What is the ancient notion of a “Disputed Question” and how might recovering it help us today?

By The Rev. James Medley, Associate Priest
Eastern Shore Chapel, Virginia Beach

The disputed question is an ancient practice of the medieval Church where groups of students bring forth opposing arguments about theological questions (normally questions not having to do with core doctrine) and debate their contrasting points.   The master (professor) resolved the dispute by making a doctrinal decision as to which argument was correct. 

The disputation is also used today in most, if not all, Episcopal seminaries.  I remember participating in the discipline at the Seminary of the Southwest under our theology professor, Anthony Baker. Tony would give us a question like, “Does scripture contain everything necessary for salvation?” or “Does God suffer?” and then divide a group of us into two teams. One team had to defend the yes point and one defend the no point.  After each team made brilliant arguments (drawing on scripture, early theologians, and reason) Tony would tell us who made the better argument and then which answer, yes or no, was correct from the standpoint of the orthodox faith of the Church. 

Tony had only one hard and fast rule for our disputations: a participant could never argue from the position of unsupported belief.  For example, we couldn’t say, “The answer is this because that’s just what I believe.”   You had to argue from the evidence of your sources.  Sometimes that evidence was inconclusive, especially if the question being disputed concerned issues that weren’t considered matters of core doctrine by the Church.  On those types of questions, we sometimes had to agree to disagree, even to the point of disagreeing with our professor. 

If The Episcopal Church decides to allow the blessing of same-gender relationships, many of us will dispute the question. We don’t have a master or professor to tell us what the correct answer is.  Actually, we have many masters and professors who are willing to tell us the correct answer but, sadly, they don’t all agree.  And, from an objective point of view, the resources we use in our dispute can be seen as being inconclusive.  I believe the question in dispute is not a matter of core doctrine, so we can afford to disagree.  What we can’t afford to do is shut down the discussion by saying our answer (whatever that answer may be) is the right answer just because that’s what we believe. Nor can we afford to walk away from each other because we hold different beliefs on a matter that isn’t core to the faith of the Church.  

We need to treat this disputed question as a disputed question. We shouldn’t stop discussing it and we should come to our own belief about it from the resources we have at hand.  However, since it doesn’t pertain to core doctrine, we need to agree to disagree when we don’t hold the same beliefs.  

Question: Do you see the blessing of same-sex unions as being more a matter of core doctrine or more like a disputed question?