709 - Regarding Legalism

Download paper_709.pdf

Rejected

Comments

[Stacy Hurt]

In paper #709 I am glad to see the issue of legalism, in the form of our stance on alcohol use, addressed. Since the biblical issue is with mis/abuse of alcohol, a general prohibition of its use should be left to the Holy Spirit’s guidance in an individual’s heart. I agree with the reasoning in the “whereas” statement. I would, however, question some of the wording in the proposed amendment of par. 3390. Perhaps the author(s) are trying to make only minor changes to the paragraph in order to respect the current wording’s regard for the effects of the abuse of alcohol. But indeed, if “any use of” or simple “partaking in” alcohol can have an adverse effect upon one’s health, family and neighbors, we have no cause to be reexamining this issue, for of course we must abstain.
Stacy Hurt
Everett FMC

[Jerome Van Kuiken]

It seems to me that the same biblical reasoning could be used to leave to individual Christians' consciences whether or not to practice slavery or polygamy: Jesus and Paul never flatly forbid either; both were acceptable within their cultural context; it was the "legalism" of earlier generations of Christians that instituted rules against slavery and polygamy, and, after all, times have changed since then. I am not rejecting this resolution outright, but I am concerned with the sort of reasoning that labels anything not expressly stated by Scripture as "legalism." Could it be that the Spirit is continuing to lead the Church into truth -- truth that never contradicts Scripture but which works out biblical implications? I'm also aware of the dangers of claiming such "progressive revelation" beyond the Bible -- just look at what Roman Catholics have done with papal infallibility and dogmas about Mary, on the one hand, or what Episcopalians have done with homosexuality, on the other hand. In sum, then, I'd like to see us wrestle with the deeper issue of biblical interpretation and application that lies behind this resolution on alcohol consumption. Perhaps the resolution is correct and the Study Commission on Doctrine is the best forum for such wrestling.

[Curtis Turner]

As a child, we had a Lutheran pastor who lived across the street from us who drank an 8 ounce glass of beer with every meal. We asked him about it and he replied that we, meaning Free Methodists, were more concerned about what people did rather than what we believed and Jesus taught. In any case, he had strong convictions about how he should live and minister. He had three boys who turned out to be Lutheran ministers. I had strong "convictions" then about playing cards. I was taught that by my parents and my church. In any case, once I was beat up because I did not join a group of kids playing canasta and when asked, my answer was, "Playing cards is against my religion." This is a typical legalistic cop out. None the less I hung out outside the door, wanting to be near my friends who were playing cards. As I look on the current Free Methodist Church, Rook is the sanctified way for passing time. Then my mind traces back to Bughouse Square in Chicago's loop. There you could see maybe a dozen people playing cards with stacks of bills along side on the benches. It was really fascinating to see how absorbed these guys were at playing their games and gambling. Of course, now we have a more mature outlook on various diversions. But weaving in and out of the various practices of others over the years have been interesting. Once I attended a Reformed Church worship service and was surprised to see almost all the people light up their cigarrettes after the service. It was amazing to me! This reminded me of H.J. Long's chapel chemistry demonstration on how to smoke a cigar. He lit the cigar and then dropped it in a bottle of oxygen where it burned with a flash. Humorous but instructive.

[Casey Taylor]

Eating at McDonald's is sin. That's what our BOD implies if I'm to believe that I should treat my body with the respect and dignity befitting a temple.

Surely he's joking, you must think. But why? Hasn't McDonald's, along with every other major fast food chain, systematically targeted CHILDREN with their marketing campaigns, intending to create overeating consumers of the most unhealthy of foods available? Should we as Methodists be concerned that the cheapest food available to the poor is also the worst? Does the damage done to body and soul by overeating matter to Free Methodists? If we really believe what our BOD says about the treatment of our bodies, then we must advocate abstention from fast food just as strenuously as we advocate abstention from alcohol.

But we never will, simply because it's much easier to stigmatize the consumption of alcohol and to ostracize those who consume it. I grant that the ABUSE of alcohol is destructive. I've seen it firsthand. But I also know that the moderate consumption of alcohol is possible by those who follow and love Christ. To follow the logic of our position on alcohol, we should endorse an ascetic diet.

As for the comment made above about our current stance (pro-abstention) as possibly an instance of ongoing revelation, WHOA! Hey, I'm all for some dialogue on that, but do we really want to pull that card out right now? That could lead into some very interesting debates, given the problems plaguing other Christian bodies...

It's dangerous to label alcohol a "legalized drug" when overconsumption of food is addictive. Perhaps we should label overeaters like we label alcoholics.

It's evangelistically inopportune to strongly recommend (i.e. "we will look down our noses at you") the total abstention of alcohol.

It's ecumenically problematic when so many Christian traditions allow alcohol consumption.

Finally, a word about alcohol and killing. Why is it we can encourage abstention from alcohol and not encourage abstention from military service? Or participation in capital punishment? Our current articulation of "War and Military Enlistment" in the BOD is replete with problems. We recognize the evil of war, AND that it's totally inconsistent with the mind of Christ, but we allow individuals to make up their own minds about military service. Is this not our own denominational captivity to American nationalism?

Apparently it's OK to kill another human being as long as I don't drink Heineken's.

[Curtis Turner]

I think the denomination has endorsed a policy of abstinence because of the deleterious effects it produces in people, not the least of which is getting drunk . . . and worse, alcohol addiction.
Besides that there are many cautions associated with drinking alcoholic beverages. The Nazarite vow included abstention from alcoholic beverages or "strong drink." John the Baptist was one who did not drink any strong drink. He was filled with the Holy Spirit from his mother's womb . . .

Perhaps some of our legalistic attitudes regarding alcohol grew out of the prohibition era when drinking was done only illegally and in "speak easys." The Bible says, "Obey every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake." In other words, we are to be exemplary citizens and examples by our good behavior.