Church split rings of dubious reasoning

Timothy Titus

Four years ago, I attended a service at the Episcopal Cathedral of

St. John the Divine in New York City. I was impressed with the

welcoming feel of this huge gothic cathedral. I walked past memorials

to the victims of the holocaust and the world AIDS epidemic.

The service was extraordinarily quick. During his homily, the

priest explained that this was because he and his flock needed to

make it to the city’s annual AIDS walk in time to participate.

Afterward, the same priest, dressed in sweats and sneakers, found me

and invited me to join the congregation in the AIDS walk. While I

could not go, I was amazed at the warmth and inclusiveness I had

discovered on the border of Harlem.

Some would say that this experience is the problem with the

Episcopal church, that rushing through the service is indicative that

the church has lost its attachment to scripture and orthodoxy,

especially since the service was rushed on behalf of a population

that is largely gay and lesbian. This is likely the feeling of those

at St. James Episcopal Church in Newport Beach, who recently

announced their secession from the Episcopal Church of the United

States, citing differences of opinion about “biblical orthodoxy.”

To me, however, this was a church performing the most important of

its mandates: to love and take care of others and to spread its love

to the outside world. Instead of “loving the most important seats” at

the banquet, this church was giving of themselves to help the

afflicted and outcast. In other words, they were following the

commands of the Gospels. They were being Christians instead of merely

churchgoers.

While All Saints’ in Long Beach has stated, in the Pilot, that its

problem with the Episcopal Church is “especially relating

homosexuality” (“Church secession saga still unresolved,” Thursday),

the Newport congregation’s problem is more nebulous. Their arguments

regard recognizing Jesus Christ as the one and “only Lord” and Savior

and Holy Scripture as the literal “Word of God.”

The timing, however, suggests otherwise. The decision to split

came about a year after the consecration of Gene Robinson, an openly

gay priest, as Bishop of New Hampshire, and only a few weeks before

the Lambeth Commission, which is studying the contention created by

Bishop Robinson’s consecration, was scheduled to issue a report on

the controversy. St. James prays for Lambeth on their website, but

they have negated the commission’s power. This is suspicious. They

pray in public, but privately mistrust the commission. Jesus had very

bad things to say about those who make an empty public show of

prayer.

But let’s take St. James leaders at their word. Their first stated

dispute is over the recognition that Jesus is the “One and Only Lord

and Savior.” St. James representatives have been unclear on how far

this is to be taken. Jesus did say “I am the way, and the truth, and

the life,” and that he was the only way to salvation. In reality, our

country and our world is full of diverse religions. What does

recognition of Jesus as the “Only” translate to in practice? The

parish has not been clear, but it looks as if their stance is that

other religions and sects of Christianity are wrong and will pay for

it.

Frankly, they could be right. But how do they know? The Rev.

Barbara Stewart, rector of St. John the Divine Episcopal Church in

Costa Mesa, said, “God is quite capable of doing God’s job -- I do

not have any need to be judge and jury. God will have mercy on those

God has mercy on.”

Other religions exist; our country allows their practice; and the

Gospels instruct Christians not to judge. Remember the famous story

of Jesus intervening in the stoning of the adulteress?

The problem is not that St. James believes in the divine nature of

Jesus -- all Christians do -- but rather the extension: What do we do

with those who disagree? To denigrate them is counterproductive; it

only makes nonbelievers more distrustful of the faith, encourages

anger and can stimulate violence. Witness the Middle East --

different religions, intolerant actions, violence on both sides. As

Stewart pointed out, it is not for mere humans to judge. To do so is

playing God.

The other argument is that Scripture is the (literal) Word of God.

Stewart explains that the letters of Paul contain some very sexist

ideologies, including that women are to be silent and cover their

heads in church. But it must be assumed that they do not take these

passages literally. The Gospel of Mark states that Christians are to

handle snakes. All Christians ignore or interpret some part of the

Bible. However, to take the literal stance is to embrace only

full-bore literalism. I have attended services at St. James, and no

snakes are handled. I don’t fault them for this, but religion void of

interpretation is an untenable stance. Once you have interpreted one

thing as unnecessary, especially something explicitly stated in the

Gospels, you have opened the door to rival interpretations.

Therefore, you must tolerate them.

Bishop J. Jon Bruno has called the Episcopal Church a “roomy

house,” one that allows dissent, and Stewart says that the church

discusses its disagreements publicly. At every general convention,

those who disagree with the direction of the church have the

opportunity to voice their views. As long as St. James holds to the

Nicene Creed, the core of Episcopalian belief, its disagreements are

welcome in public. They must be, for Jesus commands Christians to

love their neighbors and their enemies “as themselves.” In light of

this, St. James’ decision must be stimulated by other, unstated

reasons. Someone guards the door to the heaven. The argument is over

who. But check your Bible; Jesus was pretty unkind to those who

claimed this honor.

* TIMOTHY TITUS is a resident of Santa Ana and former resident of

Costa Mesa.