Print This Post
BOA ACTION: Motion that resolution #42 be referred to the BOB to craft a more desirable position in consultation with the overseers of the church to bring to the BOA with power to act a revision to the Book of Discipline ¶3213 (BOA acting as GC between sittings).
GCRCC Status: forwarded for April 2011 BOA action
Introduced by: Daleasha Hall, Oregon Conference
Written by: Daleasha Hall
Related to Paragraph(s) #: 3213
Whereas:
Whereas we desire to be healthy biblical communities where we are continually being transformed by an intimate relationship with God; and
Whereas we desire to see lives focused on Christ and transformed by God’s grace and love rather than to define the community of faith by external and exclusionary human regulations; and
Whereas Paul’s concern was that the believer’s moral behavior should be modified when necessary out of concern for the one who is “weak in faith,” but also that the one whose conscience does not allow him/her to partake of some dietary items, such as meat or wine, was in like manner admonished not to pass judgment on another with differing opinions (Rom. 14:1-23); and
Whereas total abstinence is not consistent with the teaching of Scripture, nor the personal example of our Lord Jesus Christ as reflected in His first miracle at Cana (John 2:1-11) and the shared cup of wine at the Last Supper instituting one of our most sacred Sacraments; and
Whereas Jesus’ and Paul’s admonitions were not against the use of alcohol per se, which was commonly present in wine because of the absence of preservatives in the ancient Near East, but to avoid its misuse; and
Whereas alcohol in and of itself has potential for addiction when misused; and
Whereas the Book of Discipline states that the human body is to be treated as the temple and a healthy diet is not only commendable but holy and righteous, and if longevity and health are desirable as stated in the Discipline statements on the sanctity of life and on euthanasia, and since medical treatments should be used with caution but without sinning for such purposes, then our view of alcohol should be consistent with this; and
Whereas the following journals demonstrate that using alcohol in moderation provides significant health benefits: Neurology, Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, American Journal of Epidemiology, Journal of the American Medical Association, British Medical Journal, American Journal of Public Health, New England Journal of Medicine and others; and
Whereas we have encouraged the “awakened conscience” and the spiritual discernment to help decide such matters as participation in war, we should be consistent and allow the conscience of the Christian to make the decision on other personal moral issues such as this; and
Whereas our culture and its understanding of alcohol have changed from the prohibition era when such legalistic measures were instituted, and a wholesale prohibition against any use of alcohol may be perceived as an indication of an undesirably judgmental and restrictive community that is not “safe” for the seeker;
Therefore, be it resolved:
Therefore be it resolved that section/paragraph 3213 be changed to say:
¶3213
As Christians we believe that life is full, abundant and free in Jesus Christ (John 8:35; 10:10). Therefore, we abstain from whatever damages, destroys or distorts His life in us.
Illicit drugs are prime offenders. Because various forms of narcotics cause untold damage to people and relationships and such drugs restrict personal development, damage the body and reinforce an unrealistic view of life, we avoid their use. Because Christ admonishes us to love God with all our being and our neighbor as ourselves, we advocate that individuals carefully consider their use of alcoholic beverages (Mark 12:30-31, Romans 14:1-23).
The abuse of alcohol is damaging to individuals, families, and society. It is unpredictably addictive and its destructive effects cannot be fully measured. Its abuse leaves a trail of broken marriages, family violence, crime, industrial loss, ill health, injury and death. As concerned Christians, we advocate that all Christians consider seriously the effects of our partaking of alcohol and its effects upon us for the sake of health, family and neighbors. Our intentions are to witness effectively for Christ while not placing stumbling blocks before those whose immaturity in the faith may cause them to stumble—by drinking or prohibiting drinking.
Because we believe Christians are to treat their bodies as sacred trusts, we advocate abstaining from the use of tobacco. It is a major cause of a variety of cancers and other diseases, as well as being an expensive and socially-offensive addiction. We take seriously the words of Paul, the apostle, “Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your body” (1 Corinthians 6:19-20). Because drug dependency of any kind inhibits fullness of life in Christ, we guard against the indiscriminate use of prescription and over-the-counter drugs. Though the therapeutic value of such substances may be great, their potency, proliferation and easy accessibility require that as Christians we be vigilant against their misuse. We believe that the intemperate consumption of food is a form of abusing the body which may result in illness and obesity. We e at healthily so as to preserve the strength of our bodies and so extend our years of usefulness as servants of Christ.
We endeavor by God’s help to be understanding and supportive toward those who come to Christ with problems of addiction. We believe in Christ’s power to deliver (Romans 6:13; Galatians 6:2). But we acknowledge the difficulties of overcoming the bondage of addictions, and desire to give whatever help and support are needed while fellow Christians seek full deliverance. As a further evidence of an awakened conscience, we advocate refraining from the cultivation, manufacture or promotion of these substances which are harmful to health.
– OR –
Therefore, be it resolved that the Study Commission on Doctrine be commissioned to examine this issue in the context of contemporary culture and biblical teaching and return a recommendation to the next General Conference.
Does the resolution have a direct relationship to the vision and mission of the Free Methodist Church?
Yes.
How will the proposed change help us accomplish our vision and mission?
It will help accomplish this by being more biblical and inclusive.
The Resolutions Committee rates this resolution as:
(A) Support – recommend adoption
No related posts.
When this website came to my attention, it was already after the April BOA. Is this saying this resolution was adopted? I certainly hope not. For the first time in my life I would be ashamed of our church. The discipline was already clear, abstinence was “advocated”, not mandated. That certainly seems to give wiggle room for those who feel the need to partake without giving a denominational statement. We, as Free Methodists don’t need to be able to say, “our church says we can drink, in moderation.”
To suggest that the use of alcohol in the Bible is equivalent to its use today is ridiculous. The technology did not exist to create alcohol above the level of a modest “wine”. Certainly the Biblical use did not include distilled alcohol. Finally, the common use was as is done in many European cultures today. The families drink “mixed wine”.
Be that as it may. The Biblical principle is that God is opposed to the use of alcohol as a means to impaired functioning (drunkeness). But drunkenness means something different in an age when people Pilot Jets and automobiles at great speeds and greater and instant decision making is a life and death proposition.
Some may argue that the level of alcohol use allowed Biblically would be an occasional beer. But let’s think further.
Should Marijuana be allowed because the Bible does not speak of it? We could say that about other drugs that prove to be less harmful in their cultural and personal consequences than alcohol.
Should we simply be looking for a Bible verse that allows or disallows something, or should we seek for principle?
What does love say about this issue?
I do not drink AT ALL and never will. Not simply because the FM church forbids it (sorry); not simply because I have developed a theology that denies the Biblical evidence. I will not drink because of my witness for Christ. When I was first saved, I thought there was nothing wrong with an occasional drink. After having spoken to many of my friends about my new-found commitment to Christ, I decided one day to sit down and have a beer with them to show them I was just one of the guys and not self-righteous. The response of one of those men (in the military) was “Pete, you old partying fool. You haven’t changed a bit.” I have never had a drink since. Not because of an allowance by “the letter” of Scripture, but because of the “spirit” of scripture which demands we live sacrificially and for others; that we do not cause them to stumble.
By the way, I thought that holiness meant that sort of “cross-carrying” life rather than one that says “what can I get away with and be a Christian still”?
What I find fascinating is this idea that the drinking of wine in the Scripture was somehow not ‘real wine’ but a watered down grape beverage.
Would you not then have to argue that Abraham drank gallons of ‘grape drink’ to fall into such a stupor that Ha his son saw him naked?
What would be the purpose of Proverbs 31? “Give wine….to those who are in anguish”, if it does not have the ability to ‘help them forget…?”
I appreciate this resolution. I do not see it as advocating for sloppy usage among believers, but instead we stand against the slippery slope argument which kept us from roller skating and movies in the past. Christians can be afforded freedom and yet make the Biblical choice.
Aaron,
Peter is correct that the usual practice of alcohol consumption in both Jewish and non-Jewish societies was to drink diluted wine (2 to 3 parts water per part wine). He’s also correct that distillation didn’t exist in biblical times. The verses you’ve cited (Gen. 9:20-21; Prov. 31:6-7) likely speak of drinking undiluted alcohol, which was sometimes done at drinking bouts, for instance. My concern is that, out of fear of legalism, we’re falling into a biblical literalism that ignores the context and trajectory of Scripture. One could find Bible verses to support patriarchy, polygamy, ethnic cleansing, and slavery, but where are the Resolutions calling for us to become more “biblical” on these issues?
jerome, if distillation didn’t exist, why are there warnings against drunkenness? Seems a moot point if the alcohol content was non existent.
I actually appreciate this resolution. While I deeply respect the traditional Holiness approach towards the consumption of alcohol, are we not guilty of asking current disciples to develop dietary disciplines that Jesus did not ask of his own direct disciples. Our current interpretation of the discipline equates alcohol consumption with immorality. As a physician, I can tell you that eating high fat, and high salt diets contribute to the destruction of the temple at a significantly higher rate (epidemilogically) than alcohol consumption does, but we rarely discuss the immorality of poor eating. Personally, I do not drink alcoholic beverages, but its clear that Jesus did. I believe strongly, as is worded in the resolution, that the abuse of alcohol and the potential for abuse should give us all pause in regards to alcohol consumption. However, the question is whether we want to continue to label alcohol consumption as immoral or whether we can empower people to make healthy choices. I believe this resolution allows us to take a deeper look at the foundations for our moral formation.
To advocate for abstinence and to require abstinences are substantially different from my perspective. It would be a mistake elevate abstinence from alcohol and other harmful beverages to a moral imperative lest we go the route of reviving an unhealthy legalism rather embracing a more full-bodied wholeness approach to holiness. I agree with Dr. Traxler that obesity is a far greater social problem (being a former an alcoholic, I am not unaware or undermining the serious nature of addictions of any form).
The greatest danger, in my opinion, to adopting a resolution of this nature, is to create a culture bound by law and living to the standard of the “weak in faith so as not to be as stumbling block.” It would be a dangerous path to travel if the standard of our practice is to do that which will not offend or could possibly lead to misunderstanding (which grasps only a portion of what Paul instructs in Romans 13-15, not the least of which is an admonition to the ‘weak in faith’ not to judge others for what they embrace along with the hope that those ‘strong in faith’ will not intentionally harm others. Good personal principles to be lived out in community with the use of spiritual judgement but not so good as a total blanket statement binding the ‘weak/strong’ to a particular course of action.
What I find interesting is that we equate alcohol consumption with immorality, but we hear nothing from our Church or pulpits about the sin of overeating or obesity. Obesity and overeating kill more people in America each year than alcohol. We practice frequent observance of “potluck’s” in our churches that encourage people to indulge. Take a look at our churches today and see the massive number of overweight and obese “Holiness Christians” who profess heart holiness.
Alcohol, when used in moderation can actually be healthy for us. Numerous studies have proven that moderate amounts of alcohol can reduce heart disease. But it’s also like eating; you can abuse it. Anything can be abused. Our churches are littered with people who have abused money, abused their bodies through overeating, and yes, abused their bodies with alcohol.
I feel the Church should allow people to use their own judgement when it comes to the use of alcohol. Is it worth keeping people from membership just because they have an adult beverage from time to time? Do we still want to be known as the local church that is stuck in 19th century legalism? Or do we want to be known as a church who makes disciples?
Some may ask about our “witness”. I would rather have a six pack of beer in my grocery cart than be 50 pounds overweight. When we start to “cherry pick” which habits we find immoral, we come across to the rest of the world as hypocrites.
I appreciate your comments, Mary. I think the resolution does a great job of sustaining our concern for the obvious I’ll effects, yet celebrating our hope in the Holy Spirit’s empowerment in the ‘awakened heart’ of the believer. It strikes me as strange that we would want a law in our church that would be a retroactive condemnation of Jesus’ first miracle. The Bible is so clear that it is drunkenness that is to be advocated against, not simply the consumption of alcohol. I applaud the writers of the resolution for recognizing that the issue of ‘stumbling blocks’ really does cut both ways. I want to affirm the good work of the writers of this resolution and state that I support it.
It is strange that the discussion comes to the point of discussing the impacts of alcohol vs. overeating and poor diet on health. I think a key factor is that of personal control and responsibility. The original meaning of temperance was that of moderation and self-restraint. This is could very well be applied to both. A key issue with alcohol is that when you don’t practice temperance you are likely to loose control of your actions. As Christians our witness is important. Is our witness tied to the fact that we don’t drink? I hope not.
After reading the resolution and following remarks, I am not sure the main issue of the resolution is simply that of drinking, but rather what could be conceived as a legalistic view against it. It seems that there are a few other phrasing matters that could be reconsidered from the 2007 reading of ¶3213 as well. A rewording of ¶3213 might help clarify some of these concerns. Perhaps something as follows:
As Christians we believe that life is full, abundant and free in Jesus Christ (John 8:35; 10:10). Therefore, we advocate that one should abstain from whatever damages, destroys or distorts His life in us.
Because various forms of illicit narcotics cause untold damage to people and relationships and such drugs restrict personal development, damage the body and reinforce an unrealistic view of life, we advocate that one should avoid their use. Because drug dependency of any kind inhibits fullness of life in Christ, we guard against the indiscriminate use of prescription and over-the-counter drugs. Though the therapeutic value of such substances may be great, their potency, proliferation and easy accessibility require that as Christians we be vigilant against their misuse.
Because Christ admonishes us to love God with all our being and our neighbor as ourselves, we advocate that individuals carefully consider the use of alcoholic beverages (Mark 12:30-31, Romans 14:1-23), and its effect upon their cognizant being. Although, in moderation, it may not be a sin issue; the abuse of alcohol can be damaging to individuals, families, and society. It is unpredictably addictive and its destructive effects cannot be fully measured. Its abuse leaves a trail of broken marriages, family violence, crime, industrial loss, ill health, injury and death. As concerned Christians, we advocate abstinence for the sake of one’s self, family and neighbors. Our intent is to not place legalistic barriers that may cause some to stumble, by drinking or prohibiting drinking; but that we may remain effective witnesses for Christ at all times, by abstaining from anything that could impair reason or our ability to so witness.
Because we believe Christians are to treat their bodies as sacred trusts, we advocate abstaining from the use of tobacco. In addition, the intemperate consumption of food can also be a form of abusing the body, which may result in illness and obesity. Such behaviors are believed to be major causes of a variety of cancers and other diseases, as well as being expensive and socially-offensive. We take seriously the words of Paul, the apostle, “Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your body” (1 Corinthians 6:19-20). We advocate that one should eat healthy, and get enough exercise and rest, so as to preserve the strength of our bodies and so extend our years of usefulness as servants of Christ.
We endeavor by God’s help to be understanding and supportive toward those who come to Christ with problems of addiction. We believe in Christ’s power to deliver (Romans 6:13; Galatians 6:2). But we acknowledge the difficulties of overcoming the bondage of addictions, and desire to give whatever help and support are needed while fellow Christians seek full deliverance. As a further evidence of an awakened conscience, we advocate refraining from the cultivation, manufacture or promotion of these substances which are harmful to health.
Well put Randy. Thank you for weighing in.
I reading carefully the above comments and it very helpful to see each side of the issue. As I continue my consideration of this resolution, I believe it is important as Randy Stateler said to keep in mind the purpose of the resolution.
I do believe that many of us pastors and leaders of churches speak regularly to the full abuses of the body, mind and spirit. When I take persons through membership classes, we speak fully of the “The journey” chapter, and I make sure we discuss the many forms of potential abuse(yes, including overeating and substances of many kinds, including caffine), and always come back to the better question we must always ask, “What shall I include in my day, week, life that will bring the greatest glory to God?” I dispel the notion that we ask the question, “what will God allow?” That is the wrong question.
The Methodist movement in America has had a long history of encouraging abstinence in the area of alcohol use. I see us as a church gradually lowering our standards in many of these moral issues. This is a time in America when alcohol use has become an increasing problem with most fatal accidents directly connected to alcohol use. What are we saying to our children and grandchildren when we give in to the world in this area. I have lived in a community next door to a college where alcohol consumption was much abused. I have served a church in a community where a large percentage of the young people considered alcohol a right of passage. I do not see any real positive value in changing our stand in the area of alcohol use. It will send a message to the next generation that drinking is ok for Christians. One of our retired bishops once made a statement something like this, “Each new generation lowers the standard of the previous generaton.” I have seen this happening in the area of entertainment and many other moral issues. Do we also do it in the area of alcohol? I am grieved if we do. I do not see changing this as helping me to live closer to the Lord or to bringing more people into the kingdom. Let us proceed very cautiously in this area.
Our Methodist movement has also had a history of ostracizing people who wore makeup, wore short sleeved blouses, wore wedding rings, wore jewelry, cut their hair (females” or wore long hair (males). We labeled these people as sub-christian. To permit wearing these items or styles was said to be “heading down a slippery slope”. Our Methodist movement also believed that having musical instruments in the church was “of the world”. So we banned pianos and organs, along with, God forbid, drums and guitars in the church for the first 100 years of our existence. Those who advocated musical instruments in our churches were branded as “heading down a slippery slope”.
I know many born-again Christians who drink alcohol. They are not “drunks” or “alcoholics” as many here have claimed every who drinks is. Their witness for Christ would outshine most in our tradition. They are not poor witnesses or sub-christian as we would like to label such people. Not every Christian who drinks is a bum who is in need of Alcoholics Anonymous.
How many good people have we driven away from our Free Methodist movement simply because we have an archaic legalistic rule from the 19th century that forbids the use of alcohol. When the Bible says that our bodies are a temple of the Holy Spirit, then the Lord will speak to us when it comes to the temperate use of drink AND food. And there is not one verse of scripture that states that the moderate use of alcohol is sinful.
Just because a bunch of college students abuse alcohol doesn’t mean that it’s use alone is sinful. They sin because of “drunkenness”, not because of the reasonable use of a beverage. I wish some here would be as vigilant about all the overweight people in our churches today who are the “poor witnesses” abusing food, rather than decrying those who may choose to have an alcoholic beverage in moderation.
I urge the General Conference to modify our “rule” and permit the use of alcohol.
I will be disappointed with my church if we change our position on the use of alcohol. I will still be one who believes in and practices abstinence. I do not understand how using alcohol will in any way lead me closer to God, but I do see how it could lead me away from God.
Some people who are overweight are that way because of overeating, but many are overweight because of hormonal, genetic, or other health issues. Gluttony is wrong, but may not always be directily related to a person’s weight or body type. I know many overweight people who severely limit their intake of food and still cannot easily lose weight, yet we stand by and pass judgment on them because they are large people. It takes real grace for such people to accept themselves as people that God loves in spite of their weight. The world tells us that you have to look a certain way to be attractive.
I would like to affirm the thoughtful responses to this issue as we live in the tension between freedom and discipline. However, I will be extremely disappointed if the drinking of alcohol becomes the major issue of this General Conference. I believe the Bishops are calling us to seriously re-engage in the priority of the Gospel mission of the Church. I pray that we will be at least as passionate about that as we are about our position on alcohol.
I guess I do not see it as an “either/or” situation. We must be passionate about the mission of the church and about winning the lost. However, I feel moral and social issues are of great importance as well.
If we allowed for people to make their own judgments on the use of alcohol, it would not be an issue. It’s sad that so many people won’t come to our church because we are known as the “you can’t drink” church. So people end up going to the other churches in town and win people to Christ. They go to other churches in town and tithe. They go to the other churches in town and become disciples for Christ. All the while our denomination seems stuck on a 19th century rule that keeps people out of our churches for no good reason.
Our Church and our denomination have so much to offer people. These silly rules are laughed at by our younger generation. And we are losing the young people to other churches. Sad
There seems to be a variety of things going and thus some issues we have to consider. I personally, believe that we the language should not just be reluctant “approval” as it seems it has been, but rather a call if discernment in one’s engagement with alcohol.
I understand the negative impact alcohol has on the community at large. I live in Santa Barbara and UCSB is one of the biggest party schools in the nation (it does offer some wonderful graduate programs). Moreover, being a higher education professional, I have read plenty of research highlighting the connection between alcohol use (properly stated as abuse) and poor decisions (crime, belligerence, pre-martial/forced sex). However, I don’t believe answer is to completely divorce ourselves, as Christians, from alcohol. Those who choose to responsibly consume alcohol can do so in a way that sets a different vision of how it can healthily interact with ones life (i.e. drinking w/dinner, a social beer). This is a redemptive act and one that many individuals need modeled for them. We can argue over the content of alcoholic drinks in the context of the Bible, but it is clear that there were those who got intoxicated from alcohol and those that do not. This seems to be the same issue we have currently. And just as those who drank moderately (however defined by the %of alcohol in each drink), set a standard for those who drank excessively and for youth.
Also, in regards to reaching others we cannot ignore the context of pubs and bars. These are some of the most social places in our culture, if we limit ourselves from sitting down and having a drink with folks who are asking big questions about God, purpose, etc. then I believe we are severely hindering ourselves and are a disservice to the Kingdom.
Again, I don’t want to be naive of the possible ramifications, they are real, but I also don’t want us to be clouded with the fear of “messing up”. I value that there is balance in this resolution between freedom and discipline (especially in the version written by Randy). The tension between being legalistic and laissez-faire has to be embraced; the pure pursuit of one over the other seems inevitably faulted.
*I also think the food/gluttony issue is important, but should be within the context of a different conversation. Nevertheless, I believe that there is enough scriptural, anecdotal, and scientific evidence to warrant a more serious stance on food consumption that allow for freedom but advocates discipline (if we have one or if we a statement that directly discusses the need to care for our bodies correct me, I am newer to the denomination).
Well said, friend… the thing I love about Free Methodism is our commitment to the MIDDLE WAY (Via Media). We aren’t afraid of engaging with culture and being conversant with it. Seeing and affirming the good while speaking of the One who brings true wholeness. I’ve had great conversations with non-believing friends over a pint that I would NEVER have been invited to have in another setting. We must pursue the “middle way” on this issue if we are going to see the kingdom move forward in segments of our city/world.
Over my 43 years of pastoral experience, I have struggled with these issues; however, I still believe abstinence in alcohol (a drug) is still the best position; we can take this stand without being judgmental and harsh; in contrast, being sympathetic for the person overtaken with abuses, offering help and encouragement for recovery.
Daleasha Hall’s Resolution mentions the Journals proposing “alcohol in moderation provides significant health benefits”, however, I don’t see Mayo Clinic mentioned. Back when this “research” first arose, Mayo came out in contradiction of this position. They stated that the properties in alcohol that provide help in overcoming coronary artery heart disease can be found in ordinary red grape juice, etc. without the risks of alcohol. (See Mayo Clinic Health Letter, September, 1985–their stance has not changed.) Mayo was also a leader in a strong stance against tobacco. I believe their influence led the way to not allowing tobacco in public buildings, etc.—you should have seen the number of people in Rochester standing out in sub zero weather smoking their cigarettes, during breaks, after Mayo took their stand. One Mayo doctor told my neighbor “I can do nothing more for you until you quit smoking.”
Someone’s comment above speaks about wine being used in the Lord’s Supper, instituted by Jesus. I challenge anyone to find the word “wine” (oinos), used in the New Testament, in context with the Eucharist.
I also find obesity, caused by gluttony, listed as a sin in the Bible; but that kind of preaching hits too hard at home, in our congregations (God have mercy); plus, the implied public condemnation of those with hormonal weight problems, etc.
I would recommend Randy Stateler’s proposition over the one submitted. (That’s not just because I know Randy as a friend and colleague.) Not being a delegate, I will have no vote on any of the issues; however, I don’t think that restricts speaking my opinion on this media.
Today, I am not worried about legalism in the FM Church, at least in our part of the country; sure, there will be some individuals who could qualify, but I don’t see our churches being too legalistic; if they are, they are failing to reach the lost by lack of strong Scriptural compassionate advocacy*; not by being too holy! [*paraklhsis; called alongside or parallel to that person; patterned after the superior work of the Holy Spirit]
This kind of dialogue, however, is very good. When we face issues honestly, we have a fairly good chance of finding the correct solution.
We will be praying for the Lord to direct our delegates to be submissive to the Holy Spirit’s moving, in this and all resolutions.
Pastor Betry is right on. The Bible is pretty clear… “Wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging; and whosoever is deceived thereby is not
wise” (Proverbs 20:1). The late David Wilkerson spoke out for abstinence. He wrote, ” This nation is fast becoming a sodden society of too many intoxicated citizens. Alcohol is now
the modern golden calf, and millions of people, young and old, male and female, have been
seduced by it.
The teetotaller, the prohibitionists, and all the others who have for years fought against this
flood of booze have been laughed out of existence…..To me, the real tragedy is that so many who call themselves “Christian” are now drinking. I call
them “sipping saints” – because that is how it all begins, one sip at a time. A recent poll revealed
that 81% of all Catholics now drink and 64% of all protestants. These shocking figures keep
mounting higher each month. The permissive attitude toward social drinking is fast creeping
even into the most conservative, evangelical church circles. l have spoken at Charismatic
conventions where thousands of “Spirit-filled” saints of God lifted hands in praise and adoration
to God – and after being dismissed, numbers of them walk out into the parking lot, open their
car trunks and pull out a couple six-packs and pass them around to fellow worshippers. Others
order mixed drinks with their restaurant meals, in between the praise sessions….”
I have personally been accused of being legalistic but I have seen the devastating effects of alcohol use on a family, church and society. Proverbs 6:27 says, “Can a man scoop a flame into his lap and not have his clothes catch on fire?” Even among my missionary colleagues I am a lone voice. I’m for the vulnerable teenager who sees a “mature believer” with alcohol in his grocery cart and feels empowered to go ahead and drink to his/her detriment. I’m for the alcoholic who comes to the church thinking it is a safe place only to find out that drinking is becoming more a part of the church scene! A couple of other observations make me a leader that encourages others to abstain from alcohol use. One, most people drink for effect…it calms them! Is this not one of the functions of the Holy Spirit? Second, as believers we are called to “deny ourselves, take up the cross and follow me.” When this issue is brought up, the major concern becomes obvious… individual rights rather than self denial! I’m grieved that the church is increasingly becoming more like the world… Just some thoughts.
Rev Richard J. Dickinson
Richard, I absolutely respect your decision not to drink alcohol. I just feel that you should not impose your belief on the rest of us via an archaic 19th century rule. Having a “Church Rule” simply keeps good people out of our denomination. These same people we shut out could be helping us build a great movement. Unfortunately, we seem to not trust Christians to make their own judgements as to whether to consumer alcohol. If we use your arguments, we should ban cell phones because people can send sex texts. Or maybe we should ban pork and mashed potatoes at Church potlucks because it can clog your arteries and make you fat. You get my picture?
As for the Eucharist, I find it laughable that Jesus drank Welches Grape Juice. For me, it was most likely the finest of wine. When he turned the water into wine, it had to be the finest of fermented wine. But for that issue, the Church will be arguing that issue long after we are all gone.
As I read the above comments, especially those equating obesity with alcohol consumption, a very simple observation comes to mind: We have to eat to live but there is absolutely no need to drink an “adult beverage”. even though I agree with the importance of healthy eating, that would seem to be a completely different (although important) issue. They hardly seem to be of equal consequence. While no one that I am aware of equates social drinkers with “bums” or “alcoholics”, we know too much today about the impairment one drink can bring to a person’s judgment. If our motive is to visit bars solely as a witness, why not order a soft drink? We served in the military for 22 years and attended many social functions and private dinners where alcohol was served. Our quiet “No thank you” never interfered with our ability to be a friend and to talk about the Lord. However, we were aware of the many times loosened tongues brought embarrassment or shame or lowered defenses led to impurity and violence. If one can become an alcoholic with the first drink, why open the door to that possibility? Why take the chance of killing someone on the highway after a few drinks? Yes, we want to win people to the Lord but we also want to make them disciples, living the abundant holy life to which Christ called us. Concerning voting on this resolution, it is my understanding, as a delegate, that this was first referred to the BOA who referred it on to the BOB who will study it and then send it back to the BOA for action. If this is correct, I believe it should be brought to the General Conference for a vote by the whole body because of its profound implications.
As a newbie in the FMC, I can tell you that there is inconsistency in the application of what “advocating abstinence” means. You can see that even here. Can members drink? Can everyone drink? Can members drink, but not leaders? How do you define who is a leader, for the purposes of this rule?
There is a deeper, more profound inconsistency that needs to be addressed: Is alcohol consumption per se (i.e., not intoxication) immoral? This is not a settled issue, as the whispers in churches about who is drinking and who isn’t can easily show.
The Book of Discipline bases its stance not on moral grounds, but pragmatic. We advocate abstinence to maintain a united social witness, and to help those who are alcoholics and those who have been victims of alcohol abuse. Since these are pragmatic goals, they should be measurable. Does abstaining accomplish these two goals? Anecdotal evidence can be given in either direction. A thorough study should be done. Does it actually work?
The connection between alcohol and food abuse points to the need for revising our “social witness” goal, regardless of whether the stance on alcohol is changed. We need a more comprehensive “Mission to a Self-Indulgent Society” that will be a redemptive force across multiple substances and behaviors. We could also use a broadened “Ministry to Persons in Bondage” framework that could guide congregations in recovery ministries, intercessory prayer ministries, counseling programs, etc.
Finally, I understand the fear that taking down the fence will cause all the children to run headlong into the road. But it seems to me that we have taken the alcoholic’s view of alcohol (something like, “It’s only good for getting drunk, forgetting your problems, etc.”) as fact. Do we accept a paranoid person’s view of reality, and then suggest that all live as if it were true? If people are shaped by the assumption that alcohol is only good for getting drunk, then taking down the fence may indeed lead to many problems. But leaving the fence up is not the only way to avoid destruction.
What I find fascinating is the fact that of all the resolutions on the GC11 website, this one is the one that has attracted the most attention. What does this say about us? How does this reflect our values as a denomination?
I agree, David. Good to see you here, and thanks for weighing in.
my original post mysteriously disappeared for some reason. hmmm
What’s the Bible tell us?
So don’t put up with anyone pressuring you in details of diet, worship services, or holy days. All those things are mere shadows cast before what was to come; the substance is Christ. Don’t tolerate people who try to run your life, ordering you to bow and scrape, insisting that you join their obsession with angels and that you seek out visions. They’re a lot of hot air, that’s all they are. They’re completely out of touch with the source of life, Christ, who puts us together in one piece, whose very breath and blood flow through us. He is the Head and we are the body. We can grow up healthy in God only as he nourishes us. So, then, if with Christ you’ve put all that pretentious and infantile religion behind you, why do you let yourselves be bullied by it? “Don’t touch this! Don’t taste that! Don’t go near this!” Do you think things that are here today and gone tomorrow are worth that kind of attention? Such things sound impressive if said in a deep enough voice. They even give the illusion of being pious and humble and ascetic. But they’re just another way of showing off, making yourselves look important. Colossians 2:16-23 (The Message)
Doesn’t it get tiring trying to be the Holy Spirit? What happened to the conscience of the Christian? What does Free really mean?
I know some beer drinking, over the belt “socially-offensive” belly boys that have a whole lot more love of their neighbor and Jesus than some of the Free Methodists I’ve met in 16 years of membership.
It really makes no matter what we do. People are people and just because we make it a rule or not won’t stop the farmer in the wheat field who washes away the dust with a cold PBR, or the couple toasting their anniversary with a glass of bubbly. People will follow their own conscience. As I think God intended. And if that conscience has Christ we won’t need to worry about our great denomination slipping down any hillside.
One final thought…isn’t self-control a fruit of the Holy Spirit and not a rule book?