Being The Church of The Future: The Case for A Hermeneutics of Humility
What kind of church do we want to be? What kind of people do we want to be? Can we collectively hear God’s voice and respond to these questions?
The General Conference may have an opportunity to vote on a bill that removes the language currently found in the 2021 Doctrine & Discipline which says:
B. Same-Sex Marriage
1. The African Methodist Episcopal Church believes that marriage is ordained by God as set forth in the Holy Scriptures.
2. Further, the AME Church believes that unions of any kind between persons of the same sex or gender are contrary to the will of God.
3. Therefore, the AME Church strictly prohibits and forbids any AME Church clergyperson, licensed and/or ordained, from performing or participating in, or giving any blessing to any ceremony designed to result in any pairing between persons of the same-sex gender, including, but not limited to, marriage or civil unions.
a. Any AME Church clergyperson licensed and/or ordained charged with violating this rule shall be referred to the Ministerial Efficiency Committee.
b. If the charges are sustained, the bishop shall suspend the clergyperson and shall convene the Trial Committee within forty-five (45) days.
c. If the charges are sustained by the Trial Committee, such person’s ordination shall be revoked by the Annual Conference and he or she shall be relieved of his or her orders and/or license.
4. Further, the AME Church strictly prohibits and forbids the use of any AME Church property for the performance of and/or the participation in and/or giving of any blessing on the same.” (Part XVI. Section XV. B. (pages 376-377))
A YES vote will remove this language from the Discipline – along with the the disproportionate punishments that could be directed toward clergy who violate the current prohibition.
A YES vote will NOT be a vote for same-sex marriage.
- A YES vote will NOT require AME clergy to perform marriages, civil unions, or any pairing between people of the same sex or gender.
- A YES vote will NOT require AME clergy to perform, participate in, or give blessings to any couple they have not discerned by Godly judgement to be suitable for marriage. This was the case before the current prohibition of pairing between persons of the same sex or gender was added to The Doctrine & Discipline of the African Methodist Episcopal Church in 2004.
A YES vote does NOT mean that you will have to marry, unite, pair, or bless any same-sex or same-gender couples. A YES vote does NOT mean that you will have to attend any same-sex or same-gender marriages, unions, pairings, or blessings. A YES vote does NOT mean that you approve of same-sex or same-gender marriages, unions, pairings, or blessings. A YES vote does NOT mean you affirm or approve of same-sex or same-gender relationships or homogenital intimacies. A YES vote does NOT mean that you will or must be any more likely to consider an LGBTQ+ person for an appointment or a promotion. A YES vote does NOT mean that you like any same-sex or same-gender loving people. A YES vote does NOT mean that you must be love and be kind to LGBTQ+ people – though we should all love and be kind to everyone. A YES vote does NOT require you to recognize the marriage, union, pairing, or blessing of others any more than the secular government under whose jurisdiction you reside requires.
Passing this bill will be an indication that our Church – The AME Church – is willing to embrace a hermeneutics of humility, a method of interpretation and application of the scripture that honors the authority of the “The Holy Scriptures” without denying scientific knowledge, the development of human sociality, and the limitations of human wisdom and interpretative capacities.
A hermeneutics of humility does not deny God or the authority of God’s Word. A hermeneutics of humility does deny that we always understand God and the Word and apply our understanding perfectly – even the most learned, the most seasoned, the most pious, and the most certain of us.
STUDY. A hermeneutics of humility requires balanced study. Deeper study clarifies that there is no scriptural condemnation of homogenital sex as inherently immoral. It is improper and inconsistent for us to extrapolate appropriate contemporary attitudes towards LGBTQ+ people from the un/clean designations of Hebrew Bible holiness codes and debatable terms in the New Testament. It is improper and inconsistent for us to continue interpreting biblical texts that refer to “male and female” using exclusively binary sex and gender categories when we know, scientifically, that neither sex nor gender always fit in the male-female binary.
SERVICE. A hermeneutics of humility requires that we prioritize serving the least among us. Today, the least of the Lord’s siblings includes our LGBTQ+ siblings who have been made hungry, thirsty, naked, sick, incarcerated, strangers – and who are dying – among us because of our refusal to extend ourselves to “the least” with unconditional love, affirmation, and opportunities. AME LGBTQ+ siblings are not the only “least of these.” One of the most fundamental challenges facing the AME Church is the systemic bias against members of our Church born in Africa and in the Caribbean. Instead of daring to understand justice and equity for our members in districts 14 through 20 as integral to justice and equity for our LGBTQ+ members (and vice versa), we have bought into the lie that these particular demands for justice and equity are not only detached from one another but that justice and equity for members in districts 14 through 20 is in conflict with the justice and equity LGBTQ+ members of the church and their advocates seek. Sadly, there are leaders who wish to capitalize on this lie:
- Some will campaign, insisting that their opposition to LGBTQ+ people and practices is tantamount to their being for Africa or the Caribbean – as though there are no LGBTQ+ people in Africa or the Caribbean and no LGBTQ+ members in the AME Churches in these regions – and/or that our church has no responsibility to these people and members;
- Some leaders will demonstrate their support for our clergy, lay, episcopal leaders from Africa and the Caribbean by attesting to the ways that governments in some African and Caribbean countries expect the AME Church to support campaigns against homogenital sex, but will offer little to no support for these same clergy, lay, episcopal leaders from Africa and the Caribbean to exercise full self-determination and enjoy equitable connectional leadership opportunities.
- Some will insist that removing the requirement to discriminate against LGBTQ+ people seeking marriage can, will, and should result in the mass exodus of individual congregations or entire districts from the connection, but have done little to evangelize, contribute resources to, and/or grow the AME Church.
I challenge AMEs born in and/or serving in Africa and the Caribbean and LGBTQ+ AMEs – and all AMEs – to:
- Refuse to be pitted against one another as though there are no African and Caribbean LGBTQ+ AMEs – and as though AMEs who are African and Caribbean and AMEs who are LGBTQ+ have no common ecclesial interests (even when they are not also LGBTQ+ or African or Caribbean, respectively).
- Create conditions for us to dignify one another.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT. A hermeneutics of humility requires acknowledgement of who we are. We are the inkosi ygbatfazi among the Zulu in Southern Africa; the eshenga of Namibia; the mwaamiamong the Ila of Southern Zambia and Zimbabwe; the chibadi of Zambia; the nkhonsthana of Mozambique; the ndongo-techi-la of the Congo and Sudan; the ikihindu of Burundi and Rwanda; the mugawe of the Meru people in Kenya; the ashtime in Ethiopia; the gor-digen and the yauss and oubi of the Wolof in Senegambia; ‘Yan daudu of Nigeria; the inheritors of the homoerotic traditions of the Akan and Ashanti people of Togo, Ghana, Ivory Coast, and Liberia; the khawal of North Africa; the bisexuals, gays, lesbians, queers, and transgender people of African descent, the Blackqueers and Quares in and beyond Turtle Island, and the bonified, breddren, and bunnununus of Jamaica; and countless named and unnamed other gender-sexual minorities in Africa and its diaspora. We are all of this and more.
We are the AME Church now and of the future.
I appreciate the clarity this article brings to the proposed legislation. It gives us the opportunity to step back a minute and re-evaluate our theology as a church and as individuals without retribution. I have been observing this issue in the background, wrestling with some of the scriptures mentioned in the comments against the reality of knowing that in our ranks are a wide variety of people including the LGBTQ+ community and to be honest within our clergy and clergy families. It has been my prayer all along that the AME church would learn wisdom from our counterpart denominations and move forward in a way that honors God, His grace and mercy through a thorough and balanced study of His word and our interpretations of the same. While removal of this language from our Discipline will help us to adopt a more excellent way, it also means that the work cannot end here. Leaving a void can be just as damaging.
God never asks anyone to give up anything without providing something better. The scriptures cited are clear that the LGBT + lifestyle is not sanctioned by God. If they submit to God and forsake that life, God will provide healthy , Godly relationships. To remain in sinful relationships is not God’s best for anyone. If you truly love them you will want what’s best for them too.
I must say On Homosexuality
Leviticus 18:22
& Leviticus 18:30
Romans 1:26-27
And Romans 1:24-25
God is not pleased with the LGBTQ. But if they pray God. Jehovah Rapha will heal them. But do not DO NOT expect our Zion to an accommodate the idea of including Pastors. Bishops who are LGBTQ
I ask you to read the above scriptures
God loves the LGBTQ and is willing to change them if they ask
I have read and re-read this article. It is excellently written; however, it STILL leaves me with a bottom-line question……removing the language from the Discipline MEANS…….? Clarifier: **I am a long-time subscriber and not a member of the African Methodist Episcopal Church.
Thank you for reading, re-reading, — and for posing the question, Dr. Mitchell.
Passing this bill means that the AME Church returns to its position prior to the 47th Session of the General Conference, at which point clergy were trusted to rightly discern who to marry and who not to marry by virtue of their ordination. As was the case prior to 2004, this bill MEANS that clergy RETAIN THE RIGHT (clergy have always had) TO DENY *any* couple marriage services, should there be questions about the virtues of the relationship. HOWEVER:
(1) This bill ALSO means that the Church is NOT EXPLICITLY SINGLING OUT SAME-SEX RELATIONSHIPS for the denial of marriage/union services *only* because those seeking marriage/union are two people of the same sex; and
(2) This bill ALSO means that *if* clergypersons participate in same-sex marriages/unions they will NOT BE PUNISHED MORE HARSHLY FOR PARTICIPATING IN A SAME-SEX MARRIAGE/UNION than they would for any other violation of church tradition (or law).
Most importantly, passing this bill MEANS the AME Church commits to moving with more humility as it pertains to human sexuality and can focus more on ‘preaching good news to the poor, proclaiming freedom to the captives, recovery of sight to the blind, freedom to the oppressed, and the season of God’s favor’ (Luke 4.18-19).