How does forgiveness work?
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
The Washington Post's On Faith forum currently features bloggers commenting on how and whether the sexual lives (and infidelities) of public figures should be scrutinized. Underlying all this, of course, is the debate over whether the sexual behavior by individuals in a society is inherently a private or a public activity. And the opinions range from "It's nobody's business" (Susan Jacoby) to "Of course people have a right to know because it suggests something about the person's moral character and ability to lead" (Chuck Colson).
Christians might think how this issue relates to the way we treat one another in the church - particularly church leaders. In one Post commentary, the Rev. C. Welton Gaddy argues that adultery is no more serious than other sins and should be forgiven by the church. Grace, he says, is just as capable of healing folks of sexual sin as it is of any other sin. I say, "Amen to that!" But the question then becomes, "How does that forgiveness happen?" For instance, should we follow Matthew 18 and 1 Timothy 5 and make forgiveness a matter of the entire community? Following the logic of Titus 1, should forgiveness carry with it a necessary removal from ministerial office? That is to say, do we need to look hard at the way that grace and responsibility must go together? And is any of this different for a church leader than it is for a lay person?
My sense is that, while adultery is no more serious than other serious sin, it - like financial malfeasance - has the ability to do a disproportionate amount of harm to the body of Christ. Anyone familiar with a congregation where one of the pastoral leaders has commited adultery knows what I am talking about. And I worry that the church does not deal with such transgressions in ways that are both gracious and responsible. We get so freaked out by adultery that we either want to sweep it under the rug or punish it vindictively.
So what would a gracious and responsible ministry to sexual transgressors in the church look like? And why does this seem to be one area where the church fails so miserably?
Christians might think how this issue relates to the way we treat one another in the church - particularly church leaders. In one Post commentary, the Rev. C. Welton Gaddy argues that adultery is no more serious than other sins and should be forgiven by the church. Grace, he says, is just as capable of healing folks of sexual sin as it is of any other sin. I say, "Amen to that!" But the question then becomes, "How does that forgiveness happen?" For instance, should we follow Matthew 18 and 1 Timothy 5 and make forgiveness a matter of the entire community? Following the logic of Titus 1, should forgiveness carry with it a necessary removal from ministerial office? That is to say, do we need to look hard at the way that grace and responsibility must go together? And is any of this different for a church leader than it is for a lay person?
My sense is that, while adultery is no more serious than other serious sin, it - like financial malfeasance - has the ability to do a disproportionate amount of harm to the body of Christ. Anyone familiar with a congregation where one of the pastoral leaders has commited adultery knows what I am talking about. And I worry that the church does not deal with such transgressions in ways that are both gracious and responsible. We get so freaked out by adultery that we either want to sweep it under the rug or punish it vindictively.
So what would a gracious and responsible ministry to sexual transgressors in the church look like? And why does this seem to be one area where the church fails so miserably?
Labels: Forgiveness, Sexuality, Sin
posted by Andrew C. Thompson at 9:50 PM
3 Comments:
I recall that Will Willimon in his book "Pastor" says that pastors should be removed for sexual indiscretion. I don't recall why.
You know, as I think about this issue of sexual infidelity, I realize that adultery brings with it a whole host of attendant sins. Lying is an obvious one. What other little sins have been committed in the act of adultery? The tangled web of sin should not be forgotten.
Growing up in my Southern Baptist church, we had a rule that no man (and it was always a man) could be a deacon until he'd been a member for one year. Common sense stuff, yet the church routinely broke its own rule if someone seemed like a nice guy. I will never forget when they made one man in particular a deacon. He had previously pastored other SBC churches. According to one of his cousins (a family friend) he had been forcibly removed - TWICE - for adultery. And yet he was allowed to step behind the pulpit every few months.
Fast forward a few years. I'm long gone from that church. The church fills its pastoral vacancy after th previous pastor retired. They hire a guy who left the ministry to run for office (he lost). In addition to leading the church into some bad financial decisions, he also committed adultery with a parishioner (both he and the woman were married). He left the church and they ran off to get married.
I'm not sure how these stories connect, but it's disturbing that the church that nourished my young faith could allow men with such sexual malfeasance into its leadership positions. At the very least, churches should learn to better care for their pastors BEFORE sexual misconduct. Leaders should have a network of accountability that does everything possible to inhibit adultery from happening.
Casey Taylor
irregularchristian.blogspot.com
I am also intrigued about the "weight" of sins. I will have to say, and I say this with a small amount of "I am not sure I believe this" - I think financial impropriety has a deeper and longer lasting impact on a church. Misappropriating funds or embezzlement reduces the funds of the church - limiting what it can do ministerial in the give budget cycle.
Usually the said adulterer is gone a few days after the incident, leaving hurt feelings, not hurt budgets.
Let me be clear, this is in no way meant to minimize the effects of infidelity. Just weighing in to the weight conversation.
anonymous, I disagree. Financial damage can be easily replaced, either through restitution by the offender or maybe by the church and/or community stepping up to the (offering) plate to make up for losses. But the lack of trust, the violated spouse(s), the broken marriages, broken homes, and hurt children can have long lasting effect.
Post a Comment
<< Home