FOR NEITHER HETEROSEXUALITY NOR HOMOSEXUALITY IS ANYTHING

Paul M. Lederach

August 2004 marked my sixtieth year as an ordained minister in the Mennonite church. During these years I observed and participated in many changes in the church—precipitated by the world impinging on the church and by the Holy Spirit’s working in the church.

I was born in Norristown, Pennsylvania. Until I left home to enter Goshen College, I attended a city church, the Mennonite Gospel Mission. I accepted Christ as Savior in a revival meeting there and was baptized in that city congregation.

When a junior at college, I was named to participate in the lot through which would be chosen the person to be ordained a minister for that city congregation. That brief, simple, solemn, service changed the direction of my life. The lot fell on me. I was forced to face in a new way the shape of discipleship.

During my 60 years of ministry, I cannot recall a decade when the church was not amid conflict. At one point eschatology was critical. Prophecy conferences were convened to sort out issues related to the "last days." Franconia Conference was largely "amillenial." Other conferences were "premillenial." These study conferences developed mutual respect for classical premillenial and for historic amillenialism. The more recent Dispensationalism was discerned as counterproductive to Anabaptist-Mennonite understanding of the church.

After World War II, the passing of plain attire became a stressful matter. The cape dress, black stockings, the bonnet, the prayer veiling for women and the coat without lapels, a plain hat, and no necktie were considered appropriate attire for committed Mennonites. In the early 1950s, Franconia leaders hoped the spiritual renewal from the "Brunk Revivals" would reaffirm the dress code as a visible sign of obedience to Romans 12:2, "not conformed to the world."

The old wineskins, however, could not contain the new wine. Leaders of the rural Franconia Conference were slow to come to the painful conclusion that following Jesus did not require regulation attire—something persons in mission work had long realized.

In 1949, again by lot, I was ordained to serve as a bishop. This opened the way to serve many congregations. But this also was painful. At that time Conference "Rules and Discipline" forbade members to own televisions. To enforce this legislation by withholding communion, in the light of the behaviors the New Testament called for as fruit of the Spirit, I felt like one Jesus criticized—who strained at gnats while swallowing camels!

The "charismatic movement" in many congregations led to conflict and division. Differing views about gifts of the Spirit and divine healing should not have caused rupture. Had those with newfound experience been more patient and those without the experience more tolerant, divisive actions might have been averted. Despite the sad stories of division, the charismatic emphasis brought more freedom to worship, more appreciation for the gifts of the Spirit, and greater recognition of the work of the Spirit in endurance and congregational life.

The conflict around divorce and remarriage was very difficult. When I was ordained, the belief was that divorce could be tolerated but not remarriage. Divorce could be forgiven. To remarry was to live in continued sin.

These views made evangelistic outreach difficult. Since divorce and remarriage was on every side, all too often a couple that came to faith had divorce and remarriage in their past. Mission leaders’ hands were tied. New believers could not be baptized or received into membership if remarried. Yet to suggest that the remarried couple separate (with the presence of children adding even more complexity), and/or that a spouse return to the original partner were simply not viable options. To break another marriage was not appropriate.

As more and more divorce and remarriage involved Mennonite families, the church at last was forced to face its interpretation of the Bible regarding this matter. Gradually, we learned that divorce is the sin of breaking covenant. Jesus allowed divorce for infidelity, and Paul permitted divorce of a believer from an unbeliever. We learned that remarriage is permissible and have found ways to embrace those who experienced divorce and remarriage.

In some congregations the role of women in ministry is still not resolved. Earlier in my life, when a midwestern Mennonite conference ordained a woman to the ministry, I, along with many others, felt the conference had lost its way. I said so!

Since then, I have changed my interpretation. I discovered that a text in Timothy and one in Corinthians were not the controlling texts. The New Testament reveals that many women served in ministry and that gifting by the Spirit was not gender-related. My opportunities to visit young churches in Asia and Africa, where God used women in founding and leading emerging churches, led me to see that my narrow interpretation of women in ministry had to change.

Now the church is engaged in another conflict: how to accept persons with homosexual orientation. For a long time I accepted the notion that homosexuals were perverts and homosexual activity was exceptionally evil. This was evident in the community, in the laws of many states, and also in the views of the church. As a heterosexual male, I found homosexual acts quite obnoxious. I had no difficulty labeling them sin. When I witnessed a gay pride parade in a large eastern city, these attitudes were confirmed.

Gradually, however, I began to rethink my position. It dawned on me that just as all divorces are not the same, so homosexuality is a multifaceted matter.

This came home to me as a pastor. How should I relate to gay or lesbian young people in the congregation? They grew up in Sunday school and summer Bible school. They went to such Mennonite church camps as those at Spruce Lake or Laurelville. They were active in Mennonite Youth Fellowship. They accepted Christ and were baptized.

When they came to maturity, they discovered they were gay. They sensed this from little on but could not understand it or talk about it. Yet amid the turmoil of this discovery, they wanted to follow Jesus.

And then, what about their parents? They wondered how to cope with their child’s orientation. How do they handle their own attitudes? How did they handle the prejudices, malice, and ostracism of community and fellow church members?

It became clear to me that neither the parents nor the son or daughter fitted the picture Paul painted in Romans 1:21-32. They had not turned from worshiping the creator God to worshiping idols. They did not exchange the truth about God for a lie. They were not filled with every kind of wickedness. Both parents and child wanted a place in the church as followers of Jesus.

Since New Testament days, changes in the church have been difficult. Accepting Gentiles was difficult. Refusing to practice circumcision, so clearly taught in the sacred writings of the Jews, was difficult. To see that observing the Law—with its moral code, holy days, and rituals—must give way to the law of Christ caused untold difficulty. The Law of Christ involved "love your neighbor as your self" (Gal. 5:14), being led by the Spirit (Gal. 5:18), and bearing one another’s burdens (Gal. 6:2).

This called me, as a follower of Jesus, to think about and to act differently toward persons of homosexual orientation. There is so much I don’t know about homosexuality. How does it originate? Is it in-born? Is it learned? Can orientation be changed?

Like so many things, "we know only in part." Until matters are fully known, love requires patience and kindness. Love is not arrogant or rude, and does not insist in its own way (1 Cor. 13). Clearly, theworld’s hatred of homosexuals, the ostracism, and the persecution should not be found among believers in the body of Christ.

What then should we do? Accepting homosexual persons who desire to follow Jesus into church membership is a congregational matter. A congregation that discerns membership of a homosexual is proceeding acceptably; it should not be disciplined for this.

In the congregation the person is known. Corporately the congregation discerns readiness for baptism and/or membership. Here the individual professing receiving new life by faith is affirmed. The congregation can see and rejoice in what Christ has done.

Conference and churchwide structures should provide guidance for discernment. But top-down mandates, though well intentioned, tend to lose sight of the uniqueness of each person, and in turn cause members to bite and devour one another over applying or failing to apply a mandate.

We should also encourage homosexual persons to enter committed, faithful relationships. Paul wrote that one of God’s gifts is celibacy (1 Cor. 7:6-7). Paul also said that the person without that gift and unable to practice self control should marry: "It is better to marry than to be aflame with passion" (1 Cor. 7:9). At present the homosexual person, if he or she has not been given the gift of celibacy, has no option like this. A committed relationship (I purposely avoid entering the complexities of what one should call this) would help to keep promiscuity at bay. It would afford intimacy, companionship, and stability otherwise lacking. From the beginning, God saw the necessity for a helper and partner (Gen. 2:18).

Over the centuries the Spirit has led the church to new interpretations of the Bible—in relation to slavery, to attire, to women in ministry, to divorce and remarriage. I look for the day the Spirit will enable the church to deal redemptively with persons with homosexual orientation. To paraphrase two of Paul’s statements about the "circumcision" or "uncircumcision" controversy, I hope the church will come to see this:

"In Christ Jesus neither heterosexuality nor homosexuality counts for anything; the only thing that counts is faith working through love (Gal. 5:1)."

"For neither heterosexuality nor homosexuality is anything; but a new creation is everything (Gal. 6:14)."

—Paul M. Lederach, Lansdale, Pennsylvania, has pastored many congregations and held numerous denominational leadership roles. He remains an active writer with numerous articles and books to his name, including Daniel in the Believers Church Bible Commentary series.