3 Myths about the "Tares"

Recently I had to laugh about being referred to as a "tare".  Not sure what that is referring to? 

Matthew 13:24----  Look it up.  But in case you don't want to, it is a parable Jesus told about a farmer who found out an enemy had sown tares (or weeds) along next to his wheat.  He goes to to parallel the wheat and the tares to people or to the righteous and unrighteous things of the world, and how the farmer and his laborers need to separate it for the good of the wheat. 

Yes, this is total layman's terms here.  Being called a tare was amusing, but also disconcerning.  Why on earth would someone think they had the right to classify another individual? 

I read blog after blog after blog about how people are overreacting, how those who are opposed are unfaithful, or wavering.  One in particular was rather insulting.  It listed several "Myths about the Handbook Change."  It was derogatory and simplifying of the people who are upset by the change.  So here is a short but sweet (or not so sweet) rebuttal.  I'm too tired to go into every little sticking point, so I just chose four of the biggest ones.  Take it or leave it.  You may be sick of the drama. 

Myth #1

People who disagree with the changes in the Handbook are less faithful than those who follow without question.

Ummmm.....  Oh this one drives me nuts.  I've heard it over and over and over.  It is so sickeningly rude I can't stop shaking my head.  Let me just say, No.  No.  No.  How is it unfaithful to have serious doubts about things?  How is it unfaithful to want to know why?  Yes, we understand that God works in mysterious ways.  But that doesn't negate the hurt people feel, nor the problems we may have with our conscience for blindly agreeing to go along with it.  We are people of faith.  No one should ever feel they can determine someone's faith by their doubts.  No one should tell us to leave if we don't like it.  No one should compare us to weeds.  A lesson in compassion may be in order here. 

Myth #2

The changes to the handbook do not require children to reject their parents. 

Right, because you don't need to physically say, "I reject you" to disavow and renounce the sins of your parents... who you love... So sure, you don't have to say you reject them, but what are you feeling?  What are they feeling?  You are feeling like you are rejecting them.  They are feeling rejected.  I don't understand why people seem to completely disregard the feelings of those who will be in this situation.  We are not protecting any family by forcing them to call their parents sinners.  Love the sinner, hate the sin, but tell the sinner you disagree and renounce his or her decisions.  Yep, pretty clear.  Not.

Myth #3

It doesn't hurt you personally.

I have to share this quote from the post I recently read about what he thinks regarding this. 

"If someone talks about how this hurts them, they may sincerely think that, but it is also political theater, a learned response from mimicking the rhetorical style of those who’ve had so much political success on this issue.
Now let’s be clear, many people are feeling pain because of this decision, especially those whom the policy directly affects or who have family members this affects. The myth is that our personal emotional response should change Church policy.
Sharing feelings on this issue as though they affect the rightness or wrongness of the policy is a logical fallacy. This comes under the category of argumentum ad passiones. While you may feel whatever you want about this policy change, your feelings do not affect whether or not this change was correct. When people talk about their pain as a way of ending a conversation it is little more than emotional manipulation."  Christopher D. Cunningham

I guess I didn't realize all of us who profess to have feelings on the matter are just trying to manipulate others.  How fiendishly tricky of us!  Who knew we had it in us?  Apparently Mr. Cunningham did.  And once again, No.  Just No.

Myth #4

It is simple.  It is black and white.  Either you believe the church is true or you don't.

One thing I have learned in my years is that NOTHING is ever "simple".  NOTHING is ever black and white.  There are a million shades in between those polar opposites.  A million circumstances that create complex and confusing situations.  A million reasons to look at an issue from a million different angles. 

There is no harm in trying to understand something now, rather than waiting for more guidance in the future.  You may choose to accept changes, but you still want answers.  You still want to learn more. 

Admittedly at one point in my life (before I experienced real pain and real LIFE) I struggled with this.  I was always taught that things were right or wrong.  No in-between.  I struggled with this until I learned that while I DO believe in right and wrong, (though Christopher Cunningham would disagree, telling me I don't) I think there are so many reasons, feelings, and thoughts that go behind every action it would be foolish to paint everyone and everything with the same color.  The same is true here.  We can't claim that because we know ONE gay person who is okay with this that ALL gay people are.  It is dangerous to categorize everyone together.  These people understand that their children are all different, so how is it that ALL gay people are the same? 

There is always so much more to say at a moment like this.  I, for one, am burned out.  By nature I am not an argumentative person.  I'm an empathetic person.  (Just look at my tattoos for proof).  I dislike contention and bickering.  I'm almost always the person to say, "Let's agree to disagree."  But it is nice to find a voice, however small and insignificant to the world.  So hear is my voice saying, "Love One Another."