On Oath-breaking, or When Clergy Ignore the 10 Commandments

on November 19, 2013

The United Methodist Church in the United States recently suffered mass clerical disobedience in Pennsylvania, which has since led to an ecclesiastical trial that found a pastor guilty of disobedience. In addition, retired Bishop Melvin Talbert also incited controversy for his participation in a same-sex ceremony in Alabama, which has already received a response from the Council of Bishops. In short, the UMC has been afflicted by a rash of clergy reneging on their ordination vows.

I speak as one outside United Methodism, but who has been covering this series event with keen interest. I find the entire position of the disobedient clergy to be quite curious, since pastors are supposed to be examples of faithfulness and loyalty for their congregants.

As a postulant myself, I have been thinking quite a bit on the matter of ordination, covenants, and responsibility. Part of the responsibility of preparing for ordained ministry is to look at the oaths I will take before I say them, because I’ll have to answer for them if I commit to them. This is not to be taken lightly, especially when one studies the Scriptures’ warnings about teaching and authority. In fact, older ordination liturgies used to include a calling down of curses upon oneself for failure to fulfill oaths! Some parts of the world still use such language today, and for worthy reasons. It’s the sort of thing that one approaches with prayer and fasting, not an eye-roll and a shrug of the shoulders.

My point in bringing all this up is not because I want to somehow alter the language of ordination covenants for a different denomination, but because I am astonished by the levity with which these activist-pastors break the promises they’ve made before God and man. I would expect a United Methodist to hold to the Book of Discipline in good faith just as I would expect any other breed of Christian to be loyal to their creeds, confessions, and canons.

Revisionist covenant-breakers defend themselves by calling such a stance “legalism” or by saying they, on their own or with their small cabal of compatriots, have acquired a better handle on the Holy Spirit’s leading (which, in matters of sexuality, is in direct contradiction with the revelation of Scripture). They are being “prophetic” because they are doing what feels right to them and what is against the stated explicit beliefs of historic Christian faith and the official position of their own denomination.

But this is simply an unacceptable position for pastors or even Christians. Human beings are not free-floating monads who have the power to create their own moral laws. Communions should be united around Truth. Pastors should be instilling the fear and love of God in their congregations and the world around them. Moreover, clergy are responsible for the deposit of faith entrusted to them and must be willing to lay down their lives for it. One cannot help noticing that revisionist sympathizers worry more about hurt feelings and job security, not so much the cultural backlash against inconvenient Christian ethical beliefs.

This seems a harsh charge, but United Methodists are facing a crisis of integrity at this very historic moment. Their clergy are openly and flamboyantly defying the 10 Commandments of God. Perhaps they weren’t lying when they first took their vows; we might quibble over the idolatry of contemporary sexual mores. We will let those parts of the Decalogue pass. Today, I refer to the fourth commandment, taking the Lord’s name in vain.

“They’re not swearing,” you may contest. But they have sworn! They haven’t cussed, but they swore an oath. In their typical insight, classical manuals of moral theology associated oath-breaking with blasphemy, not just lying. This is because an oath is a commitment to something in the name of God. His name is on the line, from the juridical “So help me God” to the lengthy ordination liturgies.

United Methodist pastors promised to God that they would uphold the covenant of the Discipline. God’s not some insensible force or fickle character who can be coaxed to ignore a broken covenant before Him. He has mercy for the repentant, but this open, almost giddy defiance is a blight to the pastoral office and shows no hint of turning back. It belies a failure of integrity, which extends to more than just one portion of ministry. For the spiritual well-being of clergy and laity alike, the revisionist activists need to be held accountable for their broken promises.

Inconsiderate? Perhaps, but not if such limits are for our own good and for the preservation of truth and holiness, which are inseparable from love. Methodists, with their commitment to Christian holiness, have a strong heritage in this vein of discipleship. Like St. Augustine of Hippo, Methodists realize that the law was given that grace may be sought, and grace was given that the law may be obeyed in an increasingly holy life.

Lord willing, I expect to be held to the similar standards for my soul’s health, my parish’s spiritual safety, and the sake of Christ’s Church. His Bride is not my ethical plaything. The whole controversy is sad, but these are the last gasps of desperation from ailing revisionist factions of the UMC.

  1. Comment by Richard Denison on November 19, 2013 at 1:19 pm

    There was no “rule” about this when I was ordained because no one then thought it was possible. Things change over time even if church doesn’t.

  2. Comment by Howard Merrell on November 19, 2013 at 3:10 pm

    Amen!
    In addition to the clear ethical imperative that you hold up, there is a practical consideration: Those of us who lead congregations hope that we will actually make a difference in people’s lives.
    If a preacher preaches in a church where no one is listening, does he make any sound?
    Yes, a pathetic racket.
    Once we sacrifice integrity, we surrender our right to be heard.
    There are ways of protest and change that are consistent with integrity. The sophistry you report is not.

  3. Comment by Beverly Fefferson on November 19, 2013 at 3:33 pm

    The fact that you assume progressive Methodist leaders disobey their vows with “levity” indicates that you do not understand them and you should try a little empathy before you speak.

  4. Comment by theenemyhatesclarity on November 19, 2013 at 4:43 pm

    You hit the nail on the head, several times. I hope our Bishops read this.

  5. Comment by Kay on November 19, 2013 at 5:23 pm

    I am not clergy, not trained, just what I would consider your ordinary Christian who believes in God and Jesus. I do agree that these clergy should not be disobeying their commitments to the UMC, but I do not get the disobeying of the 10 commandments. And to say that this is the last gasps of desperation from ailing revisionist factions of the UMC simply ignores what is happening concerning gay marriage in this country.

    I personally know several gay couples who are deeply religious Christians and in completely committed relationships – even more so than some heterosexual couples I know.

    I strongly believe that if this issue was as important on the “sin scale” as it is being made out to be Jesus would have managed to mention it.

  6. Comment by Rico on November 20, 2013 at 4:30 pm

    “I strongly believe that if this issue was as important on the “sin scale” as it is being made out to be Jesus would have managed to mention it.”

    That’s what’s known as a logical fallacy – argument from silence. You’ll have to do better than that.

    http://www.logicallyfallacious.com/index.php/logical-fallacies/55-argument-from-silence

  7. Comment by Kay on November 21, 2013 at 9:51 am

    Very true – I was just trying to say that I feel more weight should be given to what Jesus said than to what he did not say. I think in this country the issue of being gay and gay marriage are the sin of the day. Sin is to miss the mark, by an inch or a mile does not matter we are all sinners.

    I see this as a human rights issue. I do NOT think churches should be forced to perform gay marriages if they do not want to. Having said that I also would like to make the point that many arguing against gay marriage say that it will harm traditional marriage.

    I have been married to the same guy for over 30 years. I have yet to have anyone explain to me how my gay neighbors being allowed to marry will harm my marriage.

    If people want to write articles about any issues that harm marriage maybe they should start with infidelity, abuse and divorce. Those are important issues no matter in a gay or straight relationship.

  8. Comment by Bergenser on November 26, 2013 at 4:13 pm

    “anyone explain to me how my gay neighbors being allowed to marry will harm my marriage.”

    Oh no? How about violation of freedom of conscience and religious liberty, which we’ve already seen in numerous cases across the country. In Massachusetts, Catholic Charities was booted out of the adoption business because they refused to place children in same-sex homes.

    And that’s just the tip of the iceberg. With legalization of same-sex marriage, fewer people will marry, or remain monogamous and sexually faithful, or remain married for a lifetime. Demands for polygamy will grow–again we’ve seen the beginnings of this already.

    Make no mistake about it, same-sex “marriage” is a threat to the institution of marriage, to families, and thus to the very foundation of our society.

  9. Comment by Dave on December 3, 2013 at 11:23 am

    Thanks for your excellent article. This is not just about same-sex marriage, however. What about the oath-breaking that occurs even more broadly throughout the “conservative” evangelical church, among those who agree with you about sexual sin? I refer to the utter disregard of the 4th Commandment that permeates modern American Christianity.

  10. Comment by E on May 22, 2017 at 4:24 pm

    In the bible, it states in Leviticus, Man shell not lay with Man

  11. Comment by Ken Brownfield on July 23, 2019 at 10:35 am

    Great article and on point. The radical pastors and Bishops have broken their oath to God, the Church and the book of discipline. Obviously, they have their own agenda and will and not the will of God. How can a congregation believe a Pastor after this broken oath? Jesus did say when he started his ministry that “he came to full fill the law not to change it”. God stated in Leviticus twice that Homosexuality was and is an abomination. This was backed up when the Dead Sea scrolls were found in 1959.

The work of IRD is made possible by your generous contributions.

Receive expert analysis in your inbox.