My family has been involved with the RHCC for generations. My sister and I were "baptized" there. My great-grandparents, grandfather, and other loved ones' funerals have been there. An aunt and uncle as well as my grandmother are current members. So I periodically check the website to see what is going on there. Recently I read on rhccucc.org about their "Open and Affirming Committee." I wrote a letter to the committee and was going to email it to all the committee members (whose email addresses were available on the website) but I didn't want to intrude where I was not welcome. Instead I am posting my reaction here and inviting the committee to check it out.
Today I am writing concerning this ONA business that I read about on your website. Let me call your attention to some of the points made on your FAQ’s page. Question 6 reveals an admirable attitude to welcome and value all people. Your desire to be affirming, however, is misguided. It is similar to the derailment of the virtue of toleration today. People should be tolerant of all other people, Christians even more so. Christians are called even to love their enemies, let alone to tolerate others. Should we, however tolerate all ideas? Lifestyles? Of course not! Some ideas are wrong, some are stupid. Some lifestyles are wrong, some are immoral. A denial of this is a denial of common sense. Is it a good idea to run with scissors? Do we permit our children to do so? No. We enact rules as parents against such behavior for their protection. A Christian community, with the revealed will of God--the Bible, has the duty to warn people of moral pitfalls that will destroy their quality of life and jeopardize their eternal souls. We have the duty to persuade them of the truth and to point them in the direction of a satisfying and God-honoring life. We tolerate all people regardless of their beliefs, but we must do so without tolerating ideas that are harmful to people and society. And so it is with the issue of affirming people. We can affirm their worth and value without affirming their immorality.
Now we must decide whether or not homosexuality is immoral. You say in question 7 that “the Bible has both clear and contradictory teachings on this issue, as it does on many issues of human faithfulness.” While I am committed to tolerating the people, even loving the people who would say such things, I cannot and will not affirm such a preposterous statement which has such profoundly disastrous implications for the eternal destiny of people’s souls. I will plead with you like a doctor trying to persuade a sick patient to take the medication that will save their life. If the Bible is “contradictory” on “many issues” why believe in the Christ it reveals, why use this book alone in our worship, or faith and practice? How do you decide between what the Bible says and what competing authorities say? To come up with such a hermeneutic someone has clearly not appreciated the Bible for what it is, what it claims to be for itself! “All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.” (2 Timothy 3:16-17). Peter says, “. . . just as also our brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you, as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction.” (2 Peter 3:15-16). Jesus Himself said, “Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass away from the Law until all is accomplished.” (Matthew 5:17-18).
So what does the Bible say about homosexuality? “You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination.” (Leviticus 18:22). “. . . and in the same way also men abandoned the natural function of the women and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.” (Romans 1:27). “Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God.” (1 Corinthians 6:9-11). 1Timothy 1:9-10 says that homosexuality “is contrary to sound teaching.” What is unclear about this?
It is not your ONA policy that motivated this letter as much as what the policy says about the way you handle the Scriptures. The reason how you handle the Scriptures concerns me enough to prompt the letter is that your hermeneutic will determine how you understand the Gospel. Paul said in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4, “Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand, by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain. For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures.” The message is important because it provides you with the content of your faith, Jesus Christ crucified and risen from the dead. Jesus Christ died on the cross to pay the penalty for the sins of those who would believe in Him. You have to trust that He died for you and that by so doing He paid the penalty that was due to you for all the sin, all the wrong that you have done. Through faith in Him you are declared righteous and God welcomes you into His family and will accept you into heaven when you die. If you don’t believe in Him, then you will go to hell when you die. “He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.” (John 3:18). “Jesus said to him, ‘I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.’” (John 14:6). There is no other way to heaven than to believe in Jesus Christ, to trust in His death as the payment for your sin. If you believe that Jesus is one way to heaven and not the only way to heaven, then you do not believe in the Jesus of the Bible. When my two year old daughter wants to stick something in a power outlet she might find my reaction harsh, but I scold her for her good, because I love her. Please accept my words with the love intended.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)

10 comments:
So far all the comments I have received have come to my email. I would prefer to have them posted. What I am going to do is cut and paste some of them here, but I will delete or change the name of people to protect their privacy. The comments I am refering to come from members of the ONA committee to which the post was directed. That is all I'll say.
rthissell,
You really want honest feedback? Three words. "Stop the Hate."
Mr. X
Hello Mr. X,
Well, I did say honest. I am trying to speak the truth in love here. I do not hate anyone. If I hate, it is sin that I hate, misinterpreting the Bible I hate. Not just when others do it, but especially when I do it. Could you explain your comment? Can you show me anything that I have written that justifies your "feedback"? Seriously, I would like to try to create some understanding here. It doesn't seem like that has happened at all. Could you please interact with the texts I referenced. Can you give me some arguments from the Bible to support your position?
Go ahead and disagree with me, but please realize that my conclussions are drawn for the texts of Scripture by which I am bound. I mean no disrespect to anyone. I hope to give no offense, but if it is the word of God that offends, then I can do nothing but remain faithful to it.
rthissell
rthissell,
Again, in all honesty, I simply am not inclined to try and debate the subject. I would not deny you the right to hold your opinion, but my stance is such the polar opposite, and so immutable, that I see no sense to us butting heads over it. While I do not hold any personal enmity towards you specifically, I find the general position you espouse opprobrious. I know that there are many others who share your position, and many such websites, and I do not make a habit of adding my $.02 to every one I can find because it would be an exercise in frustration and I think it would only add fuel to the fire of this burning issue. I only wrote to you because I did receive your email asking for feedback. Best wishes in your endeavors.
PS. The opinions expressed here are solely my own, and in no way are intended to represent the views of any others on the committee or elsewhere.
Respectfully,
Mr X
Opprobious? Impressive! :>)
Thank you, Mr. X, for handling this with such smart gentleness (and so eloquently.)
Mrs. Y
Hello Mrs. Y,
I'm not sure you intended me to receive you last email, but having received it, please hear my reply. It is actually spelled "opprobrious." It means "outrageously disgraceful or shameful." I find it curious that Mr. X would describe my position with language so similar to that used by Scripture of the kind of activity that you are seeking to affirm. I suppose I have to agree with your assessment that Mr. X was gentle, given the things others would have said, but I did not find it very fair or cordial. Whether it was "smart gentleness" is another matter. Can anyone answer me with an argument from the Bible? Can we hear the two arguments and weigh them in the balance of reason to determine which better fits the Scriptural data?
Mr. X saw no reason to debate. He called his position "immutable." Are we so stuck on our own presuppositions that not even the Bible can inform, correct, or change our beliefs? Is no one open minded enough to hear another argument and subject their own to the scrutiny of others? When deciding a matter, should we not seek to know all that the Scriptures say on a matter? This certainly doesn't seem to be what God has called us to in His Word. Think of the Bereans (Acts 17:11) or Paul's charge in 2 Timothy 2:15.
If I cannot come the the RHCC or this committee of it to hear what is taught in the Bible, one has to wonder why you would claim to be a Christian Church. Supposing that you are right in your position, do you not have any wisdom to share with a Christian endeavoring to know the Bible and live faithfully to it? Can you not point someone to the truth, or do you resign to leave them in ignorance, no better for having reached out to you?
rthissell
rthissell
If you are looking for an argument –especially an argument that uses the Bible as a weapon or an excuse to hate- you have come to the wrong place. Our Christian church, using the model of Christ, seeks to understand and love all of God’s people, not fear or judge them. Interestingly, no where in scripture does Christ even mention homosexuality.
Fundamentalist Christians having been using the Bible for centuries to perpetuate prejudice, apartheid, slavery, the second class citizenship of women, and now, to instill fear toward homosexuality.
Sorry, rthissell, it’s an old trick –one in which I do not choose to participate.
Mrs. Y
Mrs. Y,
I am not looking for an argument. I don't know how I could be more clear that I am looking to discuss this issue with other professing believers in Christ. I do not fit your thinly veiled accusations of one who uses the Bible as an excuse to hate. I would prefer to refer to the Bible as my guide, maybe even a tool, but if you prefer to describe it as a weapon, that is Biblical, "the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God" (Ephesians 6:17). I would not, however, use this weapon to cut down my fellow man, but to combat error and the devil as we are instructed to in Scripture.
You are right that the Bible instructs us to love all God's people, but it goes even farther than that. We are instructed even to love our enemies. We are instructed not to be judgmental, but you must balance this with being wise, as wise as serpents, the Scripture says. I think I should post my sermon on Matthew 7:1 on the blog.
Once again the way you handle your Bible is telling. You mention that you don't find the word homosexual on the lips of Jesus in the Bible, but what do you do with the Scriptures that do mention homosexuality? They may not have been quoted as words Jesus spoke during his earthly ministry, but are they not, as part of the Bible, equally the word of God? What about 2 Timothy 3:16?
Now you turn your attention to Christian history. Do you know who the fundamentalists are? Their beginning is not as far distant as you make it sound. In the 1800's they were off to a good start, however they did begin to go astray when in what we might call the second generation they began advocating a separation that went too far. Anyway I would not wear the label of fundamentalist. If you need a label for me try Reformed, or Calvinist. It is interesting that the RHCC welcome page on the web claims ties to the Reformation. In your faith I see little if any.
But back to Christian history. It is in fact those whom you malign that deserve the credit for righting the wrongs of "prejudice, apartheid, slavery, the second class citizenship of women." I share the faith of the Christians who did these things. I even share family ties with them (Ezra Stiles, a great-grandfather of mine who was outspoken against slavery along with Samuel Hopkins).
It would seem that you are unfamiliar with the Savoy Declaration of the Faith. This is the historic statement of faith for congregationalists, of which I am one. I would disagree with it on the issue of baptism and perhaps on some of its eschatological leanings, but I must agree with 95% of it. What do you have to say about this classic statement of congregational faith? I beg you to become familiar to it.
So far the only trick I see going on here is a group claiming to be a "Christian church" without holding to, or even being interested in what the Bible, our only reliable guide for faith and practice, has to say.
Please, if you are right, and you have any measure of the compassion of Christ, show me the error of my ways. I'm still waiting for someone to use the Bible for what it was intended for, "for teaching, for reproof, for correction" (2 Timothy 3:16). Again I commend to you the example of the Bereans who were, "examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so" (Acts 17:11).
rthissell
Well, as so often is the case I wish I showed more tact and spared the edge to some of my comments. When I feel that I have taken a jab it is hard, those necessary, to not respond in kind. I do think, however, that the objective reader will conclude from the exchange above that I have been pretty fair and done resonably well. Those who disagree have not been able to give a reason for it, nor have they presented any argument from Scripture to support their position. I'll keep you updated.
Well, I said I would not use names, and so I will not, but I would love to now. The chairman of the committee has sent me a very kind and well worded response. She was very gracious in her dealings with me, for which I am thankful. This is what she said:
"I am the chair of the ONA committee at Rocky Hill Congregational Church.. I have read the e-mails that have been sent over the last few days, and am offering my perspective.
First, I'd like to clarify the task that has been assigned to our committee. We have not been asked to convince our church that we should adopt an ONA statement. Our task is strictly educational. We have been charged to bring information to the congregation about ONA. We will not be making either a decision or even a recommendation. In the UCC/Congregational tradition, church members will be making this decision. Our committee membership was carefully formed to include all perspectives on this issue, including the large contingent of "undecided". We take seriously our charge to bring enough information to church members so that they can make an informed decision. We certainly agree that Biblical perspectives are an important part of this study, and we have thus planned 2 programs on this during April.
As Mr X. told you in one of his responses, the e-mails you have received have been the personal opinions of committee members, not that of the committee. We hope you will continue to track our progress toward an ultimate decision via our website."
Before I say more I'll have to wait and see what the outcome of the upcoming studies will be.
Post a Comment