Piper and Pannenberg

So John Piper has recently written on schism, and referred to Bonhoeffer and Pannenberg in order to support his position (here). Bonhoeffer scholars already have a problem with his use of Bonhoeffer; I have something to say about his use of Pannenberg.

Firstly, his quote ignores the fact that a paragraph and a half later, Pannenberg speaks of how the Church is to treat homosexuals (available here in German). Roughly translated high points: "the fact of homosexual attraction cannot be denied, and one may also not judge it...The Church must life with the fact, that a failure to keep the norm in this [ie the sexual, also heterosexual practice] area of life is, as in others, not seldom, but rather the rule [than the exception]. The Church must meet these people with tolerance understanding, but also call them to repentance."

That's a pretty different tone, huh?

A second point: this was Pannenberg in 1994; in 2005 he wrote a professional review of practice for the German Evangelical Church on the same topic (actually, the practice of homosexual pastors living together on church property). While Pannenberg still opposes homosexuality, his words on schism are striking (available here in German). Again he calls to tolerance and understanding, and again he calls for repentance; most important, however, he gives his greatest reason for worry: that "die homosexuelle Lebensform eines Pfarrers oder einer Pfarrerin in der Tat die Einheit der Gemeinde gefährdet", that is, "the homosexual lifestyle of a pastor [male or female] indeed endangers the unity of the congregation."

Schism? Pannenberg was worried about keeping the church together! He stayed, and stays, in a church body that makes to a rule a thing he opposes: but he opposes from within, the exact opposite of what Piper seems to be calling Christians to do.

Way to take people out of context...