1Accept him whose faith is weak, without passing judgment on disputable matters. 2One man's faith allows him to eat everything, but another man, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables. 3The man who eats everything must not look down on him who does not, and the man who does not eat everything must not condemn the man who does, for God has accepted him. 4Who are you to judge someone else's servant? To his own master he stands or falls. And he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand.
5One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. 6He who regards one day as special, does so to the Lord. He who eats meat, eats to the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who abstains, does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God. 7For none of us lives to himself alone and none of us dies to himself alone. 8If we live, we live to the Lord; and if we die, we die to the Lord. So, whether we live or die, we belong to the Lord.
9For this very reason, Christ died and returned to life so that he might be the Lord of both the dead and the living. 10You, then, why do you judge your brother? Or why do you look down on your brother? For we will all stand before God's judgment seat. 11It is written:
" 'As surely as I live,' says the Lord,
'every knee will bow before me;
every tongue will confess to God.' "[a] 12So then, each of us will give an account of himself to God.
13Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another. Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in your brother's way. 14As one who is in the Lord Jesus, I am fully convinced that no food[b] is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for him it is unclean. 15If your brother is distressed because of what you eat, you are no longer acting in love. Do not by your eating destroy your brother for whom Christ died. 16Do not allow what you consider good to be spoken of as evil. 17For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit, 18because anyone who serves Christ in this way is pleasing to God and approved by men.
19Let us therefore make every effort to do what leads to peace and to mutual edification. 20Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All food is clean, but it is wrong for a man to eat anything that causes someone else to stumble. 21It is better not to eat meat or drink wine or to do anything else that will cause your brother to fall.
22So whatever you believe about these things keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the man who does not condemn himself by what he approves. 23But the man who has doubts is condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith; and everything that does not come from faith is sin.
-Romans 8.1-22, New International Version of the Bible
Our Wesleyan Polity and Discipline class has spent a great deal of time discussing the "archaic" drinking and substance abuse clause in the Discipline of the church. It is widely considered the most controversial paragraph in the publication to be considered for discussion or change this year at General Conference.
Often times the proponents or opponents head to the Bible in search of texts condoning or condemning drinking or drunkenness, but I hope here to take a different approach.
Attitudes behind this debate confound me. Our church is in a sad position, I believe. Those in favor of taming the Discipline's language of prohibition are no doubt looking out for the health of the church assuming that adding these people who would be members aside from this issue would be assets to our fellowship. The Community v. Covenant debate is here evident - those interested in joining our congregations have been taken in as disciples under Community auspices and have remained there, rather than becoming full members, because of the issue of social drinking.
Community membership is a good idea. As Community members we are able to open dialog with and disciple those the Holy Spirit is guiding to us, but it should be assumed that those joining our communities are taking on the privilege of Community membership are aware of the church's rich history of abstinence from substances - this should not be a surprise that comes up during the temporary period they are discipled as Community members. People should not become Community members after discipling of this nature who disagree with the church on this point.
Further, the real issue here is that of Christian Liberty. I personally believe it is not morally wrong to drink, as it were, socially. Some people of good conscience say social drinking is wrong on the grounds patronage of the industry results in the further violation of families and abuse by those who are unfortunate enough not to be in control of their consumption. I would not go quite that far in my argument, but I can see its merit.
My argument is against the attitudes involved. Are we truly considering our brothers and sisters in the Lord if we exercise our liberty to engage in social drinking if we know full well that weaker siblings' faith does not allow them to as well? How self centered we are to flaunt our liberty! Why can't we suspend our liberty for the sake of the Kingdom?
As for addressing the topic in the discipline at all, I believe we have here a beautiful example of our rich heritage of considering the weaker sibling. God has given us this issue, no doubt, in part because of the liberty implications - I hope we would be wrestling with some other hot topic if alcohol or substances had never been invented - simply because the church needs reminding, as we are told in 1 Corinthians 6.12, "All things are lawful for me, but not all are profitable. All things are lawful for me, but I will not be mastered by anything." (NASB)
20Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All food is clean, but it is wrong for a man to eat anything that causes someone else to stumble.
Amen
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I find it interesting that we focus so much on the "drink" and not so much on the "food", even though they are always mentioned at the same time. Is not gluttony a sin? Should we be considering overeaters to be in the same situation as alcoholics? It is frustrating to me that we focus on certain sins while leaving out ones that are much more debilitating and life-threatening. Drunkenness is not listed as one of the seven deadly sins, but sloth, anger, greed and pride are. Maybe it could be under the heading of gluttony, but so can anything we overdo - it need not be simply food and drink. A better model we could try to teach our "younger siblings" is this: moderation and wise counsel. Simply abstaining from potentially gluttonous behaviors is only half-teaching our younger brothers and sisters. Certainly yes, there are times to abstain, but if we abstain from everything potentially harmful are we not showing them that staying in a little box is the best way to live out your Christian life? You know I'm not an alchie or a druggie, Erik, and I am not taking a stand against you, just against having such an issue as part of a church doctrine.
I have heard this argument a good deal in the last few days and I appreciate its value. Moderation and wise counsel are certainly legitimate virtues to be aware of ourselves and concerned with teaching others, but at least the moderation aspect is something I don't believe to be terribly Biblical. Neither is my argument for sure, but there is also an aspect to the Bible's teaching of fleeing from sin. But there I go onto the topic I wanted to avoid - certainly it is not sinful to drink, in my opinion. The excess (in the case of alcohol) is the sin.
My point is, however, the exercise of Christian Liberty. Rather than thinking about my ability to engage in certain permitted behaviors I should be more concerned with the ways my life enables or encourages younger siblings (or siblings with a different faith than mine to) to stumble. I may be able to watch "R" rated movies without absorbing the filth, but what of my siblings who can't? Should I put a movie on in a public place and subject them to it? Moreover, on a grander scale, should I watch such movies at all and encourage filmmakers to go on making things that cause my sibling to stumble? Here is where the drinking issue is so valuable to the Wesleyan Church and as a witness to the broader faith as an example of how one generation limited their Christian Liberty on behalf of the weaker brother.
Post a Comment