booze pt.3 (concluding remarks)

If one were to disagree with the Wesleyan Church’s stance on alcohol, be a part of the Wesleyan church, and drink alcohol anyways, that person would have an issue. The issue would have nothing to do with alcohol. The real issue would be one of submission and rebellion.

Regardless of whether or you agree with all the membership guidelines of the church, the fact of the matter is that you committed to submit yourself to the guidelines of the church. For those of us who have taken the next step and have committed ourselves leadership in the church by way of ordained ministry there should be a deeper level of commitment. Sadly, many people who disagree with the guidelines confuse this with the fact that they have placed themselves as part of a body.

While here at Asbury, we are asked to sign a communal agreement on how we live called an ethos. The first paragraph of this ethos states: 

“The Asbury community is a family of believers who have committed themselves to Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord…As servants of Christ…seek to develop relationships in mutual respect. They exercise their individual and collective responsibilities…for the whole institution to fulfill its ministries.”

So the point of an ethos statement is that it is an agreement of lifestyle commitments everybody can live by. The point is not that everything is Biblically accurate; the point is that we’ve set parameters for community. Living in community is about submitting to the community and sacrificing our freedom to that community.

This is the point of the Wesleyan Church’s special directives. We as the Wesleyans have set a certain set of lifestyle choices that we all have agreed to submit ourselves to. The point is not that we agree with the individual lifestyle choices, the point is we have committed to them. If one issue bothers us so much we cannot live by it, it is not ethical of us to just simply ignore it.

If we disagree with issues in the church, we should not rebel but instead push for change. (which is what happened at this summer's General Conference). We cannot call ourselves people of integrity if we simply ignore or break the commitments we made when we joined the church. 

In these three posts, I have tried to make two points:

1. As Christians we should understand that alcohol itself is not bad, instead the abuse and addiction of this substance is what is bad.
2. As Wesleyans even if we have issues with the church’s stance, we have covenanted to these stances of our own freewill. The choice to break these agreements is an unethical one.

But at the same time, I think that the Wesleyan church should change its stance on alcohol to a more holistic stance, a stance that acknowledges the real issues at stake – addiction and abuse - and remains true to them. This is important because if we do not, we run the risk of becoming legalistic. 

These are my proposals for the Wesleyan Church:

1. “As Wesleyans we stand against all destructive practices and lifestyles that from all the ways that we abuse that which God has created good. Thus we commit to living lives free from abusing that which God has called good.”
2. “As Wesleyans we believe we were created to live lives of freedom, free from the control of addictions. Thus we commit to being free from all addictions that we might truly live lives of freedom.”

 

Booze pt. 2

As Christians we need to understand the nature of creation as innately good. Just like a beautiful painting that has been covered in smut and smoke, the world has been distorted and its beauty has been hidden. Even though its been tarnished, we can never forget the painting is still beautiful underneath! And if cleaned off, its original beauty can be restored.

Why then does the Bible speak of drunkenness being bad? Is it because alcohol itself is bad? If your answer is yes, then how do we understand the fact that God created everything good? If God indeed created everything good then we must believe that even the ingredients that go into producing alcohol are innately good. If that is true how can alcohol be bad?

Just because alcohol can be abused does not mean that it is bad. It just means that as humans we’ve found a way to abuse the beautiful creation that we’ve been given to care for. This is the problem with humans: we abuse everything around us. We abuse our resources, other people, and all elements of creation. If you want examples look at domestic abuse, slavery, dog fighting, human trafficking, strip mining, sweat shops…the list could go on and on. We call this pattern of abuse sin.

What we need to understand is that abuse is sin. The problem is that it is very easy to not understand the difference between action and abuse of the action. This is called legalism. Legalism is just as wrong as the abuse itself, because it blinds us from seeing the beauty of creation.

Thus as Christians:
1. We need to understand the innate goodness that is in the world.
2. We need to stop being legalistic.
3. We also need to stand against the abusive (or sinful) nature that is the pattern for those around us.

Booze pt. 1

Recently, for those of you in the know, the Wesleyan Church had its General Conference. One of the issues that has been heavily debated over the last couple years is the issue of alcohol. Many of you know that the Wesleyan Church has a hard stance against drinking alcohol, and all of its members must affirm this stance if they are to be a part of the church.

Now I disagree with this position. I do not feel that a list of do’s and don’ts is appropriate. I don’t think that alcohol itself is necessarily wrong, but I do affirm that an addiction to it (alcoholism) and the abuse of it (drunkenness) are both wrong. (The addiction part because it is an addiction and it causes you to lose control, and the abuse part because we should not abuse anything)

Many young persons in the Wesleyan community agree with me and have made their voices known in the church. Apart of this group has decided that it is ok to drink citing the fact that there is no Biblical mandate against it. Thus, the church’s rules prohibiting drinking are wrong, and they have the freedom to drink. This is not an isolated group, but it stretches all over the denomination.

To me the issue of whether or not I should drink has nothing to do with whether or not there is a Biblical mandate. To me the issue is that I have made a covenant saying I wouldn’t. Until that covenant is changed, I am bound to it. To me this is not a Biblical issue, it is an integrity issue. I have decided that alcohol (or any other issue) is not worth me jeopardizing my integrity.

I personally do not find drinking to be that important anyways. If I need a beer or a martini in order to have a good time, I have a problem. Comedian Jim Gaffigan makes a good point in one of his routines; we make way too big an issue out of the whole issue. As he mimics somebody asking a non-mayonnaise eating person whether or not it is ok it they eat mayo.

More Thoughts to come…

Things to take away from this post:
1.) I chose not to drink, not because I find drinking wrong, but because I have covenanted myself to the Wesleyan Church.
2.)The real issue is abuse and addiction.
3.) If I have to have a drink to have a good time, maybe there’s another issue-namely addiction.