Tuesday, December 24, 2013

Why Foundry Church loves Frank Schaefer

Pastor Frank Schaefer and the Foundry choir
We had scheduled Pastor Frank Schaefer to preach here at Foundry Church on Jan. 26, 2014, but when I heard that his ministerial credentials had been taken away from him in a 20-minute meeting of the Board of Ordained Ministry of his conference last Thursday, Dec. 19, I immediately called him and invited him to preach at Foundry the very next Sunday, Dec. 22. (Watch the service
here.)

I can only imagine what it must feel like to be defrocked. In fact, Frank admitted that even though he had tried to prepare himself, it was a harsh blow when it actually happened. I wanted Frank to be in a friendly, supportive place after the shock he must have experienced.

Foundry Church reflects the neighborhood in which we are located. On a normal Sunday a fourth to a third of our congregation are openly LGBTQ people. The Sunday Frank spoke, the percentage was probably higher.

In case there were people in the congregation who didn't know the story, I was trying to explain what had happened to Frank. Frank was put on trial for conducting his son's same-sex wedding, yes. But if he had promised never to do another wedding, he would not have lost his credentials. Yet, promising never to do another same-sex wedding would have been like admitting he was wrong to do his son's wedding, wouldn't it? 

The way I finally explained it was to say that Frank was defrocked for refusing to repent of doing his son's same-sex wedding.

As soon as I'd spoken those words, applause began in the congregation. It grew and grew. Soon everyone was on their feet and the applause would not stop. It would not stop.

The admiration and love for Frank in the Foundry sanctuary was like the Day of Pentecost. I know no other adequate comparison.

After the service I began to get some idea of why the congregation responded the way it did.

One person who had experienced a gender transition years ago told about his family never speaking to him again. Never ever.

Another person told of being cut off by family after coming out.

I got an email from someone who had finally found a partner after many years. He has spent every Christmas of his life with his family. His family told him that he had to choose between them and his partner. Either come to Christmas alone or do not come home, they said.

Another shared the pain of family members refusing to come to their weddings. Another told of parents refusing to invite them to their churches when they are visiting home because someone might figure out they are gay and the parents would be embarrassed.

The stories of rejection are heartbreaking. 

Many families love their LGBTQ family members. I do not mean to suggest the majority of families are rejecting. Thank God for PFLAG!

Nonetheless, members of the LGBTQ community have experienced enough familial rejection that at Foundry Church last Sunday their admiration and love for a father who chose his gay son over obedience to some of the rules of the church was overwhelming. The love of those of us who are straight but have LGBTQ friends and know the pain of their stories was overwhelming  

Foundry Church loves Frank Schaefer because he prioritized the covenant of family over other covenants.

You see, once you have done the wedding for your gay son, all gay people become your sons and daughters.You can not promise to turn them away, not even to save your ordination.

If we had the mind and heart of Christ, we would know that all LGBTQ people are part of our family.

Our United Methodist Book of Discipline says: "We implore families and churches not to reject or condemn lesbian and gay members and friends." (BOD ¶161.F) Yet, other statements and prohibitions in the Book of Discipline feed and legitimize this very rejection and condemnation.

I know those with positions of authority and responsibility within the United Methodist Church are struggling to know how to lead these days. A bishop I highly respect --Bishop Ken Carter of Florida-- has written recently about how difficult it is to lead both continuity and change. His thoughtfulness is profound.

But finally he casts the position he is in as a bishop in terms of this quote from one of my teachers Rabbi Ed Friedman: “Those who wish to disrupt leadership will always frame the problem in terms of liberty and order, while those in positions of leadership will always see the problem as one of order and chaos.” (A Failure of Nerve: Leadership in the Age of the Quick Fix)

A district superintendent I also highly respect --the Rev. Sky McCracken-- begins with Bishop Carter's point and goes even further. He says:
People like the Book of Discipline and our covenant... when it suits their needs. When we disagree with it, we don't like it. Yet the nature of covenant is not to be selective, but to be faithful to it. Even when we disagree with it. Should we disagree, we fight to change it. Sometimes we win those fights. Sometimes we lose. That's when our trust in God is tested. When we decide to pick and choose, the covenant falls apart. There is no glue left.
He adds:
In a covenant community, our personal opinions are trumped by the covenant community we choose to live in. Until we choose to be autonomous congregations (or conferences, or jurisdictions), we have to agree to a covenant and honor it. If we want personal liberty to rule, we need to quit being a connectional and covenant church ...
With all sincere due respect, I believe Bishop Carter and DS McCracken misunderstand. This is not about liberty. This is not about a desire to disrupt leadership. This is not about pastors and local congregations casually breaking rules because we want to be free of our obligation to the Book of Discipline or the covenant and order of the United Methodist Church. . 
In a covenant community, our personal opinions are trumped by the covenant community we choose to live in. Until we choose to be autonomous congregations (or conferences, or jurisdictions), we have to agree to a covenant and honor it. If we want personal liberty to rule, we need to quit being a connectional and covenant church - See more at: http://um-insight.net/blogs/sky-mccracken/covenant-and-order-vs.-liberty-and-chaos/page-3.html#sthash.EnRkOlLa.dpufWith all sincere respect, here is where I believe Bishop Carter and DS McCracken get it wrong. What Frank Schaefer did was not about liberty. Foundry Church's ministry is not about liberty. You misapply what Friedman taught here. 

This is about honoring the most fundamental of covenants that transcends all others. This is about the covenant to respect and honor one another as human beings created in the image of God. This is about the covenant between brothers and sisters of the family of God.

This is about what we do when we are asked by rules in a book to look our son or daughter in the eyes and say: "I will not do your wedding because my denominational covenant does not allow me to honor you and your partner's profound love and commitment for one another."

Rabbi Friedman knew that there is a difference between a leader and a manager. It is true that a leader needs to manage but it is also true that a leader is called to lead and not merely manage. A manager merely enforces rules. A leader leads in creating structures and institutions that are faithful to their deepest truths.

This condemnation of and discrimination against LGBTQ people within the Book of Discipline is not United Methodism's deepest truth. 

I believe Rabbi Friedman would tell pastors and local churches to stay focused on who they are and their deepest values, to stay in communication with those who disagree, not to get reactive when they are accused of being disruptive or unfaithful or told to get out, and to keep a sense of humor.

Foundry Church loves Frank Schaefer. He chose his son over one or two of the many rules in the Book of Discipline. In choosing his son he chose all LGBTQ people.

Frank has not become reactive but has stayed in love with the United Methodist Church that took away his ordination, and he has kept a sense of humor.

This is leadership.

Please don't accuse it of being merely an expression of a desire for liberty or an attempt to disrupt leadership. This is an expression of deep faithfulness to the most transcendent covenant.


  
People like the Book of Discipline and our covenant... when it suits their needs. When we disagree with it, we don't like it. Yet the nature of covenant is not to be selective, but to be faithful to it. Even when we disagree with it. Should we disagree, we fight to change it. Sometimes we win those fights. Sometimes we lose. That's when our trust in God is tested. When we decide to pick and choose, the covenant falls apart. There is no glue left. - See more at: http://um-insight.net/blogs/sky-mccracken/covenant-and-order-vs.-liberty-and-chaos/#sthash.8VOLVgyg.dpuf
People like the Book of Discipline and our covenant... when it suits their needs. When we disagree with it, we don't like it. Yet the nature of covenant is not to be selective, but to be faithful to it. Even when we disagree with it. Should we disagree, we fight to change it. Sometimes we win those fights. Sometimes we lose. That's when our trust in God is tested. When we decide to pick and choose, the covenant falls apart. There is no glue left. - See more at: http://um-insight.net/blogs/sky-mccracken/covenant-and-order-vs.-liberty-and-chaos/#sthash.8VOLVgyg.dpuf




3 comments:

  1. I greatly admire your wisdom and was very pleased to witness Foundry's love last Sunday.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "You see, once you have done the wedding for your gay son, all gay people become your sons and daughters.You can not promise to turn them away, not even to save your ordination." -- I love this. A truly visionary statement. Thank you for your leadership.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I find the "respect the covenant" argument completely unpersuasive.

    It was once against Discipline to ordain women. Then General Conference changed the Discipline to permit it. How many of us today look back at those who denied the opportunity of ordination to the women of 1953 and admire their commitment to "covenant?" Anyone...anyone...? More likely, we look back at them and marvel at how short sighted they were to see only words printed in a book while missing the injustice all around them.

    We sometimes change our covenants. We change them because we come to realize they are wrong. Yes, it's true that we all like the parts of Discipline we agree with and we all dislike the parts we disagree with. It's also true that Discipline has sometimes been found to be wrong. We do our church no service if we pretend the Book of Discipline in its current form represents perfection.

    You and I both know that most UM pastors have violated some section of Discipline at one time or another. I knew former EUB pastors who refused to perform infant baptisms after the merger. I know of none who had their orders taken from them. That's because no one was afraid their actions would ever lead to a change in Discipline.

    Someday, the United Methodist Church is going to perform same-sex weddings. The people who prosecuted Frank know it as well as you or I do. The zeal with which they went after him reflects not a belief that the Discipline's language on homosexuality is eternal, but fear that the status quo hangs by a thread. A man had his career taken from him for the sake of making change a little bit harder, for hanging onto the wrong a little bit longer.

    There is nothing about this that deserves the slightest respect.

    ReplyDelete