Speaking the Truth
in Love
Moral and Ethical Statements of
the Kentucky Council of Churches
Adopted by the
54th Annual Assembly of the
Kentucky Council of Churches
October 19, 2001
"But speaking the truth in love, we must
grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ, from
whom the whole body, joined and knit together by every ligament
with which it is equipped, as each part is working properly,
promotes the body's growth in building itself up in love."
Ephesians 4:15-16 NRSV
1. The Kentucky Council of Churches has stated that one of
its purposes is "to proclaim reconciliation, justice, peace
and the integrity of creation under the leading of the Holy Spirit,
[and] to engage in common witness and ministry . . ." (An
Affirmation Of Unity, 1992). In the early days of the ecumenical
movement, there was a common cliché that "doctrine
divides and service unites." In recent decades this adage
has been questioned. Public policy and social and personal ethics
are proving to be among the most divisive issues facing the ecumenical
movement and individual churches.
2. In 1952, the World Conference on Faith and Order meeting in
Lund, asked the churches if they were "showing sufficient
eagerness to enter into conversation with other churches and
whether they should not act together in all matters except those
in which deep differences of conviction compel them to act separately?"
This question, known as the "Lund Principle," is still
valid although consensus on public policy and moral principles
seems more difficult than it was in 1952.
3. Recent discussions in doctrinal and sacramental theology have
enabled us to move beyond old controversies by providing a common
vocabulary for discussion and clarification of the major points
of disagreement. The same level of consensus does not yet exist
in Christian ethics. Thus these issues generate much controversy
and may prove to be the most divisive not only for ecumenical
organizations but also within the individual churches.
4. This document will set forth some of the problems faced by
the Kentucky Council of Churches as it seeks to carry out its
mission of advocacy or dialogue on ethical questions in light
of the questions posed by the Lund Principle. It will clarify
the nature of conciliar statements and will set forth protocols
for conciliar statements.
The Problem Of Speaking Together
5. It is clear that a common vocabulary for ecumenical moral
and ethical discourse is far off. The document "Baptism,
Eucharist and Ministry" issued in 1982 by the World Council
of Churches has done much to advance ecumenical discussion in
sacramental theology by clarifying vocabulary. This document
showed that in spite of different terminology there was a remarkable
degree of convergence among the churches. It also clarified the
remaining points of divergence. This document has put the discussion
of sacraments and ministry in a new and more productive context.
6. Unfortunately, we are not at the same point in our discussions
of Christian ethics. There is little common vocabulary and our
traditional methods are different. Even terms that may be common,
such as "natural law," are given different meanings
not only among the churches but within the churches. We do not
all speak the same language when we discuss moral and ethical
questions.
7. Issues of public policy and individual action and responsibility
involve a wide range of philosophical and theological issues,:
a. How are right and wrong known?
b. What ethical ideals are possible in this sinful world?
c. What are the relative claims of individual rights and communal
responsibility?
d. What is natural law and how is it known?
e. Are there absolute moral principles?
f. What is the role of Bible and ecclesiastical authority?
g. What is the role of conscience?
h. What is the interplay between ethical ideals and the practical
necessities of living in a world of political, religious and
philosophical pluralism?
8. Because these questions are fundamental to any discussion
of the most basic and intimate issues of human behavior, they
possibly generate far more controversy than any others. Sadly,
it is often on these issues that we find the least ecumenical
consensus and the least discussion. But as stated in paragraphs
3 and 6, these issues cause as much disagreement and dissent
within traditions as among traditions. Every member church has
within its own ranks various schools of thought and different
approaches to handling ethical questions. These differences appear
in major conflicts over moral and ethical issues in parishes
or congregations and in regional, national, and international
bodies.
9. As the circle of ecumenical relationships widens, we include
additional theological understandings and different traditions
of Christian ethics. These differences could make speaking with
one voice more difficult and could lead to serious conflicts
within an ecumenical organization. However, such conflicts are
not inevitable.
10. As members of the Kentucky Council of Churches, we reaffirm
our intention to remain together, to work together, to pray together
in spite of our differences. Our unity is imperfect and we must
live with the realities of that imperfection. There can be no
progress if we retreat from these issues or if we allow them
to divide us. With patience and divine guidance, we may come
to some convergences in the future.
How Does A Divided Church Speak?
11. It is clear, that the Christian community is divided in
many ways. The issue here is to what extent a divided Church
can speak with one voice on moral and ethical issues, especially
on matters of public policy. Many churches have chosen to speak
through conciliar bodies as an expression of the unity we have
and the unity we seek. However, a statement from a Council of
churches is limited at least in the following ways:
12. First, a Council of churches, no matter how extensive its
membership, does not represent the voice of the entire Christian
community. Not all churches are members of these Councils. Even
when a Council takes action to speak on an issue, the member
churches are not bound to agree with that statement. If a statement
should be passed by a unanimous vote, it only represents the
opinions of those present and delegated to vote. Not all member
churches may be represented and the voting delegates may not
necessarily represent stated policies of their churches.
13. Second, when a church body of any kind speaks, it does not
speak from a position of privilege. Often in the public sphere,
church statements carry no special prestige or authority and
church representatives must take their place with representatives
of other special interest groups. Policy statements may not represent
the opinions of the majority of citizens. In Kentucky, the majority
of voting citizens favored a state lottery although most of the
state's churches had taken stands opposing it. Many Kentucky
churches have taken stands opposing capital punishment, but polls
show strong support for it among the people of the state.
14. Third, as Christians we do not use a common language nor
do we speak from a common ground. Our churches have different
ways of doing Christian ethics. When we use scripture, we do
not interpret it the same way. In an increasingly secularized
society, the language of religious ethics is not always immediately
understood by society at large, by the media and by policy makers.
15 Differences of method exist not only among member churches
but also within each church. Often theological allies are like-minded
individuals in other churches. Likewise strong opponents may
be within the same tradition.
16. Sometimes we have wide agreement using a common method. At
other times, we may agree on a moral and ethical position although
we may come to that position by quite different methods. Other
times, we may find varying degrees of agreement based upon our
different methods. Occasionally we are unable to agree. Even
when we disagree, we are often encouraged and enriched by our
dialogue.
Differences Of Method
17. The differences among Christians on moral and ethical
issues are great. The first difficulty we experience is that
we do not have a common name for this particular area of theology.
Roman Catholics and Anglicans have used the term "moral
theology" and have traditionally given it some independent
status as a discipline. Most Protestants have generally used
the terms "theological ethics" or "Christian ethics"
and have seen this area of theological reflection as a subdivision
of systematic theology.
Some Differences between Protestants and Roman Catholics
18. Eighteenth and nineteenth century Roman Catholic moral theology
tended to concentrate on individual morality and the questions
posed by sacramental confession and canon law. This tradition
was found in the catechisms and the text books used in seminary
education until recent times. Pope Leo XIII, in his encyclical
Rerum Novarum (1891), re-established social ethics as
an integral part of moral theology. This emphasis has been affirmed
by subsequent popes and is prominent in The Catechism of the
Catholic Church.
19. Roman Catholic moral theology grew out of the tradition of
scholastic theology and thus has classical philosophy as one
of its major sources. Continental European Protestant theology
reacted strongly against the medieval scholasticism and thus
has not traditionally relied as much on classical philosophy.
British Protestantism, especially Anglicanism, did not have the
same strong reaction to scholastic philosophy and has often been
closer to Roman Catholic moral theology.
20. Protestant theology has relied upon a variety of philosophical
systems and so has had great diversity in its understanding of
ethical issues. Some have seen ethical questions as part of the
social order and therefore the concern of the temporal order
and not the proper domain of doctrinal theology. The Pietist
and Holiness traditions tried to establish morality within a
theological context by emphasizing the moral and ethical consequences
of conversion and sanctification. Some Protestants in recent
decades have been more concerned with social ethics and public
policy questions, drawing heavily upon the resources of the social
sciences.
21. Prior to the Second Vatican Council, Roman Catholic moral
theology generally used a deductive method derived from the classical
tradition of Roman civil law. In this tradition general moral
principles were applied to particular acts. These general principles
were derived from philosophy, theology, church law and authoritative
church teaching.
22. Protestant ethics has often been inductive, abstracting general
principles by applying scriptural norms to specific cases. However,
disputes over biblical authority and interpretation have led
to disagreement over the nature of biblical norms and how they
should be applied to particular cases. Much Protestant ethical
theology has been inductive, deriving moral principles from specific
ethical judgments. Protestant ethical systems have adopted a
variety of viewpoints on the existence of absolute moral principles
and their applicability to particular situations.
23. Because of differences in ecclesiology, Roman Catholic moral
theology and Protestant theological ethics have given different
weight to church pronouncements. Because there is no institutional
magisterium in Protestantism comparable to that of the Roman
Catholic Church, doctrinal pronouncements have varying degrees
of authority according to the polity of the several churches.
Roman Catholic moral theology recognizes an institutional magisterium
in the college of bishops headed by the pope. Statements from
the magisterium, such as papal statements, actions of ecumenical
Councils, judgments and directions of the Roman curia, and pastoral
judgments of bishops, carry different degrees of authority depending
on the nature of the statement.
24. With its strong foundation in classical philosophy, Roman
Catholic moral theology has traditionally relied heavily on the
concept of natural law. In early Protestant ethics, matters related
to natural law were often seen as the proper concern of the temporal
order. The role of natural law and natural theology has been
a major point of contention in twentieth century Protestant theology.
At present, some Protestant theologians are attempting to recover
a concept of natural law. Still, there is no single definition
of natural law that would be accepted by all Protestant and Roman
Catholic theologians.
Some Differences Among Protestants
25. Authoritative Statements. Some churches have authoritative
confessions of faith, which include moral and ethical statements.
Some have policy statements that are binding on the operations
of church institutions. Some have statements that are merely
an expression of a majority at a particular church assembly or
convention.
26. Biblical Authority. Protestants hold a variety of positions
on biblical authority and interpretation. Different weight is
given to various parts of the Bible and biblical moral statements
may be contextualized by historical and literary criticism.
27. Within Protestantism there is a division between those who
see ethics primarily as a matter of individual morality and those
who would emphasize social ethics. This division becomes apparent
in conflicts over public policy issues. While the same tension
exists among Roman Catholics, it is not as pronounced as among
Protestants due to the authoritative papal statements which give
special emphasis to social ethics.
28. Christian ethical and moral theology has always wrestled
with the role of conscience. While Roman Catholic theology has
emphasized the process of forming conscience, many Protestants
has often emphasized the primacy of the individual conscience
without giving sufficient attention to how conscience is formed.
Throughout history, individual Christians have often experienced
the dilemma of conflicting demands of conscience and external
authority, both civil and religious.
29. Today there is much variety in the methods used in Christian
ethics. Some ethicists still use traditional methods and traditional
terminology. Other approaches are greatly influenced by recent
theological developments which have changed the focus of theological
reflection and introduced new categories and new language. Since
the middle years of the twentieth century, the emphasis of Roman
Catholic moral theology has shifted from the legalism of earlier
systems to a reliance on scripture and the insights of personalist
philosophy.
30. Among Protestants, the on-going, fundamental questions of
biblical authority and interpretation have influenced the methods
and conclusions of theological ethics. Thus Protestants do not
all do Christian ethics in the same way and do not use a common
vocabulary to describe the process.
Statements Of The Kentucky Council Of Churches
31. Many moral and ethical statements of the Kentucky Council
of Churches have addressed matters of public policy, enabling
representatives of the Council to speak to government officials
and legislators on public policy issues. These statements may
also be addressed to the churches to raise awareness of moral
and ethical issues, to encourage theological reflection, and
to foster constructive dialogue.
How We Speak
32. The Kentucky Council of Churches has chosen to adopt a policy
of consensus on statements of public policy advocacy (Operating
Norms 1993, B.2.c). As a result, the Council will not adopt
a policy that is contrary to the official position of any member
church. (Constitution Of The Kentucky Council Of Churches,
art VI.1). Some have seen this as an intrusion on free expression
and have called it a "gag rule," assuring that controversial
issues will not come before the Council.
33. The Council believes that consensus is the better way to
follow and does not see this policy as a disabling restriction.
We do not all agree on moral and ethical questions. We would
not want to see the Council restricted only to those who think
alike. We believe that it is important for the Council to be
broadly representative of the whole Christian community and of
the different traditions represented by the churches of our state.
We regard the presence and participation in the Kentucky Council
of Churches of many confessions and theological perspectives
as a positive value to be cherished. We prefer to speak with
consensus rather than to polarize the ecumenical community. We
also believe that while consensus building may be a slow process,
it encourages dialogue with other traditions and promotes deeper
theological reflection. Individual member churches or combinations
of churches are free to make public policy statements on any
issue, even if the Kentucky Council of Churches does not.
Guidelines For the Formulation Of Public Policy Statements
By The Council
34. When a public policy statement is formulated, the Kentucky
Council of Churches attempts to follow certain guidelines:
a There should be a clear declaration of the purpose of the statement
and the audience to whom it is addressed.
b. The background issues should be clearly stated. What is the
problem that is being addressed?
c. The specific issues that are raised from our Christian perspectives
should be clearly stated.
d. The document should be written from an ecumenical perspective:
(1). No special appeals should be made to one theological method,
one confession or one denomination's official stand. Individual
member Churches are free to issue their own statements in which
they appeal to their own traditions and authoritative stands.
(2). The document should emphasize common theological affirmations
when they can be made.
(3). The document should emphasize that as Christian citizens,
we share with other citizens a concern for the common good. We
should not be seen as claiming any special privilege for ourselves
because of our religious faith.
(4). The focus should be on our policy agreements without developing
a detailed theological position. Experience has shown that we
may agree on a policy question but come to that agreement by
different methods. For example, we might agree that gambling
casinos are not sound public policy. One tradition may believe
that any form of gambling is inherently wrong. Another tradition
might come to the same stand on the policy question after evaluating
relative claims of justice and the public good without condemning
gambling in principle. The focus should be on the specific policy
question and not on a detailed theological argument.
(5). The document should avoid sweeping generalizations such
as: "all Christians agree that ...," "Christianity
has always believed that …;" or "reason (or natural
law) tells us …." There is too much diversity in historical
and contemporary Christianity to allow such statements to be
made.
(6). We should state the position clearly without condemning
persons or demonizing opposing points of view.
When Member Churches Speak Separately
35. The Lund Principle indicates that there may be times when
member churches speak separately.
a. Individual churches or groups of churches may choose to issue
their own statements when the Kentucky Council of Churches does
not speak because of constitutional restrictions or a lack of
consensus.
b. A member church, agreeing with a Council statement, may wish
to make a supplemental statement outlining its own particular
theological position on the issue, appealing to its own traditions
and denominational statements.
c. A member church may wish to formulate a statement of dissent
from a statement of public policy approved by the Kentucky Council
of Churches if the policy statement was adopted prior to that
church's joining the Council or if the Church subsequently adopts
an official position in conflict with an already existing Council
statement.
Making Separate Statements
36. When a member church or group of churches wishes to issue
a separate statement, the following guidelines are recommended:
a. Churches should consider what effect separate actions might
have on future relationships with other churches. As a family
of faith we should not jeopardize the unity we have by reckless
and polemical statements. If we feel we must speak the truth
as we see it, we should remember the words of Saint Paul and
speak the truth in love (Ephesians 4:15).
b. Such a statement should clearly indicate why it is issued.
If it is supplemental to a statement of the Council, it should
explicitly state that it agrees with the Council's statement.
The statement may present a position based upon the traditions
and statements of that particular church and may take a stand
on related issues that were not included in the Council's statement.
c. Separate statements should emphasize points of agreement with
other churches.
d. A separate statement, like statements of the Council, should
be fair in presenting the opinions of others and avoid inflammatory
and degrading expressions.
Study Documents
37. Study documents may be issued to and for the member churches
which do not take a particular stand but which provide context
and resources for the churches so that informed dialogue and
theological reflection may take place. A study document would
allow for dialogue on issues on which there is no consensus within
the Council. It might also encourage broadly based discussion
of issues in preparation for a later policy statement.
38. A study document should state clearly that it is issued for
discussion, dialogue and exploration by the member churches and
does not represent a public policy stand of the Council. The
document should . . .
a. Indicate why the issue is important and why it deserves the
attention of the churches at this time.
b. Present contending positions fairly.
c. Indicate other doctrinal issues that relate to this question.
d. Gather existing statements from all churches, seeking to explain
what they say so that informed discussion may take place.
e. Provide discussion questions, bibliography and a list of available
audio visual materials.
f. Indicate what specific action, if any, is desired. Should
the member churches forward responses to the Council? Should
the member churches take a vote in their bodies on the issues?
The document should indicate what the Council intends to do as
a follow-up.
Dialogue On Moral And Ethical Questions
39. Christians are not in agreement on all questions of morality
and ethics. As we have noted, the divisions among us do not always
follow confessional lines. Often within a given tradition there
may be as much difference on moral issues as there is among various
traditions. These differences could be paralyzing to an ecumenical
organization like the Kentucky Council of Churches which seeks
consensus before making policy statements. When a consensus on
a moral and ethical question appears difficult or impossible,
the Kentucky Council of Churches seeks to encourage and foster
dialogue among and within the member churches, and among all
Christians and persons of good will.
40. We must remember, however, that our ecumenical relationships
are not based on agreement on all issues. We believe that our
common faith in one Lord Jesus Christ and our common baptism
give us the mandate and foundation for unity. We believe that
we are bound together in Christ and that nothing can separate
us from the love of God. Therefore, when we find that we disagree
on questions of morality and ethics, we feel compelled to engage
in dialogue with each other. Dialogue is an obligation placed
upon us both by our common humanity and by our shared Christian
faith.
41. Dialogue is not simply a method or strategy for maintaining
unity among members of an ecumenical organization. It is a concrete
expression of our unity in Christ and of the love that binds
us to each other. We believe we must remain together and seek
mutual understanding under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
42. Christian dialogue is based upon four theological affirmations:
(1) our common commitment to Christ is greater than anything
that may divide us; (2) different positions are held in good
faith; (3) many disagreements are the result of misunderstandings
of other points of view; (4) disagreements call for continuing
dialogue and not deeper divisions.
43. To be fruitful, ecumenical dialogue requires some commitments
from each of us.
a. We must be willing to set aside preconceived notions and listen
carefully to what the others are actually saying.
b. We must be willing to respect each other as Christian brothers
and sisters and to grant that everyone is speaking sincerely
and in good faith.
c. We must know our own tradition well enough to explain it clearly.
d. We must avoid polemics or caricatures of opposing view points.
e. We must understand that there are different points of view
on moral and ethical issues within other churches just as there
are within our own. We cannot expect a level of agreement with
others that we do not have within our own ranks. These differences
should be for us a special opportunity to seek reconciliation
and understanding with other Christians.
f. We must be patient. If we seek a quick resolution of our differences
we run the risk of being superficial or of exacerbating existing
divisions. We must be willing to engage in mutual discernment
through prayer and patient discussion, listening and sharing.
We believe that true consensus is the work of the Holy Spirit.
Therefore we must be patient and let the Spirit work in us, with
us and through us.
44. Dialogue among Christians with the guidance of the Holy Spirit
will strengthen the bonds of love that bind us to Christ and
to each other. Thus if we do not come a consensus and feel that
we must speak separately, we will always be mindful of our Christian
sisters and brothers and will always seek to speak the truth
in love.
45. Dialogue can be an effective means for bringing together
people who hold different points of view. It is also a practical
affirmation that all of our reflection on ethical and moral questions
must be done within the context of our relationships with other
Christians especially those with whom we have a special relationship
in the Kentucky Council of Churches. Dialogue also opens us to
other ways of thinking and helps us learn from the thought and
experience of others.
46. We the members of the Kentucky Council of Churches believe
that statements of consensus on moral and ethical questions are
an important part of our work. We also believe that dialogue
among Christians, and between Christians and other people of
good will, is in itself a concrete expression of Christian love.
Through dialogue on ethical and moral questions, we believe that
we are showing our commitment both to expressing the unity we
already have in Christ and to seeking greater unity with each
other in our common work and witness through the Kentucky Council
of Churches.
|
