The terms "liberal" and "conservative" really don't define anyone, since a particular person cannot be captured by a label. But the terms can refer to the different positions that are taken on issues that now divide the church. I have witnessed many discussions between liberals and conservatives, and have noticed that these debates almost always follow a definite pattern. I consider this pattern spiritually significant.

What divides us? Of late, the Episcopal church has debated such matters as ordination of women, sexuality, and language for God. These issues involve people, specific groups, who feel they are being excluded from the full life of the church.

When these topics are discussed the conservatives often present biblical and theological arguments. As they speak the liberals get the uneasy feeling that the conservatives are dehumanizing excluded groups by making them the object of theological analysis. The liberals react. They talk of their own pain and brokenness, the evils of judging others, and they bring before the conservative the painful reality of some excluded person they know and love. I have seen this happen many times, exactly this response. The debate normally ends at this point, but not before it has become heated and personal.

The debate is also spiritual, laying bear the human heart before God. From what I can tell, the liberals must get the feeling that the conservatives are not really defending the faith, but rather, avoiding their own brokenness by hiding behind their privilege and excluding the excluded. That is why the liberals respond by speaking of their own pain and confusion. I agree with the liberals. The conservatives rarely reveal their inner wretchedness, and further, were they consistent in their use of theological norms, they would attack head on the masses of privilege, power, greed, and wealth that characterize our social and economic life. But that rarely happens. In fact, they profit from it.

Well then, what do the liberals suggest? That we accept the broken parts of ourselves and include those broken by the system itself. But does the fact of exclusion make the demands of the excluded righteous? Not at all. It is God who decides. God is perfectly within his rights to deny homosexual marriages, deny women as priests, and deny just any language for God. I take no stand on these issues here, but God revealed in Scripture is the primary norm and not the fact of exclusion. The conservatives know this and I agree with them.

This is not to deny that God loves the rejected and excluded. He does. But that is not all. He denies some of our deepest needs, hopes, and behaviors. He calls them sin. In God's view they are utterly unacceptable and we are wrong to think otherwise. God allows us and our wrongs to be nailed to a cross and this crucifixion can last for years. In the many discussions I have witnessed, I have no memory of liberals ever saying anything like that.

The Beatitudes make it clear: the Kingdom of God belongs to those who know they are broken, poor, wretched and rejected. But that is only the beginning. Jesus also said, "Those who would follow after me must renounce themselves and take up their cross every day and follow me." Luke 9:23.
 

Comment

I wrote this essay on the basis of having participated in a number of encounters between liberal and conservative clergy on the issues facing the church today. As they spoke to each other, I could see that the both groups needed to receive more deeply the baptism of the Holy Spirit and Fire.  The conservatives, in my view, hung on to their beliefs as a way of protecting themselves against their inner pain. The liberals were a bit more aware of this pain. Both groups, however, needed to suffer the wretchedness of the dark night, something that all persons instinctively fear. It is feared because suffering is painful, but above all, it is feared because one is asked to lose control of one's life. This control is given to the Lord Jesus. This is frightening, but God asks Christians to do it because he knows it will be a blessing.

The Rev. Robert J. Sanders, Ph.D.
March, 1997