“If your eye causes you to stumble, tear it out.” Mark 9:47
Years ago, I listened as Professor William Cahoy (now Dean) of St John’s School of Theology in Collegeville referred to this passage during his Christology class, suggesting that true Biblical literalists could be known by their eye patch. Have you seen any? Jesus fed 5,000, it is said. Would you accept 4,999? How far are you willing to contextualize the feeding narrative, yet accepting its authority?
If you are a pastor, are you preaching on the lectionary text from Mark this Sunday? What will you say about these verses?
“Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her; and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.”
“The ELCA rejected 2,000 years of Biblical teaching and interpretation.” So say the opponents of the recent ELCA action approving gay clergy and moving toward marriage equality.
In the nineteenth century, abolitionists battled against the institution of slavery, but their opponents in the church cited Scripture and argued against rejecting nearly 2,000 years of Biblical teaching and interpretation. “Slaves, accept the authority of your masters with all deference, not only those who are kind and gentle but also those who are harsh,” they said, quoting 1st Peter 2:18.
In the second half of the twentieth century, many churches, including the ELCA, began to accept women for ordination. Opponents argued (some Lutheran denominations such as the Missouri Synod (LCMS) persist even today) that female ordination is contrary to 2,000 years of Biblical teaching and interpretation. “I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she is to keep silent,” said the opponents of female clergy, quoting 1st Timothy 2:12.
In many pulpits on Sunday, divorced and remarried clergy will speak to divorced and remarried persons in the pews. Is this not contrary to 2,000 years of Biblical teaching and interpretation?
“Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her; and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.”
This is not an anonymous speaker as in the case of the 1st Peter teaching. This is not merely a Pauline disciple or even Paul himself as in the 1st Timothy teaching. No, these are the words of Jesus, according to Mark, the same Jesus who said nothing about homosexuality but condemned as adulterers those who divorced and remarried.
Are any Lutheran Core or WordAlone pastors who will preach this Sunday divorced and remarried? Adulterers persisting in their sin in the pulpit? If so, how do they justify going against 2,000 years of Biblical teaching and interpretation?
How can Lutheran Core or WordAlone permit such clergy within their ranks? More to the point, how do they justify the ordination of divorced and remarried persons even while denying the same to LGBT persons?
Perhaps we all contextualize, as indeed we should, and none of us are one eyed fundamentalists.
I am going to actually preach on this text this Sunday. I am going to talk about how much we want the words to change, but that the law is condemning and doesn’t pull punches. You can see the seeds in my blog post. http://tinyurl.com/y86pca2
Ultimately though, it isn’t the law that will save us, but Christ who has already saved us.
I forgot to write. Great blog post by the way.
I have to preach on Stewardship (long story), so it will be kind of challenging. I read what Peter Rogness wrote about “we are not the Church-of-the-last-word-on-homosexuality” yesterday. Wanted to write: we are, though, the church of the last word on Sin.
The last word on sin? Jesus.
Pingback:One eyed fundamentalists | The Daily Walk
As I read this text the other day and I got a different meaning altogether. I read it as “Whoever divorces his wife(and has been unfaithful as to begin another relationship) and marries another(the said other women) commits adultery against her; and if she (Has been having an affair) and divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.”
I wonder if this is so.