2013 Doctrines Series: #1 – Revelation

During 2013 I will be using my newsletter articles to address core Christian doctrines.  I am going to be using and defining the technical terms that are used by pastors and theologians.  So this will be a kind of brief twelve part systematic theology.  This month I will be discussing the doctrine of revelation.
The doctrine of revelation does not refer to the Book of Revelation or to the End Times, but rather it is the doctrine that says that God has revealed himself, has made himself known, has disclosed himself and his will, to us.
The doctrine of revelation assumes the existence of God but teaches us that, on our own, apart from God’s revelation, we cannot know that God exists or know anything about him.  Fortunately for us, God has made revelation available to each and every human being, if only we will pay attention.  Ecclesiastes 3:11 says that God has, “set eternity in the heart of every person.”
The doctrine of revelation is divided into two main types of revelation: general revelation and special revelation.  There is also a third type that is often called private or personal revelation.
General revelation is how God is revealed in nature through creation.  Romans 1:19-20 says, “For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them.  Ever since the creation of the world his eternal power and divine nature, invisible though they are, have been understood and seen through the things he has made. So they are without excuse.”  The doctrine of general revelation says that God reveals himself to all of us through nature, so no one can claim ignorance.  If we respond to general revelation and begin to seek to know more about God, God will reveal himself to us more and more.  Hebrews 11:6 says, “Without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him,” and in Jeremiah 29:13 God says, “You will seek me and find me when you seek me with all your heart.”
But we have to be careful; general revelation will only take us so far.  If we do not take the next step and seek God in special revelation, we will end up with an empty “Man Upstairs” kind of faith which the Bible warns against in James 2:19, “You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that--and shudder.”  Even Jesus said in Matthew 7:21, “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven.”  We must move beyond general revelation to special revelation.
Special revelation is a fancy way of referring to God’s revelation in the Bible.  2 Timothy 3:16-17 says, “All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, so that everyone who belongs to God may be proficient, equipped for every good work.”  (Inspiration is also a theological term that is used to describe the way in which the Holy Spirit inspired the human authors of the Bible to write, and the way the Holy Spirit has inspired the Church to collect, translate, and interpret the Scripture right down to today.)  The only way we can really know who God is and what God wants is through the Bible.
While it is up to us to interpret and apply the Bible to our lives, and while those interpretations can and will vary from person to person, from place to place, and from time to time, we cannot simply pick and choose which parts of the Bible to believe and obey and which ones not to.  If we do that the Bible falls apart.
The main thing to remember in order to help us understand the Bible is that the Bible, from beginning to end, is about Jesus.  From Genesis all the way through the Old Testament we are told about the Messiah who was to come.  In the New Testament we are told that Jesus is that Messiah and that he came to earth, died, rose again, ascended into heaven, and will return to earth one day to establish his Kingdom.  Perhaps John does the best job of describing the purpose, not only his Gospel, but the whole Bible in John 20:30-31, “Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book.  But these are written so that you may come to believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that through believing you may have life in his name.”
As United Methodists we have a tool that has come to be known as the Wesleyan Quadrilateral.  It has four sides: Scripture, Tradition, Reason, and Experience.  Of these Scripture is primary and the other three are used to help interpret, understand, and apply Scripture.
Finally, there is also a doctrine of personal or private revelation.  These are revelations that God makes to us by the Holy Spirit as individuals.  Usually these come in the form of strong impressions, feelings, and insights that we get from prayer or Bible study.   God may help us understand something better, or call us to do something specific.  However, some people in history have reported having dreams, seeing visions, or even hearing an audible voice.
John Wesley, the founder of the Methodist movement, described an experience in which his heart was “strangely warmed” during a meeting on Aldersgate Street in London.  This moment of personal revelation would become a new beginning for Wesley and would result in the United Methodist Church we know today.
We must use EXTREME CAUTION here to make sure that it is God who is speaking and not our own imaginations, or worse.  A personal revelation will never ever contradict the Bible.  If we feel that we have had a personal revelation we need to check it against the Bible and consult with other Christians in the Church to make sure we are not getting off track.
The whole point of the doctrine of Revelation is that God wants us to know him, and that we can know him and have a relationship with him, because he has revealed himself to us.        

“The UMC and the Issues 2012: Church and State”

This is my last article in my “UMC and the Issues” series and this month we will be finishing up with the issue of the relationship between the church and the state.

In the U.S. we have a strong commitment to keeping the church and the government separate.  This was born out of what our founders saw in Europe where the church exercised power through the government and vice-versa and where religious wars were fought between the European powers.

The first amendment of the United States Constitution says, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”  This means that the government cannot establish, favor, or support any religion as an official religion and that the government cannot interfere with any individual in the practice of their own religion.

The Social Principles of the United Methodist Church state, “The United Methodist Church has for many years supported the separation of church and state. In some parts of the world this separation has guaranteed the diversity of religious expressions and the freedom to worship God according to each person's conscience. Separation of church and state means no organic union of the two, but it does permit interaction. The state should not use its authority to promote particular religious beliefs (including atheism), nor should it require prayer or worship in the public schools, but it should leave students free to practice their own religious convictions. We believe that the state should not attempt to control the church, nor should the church seek to dominate the state. The rightful and vital separation of church and state, which has served the cause of religious liberty, should not be misconstrued as the abolition of all religious expression from public life.”  (Discipline paragraph 164C)

The places where this issue comes up the most in our time are in public prayer, especially in schools, and in public religious displays like a Nativity scene or the Ten Commandments.  These are the places among others where “establishment” and “free exercise” come head to head.  For instance, students praying by themselves, or as a group, is free exercise; a teacher praying while a class is forced to listen, or to recite, is establishment.  A Nativity scene or a Ten Commandments monument on a courthouse lawn, as long as it is paid for with private money, in my opinion, would be free exercise, not establishment.  However, not everyone would agree with me.

What distresses me about this issue is that so often “Christians” can become difficult and disrespectful about it.  While we do need to exercise our rights and we do need to speak out and share our faith, we need to remember that our mission is to share the Good News and we can never do that by being disrespectful.    

The UMC and the Issues 2012: Immigration

            Immigration is a very hot issue right now.  Many Americans feel very torn because America has always prided itself as a land of opportunity that has always been ready to welcome people from all over the world.  After all, most of us are descendants of immigrants.  However, we also acknowledge that we do need to have some system of control at our borders.  The question then becomes whether or not that system is fair and effective.  Another question arises when we realize that many people who are undocumented have been in this country for years, have worked hard, have been otherwise law abiding, have bought homes, built lives, and raised families.  These are complex questions that I cannot answer here.

            The position of the United Methodist Church is less concerned about the legal status of immigrants than about their status and treatment as persons.

We recognize, embrace, and affirm all persons, regardless of country of origin, as members of the family of God. We affirm the right of all persons to equal opportunities for employment, access to housing, health care, education, and freedom from social discrimination. We urge the Church and society to recognize the gifts, contributions, and struggles of those who are immigrants and to advocate for justice for all. (Book of Discipline 2008 Paragraph 162H)

For centuries people have moved across borders in search of work. In our global world this is still a relevant and increasing form of immigration.  Improved wages, better working conditions, and jobs available are reasons for immigration due to work opportunities. Workers from other countries are in many societies an important resource to fill the society’s need of workers. But foreign workers too often meet exploitation, absence of protecting laws, and unreasonable wages and working conditions.  We call upon governments and all employers to ensure for foreign workers the same economic, educational, and social benefits enjoyed by other citizens.  Foreign workers also need a religious fellowship, and we call for the churches to include these in their care and fellowships and to support them in their efforts for better conditions. (Paragraph 163F)

            On the national level, we need to ensure that we have fair and just immigration laws and that those laws are fairly and justly enforced.

            However, as individuals and as the church, we need to welcome and care for all people, including the immigrants among us. 

The UMC and the Issues 2012: End of Life Issues

This time I will deal with three issues under the heading, “End of Life Issues.”  The first issue is entitled in the Social Principles as, “Faithful Care for Dying Persons.”   The Social Principles state, “Care for dying persons is part of our stewardship of the divine gift of life when cure is no longer possible. Dying persons and their families are free to discontinue treatments when they cease to be of benefit to the patient.” (Discipline paragraph 161M)  

There is a point at which further medical treatments will not provide a cure, will not increase quality of life, and will on delay death and prolong suffering.  In those cases medical treatments, including life support, may be withdrawn or withheld and only comfort measures and pain relief provided.  The patient is kept as comfortable as possible and nature is allowed to take its course.  I stand in gratitude and awe of the Hospice movement and the people involved with it who provide this wonderful ministry.  

However, a distinction must be made between allowing a person to die with dignity and an actions on the part of the patient or others to cause or hasten death.  When these actions are performed by others it is known as euthanasia and when other people assist the patient in these actions it is known as assisted suicide.  The Social Principles reject both of these as morally unacceptable. (See Discipline paragraph 161M, N)

The second issue is the issue of suicide.  The Social Principles state, “We believe that suicide is not the way a human life should end. Often suicide is the result of untreated depression, or untreated pain and suffering... A Christian perspective on suicide begins with an affirmation of faith that nothing, including suicide, separates us from the love of God (Romans 8:38-39). Therefore, we deplore the condemnation of people who complete suicide, and we consider unjust the stigma that so often falls on surviving family and friends.”

There was a time when many believed that suicide was an automatic trip to hell.  I cannot stress enough that I, and United Methodists in general, DO NOT believe this.  The grace of God in Jesus Christ is sufficient to forgive anything, even suicide.  We as the church need to reach out to those who are at risk for suicide and see that they get the help they need.  And, we need to reach out in comfort to those who have had loved ones commit suicide.

Finally, we need to discuss the issue of the death penalty.  The Social Principles state, “We believe the death penalty denies the power of Christ to redeem, restore and transform all human beings... For this reason, we oppose the death penalty (capital punishment) and urge its elimination from all criminal codes.”  Setting aside all legal, practical, and personal arguments, we believe that Jesus Christ has to power to transform the life of anyone and everyone, therefore we are opposed to the death penalty.

In all of these issues the common theme is our belief that human life is a gift from God and that we are all stewards of that gift in ourselves and in one another.  While there may come a time when we are not required to prolong life, we are always required to care for it, and we never have the authority to end it.  

The UMC and the Issues 2012: Abortion

The two most divisive moral issues of our day are homosexuality and abortion.  Homosexuality I dealt with prior to General Conference and the official position of the United Methodist Church, despite some lively and heartfelt debate on both sides, did not change.  However, there are still many in the Church who publicly and privately disagree with that position.  

On the other issue, abortion, General Conference added language that expanded and somewhat strengthened the Church’s official position.  The added language will appear in the 2012 version of the Discipline.  However, the general content and context of the position remained the same, therefore; I am quoting the 2008 language below.

“...Our belief in the sanctity of unborn human life makes us reluctant to approve abortion.
But we are equally bound to respect the sacredness of the life and well-being of the mother and the unborn child.  
We recognize tragic conflicts of life with life that may justify abortion, and in such cases we support the legal option of abortion under proper medical procedures...
...We cannot affirm abortion as an acceptable means of birth control, and we unconditionally reject it as a means of gender selection...
...We call all Christians to a searching and prayerful inquiry into the sorts of conditions that may cause them to consider abortion.
The Church shall offer ministries to reduce unintended pregnancies. We commit our Church to continue to provide nurturing ministries to those who terminate a pregnancy, to those in the midst of a crisis pregnancy, and to those who give birth...
...Governmental laws and regulations do not provide all the guidance required by the informed Christian conscience. Therefore, a decision concerning abortion should be made only after thoughtful and prayerful consideration by the parties involved, with medical, family, pastoral, and other appropriate counsel.” (From: The Book of Discipline of The United Methodist Church 2008 Paragraph 161J)

The thing that distresses me most about the abortion debate in our culture is the fact that both sides take such extreme positions.  The Pro-Life side says that abortion is murder and that abortion should be illegal in all, or most, circumstances.  (Some do not even make exceptions for rape, incest, or the health of the mother.)  Meanwhile, the Pro-Choice side often seems to cast abortion as merely in the realm of personal choice that a woman has over her body.  (This often sounds like abortion is the moral equivalent of a haircut or a tattoo.)  Many reasonable churches, which I believe the UMC is, and many reasonable people, which I think I am, and all of you are, would reject both of these extremes.

The UMC states, “We recognize tragic conflicts of life with life that may justify abortion, and in such cases we support the legal option of abortion under proper medical procedures.”  At the same time, the UMC does not affirm abortion as an acceptable means of birth control.  There are varied and tragic circumstances that may justify abortion, but abortion is never simply a “choice” or a “solution” to the “problem” of an unwanted pregnancy.

In closing, I would commend to all of us, as a local church, and as individuals, the recommendations of this Social Principle.  First, to be in ministry to reduce unintended pregnancies and to provide nurturing ministries to those who have had abortions, to those in the midst of crisis pregnancies, and to those who give birth.  And, second, to engage in a searching and prayerful inquiry into the sorts of conditions that may lead people to consider abortion and under what circumstances abortion would be justified, remembering that, “Governmental laws and regulations do not provide all the guidance required by the informed Christian conscience.”

The UMC and the Issues 2012: Gambling

The Social Principles reserve their strongest language for the issue of gambling calling gambling “a menace to society.”  The full statement reads as follows,

Gambling is a menace to society, deadly to the best interests of moral, social, economic, and spiritual life, and destructive of good government. As an act of faith and concern, Christians should abstain from gambling and should strive to minister to those victimized by the practice.

Where gambling has become addictive, the Church will encourage such individuals to receive therapeutic assistance so that the individual's energies may be redirected into positive and constructive ends.

The Church should promote standards and personal lifestyles that would make unnecessary and undesirable the resort to commercial gambling—including public lotteries—as a recreation, as an escape, or as a means of producing public revenue or funds for support of charities or government. (Discipline paragraph 163.G)

Also, the United Methodist Church has rules prohibiting local churches, conferences, and agencies from using “raffles, bingo, door prizes, other drawing schemes, or games of chance for the purpose of gambling or fundraising.” (Book of Resolutions of the United Methodist Church 2008 page 556)  Churches are also prohibited from accepting funds from gambling sources.

I am aware that this is a sensitive issue for us here in this area due to the presence of the Meskwaki Casino.  Our Book of Resolutions, which contains resolutions by General Conference that expand on the Social Principles, does address the issue of tribal casinos.

While we support tribal self-determination and self-governance, resorting to gambling as a form of economic development is regrettable... We encourage tribal governments to wean themselves from gambling as a form of economic development; and we encourage and fully support tribal efforts to diversify economically away from gambling. (Book of Resolutions of the United Methodist Church 2008 pages 555-556)

We all know deep in our hearts that gambling is not a sustainable method of economic development because it takes more than it gives and destroys more than it creates.  We also know deep in our hearts the damage that gambling does to individuals, families, communities, and society as a whole.

I know that many of you may gamble recreationally.  I would encourage you to consider less destructive methods of recreation.  I encourage those of you who struggle with gambling to reach out to me or to others for help.  And, if you have a problem with excess money on your hands, I am sure the church can help you out with that!  Ha ha!

UMC and the Issues 2012: Alcohol, and Tobacco

Historically, Methodism, and the United Brethren Church, have been associated with the Temperance Movement which came to a climax in the 1920’s with Prohibition.  There was a time when being a Mthodist or Brethren meant absolute abstinence from alcohol and tobacco.  For clergy, complete abstinence from both was part of the vows which they took.
However, times have changed somewhat.  Our current Social Principles read.

We affirm our long-standing support of abstinence from alcohol as a faithful witness to God's liberating and redeeming love for persons. We support abstinence from the use of any illegal drugs. Since the use of illegal drugs, as well as illegal and problematic use of alcohol, is a major factor in crime, disease, death, and family dysfunction, we support educational programs as well as other prevention strategies encouraging abstinence from illegal drug use and, with regard to those who choose to consume alcoholic beverages, judicious use with deliberate and intentional restraint, with Scripture as a guide. (Paragraph 162.L)
We affirm our historic tradition of high standards of personal discipline and social responsibility. In light of the overwhelming evidence that tobacco smoking and the use of smokeless tobacco are hazardous to the health of persons of all ages, we recommend total abstinence from the use of tobacco. (Paragraph 162.M)

        For clergy, our vows now include the statement that we will, “Agree for the sake of the mission of Jesus Christ in the world to... exercise responsible self control by personal habits conducive to bodily health, [and] mental and emotional maturity...” (Paragraph 311.2.d)
       I am often asked questions like, “Can United Methodists drink, smoke, etc.?  If the meaning of those questions are along the lines of, “Will someone who drinks or smokes be denied membership in, or be removed from, the church,” the answer is an overwhelming “No.”
      However, the better question is, “Should United Methodists drink or smoke?”  Given God’s great concern for our individual and personal well-being in mind, body, and spirit, a concern which God has called the church to proclaim, and given the overwhelming evidence for the damage that is caused by alcohol and tobacco to our personal well-being and the well-being of families and society as a whole, the answer to that question must also be a resounding “No,” or at least, “With great restraint and moderation.”
      This is also a good reminder of what the Social Principles are and how they are meant to be used.  The Social Principles are not a rulebook which we must agree with and obey in order to call ourselves United Methodists, rather they are a guidebook to help us make decisions about how we will live.  We are free to disagree with any or all of their guidance.  However, I, and all who teach in the church, are required to present them as the official positions of the United Methodist Church.
      I hope you will join me in following the guidance of the Social Principles in making better and more healthy choices in all areas of our lives.  I also hope you will join me in celebrating the fact that we are part of a church that cares enough about us and the world and the world around us to offer us guidance but stops short of trying to force us to agree.