To Piss Off ISIS

Here is a picture that I realized will really piss off the terrorists:

In the long run they may have done more to further LGBT acceptance in the US.

Oh- it is also fair to say that the picture will also piss off a few Republicans and fundamentalist Christians.

A Last Minute Post

Well, last minute in the sense that I am actually writing this just prior to posting it. Most of my work on the blog is, by nature, done ahead of time. That way it doesn't become a rush to get something written and posted at the last minute before midnight.

But because of scheduling up ahead of me over the next 10 days, I knew that if I waited to post these thoughts, it might be "old news."

So I decided to post this one today. That way it really is current events.

• It's about that lion in Africa and the Minnesota dentist who paid $50,000 to have it lured from a sanctuary so he could shoot it with a bow and arrow then track it for 40-hours in its agony and then kill it.

• It's also about the Cincinnati university police officer who has been arraigned for murder in a traffic stop gone bad.

• It's about the insanity of the alleged Planned Parenthood videos that purport to show that the organization is a venal, baby-killing group out to make money from fetuses.

• It's about the presidential [sic] candidates calling Mexicans rapists and accusing the sitting president of leading Jews to the ovens over a nuclear arms deal.

• It's about denying climate change because it will hurt business and profits to do otherwise and the hell with the health of the planet.

• It's about having to have 30+ women claim to be raped by a well-known celebrity- and even then saying it didn't happen until his own words describe exactly what they have claimed.

It's about our human tendency for hypocrisy, prejudice, narrow-mindedness and the belief that I am right and everyone else is wrong. (Myself included).

What got me started was seeing the incredible world-wide and national reaction to the lion killing. The reaction was far beyond that for any of the other killings we are hearing about. The reaction to a lion (and I AM an animal conservationist!), even a "famous" and protected lion, raises more anger than much else that is REAL news. Every time three is a mass killing somewhere in the country we are told to pray and NOT politicize. Yet every killing like that does have a political side to it. We are told to remember that all lives matter, not just black lives, even when it is the black lives that seem to be of far less value in how, when, and where they are killed.

Yes, all lives matter, and THEREFORE,

• all black lives matter, and when they are being killed in traffic stops or as the result of incredibly far-fetched traffic stops, THEY matter and we need to pay attention.

Yes, all lives matter, and THEREFORE,

• the lives of billions on the planet matter when we are facing potentially catastrophic changes to our environment that will put those lives in severe jeopardy.

Yes, all lives matter, and THEREFORE,

• the lives of the Israelis and the lives of millions of others in the Middle East matter enough to work hard at preventing nuclear weapons from continuing to proliferate and putting all of them at risk.

Yes, all lives matter, and THEREFORE, why do we ignore the cries of

• women who have been raped, 
• veterans who have been denied health services, 
• poor people who can't get health care, 
• police officers who are under incredible pressures and need better support, stress assistance and training for their difficult jobs, 
• bullied gay youth, 
• the mentally ill who are seen as crazy and to be held in contempt, 
• prisoners in overcrowded prisons that are filled with non-violent offenders incarcerated because they possessed marijuana
• the immigrants who, like most of OUR OWN ancestors are here to build the American dream and rape and pillage?

I could go on. I can rant on this for hours, but all I will do is get myself all worked up and feel like I am helpless and powerless to do anything about it. I had to get it off my chest, now, when it is news.

• Pray for peace
• Work for peace
• Uphold peace
• Make peace a reality 
• Live peace each day

We all matter- let's act that way and not just say it as a way to reinforce our ideology or put down someone else's life.

Let's live today as if each person we meet has a life that matters and then treat them that way.

No Words Needed Today

In Memoriam: Fr. Malcolm Boyd

Fr. Malcolm Boyd
1923 - 2015

An Episcopal priest of deep faith and just as deep social commitment. In 1965 his simple yet moving book of prayers, Are You Running With Me, Jesus? was radical and certainly outside the box of traditional Christian spirituality. His publisher, when issuing a 40th anniversary edition said:

In the middle of the turbulent 1960s Malcolm Boyd's Are You Running With Me, Jesus? appeared on the scene and broke the mold from which devotional texts had previously been made. Boyd's prayers engaged traditional Christian themes with a decidedly contemporary voice honest, direct, insightful while at the same time taking on issues of everyday concern: personal freedom, racial justice, sexuality. Billed by its original publisher as a collection of prayers for all of us today who are finding it harder and harder to pray, this landmark book has influenced generations of Christians and seekers.

On his web site he is noted as:

• Bestseller author
• Gay Elder
• Episcopal Priest for 57 Years
• Civil Rights and Antiwar Activist; a “Freedom Rider” in 196l

In 1998 as he was entering the "golden years" at age 75, he did not rail against the night or urge people to fight against it. He wrote a book called Go Gentle Into That Good Night." In short, from one era to another he was calling people to pay attention to their world, their lives, and Jesus. An amazing man who has left quite a legacy.

Here are some quotes from Malcolm Boyd.

• By my definition, prayer is consciously hanging out with God. Being with God in a deliberate way.
• Entrenched scriptural literalism is, in my opinion, completely out of touch with reality.
• I find Jesus my confidant and companion, brother and savior; our relationship is intimate, vulnerable, demanding yet comfortable and reassuring.

Here's the title prayer of the book that changed many people's prayers:

It’s morning, Jesus.
 It's
 morning, 
and
 here's 
that
 light 
and 
sound
 all 
over 
again.


Where
 am
 I
 running?

You 
know 
these
 things
 I
 can't
 understand.
 It's 
not
 that 
I
 need 
to
 have
 you
 tell 
me.


What
 counts 
most 
is
 just
 that
 somebody
 knows,
 and
 it's
 you.
 That
 helps
 a
lot.


So
 I'll
 follow
 along,
 okay?
 But
 lead,
 Lord.
 Now
 I've
 got 
to
 run.


Are 
you
 running
 with 
me,
 Jesus?

And finally, from the same book:

PRAYER
 OF
 REPENTANCE

God:

Take
 fire
 and 
burn 
away
 our guilt
 and
 our
 lying
 hypocrisies.


Take 
water 
and
 wash
 away
 our
 brothers' 
blood
 which
 we
 have
 caused
 to
 be
 shed.


Take 
hot 
sunlight
 and
 dry
 the
 tears 
of
 those
 we
 have 
hurt,
 and
 heal
 their
 wounded
 souls, 
minds,
 and
 bodies.


Take
 love
 and
 root 
it
 in 
our
 hearts,
 so
 that 
brotherhood 
may
 grow, 
transforming
 the
 dry 
desert of
 our 
prejudices
 and
 hatreds.

Amen

Rest in peace, Brother Malcolm. Rest in peace.

I Get Angry - Very Angry

If this law is enacted in Michigan, it will be another step backwards in the fight against discrimination. It would allow doctors and EMTs to refuse care, repeat REFUSE CARE to people whose lifestyles they disagree with.

If it wasn't from a local CBS newsfeed in Detroit I would have thought it was a headline from The Onion.

It says something very unhealthy about American politics when a bill like this is even considered as a possibility. It goes against every ethical standard of every health care license issued. It contradicts every basic human value and every bit of Christian faith. It is a perfect opportunity to dig into a) The Parable of the Good Samaritan and b) The story of the woman caught in adultery - let those without sin cast the first stone.

What kind of nation are we becoming when we justify torture because someone else attacked us so we can respond with revenge and anger? What kind of human and humane value systems are we discarding in the name of an abusive understanding of religion? It is a good thing these politicians were not in charge in the civil rights era.

Oh, wait a minute, they were. And they were proven to be on the wrong side of history, faith, and ethics.

If we allow that kind of thing it is no different from the radical Islamist sects who want to impose sharia law. It lowers us to a least, and pretty damn low common denominator.

The Tipping Point

It would appear that yesterday's non-decision by the US Supreme Court may be the tipping point on same-gender marriage in the United States. Talk about a quick turn-around over a very short period of time! One activist commented on the news last evening that it is almost like whiplash!

Even four or five years ago, it would have been impossible to believe that such a sea-change would occur within such a time frame. yet it has. There was of course, the obvious cause of the Supreme Court finding that the Defense of Marriage Act was unconstitutional. That opened the door. But still- this fast?

I think the reasons have just as much to do with two things.

First, the speed at which information changes and doubles is amazing. More people are more aware more quickly than at any time in history. The 24/7 news cycle helps, but it is just as much the very existence of so much raw data available to more people. Over the past few years more people have become more aware of the arguments for- and against- the right to get married. The information showed that more people than had been thought to approve, did approve. More people learned that the discussion was no longer in the closets of America- it was on the Main Streets and offices and factories and in our church pews.

Which leads to the second thing that I think has happened. More people have come out of the closet and more people know more people who are openly gay. Guess what? They are neighbors, friends, co-workers and children. I may have told this story before, but it is worth repeating if I did. Sometime about 25 years ago I was at a church camp where we raised the issue of acceptance of gay young people. Those who opposed what some of us were saying would get angry at us when we raised stories of real people being hurt and pushed aside simply because they were gay. We were challenged not to make it a personal issue. We were talking about sin. Don't confuse the issue with real life people.

In these last 25 years more people are willing to see the gay people in their midst and discover that they are just like anybody else. What they want is the equality of marriage and to have their love recognized by the powers that be and the world in general.

Today there are now 30 states where same-gender marriage is legal. For today the argument is moot.

At last!

Heroes: Part 2- More About My List

A month ago I posted about a list of my heroes. I wasn't talking about the individuals that touched me personally- professors, elders, etc. I have talked about some of them in other posts. Many of them (most of them?) are now passed on, my mentors are gone. But these heroes are some of the world-changers who have most motivated, inspired, challenged, and ultimately changed me. It started as an introduction to a post of pictures of Cesar Chavez that I took over 40 years ago. It is now morphing into more than just Sr. Chavez.

Here then is that original list, in alphabetical order, with one addition that I can't believe I missed.

• Louis Armstrong- perhaps the greatest, most creative and even talented of all 20th Century musicians. He inspired me as a trumpet player, but also as one who stood up and did what needed to be done to be successful.
• Dan and Phil Berrigan- The Brothers Berrigan, both originally Roman Catholic priests, although Phil left to get married. Their faith led them to some acts of civil disobedience and time in prison. Jesus, they believed, wanted His followers to speak out against war and injustice. Their witness was a challenge to my easy, comfortable, "personal" faith.
• Dietrich Bonhoeffer- Deeper than even the Berrigans, Bonhoeffer may be the quintessential theologian/witness against the horrors of the 20th Century. His challenge to "cheap grace" and the "cost of discipleship, opened understandings into being a Jesus follower that he barely had a chance to live out. A man of amazing trust in God and a challenge to cultural christianity.
• Cesar Chavez- I spoke of his witness for the poor and oppressed. He was another man of faith, non-ordained, but one whose life was guided by an awareness of the ways of Jesus.
• Robert Kennedy- In my mind, the most challenging of politicians of the mid-20th Century. A complex and probably conflicted person who showed both the good and bad of politics in his short history. In the end, he was attempting, I believe, to make the changes in himself and the country that were, and still are, sorely needed. His announcement of Martin Luther King's death on the streets of Indianapolis is one of the more moving moments of a very difficult year.
• Martin Luther King, Jr.- The man I would nominate for American of the Century. Another man of faith, working at his best to make a difference. His commitment to non-violence helped move civil rights into the mainstream. He and others lost their lives to make it happen. His "I have a dream" speech still stands as a beacon and guidance for the future.
• Mahatma Gandhi- The guiding saint of non-violence. He died the year I was born, but his teachings and witness still reverberate. An amazing individual.
• Harvey Milk- A man who kind of fell into the right place at the right time. He didn't know what to do with his life so he became an activist for Gay Rights- or at least that's how it looks from the outside.He came out of the closet, won his place in the city of San Francisco, and lost his life. Yet he helped give life to that part of the civil rights movement that we are finally seeing the results from.
• Nelson Mandela- In my book, the Man of the World for the 20th Century. With every reason to be angry and vengeful, he turned toward reconciliation. Oppressed and imprisoned for his fight for equality, he didn't try to take away the equality of his prisoners or oppressors. Along with Bishop Desmond Tutu, a witness to the world of the right way to forgive- anything!
• Pope John XXIII- A quiet man of gentle faith who pulled the Catholic Church out of the middle ages and showed that the church should have a voice in the modern world. In way too short a time as Pope he accomplished hundreds of years of reform. While some of it slowed down after his death, he gave faith a hopeful name. Pope Francis appears to be trying to walk in his holy shoes.
• Archbishop Oscar Romero- El Salvadoran Bishop, he believed in liberation of the oppressed and to change a corrupt system based on wealth and prestige. He had called for Christian soldiers to put down their arms and stop oppressing the poor. A day later, as he stepped to the altar for the Eucharist, he was assassinated. The oppression of Jesus' followers can be just as powerful in Christian countries.
• Elie Wiesel- Holocaust survivor, Nobel Prize laureate, the voice for the voiceless millions of World War II genocide. The only man on the list (other than Chavez) who I personally saw and heard speak. A gentle man who in his demeanor maintains that innocence that continues to ask the awful question, "How can this happen?" while always working so that it will happen "Never again!" He is an icon for me, an image that allows me to see into the pained face of God as God looked down on our human insanity of the 20th Century.

Many of these were paradoxes- mixtures of good and bad, healthy and unhealthy habits. Just like me.

Many were men of deep faith who allowed their faith to guide their whole walk in life. As a result, most were willing to stand up to the established order so that it would be more open and receptive to more people.

All, in their own ways, were rebels, radicals, even, hoping to make a difference. Whether through music, words, or actions, these individuals have shaped my faith and my outlook on the world. They all make sense to me. I have no idea if I could ever do what they did in the face of what they lived. When I look at them, I can only repeat what the father of a boy with an evil spirit said to Jesus:

I believe; help my unbelief.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

As I noted in the previous post last month, this is a list of men. They came to mind first probably because of the simple fact that I am a man and the ones who most moved me into so many challenges gave me different understanding about being male. In another upcoming post I will take a look at the women who are my heroes.

A New Day

Last Sunday, the church I have been a part of for over 40 years made a momentous decision. The national Synod assembly which meets every four years passed a resolution permitting persons who are in a same-sex committed relationship, to be ordained and serve as pastors. (This assembly was about 250 lay and clergy delegates from around the country.)

(Link for more information)

That 40-year number is significant for me. It was exactly 40 years ago at another of these Synod meetings that I began my journey as a pastor in this church. And it was at that Synod that a ground-breaking-for-its-day resolution was passed which did not condemn homosexuality but instead called the church to be open to pastoral ministry for all who might be gay.

This was 1974. For those too young to remember that was only five years (5 years!) after what has since been known as the "Stonewall Riots."

Early on the morning of Saturday, 28 June 1969, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and questioning persons rioted following a police raid on the Stonewall Inn, a gay bar at 43 Christopher Street, New York City. This riot and further protests and rioting over the following nights were the watershed moment in modern LGBT rights movement and the impetus for organizing LGBT pride marches on a much larger public scale.
--Wikipedia

For gay rights, 1974 was almost prehistoric. Harvey Milk had barely arrived in San Francisco and was still figuring out how he would make a difference.

In 1974 many people would say they knew no gay people. That was simply because most gay people didn't let people know. It was too dangerous. Any gay clergy in our denomination were well hidden. For the church to say that it was okay to minister to them without also adding that they were sinners in need of redemption was a truly forward thinking idea, perhaps way ahead of its time for a small, mainline, every-day Protestant denomination.

In 1974 there were no women clergy in our denomination, though the first was about to finish her seminary studies and, within 6 months, be ordained. There were those at Synod that year who strongly disagreed with what was about to happen. They said it was going against God's Word and God's Will. We were starting down a very dangerous path, they insisted. Most of these did not attend the ordination of our first woman pastor a few months later. They were conspicuous in their absence.

Fifteen years later I was still getting comments from time to time about how women should not be ordained. (I even heard it again recently!)

In 1974 clergy were expected to get permission from their Board of Elders if they were going to perform a wedding where one of the persons was divorced. (Many ignored it, or with the general acceptance of their Board just went ahead without that permission.) A few years later when a divorced pastor was elected to a major office, several people commented to me that this was just wrong.

I mention these two issues because they are gender and marriage-related as well as to show how times have changed. To me this seems like a very short period of time- yet it was so long ago!

Over these past 40 years the church has wrestled long and often with the questions and theology surrounding gay pastors, gay care, gay acceptance. The international church even called on all Provinces around the world to have a moratorium on the issue and associated resolutions, which we in the Northern Province followed. But the questions remained. The biggest was the "internal" church-related question- what about gay men and women in relationships or, where allowed, married?

The church accepted non-practicing (i.e. celibate) gay persons as pastors. Sort of. Some ordained pastors left the church to go into a committed relationship or to get out of the congregational spotlight. Other gay people had their faith strained to the breaking point by not being allowed to become pastors become of their sexual orientation.

Some pastors with gay children were left wondering what they could- or should- do about it. Some were left in anguish. Others became activists.

Even during the first decade of the AIDS/HIV epidemic the church talked about- and cared for- many HIV-positive individuals. But they often avoided the underlying difficulties of homosexuality. During those years I worked with the Wisconsin Conference of Churches AIDS Task Force and wrote our denomination's social issues study guide on HIV. Even then, in conferences and workshops, it was often difficult to keep the issues from impacting each other when talked about out in the churches. Someone always wanted to shift the topic from caring for persons with AIDS/HIV to sin and homosexuality.

Slowly things changed. We learned of more gay persons in our congregations; we saw shifts in public perceptions; a younger generation which has grown up in these past 40 years often wondered what the big deal was.

Four years ago our Province started, again, down the road of discussion and decision-making on the ordination issue. With great leadership and tact on the part of our Provincial boards, listening and discussion meetings were held. People were given many opportunities to hear and speak. It was not easy. They handled it, I believe, superbly, always insisting on our motto: "In all things love."

Last Sunday the resolution was passed, 181 - 62- not an insignificant margin. While the votes were being counted the delegates stood in a circle, holding hands, singing. People on different sides of the issue were moved by the "unity in non-essentials" that this showed. One of the bishops commented that it was the witness of unity that was the big message of the day.

The problems and issue haven't gone away. More questions were raised. More will be discovered. The feelings of the rank-and-file have yet to be heard and considered. The move was made, aware of the potential for divisiveness, but with many prayers that sometimes it is more important to do the right thing.

Several personal reflections have come to me in the past week.
1) It is humbling to see the whole arc of this story from my first Synod 40 years ago. While I was not physically at this one, there was a spiritual connection I felt (and others as well) through Facebook and other social media. My prayer presence was powerful. I have yet to absorb THAT aspect of it. It is also exciting to see the fruits of labor begun 40 years ago begin to become reality.

2) I am reminded of kairos (God's time) vs. chronos (linear time.) In the proper time things happen, not on my time schedule. That does make it very frustrating and even painful to those waiting in linear time. Why didn't this happen sooner? What about those who have been disenfranchised in the past 40 years? We can, of course, ask their forgiveness and then move on together. But to have pushed this on our time schedule and agenda would perhaps have been even more devastating. Plus, all we have is today to do what is right. The past is gone.

3) This is not the first (or last) time that the church has had to deal with difficult issues that are quite divisive. People have left the church, calling it heretical and dead wrong, over many issues. To name a few:

• baptism of infants vs believer's baptism
• slavery and civil rights
• ordination of women
• abortion
• liturgy in the common language of the people
• wine or grape juice in communion
• music in church
• the type of music in church
• and on and on and on

The same will happen over this issue and then another and so on. It was the awareness of this that helped me move through this issue. I remember the Civil Rights divisiveness, I have had to say goodbye to church members who left over our more liberal-middle of the road stance on abortion, at least one family left the church when I went into treatment for alcoholism and history very clearly reminded me that it was an unshakeable, inerrant biblical truth that slavery was just. If every time a potentially divisive issue comes up we hold to the old ways, the status quo or the way we have always done things, we will never go anywhere or do anything. We will allow the church to be held hostage by narrow minorities. No specific church has all the answers; no specific church or denomination has The Truth; no church or denomination can be all things to all people. The Church Universal might, but not any one of us.

That is probably the most important reminder I have gotten out of the struggle on this over the past 40 years. It is important and I think we need to take ourselves a little less seriously on many of these concerns. Let go of our grandiosity, our human tendency to want or think we have all the answers. to be open and listen and continue in fellowship with others.

At the end of the day I am honored to have been a small part of this movement over these 40 years. I am excited by what happened last week and pray that we can all find the joy of our Lord's presence in this work. I am sure he is with us and will continue to be so as we work out the wrinkles and concerns that still exist.

And once more, to the leadership of our Province- thank you for a job very well done!

A 45-year Memory

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Today is the 45th Anniversary of the Stonewall Riots. It is also, as has been the tradition, Gay Pride Weekend. The Stonewall is a National Historic Landmark. Rightly so. A great deal has changed in the last couple years  Same-sex marriage is becoming a right in many states. A number of churches have okayed gay marriage and acceptance of gay pastors. These incredibly rapid changes in the surrounding culture have had an impact on the church. Some have used it to condemn the society as "godless" or worse. Others have allowed themselves to review the theological views that have often underpinned anti-gay positions and found them wanting.

Overall, though, what began on that June night 45 years ago has been significant and incredibly important.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The Times Keep Changing- Thankfully!

Two scenes from the last week for me have shown how great a change continues to be happening in our society.

Scene One: Saturday evening, "Independent Lens" on PBS, the Academy-Award nominated documentary, How to Survive a Plague. It took me back to a time over 25 years ago when AIDS was a terrifying plague, when my friend Donald was dying, his partner already gone. Political inaction was the word in Washington; judgement and fear were the words in many parts of the country. Homosexuality was still ghetto-ized and many Americans could claim they knew no gay people. The documentary gave a painful, in-depth view of what was a painful, paranoid, even hate-filled time.

Scene Two: Four days earlier, Mall of America, Minneapolis, MN. As we walked along the east entrance two young men walk by us and, moving together, held hands as they walked into the main mall area. If they hadn't walked right in front of us, we would never have noticed. They were just another couple, showing caring for each other by simply holding hands. What a joyous sight for someone who would never have believed that would be possible in my lifetime.

Much has been written about the incredibly quick change in perspective and acceptance of same-sex marriage in the past several years. The difference between the story of the movie and a couple in Minneapolis 25 years later speaks the same seismic shift. There are still those who are arguing for Old Testament-style handling of gay people in general. There are those who believe that this is a sign of how low and sinful the society of the 21st Century has become.

But perhaps it is more a sign of how compassion and love can win the hearts and minds of a nation.

Here's What's Wrong With This Thinking

I heard this rationalization again today from the conservative element in Wisconsin following yesterday's overturning of that state's ban on same-sex marriage. Basically it said that the courts should not overturn a constitutional amendment because, are you ready-

It was legally voted into law by a majority of the people of that state.

On the very superficial surface (yes, that is redundant!) it kind of maybe makes sense. We are a democracy. There is majority rule. The one with the most votes wins. So who is this judge to make her own law.

Thank goodness that argument didn't win in the 1860s when THE SAME argument could have been used to deny slaves their freedom. After all, those states legally allowed slavery. Those states should have been allowed to keep their slaves. That's the old "states' rights" argument. So today the states that want to ban same-sex marriage should be allowed to maintain their prejudicial opinion, regardless of what may be a more informed and open decision.

Sorry Wisconsin (and other states') conservatives. That doesn't hold water. Once the Defense of Marriage Act was nullified, there is no legal reason to deny equal rights and privilege. My guess is that the side with the most money was actually the winner in the earlier debates over same-sex marriage ban. Now it is reason, common sense, and an acceptance of people who may have a different way of seeing the world.

Which brings me to another quick note:
Since when does the party with the most money get special privilege?

But that's for another time. For today,

On Wisconsin!

What Will We Tell the Kids?

This is what's known as a "Kiss Cam" shot. It is a common entertainment at sporting events around the country.The camera picks out a couple, places them in the center of the heart and everyone expects them to kiss.

In public.

Before God and tens of thousands in the stadium.

No one thinks anything of it. It's cute. Kissing is good.



Unless you're Michael Sam and his boyfriend.

Then people go crazy over a public kiss between two people who love each other.

What in the world will we tell the kids? How can we explain this? What can we say?

Simple- tell them two people who love each other were overwhelmed by the honest emotions of the moment.

I hope Michael Sam makes it as a pro football player. Like many pioneers before him, breaking boundaries and prejudices can be tough.

Back in the mid-1970s when women were first being "allowed" to be clergy in the church they were often expected to be perfect, no blemishes, no problems that men were regularly excused from. One little misstep and they "boo-birds" were there to gloat in their obviously true and proper position that women can't do that- and shouldn't. Because "the Bible said so!"

Or go back to # 42 for the Dodgers in the mid-1940s. The crap that Jackie Robinson had to put up with is inexcusable. Yet it was often supported by "the Bible tells us so!"

Is Michael Sam as important as Robinson or the women clergy pioneers of the 70s?

In his own way, I would say "Yes!" I wish him the best. He has a long road ahead of him.

May he stay on track and not allow the craziness that is sure to swirl around him to de-focus him from what he wants to do.

Never in Service of Discrimination

Came across this on Facebook. With the veto of the anti-gay law in Arizona, there is still more going on. I gather there is a bill in Mississippi ready to do the same thing.

Here, in a petition is a short, impassioned plea for sanity, is a way to take a stand that does not mix religion and discrimination. As it says these arguments are far too similar to justifications for Jim Crow laws that kept African Americans from dignity and equality.

Clergy can sign the petition at this link.

Clergy Against Discrimination

As evangelicals, mainline Protestants and Catholics we are alarmed by the pending Mississippi bill that would allow virtually anyone, including businesses, to discriminate against customers in the name of religious liberty. We call on Mississippi and all states to abandon legislation that threatens democracy, civil rights and religious freedom itself.

These misguided efforts eerily echo Jim Crow laws that robbed African Americans of their basic human dignity. Businesses once barred not only blacks, but Jews and Asians from buying homes in certain neighborhoods or eating in restaurants even after Supreme Court rulings overturned segregation laws.

We must not allow faith to be used in the service of discrimination.

When we seek to codify legislation that discriminates against any class of people—no matter our diverse theological beliefs about marriage—we tarnish the treasure of religious freedom and the highest ideals of our democracy. Most of all, we are complicit in violating the Golden Rule that unites us as Christians—to love God and our neighbor as we love ourselves.
-Link

Faith in Public Life:
Advancing faith as a powerful
force for justice, compassion
and the common good.

Change Continues

Yesterday came the latest headline out of New Jersey.

Christie Withdraws Appeal of Same-Sex Marriage Ruling in New Jersey - NYTimes.com

At the end of last week the New Jersey Supreme Court did not stay the right of same-sex couples to get married starting yesterday in New Jersey. Gov. Chris Christie, who has spoken against the ruling decided that the time had come to stop fighting on this one.

No appeal.

No taking the ruling on to a higher court.

So yesterday New Jersey allowed same-sex marriage!

I have never NOT had a cynical side to me political insights or thoughts. This one sent me wondering, though, down the 2016 presidential campaign trail. That being a road that Gov. Christie has already bought the maps for.

He can read the writing on the wall with this issue. It has gone to new areas unheard of only a few years ago. Fourteen states now allow it. In spite of the Tea Party and evangelical Christians, the opinions only get stronger and more supportive. As more people realize they know gay couples, this will just enhance the opinions.

Christie is no dummy. He knows he better test the winds of change on this one. Yes, he knows he will be against Tea Party-supported candidates. Which is why he is taking a different road. He is making it clear in his own way to the great middle-of-the-road voting bloc, as well as the younger voters, that he has a broader view- a greater openness. If he wants to win, that's his hope.

With all the shenanigans in Washington where GOP leaders are terrified of the Tea Party, it is refreshing to see someone who reads the polls and begins to understand that the world is not only changing, it's changing faster than any of us ever thought possible.

In the end my first cynical comment: I guess Gov. Christie reads the polls, turned into gratitude that someone is willing to go out on a limb.

THE Quote of the Decade

Nineteen words.

Simplicity in words; simplicity in sentiment.
Simplicity in its down-to-earth colloquialism.

Yet, in that Franciscan simplicity may be a short, sweet start to a seismic shift.

“If someone is gay and he searches for the Lord and has good will, who am I to judge?”
Pope Francis

It may even be the quote of the 21st Century so far.

Looking for News In All the Wrong Places?

I went looking for "religious" news on Yahoo! this morning. There were a lot of little things about what Pope Francis did or said. There were some analysis pieces about the waning impact of the Catholic Church in state legislatures on the issue of gay marriage.

I decided to do some more surfing and was able to find the average and the not so average. I discovered that the news is pretty much the same in religion as  in politics. The stories can be irrelevant outside of a small circle of friends or potentially dramatic. Sometimes it may even be in the same story.

Over at the Huffington Post there were some opinion pieces and such. One headline was both a surprise and an "Of Course!"

Muslim and Jewish Leaders Unite to Combat Hatred

Religion New Service had it's headline story:

Cancer diagnosis gives second life to Carman’s music career
(RNS)-Once one of the biggest names in Christian music, Carman had been rejected by every Christian music label in the last 12 or 13 years. It was only after he went public about his terminal illness that the 57-year-old singer-songwriter discovered he still had an audience.

Worldwide Religious News had the following headline links on their homepage. They are perhaps the best example of the important, the disturbing and the "who cares!":

• Americans see religion in decline yet want more of it. What's up with that?
• Southern Baptists Move To Cut Ties With Boy Scouts Of America Over Inclusion Of Gay Scouts
• Myanmar Mosque, Muslim Orphanage Burned After Alleged Immolation Of Buddhist Woman
• 'Japanese Jesus' Legend: Christ Escaped Jerusalem, Lived In Japan With Family As Rice Farmer
• Italian professor says has found world’s oldest complete Torah in Bologna

A number of places, of course, had the news of author Fr. Andrew Greeley's death.

But arguably the biggest piece I found anywhere was this one:

LOS ANGELES (AP) — The Evangelical Lutheran Church of America [ELCA] elected its first openly gay bishop to a six-year term on Friday at an annual assembly in Southern California, officials said.

The election of Rev. Dr. R. Guy Erwin comes after the church's controversial rule change in 2009 that allowed gays and lesbians to be ordained in the nation's largest Lutheran denomination.

From a very basic, cultural perspective this barely ranks a note when compared to state legislatures (Way to go, Minnesota!) and their advancement of Gay marriage. It will be ten years next week since the Episcopal Church elected Bishop Gene Robinson in New Hampshire. As most religion news headlines show, the "news" of religion is not all that high on the exciting scale. This one seems like news that only the family would care about.

While I don't think it is earth-shattering, I do believe it shows the direction of our society toward more openness and a shift among at least some religiously-inclined individuals in the same direction.

My small denomination is wrestling with the ordination of gay individuals prior to the next national meetings in a year. The connection with this story is also that my denomination has "full communion" with both the Episcopal Church and the ELCA. So for our leadership the question is on the agenda: What if a "legally" ordained gay person from either of these other churches wanted to become a pastor in our denomination?

[Side note disclaimer: In retirement my wife and I are now members of an Episcopal Church.]

No, that is not tsunami-generating movement, either. But I think it illustrates how some of these issues move forward like they do- a little bit at a time- with a lot more connections than we realize. In the great scheme of the Christian timeline the approval of the ordination of women is more like a few moments ago- the early- to mid-70s in the mainline denominations. I graduated with, and was ordained only a few months before our first ordained woman pastor. Forty years is only 2% of Christian history. Yet it was in that movement that the movement to accept and ordain Gay individuals took root.

Each start as small movements. Not the kind that at first make news. But that is how change works. While there re the "black swans" that shatter all preconceptions and make us shift, long-term social change works much more slowly than that. Christianity itself was not a legal religion for 300 years. That's 15% of its history. But it was the slow movement, the incrementally small changes that brought about significant, cultural shifts.

That's why it is important not to be blinded by the big stories. They may tell us a lot about where we are, but it isn't very often they can tell us with any certainty about where we are going.

Would I Have Had the Courage?

Earlier this week the Minnesota House passed the bill legalizing marriage equality. Probably within a few days the Minnesota Senate will do the same making Minnesota the 12th state to do so. I have been clear of my agreement of the bill and its ideas.

But I wonder if I would have been willing to do that if I were still in the active ministry?

What brough that to mind was that my current pastor at the Episcopal Church where we are now members, was on TV (as he has been before) expressing the acceptance of the bill and advicating marriage equality. He has been clear where he stands from the start last year when Minnesota defeated the anti-equality bill . There he was on TV on Thursday, in public, giving his opinion.

I am sure that I would not have been doing so. I am sure that I would have wanted to talk about it only with people who know my opinion already. I am sure that if someone in my church would have asked me where I stood I would have said my opinion but then hemmed and hawed with some statement about accepting, etc.

Of course, I haven't been in the church in almost 10 years now. Times, on this issue, have changed in our culture. But I was aware of how few pastors might have been making public statements on the issue. You know, we have to be able to minister to everyone and not offend anyone. Even if we believe they are wrong(?) But I am sure that in my desire to be liked and to be able to minister to everyone in my church, I would very likely have been less open than some.

On the same newscast was a pastor from a more conservative church who made it clear that their church was not going to go along with this cultural shift. Since the beginning of their church, he said, they have stuck with the Bible and scriptural values. He was not afraid of his views. He was certain of them and didn't care if people disagreed. He doesn't have the desire to minister to people who disagree with him unless they are willing to be open to changing their opinion. (My interpretation.)

Why is it that when we find that we disagree with what has been a more traditional opinion of theology and scripture that we hem and haw? We bow, if ever so slightly, to the tradition and lose sight of the fact that in many instances, (most instances, perhaps) those long-held interpretations are as culturally-based as the contemporary ones.

I have a sense that what we might be witnessing is similar to what was happening in American theology in the mid-1800s and again in the mid-1900s over issues of race. We missed the fact then that the Hebrew Bible (and therefore the under-pinnings of the Christian Scriptures) are tribal, a variation of the racial arguments. We may have difficulty today seeing how in any way you can justify human slavery and the de-humanizing of whole sections of the world population can be God's will.

I pray that the move we have been seeing in the past several years will prove to be as antiquated and irrational in 50 or 100 years. I pray that these steps can lead us to a deeper and more inclusive vision of who we are as human brothers and sisters. I pray, finally, that God's love can be seen and experienced as grace instead of law.

What a Strange Concept!

The ongoing debate over gay marriage has certainly hit a new level of discussion. I was listening to the public radio program On Being last evening and caught part of the discussion on the issue. Two things hit me.

First, in the discussion by a person formerly opposed to gay marriage, he made the point that here are these individuals who want IN to an institution that many mainstream Americans seem to want OUT of. And it is the institution that the anti-gay marriage people are trying to protect. What this amounts to, I realized as he talked, is a major cognitive dissonance when what we see and say and believe and want all come into some form of disagreement.

In essence he said that he realized that all the anti-gay marriage talk hadn't done anything to strengthen the institution. Marriage is in trouble, he implied, in spite of all the support it is supposedly getting. Why then are people trying to prevent those who WANT to get married from getting married?

Sidenote: I have been hearing how marriage is in such trouble for as long as I've been married (41 years). Maybe we are just better informed about it. Maybe more people feel free to leave truly bad marriages. Maybe we just are more willing to look around and see that the old institution of marriage was broken and we are in a time of moving it into a new way. I don't know, but it is not a new problem in 2013.

In that may well be the seeds of the change that has been occurring over the last few years. It is a massive change which, as the pundits have been telling us, is an almost unprecedented change in a short time. How does not allowing someone to get married keep marriage safe? So goes strange concept #1.

Second was the idea that most of the time when we are discussing this issue, we are leaving out one small factor. What is at the heart of marriage? What is it all about? Children? Commitment? Societal institutions under fire? Religion?

Nope.

In the end it is about love.

Whatever that means for the individuals, love is the underpinning of marriage. It is the force that brings two people together. And as it grows, it is the glue that surrounds the couple and keeps them going when the original love (or infatuation) begins to wear off. Love goes deeper and forms newer bonds within the relationship.

Love.

What another strange concept. The more we argue about the rights and wrongs of marriage (gay or straight) the more we lose sight of love. And the more we need to be reminded of it and how, in our current situation the government denies the right of love to be officially recognized in a rite of love.

May this strange concept of love not be denied. May it be allowed to blossom and bloom.

Historic- or Not (2)

Yesterday I commented here that I was afraid that the Supreme Court will do its s - l - o - w turtle dance around any major change that would make a difference. Today's discussion and questions seem to indicate that I may have been on the right track. Court watchers heard what sounded like good arguments that DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act) will probably be shot down. That is not bad. That is good. For those who live in states where gay marriage is legal, it means the Federal benefits ban would be lifted.

Looking back on yesterday it seems likely that they will decide that case on Proposition 8's constitutionality along  narrow legal grounds. That's okay- if you live in California. But it sets no precedent for anywhere else.

Obviously the hope would be that this would be the impetus for changes to be encouraged elsewhere, especially in states that do not now have bans on gay marriage.It may also spur some movement to reverse those states that ban it. So some movement may be possible.

But those of us who hoped for a Brown v. Board of Education or Rove v. Wade type decision will probably be disappointed. Chief Justice Roberts will most likely be the most significant influence in the whole process, working between the sides to get a workable compromise. But in the slow movement of a court that almost by working definition lags behind change, that will mean only a small step forward.

Probably better than none.

By the way, I guess that symbol up there in the right corner of the post was a social media sensation yesterday. A good sign of the change that is still taking place.

Historic - or Not?

I have a fear that all the hoopla over the Supreme Court's potential decision may come to naught. This heavily divided court will remain heavily divided and do what they have done before- split the difference- and get everybody angry. What I fear will happen is they will find that:

• the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is unconstitutional and
• Proposition 8 IS constitutional

which will leave us absolutely nowhere!

The states that allow same-sex marriage will be left out in the cold and give the anti-same-sex marriage groups impetus to try to overturn that in those states. The ones that have "bans" on same-sex marriage will be allowed to continue their denial of rights.

One thing out of today's presentation that was good... when Justice Sonia Sotomayor commented that if marriage is all about procreation, then no marriage licenses should be issued for people over 50. It is those kinds of arguments and important counter-arguments that may, in the end, win the day.