"This kind of thing..." Really.

In an article posted today on the Christian Century Networks Blog the following was reported, referencing the maneuver to prevent discussion on the definition of marriage at the last General Assembly:

"Progressive Presbyterians were disappointed by the redefinition defeat. The resolution was essentially voted down July 8 in a parliamentary maneuver and never came to the floor for a full debate; an attempt to revive the resolution failed by a wide margin the next morning.

'The church was not yet ready to make a decision,' General Assembly moderator Cynthia Bolbach told reporters. "This kind of thing happens at every assembly.'"

"This kind of thing..." Really.

Earlier in the article, Pam Byers, Executive Director of Covenant Network offered this statement:

We're hoping very much to reengage and continue the momentum...As more Presbyterians recognize that they know good, faithful gay Presbyterians, it becomes harder to maintain this exclusion."

"It becomes harder to maintain this exclusion."

The juxtaposition of these comments by two powerful leaders in the PC(USA) frames some of the problem. For the church, it's just a time of not ready and expressing the lack of readiness as just another exercize of parliamentary procedure. So, for the gay and lesbian people of the church the status of exclusion continues, based on policy absent any other voice from leadership levels of the Office of General Assembly or elsewhere in Louisville.

Policy v. People. PC(USA)?

I admit it. I don't believe it has to be so. As a result, I continue to exhort every leader I can find, inlcuding supportive moderators of the PC(USA) to stand up and state to all that this church is wrong in its exclusionary policy. To state to those who believe that they are forgotten that it is not so. That they know this church is not welcoming and that it needs to change to become fully faithful.

Leadership from the PC(USA) needs to stand up and say that this instiutional marginalization is not "just a thing" dictated by policy. We need to exit the state of denial we seem to cower within, acknowledging that it is not "decent" to accept the dehumanization of others to maintain "order."

We who are excluded are not issues. We are baptized living, breathing, loving sisters and brothers. And this church's actions, or in this case inaction, reaches far beyond those who might call themselves Presbyterians. We are failing the human community of creation by excluding Lesbuan, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender folk from the full work and worship of this church with all the privileges of the church, including marriage. If there is to be any discussion of sin, it needs to start with this egregious error.

If the leadership of the church represents the whole church, when do they represent the LGBT commnity? Where in the official PC(USA) church is there an office, a person, or an outreach for the concerns of our sisters and brothers who are lesbian and gay? There is only public silence and sometime private support.

I also admit to wondering when will this church produce someone unconcerned with losing their status or position to the degree that they will stand up for the marginalized people they privately say they support and, at least, create a center in the church, not another study,  to help change the institutional church. We do not need to be studied; we need to be welcomed, even at the risk of upsetting others. I believe there is biblical precedent for such a thing.

I agree with Pam Byers and others who say that the exclusion [of LGBT folk] is slowly being chipped away, as more and more people ..."recognize that they know good, faitful gay Presbyterians."

I would add to that. I would add that in addition to knowing good, faithful gay Presbyterians, more and more people are recognizing the unintentional complicity of this church in the hate crimes and homophobia that plague this and other societies and cultures around the world. More and more people have had enough with a church that promises to follow the teachings of Jesus, but lacks the courage to make the same sacrifices it demands of others. Sacrifices it demands without any sense of public policy statement, institutional support, or what would be welcome outrage at the harm and injustice caused by silence and refusal.

Just another thing...

Hardly.

Denied...

I remember being 19 and the night my brother was lost in a car accident. The next morning I awoke thinking, "What a terrible dream," only to suddenly be swept up in the reality of finding Michael was forever gone.

No one died last night at the plenary, but the reality is that a huge loss took place in the way of the 219th General Assembly and those who came here faithfully and prepared to have an open conversation about marriage. When I awoke this morning, I thought, "What a terrible dream," only to be rapidly filled with the familiar sickening disappointment of our community again being admonished by those who see us as "less than" because we are people who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender.

The vote to put off discussion of the amendments sent to the assembly by the dedicated and faithful work of the advocates, committee, and all those who have labored for more than two years to be ready to speak - the vote to put this off was more than a procedural maneuver. It was an act of violence, such as the gay (LGBT) community has come to know all too well from those who affirm their comfortability by denying the fullness of our lives, any way they can.

What took place last night is neither Christian nor loving. It was the act of desperation and fear by those who know this church is changing and are so fearful of the possible change - that they are willing to block the Spirit they claim so passionately to embrace.

Last night's actions to quiet the voice of those who the Spirit led here to speak have changed this morning's landscape to one littered with the broken facade of forbearance and decency. I do hope that none of the commissioners who voted to postpone the conversation ever experiences what they did to us last night. It was really that bad.

As before, let us continue to pursue the justice, once more denied us, praying for those who continue to oppress us, trusting in God even now.

We are not done.

A Reponse to Scott Anderson's interview...

The following is a response to a recent interview of Scott Anderson by Janet Edwards on her blog A Time to Embrace:

Dear Janet,

Thanks for this interview and thanks to Scott for his dedication to the radical message of the gospel, made even more radical because we have moved so far from it in so many ways. I couldn't agree more about fighting, especially over Scripture. Still...

... if Jesus could flip the tables of the moneychangers on end...how much more might he respond in the face of our sisters and brothers paying the price of exclusion and bearing the brunt of the complicity of a church in its teachings? Teachings that impact the broad society, and in this instance, foster marginalization and violence toward our sisters and brothers who are LGBT, all done in his name? I think the tables, at least, would fly again.

As I see it, for a church to be relevant, it must take the same risks that Jesus did, risks which ended up having him executed. We're not there, maybe never will be in taking such risks. But the path to such steadfast love is too often littered with the selfish needs of others. In this case, the needs seem to include a requisite comfortability with the LGBT community before we are fully embraced. So, the church accepts, as a matter of course, the destruction of others' lives until enough people are comfortable for a church, this church, to finally say, "Welcome."

I believe that it must be the church that leads the way, and not for the benefit of you, Scott, or me, really, but for all those who see this church as unwelcoming. For those we are turning away. How can we be who we say we are and continue such practices? How can our leadership from the local congregations to the moderator's office do anything other than publicly and unequivocally call for change now, letting others hear the voice we follow in so many ways? What on earth or in the heavens are we afraid of? Maybe, better question, what are we afraid of losing for speaking out with such conviction and risk?

This is not just about polity. It is about witness and about execution: an execution now being done by some in the name of Jesus.

That's got to be enough to turn some tables over...

Ray Bagnuolo, Minister Word and Sacrament
Ordained and openly gay in 2005
Serving Jan Hus Presbyterian Church and Neighborhood House
New York City
Board Member of More Light Presbyterians, speaking only for myself.

Lie Away and Awake at Night

"Don't Ask Don't Tell" may soon very well be gone. Happily so. Still, again, we have followed the accepted path of huge and irreversible tragedy in the lives of others to get there - waiting for the time when the marginalizers and others are comfortable enough to be willing to change.

I wonder often about the people we sacrifice as a society, later referring to them as ahead of their time, bold, prophetic, pioneers, and such. Euphemisms to cover up our own guilt, if even recognized. I think about how these leaders were harassed, imprisoned, marginalized, oppressed, separated from families, friends, and equal opportunities for work and worship.

I don't understand the appetite for such human sacrifice, however well the plodding and unwinding road toward justice might be. I keep thinking about the people of color, the women, the LGBT community and other marginalized groups and their allies who fought for justice and suffered the consequences. Who are those people now, in the eyes of society, church, or state? Are they still criminals or are they now considered heroes or heroines? What have we learned from them? Is it simply to continue to follow their tried and tragic paths to justice?

Do we need to put our hands upon the oven doors at Auschwitz to know we don't need to ever go so far again?

Whether you think there is such a thing as lies of omission or not, it may very well be that deceit at its core, is something more damaging than any lie. When deceit is institutionalized and encouraged, we quickly slide into the nearly irreversible soul-sickness of fear and distance - from ourselves and others.

Whether it is the violation of the first oath of honesty that a seviceperson who is LGBT takes when they deny themselves to satisfy the state; whether it is the crafted avoidance of honestly identifying oneself as LGBT at the time of ordination in service to the church; whether it is the lie that tears apart the relationships formed for appearances - each moves us further away from any chance of change by honesty, before the sacrifices and tragedies reach numbing proportions on their way to being heralded as future brave hearts.

I believe it is true that the laws of state and church do in fact follow the same path: by the time the law is written and passed the changes have occurred for the majority of people. That's what is happening in "Don't Ask Don't Tell" and in the church, as well.

While I have always expected the church, especially the Christian church, to live more closely to the right and radical teachings of Jesus, I would accept the boldness of the state to take the lead, knowing that faithful hearts live in all places. What is it that keeps us so locked in our ways?

I think it's fear. It's all about fear and what people are willing to do to get what they want. There's a good chance that if fear is driving us on toward a goal...it's the wrong goal. It may be that losing what we believe we're supposed to have in favor of being who we are - is the difference between lying away and awake at night - or a just and peaceful sleep.

Ex-gay? Ex-loving.

Chances are that if you are a person who is Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, or Transgender - and you have struggled within the church - chances are, somewhere along the way you heard these words: "We love you but hate your sin." Nothing directed toward people who identify as LGBT could be more disingenuous, more filled with hubris than combining love for another with hatred of some part of their being.

Hamartia or ἁμαρτία, the Greek word for sin frequently used in the Second or New Testament has the meaning of "missing the mark." The idea that distance from God is what needs to be shortened in our faith and personal journeys removes the dialectical premise that Love either replaces sin or leaves one in the throes of sin, pitied and "loved" from a distance.

It is this play of the fear of sin on people and their faith that funds those out to eliminate homosexuality from the face of the earth, or to simply, sadly, leave the "sinners" behind.

The ex-gay and reparative therapy movement is smart and subtle enough not to alienate most people, since more and more we all know someone who is family and gay. So rather than take on families and love within families, these groups rally together in huge megalithic collaborations and create just enough doubt, enough fear, and enough compassion to justify peoples’ oppression of anyone who is LGBT that does not abide by or follow their path. And, are you surprised that the oppression is all couched in the shameful use of the love of Jesus Christ to achieve such goals?

Quoting from Kristin J. Temba's response to Professor Mark Achtemeier's "And Grace Will Lead Me Home," in which he tells his story of transition to supporting folk who are LGBT, Kristin outlines the somewhat frightening association and collaboration of well-funded groups out to turn Christian America straight. “One by One,” the group of which Kristin is a part, was founded in 1994. Since that time, it has found partnership with, among other anti-gay groups, “Love Won Out” (Focus on Family) and NARTH (National Association for Research of Therapy of Homosexuality). What none of these groups acknowledges is that the success rate for reparative therapy, according to the APA, is in the 1-2% range. What none of these groups acknowledge is that their primary therapeutic models, however they are designed, are about suppressing feelings. What none of these groups acknowledge is that public leaders of the ex-gay groups have themselves been unable to maintain their ex-gay status, often resigning in disgrace and then being replaced the next day, as if nothing had happened. (I won't name folk here, that's not my intention. A simple search will find the information, if you are interested.)

Also what none of these groups will acknowledge is what any person who is LGBT already knows, that there are people trapped in heterosexual relations because of pressure to conform. This is what the ex-gay movement is willing to accept and misrepresent so that they can create enough doubt in the public's mind to stop our church from being fully welcoming, without special caveats, to our sisters and brothers who are LGBT.

If we wait to be convinced of what we should do, change will not occur. That is the strategy of any group seeking to maintain the status quo - "Keep the debate going, have more studies, approach justice - but don't quite embrace it, and above all keep the church free of LGBT folks by whatever means, to whatever degree you can, especially from ordination, especially from marriage. Be willing to scare people into condescension without any guilt or consequences. Surround yourself in God to hold your assailants quiet.”

It is interesting that in the discussions taking place around the country about overtures to delete or change G-6.0106b that the ex-gay groups, well-funded, well-practiced, and so smooth...are in the mix of the discussion. To me, it's like bringing creationism and evolution into this critical reformation. And if you don't think that's an effective strategy, how many of you 100% believe in evolution? I would bet that there is some hedging of that for many that comes out as, "Well, you know, God can do whatever God wants to do. So, I'm pretty sure, but who knows." Just a little doubt, the smallest of doubt - the least of fear - has always been used to oppress others. This is no different.

I believe we have been given the wonderful ambiguity of God’s great creation, not to parse or compartmentalize it. It has been given to us to embrace. All the rhetoric, all the papers, all the Gagnons and Tembens and others who create the doubt - are only able to do so because we allow them. And, I am certainly not out to try and change any of these folk. But why are they so intent on changing me and others like me? Homophobia comes to mind.

It has all gotten so complicated that the answer is simple, really. What do we believe and where are we willing to stand in finally making this church a welcoming church and model for the Good News and others to follow. Are we so afraid of risk, that we are unable to see that our membership, relevance, and yes - treasuries, are all in decline because of our fears toward our sisters and brothers and tenacious embrace of the status quo? Are we so blind that we don’t see how these actions of exclusion make us complicit in the violence they engender? Is it any wonder people flee us...

You know, when Jesus set his face to Jerusalem, I am one of those who believe that he didn't know exactly what was going to happen. However, I do believe he knew it was going to be serious and dangerous. Yet, he went. He stayed on the path because of his love for us -- all of us -- and the attempt to shorten the distance, the hamartia, between all of us and God.

It's my belief, that any vote against the deletion of G-6.0106b is the opposite of Jesus' path that we profess to follow.

When did we come to be so fearful of one another? How did we forget that being Christian was not about "ex-ing" anyone, but about risking it all to love one another, in the name of Jesus Christ?

Ray Bagnuolo

January 8, 2010

Three Fingers Pointing Back

Our church is entering another round of overtures trying to change our constitution to be fully inclusive for our friends who are LGBT (like me! :)) There are many voices working for this change in a variety of ways. Thanks to our allies who have spoken for our community when it was so difficult for us to speak for ourselves. However, that can no longer be the sole voice. At this point in the struggle we need to be out and speak and let people get to know us as we are and as people who are LGBT. Yes. Out of the closet.

As long as we feel we have something to lose, we, as a community, will be less than we can be. Janis Joplin once sang, "Freedom is just another word for nothing left to lose." Once we are strong enough and trusting enough to become risk-takers instead of planners and strategists, alone - and we have nothing left to lose that is more important than being faithfully authentic and present, especially true for our leaders and emerging candidates for ministry - then amazing things will happen.

In the meantime, the continuing debate goes on and fingers are pointed.

If there is not enough courage in church leaders to be out regardless of the risk -- it seems that we're just waiting for the passing of generations to solve the injustice in which we are complicit. What's good for our sisters and brothers who do not identify as LGBT should be good for everyone. It's really not a debate. Either we are a church that includes or we are not. I believe we can be such a church by deleting the section of our constitution in question and opening our doors. Or we can be like milquetoast...not letting people know for sure who we are with three fingers pointing back at us.

So, are you in or out?