Palisades Presbyterian Church, Palisades, NY
Sermon Delivered July 13, 2008
©2008 Ray Bagnuolo
Readings:
Psalm 119:105-112
Matthew 13:1-9, 18-23
It was in the aftermath of the assassination of John F. Kennedy that Paul Simon composed the song “The Sound(s) of Silence.” He wrote it as an attempt to capture the heart of a nation reeling from the unthinkable.
Included in their night club and coffee house performances, Simon and Garfunkel performed “Sound of Silence” on an album they soon released, which subsequently flopped. Shortly afterwards, they broke up as a group and went their separate ways.
Unbeknownst to either Paul Simon or Art Garfunkel, their music label producer overdubbed the original with a bass, drums, and electric guitar and re-released the single in 1965. By January 1966, it was number one on the charts; the duo reunited and released a hasty album to capitalize on their success, and the rest is history.
And this song, in particular, is history. It is 18th on the most played song list of the 20th century and #156 on the top 500 songs of all time. Impressive, and not without reason.
I was thirteen or so when I first heard it. I had no idea that it so harmonized with the times and that its haunting depths would capture me every time I heard it or read the lyrics right up until today. It seems I am not alone in this.
At certain times, the song surfaces, as today. I am sure that it has come up here before in my comments, and I have more than once used it in school in any number of ways – to the delight of every group I have taught. In fact, after one lesson in which I first read the lyrics as a poem, discussed it with the class, and then wrote about it – I played the recording. You could have heard a pin drop. Even more interesting were the comments of parents and guardians that I received, about their children coming home humming “Sound of Silence,” much to their surprise and their own memories that it stirred.
Some messages are just like that. They don’t ever fade. The images they create linger long enough to become permanent in some way, even definitive about a way in which we see things. Sort of like a gospel…
For me, the lines that have always captured me are towards the end:
The words of the prophets are written on the subway walls
and tenement halls
and whispered in the sounds of silence.
You know that I grew up in the City, in the Bronx. There was something about the juxtaposition of the word “prophet” and the “tenement walls” that linked God and the neighborhood in a way that was real to me.
There was something about the real presence of God in the streets on which we lived that was different than the experiences I had had of “religion” – in the church, in the parochial school, in the traditions and sacraments. That was all wonderful and mysterious and profound, but the concept of God in the streets, talking to us through others, coming out of the silence – or the noises of silence: well, it opened God to me in ways that I had never thought of before.
Without knowing it, I think I was having my first radical experience! And, I was noticing the response of some of those around me for the first time, the efforts to quell the rising tide of disappointment, disbelief, and dissent of the sixties. I was observing more and more the phenomenon of truth confronting power, yet I wasn’t quite sure where they divided or came together. Later I discovered just how much a chord had been struck and a seed planted in me.
That chord, today, is still difficult to describe – but in its essence, I call it the voice that each of us has deep inside: the one that is listened to and is spoken of.
You may remember me at one point talking about my seminary professor, The Rev. Dr. Barbara Austin-Lucas. She’s the one that said, “When you read the Bible it reads you.”
[Ezekiel 37:1-14 Valley of the Dry Bones]
The day I heard her say that – I knew exactly what she meant. That was it! It was that voice again. The one that you suddenly hear, when you are not expecting to hear one at all. The one that is so real that it prompts some kind of response. It’s the voice that creates that “pause” out of nowhere like the “beauty” of last week’s comments.
Even more, it’s that creative spirit that we all hear in the many ways in which we practice such things in our life.
So, when Dr. Austin-Lucas said that I probably heard nothing else for the rest of the class. Because suddenly then, as now, all those thoughts I had had about how God was and is; the questions; the feelings that certain things could just not be right or had to be right – all of a sudden they were given, at least, the possibility of being true – and not sealed tightly in the slammed covers of a book held high overhead like an icon or idol to be worshipped.
The experience of discovering God and prophets and God active in today’s world, rather than limited to the 66 Books or 1282 pages of the first Gutenberg Bible was an important spiritual passage for me. From there, it’s really not such a big leap to believe that God is still writing the Bible today and that we should keep listening, praying, and taking action.
I see none of this as an affront the authority of the Bible; in fact, I see this continued interaction with God and each other in this way as called for in the writings of much of the Scritpures.
The inner voice, that conversation that is initiated by the Spirit that is in us all, the God-given gifts of intellect, consciousness, and a deeper sense than we know - demands that we bring alive the teachings of Jesus today – in ways that meet the needs and conditions of our times, as Jesus did in his. This is not relativism, by any means but true transcendence from one time to the next with the same message of the Love of God, carried in the Good News, written for times from then to now, for places from the fields of summer, to our houses of worship, to the innermost of neighborhoods and tenement walls.
Such is the power of the Gospel to weave itself flawlessly into all times and creation, in all languages and the silence that precedes them – if we let it be what it is: God alive in this world calling us into service of one another, sharing the love that is unconditionally granted to us.
The psalmist in this morning’s first reading reflects this great and personal relationship of the author and his or her community with God. It is a relationship that is not only thoughtful, but the first line makes it clear that there is a call that emerges from the voice of God that we hear: “Your word is a lamp unto my feet.” Not a lamp unto my brain, but my feet. Upon hearing the words, we know what we are supposed to do, and then it is up to us to “step up,” so to speak. To bring our relationship with God into all of our lives and dealings with ourselves and all we meet. Think of what that means to this broken world: love, compassion, forgiveness, generosity, hospitality, patience, understanding, acceptance… That is TRULY something radical!
In the restless dreams I walked alone
Narrow streets of cobblestone
‘Neath the halo of a street lamp
I turned my collar to the cold and damp
When my eyes were stabbed by a the flash of a neon light
That split the night
And touched the sound of silence.
We are the agents who “split the night,” “touch the sound of silence,” and become that lamp unto the feet…helping to make sure the path becomes clear for ourselves and others to follow – and as the psalmist concludes:
“Your decrees are my heritage forever;
they are the joy of my heart.
I incline my heart to perform your statutes forever,
to the end.”
The vision, the knowing, the “Aha!” This is what we are called to do! It is our life in the many ways we live our life, tucked away in the deep knowing and sense of God within calling out to the others and God within them. It is, in fact, the ancient Sanscrit greeting: "Namasthe" - the Spirit in me greet the Spirit in you.
Nothing brings us to vibrancy in quite the same way as when we are in alignment, heart and soul with God and each other, inclining our hearts to perform God’s will, listening, talking with others, praying, and then taking action on what is still being revealed to us. Inclining our heart…to listen…to see…to hear…
Hello darkness, my old friend
I’ve come to talk with you again
Because a vision softly creeping
Left its seeds while I was sleeping
And the vision that was planted in my brain
Still remains
Within the sound of silence
When God calls us into the silence and visions of justice or hope or love – when God calls us over the expired boundaries of laws created long ago to ensure the survival of a race through purity codes for food, as an example, we need to listen in the now.
This world of ours is as divided now by what our religions teach us to do as any political regime’s mandates. Some of us exclude and divide, assuring ourselves and one another, that we are most right and others are most wrong – and we “shun” others in the name of God. How, in the name of God, could we do such a thing?
Where did we ever get such ideas? How did some places become so fallow? Well, it seems we didn’t listen.
In the parable of the sower, Jesus tells the gathered that seeds planted in the rich soil will grow a hundredfold, more or less. And then he says:
“Let anyone with ears listen!
“The one who hears the word and understands it will be blessed.”
Jesus didn’t then say, “So, here are the prescriptions and the proscriptions.” No, but he might have agreed with Simon and Garfunkel’s words:
“Fools,” said I, “You do not know
Silence like a cancer grows
Hear my words that I might teach you
Take my arms that I might reach you”
He just might have…sung along...
As a teacher, I am always aware that my role is to provide the tools needed for the young people I teach to go out into their world prepared to think in effective ways, so that when they discover things in their lives that I could never imagine – in some way, I have helped them be prepared by being able to think – in a more intuitive way.
I have come to know that intuitiveness as the working domain of the Spirit – sometimes stifled by my own human condition tossing in stones, and thorns, and shallow soil. So I do not rely solely on the intuition, alone, for fear that it might be too much of my voice and not so much of God’s call. It’s the reason I need to be in community, prayer in community, worship, discussion, and even debate.
Still, there comes a time when all that is done - and one has to base their actions on their convictions. For me, it must always be about the other. I like my objects of comfort and time on the beach – maybe too much. But I do know that deep inside none of those things are as important as being faithful, true to the prophets’ voices all around me in this world of ours, the voices that speak deeply as they did to the psalmist or from Jesus, or the lyrics of a song and a time whose chord is struck by the path I have been given to follow.
A voice and a path, for me and others, that is alive here as any prophet or psalmist, poet or evangelist.
I think it is much more difficult to resist the voice of God in our lives, however we know God, once we have accepted the fact that God does, indeed, continue to speak to us. Once that happens, the light shines unto the feet, the harvest is assured to be abundant in ways beyond counting, and the silence is truly filled with the sounds of God’s great joy… welcoming and inviting all to follow.
Sunday, July 13, 2008
Sunday, June 29, 2008
Burnt offerings, not required
Sermon Delivered – Palisades Presbyterian Church
© Ray Bagnuolo, June 29. 2008
Lectionary Readings: Genesis 22:1-14; Matthew 10:40-42
With thoughts on the General Assembly…
The headline might have read: “Father prepared to sacrifice son.”
This is a hard text. It reflects a time a bit worse than our own. Quite a bit worse.
It was bad enough that animals were sacrificed in religious rites and still are in some places; but it was an ancient time with a fairly distributed practice of human sacrifices to assuage the deities.
Fortunately, we can historically distance ourselves from other gods and religious practices to satisfy those gods, but when it comes to God the Almighty, the One God, the God that we worship, the God we are told spoke to Abraham – it becomes a very difficult passage to accept as a reflection of the loving God we have come to know in our lives.
It’s a story from Genesis, written long after it occurred. It’s a story that is referred to in all three faiths that stemmed from Abraham: Judaism, Islam, and Christianity. Each has its own and multiple interpretations – from Abraham being tested by God, to some suggesting his imagination got the better of him, thinking he was called to such an horrific thing.
Some excuse Abraham’s actions, believing he knew that Isaac would be fine, since God had already promised him that Isaac, the sacrifice, would be the father of many. Since that had yet to happen, Abraham had nothing to worry about. One way or another, Isaac would be saved, revived, or resurrected.
Others say this is a more symbolic passage, using the father of the faith to put an end to human sacrifice, with the imprimatur of God. They say it was a condemnation of such barbarism.
And, some interpretations see this story as foreshadowing a time when God would sacrifice God’s only son Jesus, to make amends for the sins of the world – still not such an easy notion to grasp.
Other details…according to all three traditions of faith, Isaac was an adult at the time of the story – certainly able to resist, had he chosen to. Islam, actually, believes it was not Isaac who was the sacrifice – but Ishmael.
And what of Sarah? I had friends in seminary who suggested that it was Sarah who had followed a strangely behaving Abraham around, and that she was the one who actually called out to him, snapped him out of his trance that prevented Isaac from being killed.
If I had to guess, because that is all it would be, I would side with the symbolic aspect of the writings – this being one of those early instructional stories about how to behave or not, teaching the emerging nation as it went along. Or, I could side with a story about a declining centenarian-at-least Abraham, acting strangely in his well-advanced age, nearly committing a terrible tragedy, written into the Torah in ways that took a real and embarrassing event, giving it broad and formative meaning.
I don’t know, really.
However, I simply cannot accept this being a directive from God that orders the sacrifice of human life. Certain theologians hold fast to the idea that if God chooses, God can take life. I can accept that; unsure if God participates in our world in that particular way, but I can accept that.
However, I cannot accept that God uses others as surrogates to commit murder to please or calm God – or for any other purpose.
Were that so, this world would be even more of a strange place than it already is.
You may disagree, and I respect that. It is just that I have taken so long in moving from a vindictive, punishing, unpredictable God, brandishing guilt and long-suffering - referred to over and again in the Old Testament, that my exegetical exercises, more often than not, lead me to the broader hermeneutics, the side of the narratives with strong instructional guides imbedded in their scripts.
Still, much is conjecture, inspired by the work and study of Scriptures. I could find no definitive information that suggests that child sacrifice in the Hebrew tradition ended following this story – nor can I find any indication that it continued – other than some suggesting Jesus was the next and ultimate sacrifice of God for humanity:
A way of showing such love that God sacrificed God’s only son to heal the world.
However, I think that is much different. God who inspires one with Godsself in such a way that they are willing to follow the path of faithfulness and love – right into the arms and dangers of their oppressors – that is a love story between God and God’s Son – one from which we all can learn.
It is always interesting to consider our readings from the lectionary against the backdrop of current events. This week at the 218th General Assembly there was an opening for the Spirit to “get windy” and, indeed, it did. Over the period of ten days or so, the committees and plenary sessions voted to delete G-6.0106b from the Book of Order; to delete previous AI’s that referred to homosexual behavior as sin; initiated the process to revise the Heidelberg Catechism and its references to homosexuality; and it overturned the ruling of the GAPJC which set G-6.0106 apart as an essential tenet that could not be scrupled.
A windy and great Spirit – refreshing old and “not so ancient” practices in light of a loving and inclusive, radically so – God.
I’ve ordered summaries of the actions of this GA for the congregation and will have them available in the next few weeks. In the meantime, visit pcusa.org for all the details.
In terms of deciding to actively seek changes from where we were just a short time ago these are as major initiatives—even prophetic. It was here in our Session at Palisades Presbyterian Church that the first of the Delete B overtures originated for this General Assembly.
And rightly, we share joy with others for the chance to create a more just, inclusive, and loving church, acknowledging that these proposals have at the same time, created terror for others who believe these changes will mark the end of their beloved church.
There is no victory here, for that would suggest we have no choice but to be divided. It may be that we are at the moment, but I cannot accept that will always be the case.
More than changing the constitution or even creating a more just church, these decisions allow us to now enter into a space of conversation, prayer, and being with one another – required, as a result of the GA’s actions. We have been given an opportunity, within a timeline, for all of us step back and observe the “see-saw.” It’s the same one we have spoken of before, the one that has kept us on opposite sides in the forever rising and falling of the church around the lives of people affected by the choices we have and will make. We have the chance to set the pivot aside and then step forward and embrace, yes, embrace one another as sisters and brothers in baptism, created by the same God, called by the same God, to be one – with our differences. We have been given the chance to end the sacrifice of one group or another to satisfy a God some believe demands such things. We have a chance to be of faith: vulnerable, present, honest, compassionate, accepting, and humble.
This is the time to step out and into the light and God’s will for this church.
There is probably no group that can help in healing others more than those who have survived being the object of such oppression. To survive the oppression and to have the courage and desire to use such wounds in healing and loving others is the most powerful demonstration of the Spirit. It is the most powerful demonstration of the inherent wrongs of such oppression, sometimes first seen when the oppressor loves the other. This is the foundational love, the only force in my opinion that will end this struggle once and for all.
I believe it is time for us to step aside and agree to vote out these amendments together – not out of agreement or disagreement, but out of love, so that we may return to ministering in a broken world that has such incredible needs.
Therein, I think, is the difference between the stories of the Old Testament, the Torah, and Q’uran about Abraham – and the new commands of God through Jesus in the New of Second Testament. No longer are we to sacrifice oneor many of our own to satisfy a testing and testy God. Rather we are to love one another as God loves us. From there, we will be able to get along just fine.
The sheer welcome of this morning’s reading of Matthew underscores that even the smallest acts of hospitality in the Name of Jesus, welcomes one in the name of God. The welcoming acts of our lives, our Christian lives, are direct extensions of the presence of God in our world reaching out and through us to one another, saying, “Come. You are welcome. You are neither above nor below us – but with us as, in the name of the one who calls us all.”
Wouldn’t it be something if we were able to frame our mission in such a way that we voted, instead, on love? Do you think it could be a unanimous vote? Wouldn’t that be something?
The quote on the front of this morning’s bulletin is from The Secret Message of Jesus by Brain D. McLaren.
“…if Jesus does his job successfully, if Jesus effectively proclaims and introduces people into the kin[g]dom of God, he bequeaths to his successors not the same situation he inherited but rather a radically new situation—with new problems, new questions, new opportunities, and new requirements.”
It seems to me that this is where we are. This can no longer be a teeter-totter time of one side over the other, but instead an agreement to clear the obstacles to unity in a way that really brings us new problems, opportunities, and requirements – for the world and our hearts are in need of such healing. And, I think that is the gift of this GA – the chance to heal and love one another, as God loves us. Let us ratify that by whatever we might do.
Let this be so as we move forward. Let us give thanks for all our sisters and brothers, and, thanks, especially to you your faithfulness, courage, and love for all whom God has created and called.
Amen.
© Ray Bagnuolo, June 29. 2008
Lectionary Readings: Genesis 22:1-14; Matthew 10:40-42
With thoughts on the General Assembly…
The headline might have read: “Father prepared to sacrifice son.”
This is a hard text. It reflects a time a bit worse than our own. Quite a bit worse.
It was bad enough that animals were sacrificed in religious rites and still are in some places; but it was an ancient time with a fairly distributed practice of human sacrifices to assuage the deities.
Fortunately, we can historically distance ourselves from other gods and religious practices to satisfy those gods, but when it comes to God the Almighty, the One God, the God that we worship, the God we are told spoke to Abraham – it becomes a very difficult passage to accept as a reflection of the loving God we have come to know in our lives.
It’s a story from Genesis, written long after it occurred. It’s a story that is referred to in all three faiths that stemmed from Abraham: Judaism, Islam, and Christianity. Each has its own and multiple interpretations – from Abraham being tested by God, to some suggesting his imagination got the better of him, thinking he was called to such an horrific thing.
Some excuse Abraham’s actions, believing he knew that Isaac would be fine, since God had already promised him that Isaac, the sacrifice, would be the father of many. Since that had yet to happen, Abraham had nothing to worry about. One way or another, Isaac would be saved, revived, or resurrected.
Others say this is a more symbolic passage, using the father of the faith to put an end to human sacrifice, with the imprimatur of God. They say it was a condemnation of such barbarism.
And, some interpretations see this story as foreshadowing a time when God would sacrifice God’s only son Jesus, to make amends for the sins of the world – still not such an easy notion to grasp.
Other details…according to all three traditions of faith, Isaac was an adult at the time of the story – certainly able to resist, had he chosen to. Islam, actually, believes it was not Isaac who was the sacrifice – but Ishmael.
And what of Sarah? I had friends in seminary who suggested that it was Sarah who had followed a strangely behaving Abraham around, and that she was the one who actually called out to him, snapped him out of his trance that prevented Isaac from being killed.
If I had to guess, because that is all it would be, I would side with the symbolic aspect of the writings – this being one of those early instructional stories about how to behave or not, teaching the emerging nation as it went along. Or, I could side with a story about a declining centenarian-at-least Abraham, acting strangely in his well-advanced age, nearly committing a terrible tragedy, written into the Torah in ways that took a real and embarrassing event, giving it broad and formative meaning.
I don’t know, really.
However, I simply cannot accept this being a directive from God that orders the sacrifice of human life. Certain theologians hold fast to the idea that if God chooses, God can take life. I can accept that; unsure if God participates in our world in that particular way, but I can accept that.
However, I cannot accept that God uses others as surrogates to commit murder to please or calm God – or for any other purpose.
Were that so, this world would be even more of a strange place than it already is.
You may disagree, and I respect that. It is just that I have taken so long in moving from a vindictive, punishing, unpredictable God, brandishing guilt and long-suffering - referred to over and again in the Old Testament, that my exegetical exercises, more often than not, lead me to the broader hermeneutics, the side of the narratives with strong instructional guides imbedded in their scripts.
Still, much is conjecture, inspired by the work and study of Scriptures. I could find no definitive information that suggests that child sacrifice in the Hebrew tradition ended following this story – nor can I find any indication that it continued – other than some suggesting Jesus was the next and ultimate sacrifice of God for humanity:
A way of showing such love that God sacrificed God’s only son to heal the world.
However, I think that is much different. God who inspires one with Godsself in such a way that they are willing to follow the path of faithfulness and love – right into the arms and dangers of their oppressors – that is a love story between God and God’s Son – one from which we all can learn.
It is always interesting to consider our readings from the lectionary against the backdrop of current events. This week at the 218th General Assembly there was an opening for the Spirit to “get windy” and, indeed, it did. Over the period of ten days or so, the committees and plenary sessions voted to delete G-6.0106b from the Book of Order; to delete previous AI’s that referred to homosexual behavior as sin; initiated the process to revise the Heidelberg Catechism and its references to homosexuality; and it overturned the ruling of the GAPJC which set G-6.0106 apart as an essential tenet that could not be scrupled.
A windy and great Spirit – refreshing old and “not so ancient” practices in light of a loving and inclusive, radically so – God.
I’ve ordered summaries of the actions of this GA for the congregation and will have them available in the next few weeks. In the meantime, visit pcusa.org for all the details.
In terms of deciding to actively seek changes from where we were just a short time ago these are as major initiatives—even prophetic. It was here in our Session at Palisades Presbyterian Church that the first of the Delete B overtures originated for this General Assembly.
And rightly, we share joy with others for the chance to create a more just, inclusive, and loving church, acknowledging that these proposals have at the same time, created terror for others who believe these changes will mark the end of their beloved church.
There is no victory here, for that would suggest we have no choice but to be divided. It may be that we are at the moment, but I cannot accept that will always be the case.
More than changing the constitution or even creating a more just church, these decisions allow us to now enter into a space of conversation, prayer, and being with one another – required, as a result of the GA’s actions. We have been given an opportunity, within a timeline, for all of us step back and observe the “see-saw.” It’s the same one we have spoken of before, the one that has kept us on opposite sides in the forever rising and falling of the church around the lives of people affected by the choices we have and will make. We have the chance to set the pivot aside and then step forward and embrace, yes, embrace one another as sisters and brothers in baptism, created by the same God, called by the same God, to be one – with our differences. We have been given the chance to end the sacrifice of one group or another to satisfy a God some believe demands such things. We have a chance to be of faith: vulnerable, present, honest, compassionate, accepting, and humble.
This is the time to step out and into the light and God’s will for this church.
There is probably no group that can help in healing others more than those who have survived being the object of such oppression. To survive the oppression and to have the courage and desire to use such wounds in healing and loving others is the most powerful demonstration of the Spirit. It is the most powerful demonstration of the inherent wrongs of such oppression, sometimes first seen when the oppressor loves the other. This is the foundational love, the only force in my opinion that will end this struggle once and for all.
I believe it is time for us to step aside and agree to vote out these amendments together – not out of agreement or disagreement, but out of love, so that we may return to ministering in a broken world that has such incredible needs.
Therein, I think, is the difference between the stories of the Old Testament, the Torah, and Q’uran about Abraham – and the new commands of God through Jesus in the New of Second Testament. No longer are we to sacrifice oneor many of our own to satisfy a testing and testy God. Rather we are to love one another as God loves us. From there, we will be able to get along just fine.
The sheer welcome of this morning’s reading of Matthew underscores that even the smallest acts of hospitality in the Name of Jesus, welcomes one in the name of God. The welcoming acts of our lives, our Christian lives, are direct extensions of the presence of God in our world reaching out and through us to one another, saying, “Come. You are welcome. You are neither above nor below us – but with us as, in the name of the one who calls us all.”
Wouldn’t it be something if we were able to frame our mission in such a way that we voted, instead, on love? Do you think it could be a unanimous vote? Wouldn’t that be something?
The quote on the front of this morning’s bulletin is from The Secret Message of Jesus by Brain D. McLaren.
“…if Jesus does his job successfully, if Jesus effectively proclaims and introduces people into the kin[g]dom of God, he bequeaths to his successors not the same situation he inherited but rather a radically new situation—with new problems, new questions, new opportunities, and new requirements.”
It seems to me that this is where we are. This can no longer be a teeter-totter time of one side over the other, but instead an agreement to clear the obstacles to unity in a way that really brings us new problems, opportunities, and requirements – for the world and our hearts are in need of such healing. And, I think that is the gift of this GA – the chance to heal and love one another, as God loves us. Let us ratify that by whatever we might do.
Let this be so as we move forward. Let us give thanks for all our sisters and brothers, and, thanks, especially to you your faithfulness, courage, and love for all whom God has created and called.
Amen.
Thursday, June 12, 2008
Myth 5: We Can Accept Compromise...
My purpose in writing this series of essays has been to share with you my personal and critical process in thinking through, again, the need for deleting G-6.0106b from the constitution of the Presbyterian Church (USA). I do not write on behalf of any progressive group. I recognize each of the organizations, supporting some positions more than others. Still, I persist in reiterating the need and responsibility we have for all progressive groups to be one family for justice as the Church of Jesus Christ – especially at this General Assembly. I hope this and my other pieces over the last three months have been helpful in your reflections and processes, as well.
As a gay man and an ordained Minister of the Word and Sacrament, I know first-hand the struggle to navigate our system weighted heavily against the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, and Questioning Community (LGBT/Q2). As an openly gay candidate who refused to abide by G-6.0106b and was, nonetheless, ordained, I understand and accept the consequences of such moral decisions. I have been witness to the power of a presbytery refusing to accept unjust standards against others and me. I have been touched by the courage of a community to call me and initiate my ordination, saying to others who they were in the process. I have been part of what takes place when we step out of the way of the Spirit and join together – differences and all -- to practice our faith in worship, prayer, voice, and action. I have watched differences fade once they were rejected as obstacles to justice. I have seen more love and more light emerge. And, I know there is much more to do.
Aside from the difficulty we have had in joining together as one progressive group, what is it that makes anything other than the deletion of G-6.0106b a just recommendation to the committees and the plenary? Why not one galvanized presence? Aren’t we the best ones to offer such a call to action? I wonder even more what makes some groups willing to propose recommendations that involve more processes and litigation rather than simply eliminate the dividing line? I wonder how any of us can survive more violence against LGBT/Q2 folks as an acceptable expense on the way to one day becoming truly inclusive.
I have always believed that if we could just find the singular strand that has been the coiled bondage around justice – that once removed -- Justice (the Holy Spirit) would flow freely and with real winds for change.
So what holds us back from coming together as one? Why continue to dodge the Spirit?
I’ve asked and attempted to address this before. Even now, I keep trying to hone in on the causative factor that separates us in our positions and degrees of (im)patience for change.
I’ve come to the conclusion that the real cause of the challenge to full inclusion is such anathema to the idea of being Christian that we refuse to or simply cannot see it. It is at the root of our church, systematic and pervasive. It is more than homophobia or gender bias. It is a sickening, pogramatic, and institutionally endorsed disdain and fear of folks who are LGBT/Q2. It is so deeply ingrained in the institution of the PC(USA) that we accept G-6.0106b in our Book of Order and resist constitutional change with alternatives or dismissals. The fear and disdain toward the LGBT/Q2 community are so matter-of-fact a part of the order of church business that they have become very nearly indiscernible from the institution, itself. If we are seeking reasons for the flight of many from religion and the irrelevancy of the church in the lives of the masses, I would start here as the primary source of the exodus. Folks outside the church often see our own bigotry more clearly than we do.
To be a church and to have laws on the books used to exclude LGBT/Q2 folk as fully integrated families and members, refusing them equal access to the benefit and servanthood of membership and leadership within the church – says much that is unfaithful about us, I think.
It is a disease of fear that surrounds us. A sickness perpetuated by the institution. And whatever hope we have for changing this illness hinges on what we do in the next two weeks about G-6.0106b.
I’ve tried this, always with the same results. Try naming a reason for considering the prospect of keeping G-6.0106b in the Book of Order that isn’t fear-based in one way or another. If you think you find one, please send it to me: Email.
I have come to an assessment that the reason we have alternative proposals and overtures to offer this assembly is, in part, to address the different levels of fear. Are we trying to find an acceptable level of fear? Are we afraid of the consequences of embracing the Holy Spirit and placing everything at risk as a sign of our faith and trust? Are we committed to such a degree for those we have been called to set free?
We simply cannot be limited by fear.
Yet, we are, I think. We chart slower more involved paths: propose scrupling, differently worded amendments, test court cases, additional language to assuage the fear – alternatives so we don’t scare anyone away. We become a chorus of different voices with a tune no one can follow well; the same strategy, by the way, which is often used by some to undermine progress.
We know that the only real neutralizer to fear is Love (God).
As a gay man and an ordained Minister of the Word and Sacrament, I know first-hand the struggle to navigate our system weighted heavily against the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, and Questioning Community (LGBT/Q2). As an openly gay candidate who refused to abide by G-6.0106b and was, nonetheless, ordained, I understand and accept the consequences of such moral decisions. I have been witness to the power of a presbytery refusing to accept unjust standards against others and me. I have been touched by the courage of a community to call me and initiate my ordination, saying to others who they were in the process. I have been part of what takes place when we step out of the way of the Spirit and join together – differences and all -- to practice our faith in worship, prayer, voice, and action. I have watched differences fade once they were rejected as obstacles to justice. I have seen more love and more light emerge. And, I know there is much more to do.
Aside from the difficulty we have had in joining together as one progressive group, what is it that makes anything other than the deletion of G-6.0106b a just recommendation to the committees and the plenary? Why not one galvanized presence? Aren’t we the best ones to offer such a call to action? I wonder even more what makes some groups willing to propose recommendations that involve more processes and litigation rather than simply eliminate the dividing line? I wonder how any of us can survive more violence against LGBT/Q2 folks as an acceptable expense on the way to one day becoming truly inclusive.
I have always believed that if we could just find the singular strand that has been the coiled bondage around justice – that once removed -- Justice (the Holy Spirit) would flow freely and with real winds for change.
So what holds us back from coming together as one? Why continue to dodge the Spirit?
I’ve asked and attempted to address this before. Even now, I keep trying to hone in on the causative factor that separates us in our positions and degrees of (im)patience for change.
I’ve come to the conclusion that the real cause of the challenge to full inclusion is such anathema to the idea of being Christian that we refuse to or simply cannot see it. It is at the root of our church, systematic and pervasive. It is more than homophobia or gender bias. It is a sickening, pogramatic, and institutionally endorsed disdain and fear of folks who are LGBT/Q2. It is so deeply ingrained in the institution of the PC(USA) that we accept G-6.0106b in our Book of Order and resist constitutional change with alternatives or dismissals. The fear and disdain toward the LGBT/Q2 community are so matter-of-fact a part of the order of church business that they have become very nearly indiscernible from the institution, itself. If we are seeking reasons for the flight of many from religion and the irrelevancy of the church in the lives of the masses, I would start here as the primary source of the exodus. Folks outside the church often see our own bigotry more clearly than we do.
To be a church and to have laws on the books used to exclude LGBT/Q2 folk as fully integrated families and members, refusing them equal access to the benefit and servanthood of membership and leadership within the church – says much that is unfaithful about us, I think.
It is a disease of fear that surrounds us. A sickness perpetuated by the institution. And whatever hope we have for changing this illness hinges on what we do in the next two weeks about G-6.0106b.
I’ve tried this, always with the same results. Try naming a reason for considering the prospect of keeping G-6.0106b in the Book of Order that isn’t fear-based in one way or another. If you think you find one, please send it to me: Email.
I have come to an assessment that the reason we have alternative proposals and overtures to offer this assembly is, in part, to address the different levels of fear. Are we trying to find an acceptable level of fear? Are we afraid of the consequences of embracing the Holy Spirit and placing everything at risk as a sign of our faith and trust? Are we committed to such a degree for those we have been called to set free?
We simply cannot be limited by fear.
Yet, we are, I think. We chart slower more involved paths: propose scrupling, differently worded amendments, test court cases, additional language to assuage the fear – alternatives so we don’t scare anyone away. We become a chorus of different voices with a tune no one can follow well; the same strategy, by the way, which is often used by some to undermine progress.
We know that the only real neutralizer to fear is Love (God).
- Not “We love you but hate your sin.”
- Not, “We love you, just give us more time to trust you.”
- Not, “We love you, so if you can find a way to make it through these hoops that no one else needs to get through, then we will ordain you.”
And certainly not, “We love you, and so does God,” for love that excludes can never be equated with the Love of God.
The courage of Love is the answer. That’s the best I can do. We are really engaged in an epic struggle between love and fear. Every tenet of our faith calls us not to worry and trust in God. Still, many resist.
Simply, the human and spiritual price is too high for this church to accept fear, unwittingly or otherwise demanding that our LGBT/Q2 sisters and brothers live their lives in suffering, seated patiently at the table as a sign of faithfulness to God.
That’s not the table Jesus set. That’s the table Jesus overturned!
The choices: Fear (Sickness) or Love (Justice). Will this be the assembly that re-energizes the course of Love or builds up the walls of fear?
For me, anything other than the deletion of G-6.0106b is a step toward ensuring Fear’s dominance in the PC(USA). It is a sad day, indeed, every day that G-6.0106b is in our Book of Order.
How am I so sure? Well, it always comes down to this for me:
If we are able to look our LGBT/Q2 sisters and brothers in the eyes, and from deep in our hearts say to them, “Just wait a while longer” or “G-6.0106b should remain because…” then we, too, have been dulled by fear. We have forgotten the price of being LGBT/Q2 in this church. For me, once that memory is gone, anything goes.
So, once again, I pray for an act of the Spirit to bring all the progressive groups together at the General Assembly and with one voice call simply and clearly for the deletion of G-6.0106b, along with related guidance and interpretations that group people who are LGBT/Q2 into the category of: “To be feared.”
I believe that the most important work in the history of the progressive movement for LGBT/Q2 folk and this church will begin following a vote to change the constitution. We will need to organize and travel to every presbytery and church that will have us to show how we are ministers of Love and Hope and Healing. Let us finish this, so we can begin being mission to all.
Please, accept no compromise or other name for fear – even for the smallest of whiles. God bless you all in these and the times ahead.
Tuesday, May 20, 2008
Myth 4: It’s about “the Middle”
To the point: we often hear discussions about the success of constitutional change in our church relying on a favorable shift of “the middle,” those yet to decide or be vocal about their decision regarding ordination standards. The premise is that if enough of those “uncommitted” could find reason to support the removal of G-6.0106b, we would be able to make it happen. “Once we had the middle behind us, we’d be all set.”
All this sounds logical, plausible, and very practical, doesn’t it? And, in fact it is, with one exception. It hinges the success of eliminating the oppression and violence toward LGBT folk on persuading a “great mass of people” that such injustices are wrong. We already know exclusion is wrong. We already know marginalization of LGBT folk is wrong. We already know the terrible mire of weariness, resistance, and the imbalance of power that threatens the LGBT community and its supporters at every turn, as we seek justice. We know, too, the diversions that distract us from the real objective – God’s radical and generous equity. And so, we call forth and support individuals and organizations: to lead us through the myths and obstacles. These are the progressive organizations. Their work is critical, timely, and sacred, in every sense of the word. And, reaching out to others is a major part of their work.
Truly, I am committed to broad and comprehensive pastoral, educational, and personal efforts in helping others to know their sisters and brothers who are LGBT. I understand the changes that occur when we have the chance to touch and be touched by the hearts and minds of people we first encounter as different. I am dedicated to the goal that we embrace our shared baptism, without limitations on gender or sexual identity, and we find ways to work together as equal members of the Body of Christ. This is our work. These efforts, just as importanty, are foundational in the healing ministry that will need to follow the deletion of G-6.0106b. However, it is not the “middle’s” job to decide our course; it is our job to lead and inform. We cannot subjugate our calls to the political or geographical formation and opinions of groups.
Aligning our efforts to the potential support of this broad and undefined segment of the population is the same as suggesting that we just wait a while. There it is again. “Slow down. Wait a while. Give folks a chance to catch up on the issue and become comfortable with this idea.”
First, we are not issues, ideas, or objectified notions with which to become comfortable. We are living, breathing creations of God being discriminated against and diminished by a church that calls itself the Church of Jesus Christ. If that doesn’t give us pause then none of this is much going to matter.
Second, we are called to lead. We have to be out ahead of others who are not yet ready and show them what has to be done and ask for their support, not wait for them to say they are “ready.” The ultimate decisions are out of our control, anyway. The choices people make will be between themselves and the Holy Spirit. Our job is to inform and teach others why G-6.0106b has to be removed, instead of continuing to seek interpretations and rulings of authoritative interpretations that allow it to be scrupled. It just doesn’t make sense to do anything other than delete G-6.0106b, especially if you are a member of the community being oppressed in the life and polity of the PC(USA).
Really, who is the beneficiary of G-6.0106b remaining in the Book of Order, as an essential tenet or not? Why even offer an option to addressing it, other than removing it if we believe as we say we do that it needs to go? What could be the reasons? It’s not time? The middle is not ready? It will split the church or unsettle our unity?
Consider this: the last openly gay candidate that was examined, cleared to seek a call, called, and ordained as a Minister of the Word and Sacrament was in late 2005. Since then, according to Research Services at PC(USA), an estimated 850-900 individuals have been ordained to serve as Ministers of the Word and Sacrament. Progress?
One cannot help but make the leap that those opposing the ordination of LGBT individuals are feeling satisfied with such results, results guaranteed to be pretty much the same until G-6.0106b is removed. Even if the GAPJC's decision on scrupling were reversed, every LGBT candidate would be asked to go through another level of examination, another challenge, another test - keeping the welcoming of called sisters and brothers who are LGBT to a trickle not much better than now. Equity? Justice? Love?
We are better than this, and once more I repeat the call for the leaders of the progressive groups to step forward together, set aside any differences, and do what needs to be done together to delete G-6.0106b at this General Assembly. Our divisiveness works to the advantage of those who would like nothing to change. I love those who oppose us, but I think we have helped them enough. Tell those you know, “It’s time.”
All this sounds logical, plausible, and very practical, doesn’t it? And, in fact it is, with one exception. It hinges the success of eliminating the oppression and violence toward LGBT folk on persuading a “great mass of people” that such injustices are wrong. We already know exclusion is wrong. We already know marginalization of LGBT folk is wrong. We already know the terrible mire of weariness, resistance, and the imbalance of power that threatens the LGBT community and its supporters at every turn, as we seek justice. We know, too, the diversions that distract us from the real objective – God’s radical and generous equity. And so, we call forth and support individuals and organizations: to lead us through the myths and obstacles. These are the progressive organizations. Their work is critical, timely, and sacred, in every sense of the word. And, reaching out to others is a major part of their work.
Truly, I am committed to broad and comprehensive pastoral, educational, and personal efforts in helping others to know their sisters and brothers who are LGBT. I understand the changes that occur when we have the chance to touch and be touched by the hearts and minds of people we first encounter as different. I am dedicated to the goal that we embrace our shared baptism, without limitations on gender or sexual identity, and we find ways to work together as equal members of the Body of Christ. This is our work. These efforts, just as importanty, are foundational in the healing ministry that will need to follow the deletion of G-6.0106b. However, it is not the “middle’s” job to decide our course; it is our job to lead and inform. We cannot subjugate our calls to the political or geographical formation and opinions of groups.
Aligning our efforts to the potential support of this broad and undefined segment of the population is the same as suggesting that we just wait a while. There it is again. “Slow down. Wait a while. Give folks a chance to catch up on the issue and become comfortable with this idea.”
First, we are not issues, ideas, or objectified notions with which to become comfortable. We are living, breathing creations of God being discriminated against and diminished by a church that calls itself the Church of Jesus Christ. If that doesn’t give us pause then none of this is much going to matter.
Second, we are called to lead. We have to be out ahead of others who are not yet ready and show them what has to be done and ask for their support, not wait for them to say they are “ready.” The ultimate decisions are out of our control, anyway. The choices people make will be between themselves and the Holy Spirit. Our job is to inform and teach others why G-6.0106b has to be removed, instead of continuing to seek interpretations and rulings of authoritative interpretations that allow it to be scrupled. It just doesn’t make sense to do anything other than delete G-6.0106b, especially if you are a member of the community being oppressed in the life and polity of the PC(USA).
Really, who is the beneficiary of G-6.0106b remaining in the Book of Order, as an essential tenet or not? Why even offer an option to addressing it, other than removing it if we believe as we say we do that it needs to go? What could be the reasons? It’s not time? The middle is not ready? It will split the church or unsettle our unity?
Consider this: the last openly gay candidate that was examined, cleared to seek a call, called, and ordained as a Minister of the Word and Sacrament was in late 2005. Since then, according to Research Services at PC(USA), an estimated 850-900 individuals have been ordained to serve as Ministers of the Word and Sacrament. Progress?
One cannot help but make the leap that those opposing the ordination of LGBT individuals are feeling satisfied with such results, results guaranteed to be pretty much the same until G-6.0106b is removed. Even if the GAPJC's decision on scrupling were reversed, every LGBT candidate would be asked to go through another level of examination, another challenge, another test - keeping the welcoming of called sisters and brothers who are LGBT to a trickle not much better than now. Equity? Justice? Love?
We are better than this, and once more I repeat the call for the leaders of the progressive groups to step forward together, set aside any differences, and do what needs to be done together to delete G-6.0106b at this General Assembly. Our divisiveness works to the advantage of those who would like nothing to change. I love those who oppose us, but I think we have helped them enough. Tell those you know, “It’s time.”
Friday, May 9, 2008
Myth 3: Full Inclusion for LGBT Folk Will Produce Schism
If the unity of the Presbyterian Church (USA) is so fragile that the full inclusion of Lesbian Gay Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) persons will wrench it apart, then maybe it is time for a restructuring. If welcoming our sisters and brothers is going to break us, we are already in serious need of repair.
What is more likely is that the full inclusion of LGBT folk threatens the power structure of the church rather than its theological integrity. Holding the line against full inclusion assures the continued dominance of those seen as “protectors” of the church, leaders whose authority is assured by their resistance to change in any meaningful way for our community and its allies. The full inclusion of LGBT members would likely reveal the true struggle in this church, which is resistance to the redistribution of power in any equitable and truly welcoming way.
The inclusion of our LGBT sisters and brothers has become the threatening fault line in the rhetoric, nurtured in the fear of what change will bring about. The decades-long delay against inclusion has become so mired in the language and practice of fear that we now believe that living into the fundamental principles of Christianity will actually destroy us. No, it will not destroy us, but it will eliminate the dysfunctional behavior of reducing others’ status to raise one’s own sense of importance and righteousness. Such a change will help to shift the church back to its dominant Christian mission of a radically welcoming and loving God, instead of a limited and exclusive institution.
Think about it for a moment. The PC(USA) may actually be known more for whom it refuses to welcome fully than for whom it fully embraces. It is, constitutionally, a resistance movement against God’s creation. In the long run, more than any decision, this aberration of call, misguided by fear and selfishness, will split and plunder the church.
What would it be like to have the constitutional barrier of G-6.0106b removed, along with other limiting AI’s, definitions, and interpretations? How many people, leaders, would suddenly be called upon to answer questions to their congregations and the world about gender identity, sexuality, differing views on Scripture, mission, past practices, and future outreach? What would it be like to suddenly be in such a situation? It would be wonderful! Finally, the fresh air of the Spirit would make it possible to be freed from the gender dominance and exclusive practices that we know in our hearts to be wrong.
It’s not time!
It will split the church!
It will tear apart our unity!
Do these responses sound Spirit-filled and faith-based? Or do they sound like the cry of those afraid of losing something; those holding on too tightly to what most of us believe should have been released long ago?
Today, the church’s fear of doing what is right produces violence and support for hate crimes against the communities we marginalize by our exclusion. The LGBT community continues to be pushed back in this church, and with each thrust away from the table, these actions reinforce the perception and responses of those who become more assured that LGBT people are less than. We embolden those who find encouragement for hatred toward LGBT folk each time we reaffirm LGBT persons are not fully welcome. Our witness to the world includes the message of discrimination, homophobia, and marginalization. How was this ever right before? How could it be right now?
There is little hope for us not to fracture as a church unless we clean house of these hurtful messages and practices
The recent ruling in favor of The Rev. Dr. Janie Spahr in which she was found not guilty of violating her ordination vows by “marrying same gender couples” summarizes the attitude toward LGBT folk from the institutional perspective of the church. Janie was found “not guilty” because the General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission said that she could not be found guilty of something she could not do, that is marrying anyone other than a man and a woman. Clearly, the court reaffirmed that there is no place for the LGBT community in their eyes – based on the Constitution, except as limited, diminished, second-class citizens.
What does that say to our LGBT family? If this were a decision against you, what would you hear in the words and actions of the court and the Constitution upon which they based their decision? I think you would hear:
It’s not time!
It will split the church!
It will tear apart our unity!
Schism as the result of full inclusion for LGBT folk is a myth. It is a fear used to fund-raise by opponents and propel the status quo that benefits no one, not even those who hold the power now, for it has become an infection affecting all.
The church will not split as a result of opening its doors to the LGBT community. It will strengthen and grow in ways we could not even imagine. However, membership is not the reason to change the Constitution, nor is fear the reason to keep it flawed.
It is about Justice and Love. There can be no justice and love in this church until G-6.0106b is removed and all other references that limit participation and definition of membership for LGBT folk have been deleted or changed.
Fear and Schism are the twin myths that have become accepted remedies for maintaining the exclusion of LGBT folk from the church on a constitutional and institutional basis.
It’s time now!
It will prevent schism!
It will bring us together!
Once again, I call for all the progressive groups to come together for this General Assembly with one voice and embrace the call to cure this church of the twin soul-sicknesses of procrastination and homophobia.
Here’s what I believe we are called to do: Remove G-6.0106b from the Book of Order, strike the Authoritative Interpretation of 1978/1993[1], change the language of marriage in the Directory for Worship, and correct the Heidelberg Catechism in our Confessions.
- Using LGBT folk to hedge and hold onto power? True.
- Schism if LGBT folk were welcomed fully? Just another myth.
- What are we waiting for? I have no idea.
[1] http://www.presbyweb.com/Documents/DefinitiveGuidance1978.htm
What is more likely is that the full inclusion of LGBT folk threatens the power structure of the church rather than its theological integrity. Holding the line against full inclusion assures the continued dominance of those seen as “protectors” of the church, leaders whose authority is assured by their resistance to change in any meaningful way for our community and its allies. The full inclusion of LGBT members would likely reveal the true struggle in this church, which is resistance to the redistribution of power in any equitable and truly welcoming way.
The inclusion of our LGBT sisters and brothers has become the threatening fault line in the rhetoric, nurtured in the fear of what change will bring about. The decades-long delay against inclusion has become so mired in the language and practice of fear that we now believe that living into the fundamental principles of Christianity will actually destroy us. No, it will not destroy us, but it will eliminate the dysfunctional behavior of reducing others’ status to raise one’s own sense of importance and righteousness. Such a change will help to shift the church back to its dominant Christian mission of a radically welcoming and loving God, instead of a limited and exclusive institution.
Think about it for a moment. The PC(USA) may actually be known more for whom it refuses to welcome fully than for whom it fully embraces. It is, constitutionally, a resistance movement against God’s creation. In the long run, more than any decision, this aberration of call, misguided by fear and selfishness, will split and plunder the church.
What would it be like to have the constitutional barrier of G-6.0106b removed, along with other limiting AI’s, definitions, and interpretations? How many people, leaders, would suddenly be called upon to answer questions to their congregations and the world about gender identity, sexuality, differing views on Scripture, mission, past practices, and future outreach? What would it be like to suddenly be in such a situation? It would be wonderful! Finally, the fresh air of the Spirit would make it possible to be freed from the gender dominance and exclusive practices that we know in our hearts to be wrong.
It’s not time!
It will split the church!
It will tear apart our unity!
Do these responses sound Spirit-filled and faith-based? Or do they sound like the cry of those afraid of losing something; those holding on too tightly to what most of us believe should have been released long ago?
Today, the church’s fear of doing what is right produces violence and support for hate crimes against the communities we marginalize by our exclusion. The LGBT community continues to be pushed back in this church, and with each thrust away from the table, these actions reinforce the perception and responses of those who become more assured that LGBT people are less than. We embolden those who find encouragement for hatred toward LGBT folk each time we reaffirm LGBT persons are not fully welcome. Our witness to the world includes the message of discrimination, homophobia, and marginalization. How was this ever right before? How could it be right now?
There is little hope for us not to fracture as a church unless we clean house of these hurtful messages and practices
The recent ruling in favor of The Rev. Dr. Janie Spahr in which she was found not guilty of violating her ordination vows by “marrying same gender couples” summarizes the attitude toward LGBT folk from the institutional perspective of the church. Janie was found “not guilty” because the General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission said that she could not be found guilty of something she could not do, that is marrying anyone other than a man and a woman. Clearly, the court reaffirmed that there is no place for the LGBT community in their eyes – based on the Constitution, except as limited, diminished, second-class citizens.
What does that say to our LGBT family? If this were a decision against you, what would you hear in the words and actions of the court and the Constitution upon which they based their decision? I think you would hear:
It’s not time!
It will split the church!
It will tear apart our unity!
Schism as the result of full inclusion for LGBT folk is a myth. It is a fear used to fund-raise by opponents and propel the status quo that benefits no one, not even those who hold the power now, for it has become an infection affecting all.
The church will not split as a result of opening its doors to the LGBT community. It will strengthen and grow in ways we could not even imagine. However, membership is not the reason to change the Constitution, nor is fear the reason to keep it flawed.
It is about Justice and Love. There can be no justice and love in this church until G-6.0106b is removed and all other references that limit participation and definition of membership for LGBT folk have been deleted or changed.
Fear and Schism are the twin myths that have become accepted remedies for maintaining the exclusion of LGBT folk from the church on a constitutional and institutional basis.
It’s time now!
It will prevent schism!
It will bring us together!
Once again, I call for all the progressive groups to come together for this General Assembly with one voice and embrace the call to cure this church of the twin soul-sicknesses of procrastination and homophobia.
Here’s what I believe we are called to do: Remove G-6.0106b from the Book of Order, strike the Authoritative Interpretation of 1978/1993[1], change the language of marriage in the Directory for Worship, and correct the Heidelberg Catechism in our Confessions.
- Using LGBT folk to hedge and hold onto power? True.
- Schism if LGBT folk were welcomed fully? Just another myth.
- What are we waiting for? I have no idea.
[1] http://www.presbyweb.com/Documents/DefinitiveGuidance1978.htm
Wednesday, April 30, 2008
Myth 2: Timing is Everything
Not here. Not in terms of how we must always keep the voice of Lesbian Gay Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) folk in front of the church, at all times, in the strongest of justice-loving ways, and in spite of any “odds” of changing the church at one point or another.
In our work, in our lives, we have only the present. The rest is in God’s hands. Time is important, if only as a reminder. A reminder of how long this difficult struggle has been taking place. A reminder that for nearly forty years our baptized sisters and brothers have been marginalized and rejected by this church, except in the most limited of ways. If you are LGBT you are only partially accepted in this church, which means you are not accepted at all.
Whatever time may be, it has not been something in our favor. It is a myth to suggest that time will change our situation for the better. If anything, “the waiting for the right time” has been an albatross hung around the neck of this Body of Christ; a yoke that bears the signature of all but Christian love. To delay in any way to set our face to the General Assembly with other than the full and unconditional inclusion of the LGBT community in our hearts and on our lips is to favor our own comfort at the expense of our sisters and brothers. That, my friends, goes against every Christian tenet and principle I have ever learned.
Honestly, I don’t get it. What is the reason for waiting? Are we not “done” yet?
There can be no silence when others who are oppressed and excluded are unable to speak for themselves. In that place of imposed silence, we who can speak have a sacred responsibility to do so, regardless of the outcome of any proposals. It is not the proposal or the possibility of its passage that frames this call, but the voice we have been given to speak: as one, together, unmistakably in concert, heart, and soul. The LGBT community and all others who are excluded from this church have to hear that they have not been forgotten. We need to continuously invite this church to join us in this God-given, fundamental call that we share for inclusion, justice, and love.
In the recent decision of the GAPJC regarding Janie Spahr and her marrying of same gender couples, the ruling stated:
“It is acknowledged by those who have heard this case at every level that Spahr has acted in light of her call and the church’s call to participate in a caring and compassionate ministry to persons who have been marginalized, who are faithful Christians, and who wish to be accepted in every way as full members of the body of Christ. In this, Spahr may consider herself to be acting in the role of a prophet to the church, while others would reject such a characterization. Prophecy contains risk and uncertainty both for those who would speak and for those who listen. The role of a prophet carries consequences.”
What we do carries consequences. It is not the outcome that carries consequences, but what we do now. Let us embrace the consequences of action and prophecy that embody faithfulness and justice, love and courage. These are not the products of time, but gifts of the Spirit. Such gifts are given us because we need them to do the right thing, which is always in the present.
Once again, I call for all the progressive groups to come together for this General Assembly with one voice and embrace the call to cure this church of the twin soul-sicknesses of procrastination and homophobia. What are we waiting for?
Here’s what I believe we are called to do: Remove G-6.0106b from the Book of Order, strike the Authoritative Interpretation of 1978/1993[1], change the language of marriage in the Directory for Worship, and correct the Heidelberg Catechism in our Confessions.
To say we are loved but it’s just not time, is to really say we are not loved, at all.
A better time for justice? Just another myth.
[1] http://www.presbyweb.com/Documents/DefinitiveGuidance1978.htm
---
by Ray Bagnuolo, Gay and Minister of the Word and Sacrament
©2008 Ray Bagnuolo; Permission Granted for All Reprints
In our work, in our lives, we have only the present. The rest is in God’s hands. Time is important, if only as a reminder. A reminder of how long this difficult struggle has been taking place. A reminder that for nearly forty years our baptized sisters and brothers have been marginalized and rejected by this church, except in the most limited of ways. If you are LGBT you are only partially accepted in this church, which means you are not accepted at all.
Whatever time may be, it has not been something in our favor. It is a myth to suggest that time will change our situation for the better. If anything, “the waiting for the right time” has been an albatross hung around the neck of this Body of Christ; a yoke that bears the signature of all but Christian love. To delay in any way to set our face to the General Assembly with other than the full and unconditional inclusion of the LGBT community in our hearts and on our lips is to favor our own comfort at the expense of our sisters and brothers. That, my friends, goes against every Christian tenet and principle I have ever learned.
Honestly, I don’t get it. What is the reason for waiting? Are we not “done” yet?
There can be no silence when others who are oppressed and excluded are unable to speak for themselves. In that place of imposed silence, we who can speak have a sacred responsibility to do so, regardless of the outcome of any proposals. It is not the proposal or the possibility of its passage that frames this call, but the voice we have been given to speak: as one, together, unmistakably in concert, heart, and soul. The LGBT community and all others who are excluded from this church have to hear that they have not been forgotten. We need to continuously invite this church to join us in this God-given, fundamental call that we share for inclusion, justice, and love.
In the recent decision of the GAPJC regarding Janie Spahr and her marrying of same gender couples, the ruling stated:
“It is acknowledged by those who have heard this case at every level that Spahr has acted in light of her call and the church’s call to participate in a caring and compassionate ministry to persons who have been marginalized, who are faithful Christians, and who wish to be accepted in every way as full members of the body of Christ. In this, Spahr may consider herself to be acting in the role of a prophet to the church, while others would reject such a characterization. Prophecy contains risk and uncertainty both for those who would speak and for those who listen. The role of a prophet carries consequences.”
What we do carries consequences. It is not the outcome that carries consequences, but what we do now. Let us embrace the consequences of action and prophecy that embody faithfulness and justice, love and courage. These are not the products of time, but gifts of the Spirit. Such gifts are given us because we need them to do the right thing, which is always in the present.
Once again, I call for all the progressive groups to come together for this General Assembly with one voice and embrace the call to cure this church of the twin soul-sicknesses of procrastination and homophobia. What are we waiting for?
Here’s what I believe we are called to do: Remove G-6.0106b from the Book of Order, strike the Authoritative Interpretation of 1978/1993[1], change the language of marriage in the Directory for Worship, and correct the Heidelberg Catechism in our Confessions.
To say we are loved but it’s just not time, is to really say we are not loved, at all.
A better time for justice? Just another myth.
[1] http://www.presbyweb.com/Documents/DefinitiveGuidance1978.htm
---
by Ray Bagnuolo, Gay and Minister of the Word and Sacrament
©2008 Ray Bagnuolo; Permission Granted for All Reprints
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)