not be made on the basis of sentiment or prejudice but on the basis of evidence from Scripture, tradition, reason and experience. Where Scripture is unclear, Christian tradition gets a vote. But reason and experience also come into play (in any theological decision) insofar as Scripture is truly unclear.

Now, if you disagree with this proposed method of deciding whether practicing gays should be welcomed and affirmed as full members with leadership privileges, please do not just say so—explain your proposed alternative. And do NOT just say (or suggest) that churches ought not to agonize over the decision but just “be” welcoming and affirming of everyone because that’s not going to happen. No church is welcoming and affirming of everyone without limitations or qualifications. If one is, it eventually won’t be when confronted with some applicant for membership. Please stick to what I am talking about here—how should a church that is not already “welcoming and affirming” of practicing gays go about deciding whether or not to become that when such a decision is to be made?

Uncategorized

Previous Post

June 20, 2014

Are Women More Inclined toward Inclusiveness than Men?

Next Post

June 26, 2014 How American Evangelical Christianity Has Changed...

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Against Liberal Theology Uncategorized

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

In Revelation, what is the correct sequence of events in the End Times?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Dragon cast to earth, beast rises from sea, false prophet rises from earth, mark of the beast given False prophet rises, dragon cast to earth, beast rises from sea, mark of the beast given Mark of the beast given, dragon cast to earth, beast rises, false prophet rises Beast rises from sea, dragon cast to earth, mark of the beast given, false prophet rises