A Thirty Year Conversation Comes To An End

Some things just take time, I guess, because after some thirty years of talk — Can you imagine talking about one subject for thirty years? — about The Gays and marriage, members of the Presbyterian Church have finally decided to change their constitutional definition of marriage to include same-sex marriage.

Thirty years! I could say, “Better late than never, but thirty years!”

The church’s General Assembly recommended the change last year, and just this week the 171 regional presbyteries have agreed to follow suit; the new wording goes from marriage being between “a man and a woman” to being between “two people, traditionally a man and a woman.”

I kinda wish they could have left that last part out because in another thirty years marriage might also be a tradition of two same-sex people.

Still, it’s not all roses for the Presbyterian Church; it has been losing members as it shifts to the left and equality, though, to be fair, most religions are seeing their numbers diminish as they progress toward equality.

The first wave of departures came back in 2011 when the presbyteries began allowing gay men and women to be ordained as pastors, elders and deacons, but since most of those who left were of the more conservative ilk, it was only a matter of time for that thirty year discussion to finally come to an end and for the church to allow same-sex marriage.

My take? Meh. I mean, it’s not like we need the churches to allow same-sex marriage; marriage is not a religious institution, though it can follow a religious ceremony. Marriage is a civil institution and so churches, whether for marriage equality or against it, don’t really have much say in the legality of the matter.

Still for those same-sex couples who follow a particular faith, this is a welcome sign; and for those folks who follow a particular faith that is still dragging its heels on the issues of LGBT equality, maybe now’s the time to shift from your current church to a more progressive one.

Just sayin’.

via NYT

photo credit

Presbyterians Vote For Marriage Equality By 3-to-1 Margin

Last week the Presbyterian Church of the United States [PCUSA] voted to allow same-sex weddings to be performed inside their churches, making them on of the largest Christian denominations to allow its entire congregation equality.

And it wasn’t one of those, Oooh, narrow victory kind of voted either; it was passed by a 76% to 24% vote—meaning nearly three times as many members stand for equality as don’t. In addition, naturally, the General Assembly also made it clear that they will take no issue with any pastor in their ranks who chooses to perform a same-sex wedding in states where they are legal, and delegates approved new language about marriage in the church’s Book of Order altering references to “a man and woman” to “two persons.”

Now, to make this queer, the change will not become church law until a majority of the 172 regional presbyteries vote to ratify the new language, but given that this vote was 3-to-1 for approval, it seems approval is expected.

The Presbyterian Lay Committee, which opposes same-sex marriage, urged congregations to launch a financial boycott out of protest:

“The Presbyterian Lay Committee mourns these actions and calls on all Presbyterians to resist and protest them. … You should refuse to fund the General Assembly, your synod, your presbytery and even your local church if those bodies have not explicitly and publicly repudiated these unbiblical actions. … God will not be mocked, and those who substitute their own felt desires for God’s unchangeable Truth will not be found guiltless before a holy God.”

In other words, those folks who believe that everyone is equal both in the eyes of the law and in the eyes of their God, might be going to Hell because they approve same-sex marriage, but my feeling is that if The Gays and The Gay Allies are all going to Hell because we believe in equality, then Hell might be the best party ever!

Congratulations to the PCUSA and let’s hope that, as this vote is spread throughout the churches in this country that the vote for equality stays strong.

source

Two Faiths .... Two Views

One of the problems I think we have as a country is that we tend to lump all people into categories. I mean, all gay men aren’t sex pigs; all Black men aren’t deadbeat dads, all Mexicans aren’t illegal, and all religions aren’t the same. And that’s what we have here: a tale of two faiths.

It seems that, last week, the General Assembly of the nation's largest Presbyterian denomination voted against a proposal that would have paved the way toward the church allowing same-sex weddings in their midst.

The proposal would have changed the church's Book of Order to define marriage as between "two people" but after the vote—and the narrow victory—it will keep the definition of marriage as between "a man and a woman."

"God, we are a divided church," said the Reverend Neal Presa, a New Jersey pastor and the General Assembly moderator, said while guiding church members in prayer after the vote.

And, in light of thatvote by the General Assembly—which is made up of pastors and lay people—pro-same sex marriage activists must wait another two years until the church's next national meeting to make marriage-related proposals.

On the other hand,

On the other hand, the United Methodist Church in the Northwest has set itself at with its parent denomination by endorsing Referendum 74 and asking voters to make Washington the nation’s seventh state to enact same-sex marriage.

The issue of marriage equality has divided much of Washington's faith community. While Episcopalians, Methodists and the ecumenical Faith Action Network have come out for same-sex marriage, the state’s Catholic bishops and many fundamentalist churches opposed it.  Seattle Archbishop J. Peter Sartain, apparently unaware of that whole Separation of Church and State thingy, even asked his parishes to serve as collection centers for signatures on the referendum petition. Still, many Seattle and Tacoma parishes refused the Archbishop’s request and even sent contingents from Catholics for Marriage Equality and Mormons for Marriage Equality to march in the Seattle Pride Day parade.

And while the United Methodist Church in the Northwest has come down on the side of equality, all is not the same among all Methodists. The parent church, at its convention, rejected a change in church doctrine, which asserts that “the practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching.”  Gays and lesbians are officially not allowed to serve as clergy, and the celebration of holy unions is prohibited by church law.

But the Reverend Sandy Brown, at Seattle First United Methodist Church, will not be silent: “Our church will not be deterred by our denomination’s heartless stand on homosexuality. We are out and proud to stand with our LGBT families, friends and neighbors.”

So, while all gays are not alike, or all Black men, Mexicans, women, and people of faith, the simple fact remains that in this country all men are supposed to be created equal. And some churches, some people of faith, as well aware of that, and are doing something about it.

Presbyterians Vote Against Marriage Equality

Methodists Endorse Marriage Equality

Another First....Another LGBT First!

Holy Protestant, Batman!

This Saturday, Scott Anderson will become the first openly gay minister ordained by the Presbyterian Church U.S.A. since the denomination amended its constitution this year to allow it.

Yup, a homo in  the pulpit, just like God intended.

It's been a long road for Scott Anderson, who, twenty-one years ago, realized he had two choices: continue to serve as a Presbyterian minister and hide his identity as a gay man, or leave the ministry and live, as he says, "with a sense of integrity" about who he is.

He left, but always hoped he could find his way back to what he thought of as his calling. And now he has: "I have felt a call from God to serve as a parish pastor since I was a sophomore in high school...When I came out and left the ministry, I never thought in my lifetime this day would come. This has been 20 years of God surprising me, really."

Surprising too, are the people who support Scott Anderson in his dream. Many call him profoundly qualified, a compassionate and deeply spiritual man, a gifted preacher, well-versed in theology. Sounds like he was born that way.

Rev. Nancy Enderle, who headed the presbytery committee that oversaw Anderson's three-year ordination process and recommended him unanimously: "Scott's gifts for ministry were so abundant and clear. He has this tremendous intellect, but also an air of humility and grace."

Of course, not everyone is as open as, say, Scott Anderson, or Nancy Enderle, or, well, even God. Forrest Norman, chairman of the North Carolina-based Presbyterian Lay Committee, which opposes the ordination of gay and lesbian pastors, saying it is inconsistent with Biblical teaching: "We want leaders to uphold the highest levels of conduct within the denomination. We want people to live in the way God called them to live."

Um, Forrest? You mean you want a compassionate and deeply spiritual man, a gifted preacher, well-versed in theology? That would be Scott Anderson. Why don't you set aside your bigotry and homophobia, and your selective memory regarding what is in the Bible and realize that God is love.

That's all. And that's what Scott Anderson wants people to know. Is that so wrong?

source

Defying The Church In The Name Of Equality

So, it was only yesterday that everyone in New York State became equal; all New Yorkers, even the gay ones, are allowed to marry the person they love, legally, and rightfully. That's a good day, dontcha think?

Of course, part of the equality bill is that churches will not be forced to perform same-sex marriages, nor can they be sued for refusing to do so. And, I like that idea, too. If we don't want the Church affecting the State, we should not allow the State to affect the Church. It's that whole Separation thing.

But at one church, the First Presbyterian Church of Glen Cove, Reverend Elizabeth Simpson sees several same-sex couples in her congregation, and she sees how much they love one another, and she's going to do something about it, even if it gets her defrocked.

Next March, Reverend Simpson will perform the marriage ceremony for one of those gay couples, and she'll do it in the church, saying, “I will make myself vulnerable to accusations or indictments, so to speak, from within the Presbytery, [but my] feeling is since just recently the church changed its mind about ordaining gays and lesbian people that I think eventually that [they will] change their sense about what marriage is.”

And while she may not yet have the backing of the church hierarchy, she has the complete backing of her own church. In fact, she says it isn't even an issue among her congregation. The feeling is Of course they can get married. Why not?

Why not indeed.  It isn't a big deal, really, except to the two people involved, who've made a commitment to spend their lives together, become a family, and maybe raise a family, and to have the whole world, or maybe just the stat of New York, or maybe just their congregation, share in that feeling.

source

You Have Two Choices: It's Wrong, Or It's A Sin

Well, it seems that the Presbyterian Church wants to allow openly gay and lesbian pastors to begin serving congregations around the country, but South Carolina congregations are, naturally, pissed off about it.

At a national assembly of Presbyterians last year, they voted to change the church constitution to removed wording that required celibacy and fidelity in marriage when considering church leaders. The proposed changes needed approval by a majority of the denomination's 173 regional presbyteries and just last week a Minnesota presbytery cast the deciding 87th vote. The new policy now goes into effect in July.

Of course, because it's South Carolina, all five of my state's presbyteries voted against the change. Dr. Alan Arnold of the Trinity Presbytery, which oversees the majority of Midlands congregations, says that, while churches are now permitted to ordain homosexual clergy, local congregations retain control over that process and he does not expect to see any immediate major changes here.

Which means South Carolina can keep it's homophobia in tact.

Still, more annoying than the idea that these "Christians" are such intolerant bigots, is what our local Fox News channel--Wach Fox 57--did with the story. As news channels often do, they offered up a poll for people to vote on whether or not they agreed with the Presbyterian church welcoming gay church leaders. But they didn't phrase the question like that. It was like this:

Wow.
 
Either way you look at it, it's anti-gay , homophobic, bigoted intolerant nonsense. Thanks South Carolina, and Wach Fox 57, for keeping it real.
 
Real stupid.
 
source

Murray Richmond: Coming Out Of The Dark

Murray Richmond was a Presbyterian minister for 17 years, and a hospital chaplain for three years. He used to stand at the pulpit and preach against The Gays and the sins of homosexuality, and the Word of God and blibbety blah blay blue everything anti-gay.

Murray Richmond

Now, however, Murray Richardson has come out of the darkness, revealing that, as Americans have shifted their attitudes bout marriage equality--from 32% approval in 2004 to 53% today--he is one of those Americans who has changed his mind.

Pastor say what?

He tells of being ordained back in 1989, and serving a church in North Carolina. Homosexuality wasn't much of an issue, gay rights weren't an issue, except maybe to the LGBT community, and the idea of an openly gay pastor was, well, it simply wasn't done. Murray Richmond believed, then, that no one "could be a practicing homosexual and a Christian. The Bible was straightforward on this issue. It all seemed incredibly obvious to me."

Then came the 90s, and suddenly homosexuality became a hot-button issue for more than just The Gays; straight people were talking about it, supporting it, protesting it. Murray Richmond advocated that old chestnut, "hate the sin, love the sinner"--he'd picked his side in the debate, and his side was anti-gay.

However, even then he didn't like the debate, because he thought other things, like, oh say, helping the poor, feeding the hungry, aiding the homeless, should be of the utmost importance, not, as he says, "determining the morality of what adults did in their bedrooms."

But Murray joined the crowds and preached against homosexuality. Today, he calls that holding "the traditional line" and limiting the role of gays in the church. But Murray felt something wasn't right with the anti-LGBT preaching; what he had once believed to be "biblically correct began to feel less and less right" in his heart.

And then Murray had an epiphany, well, three epiphanies, I guess.

He began having an online chat with a gay Christian man, who, like so many gay Christians, struggle with their orientation and their faith, and how those two things should work. The man struggled to tell Murray of his thoughts and ideas, that "God was more concerned with his pride than his sexuality" because he felt Murray, like every other man of the cloth to whom he'd spoken, had tried to convert him. But Murray listened, and questioned himself, and the church.

Then, one of his parishioners asked him to perform an exorcism for him because he was gay. The man had tried everything to change from gay to straight, and thought exorcism might actually do the trick. Murray still felt the man, and his homosexuality, were sinful, but he also knew that the man was not demon-possessed. He was just gay, and afraid.

Finally, Murray Richmond met a woman whose husband had left her for another man. And, to make matters worse, in the woman's eyes, her husband was, of all things, a minister in a small-town. But Murray Richmond was astonished by "her grace," and how she still called her husband the best minister she had ever known; a man who had simply decided that "he could no longer live the lie of his sexuality." 

These three revelations convinced Murray Richmond that no one chooses to be gay, like he had not chosen heterosexuality. And Murray realized that, after years of doing so, albeit begrudgingly, he could no longer condemn gay men and women for something that is not their fault, not their choice.

In the end, what affirmed his newfound beliefs, was when he was "approached by five individuals who demanded: that he come out strongly against acceptance of LGBT people in his next sermon. They wanted him to preach what the Bible said on the issue, but found it funny that "all five of them were divorced and remarried...[and]...[h]ad I done a sermon on what the Bible said about divorce, every one of them would have left the church in a huff."

Indeed.

Still, Murray Richmond did that sermon, possibly out of fear of repercussions from his flock, and today he says it was not his "best hour as a Minister of Word and Sacrament." He felt the Bible, and, apparently God's, view on homosexuality, was far more nuanced than he thought, and, while he tried to instill that thought into his sermon, he still feels he came off as anti-gay.

Murray Richmond:

"Looking back, I see how much my own opinions had been formed by the fact that I was representing a split congregation. Our church, like so many, was divided. And while the people who believed it should be accepted were not going to leave if we maintained a position of non-acceptance, those who felt it was a sin would bolt in a heartbeat if we ever allowed gay clergy or gay marriage. If they bolted, half our budget would go out the door. I knew the issue could tear the church apart. What I didn't realize was how it could tear apart the people in the church as well.
[....]
Murray Richmond left his ministry in 2005 to work as a hospital chaplain. He says one reason he left was because his own marriage was breaking up, but also he was "tired of trying to live up to standards that I did not fully agree with."

Now, he believes in the change, he believes in marriage equality, he believes you can be gay and Christian. He's a believer of all things possible now, and realizes why the church singles out homosexuality as a "litmus test for True Christianity."

Murray Richmond:

Now I am wondering why, if two gay people want to commit their lives to one another, they should ever be denied that chance. No church or pastor should be forced to perform those ceremonies, and they can choose not to recognize gay marriage for their adherents. But the constitution of the Presbyterian Church does not explicitly forbid a pastor from being a thief, a murderer, or an egotistical jerk. It is not designed to do these things. It does prohibit a gay person from becoming a pastor. All I can ask is: Why?"

Welcome into the light, Murray, and keep spreading your words wherever you can.He began to see how the churches use the anti-gay movement as a means to raise money for themselves, and he began to really look at the Bible, and how it talked about homosexuality, and he realized it wasn't as clear cut as he'd been taught, and as he'd once preached.

source

Meanwhile, Also In California

The Reverend Jane Spahr, a retired Presbyterian minister and vocal critic of her faith's position on same-sex marriage, is set to be tried by a church court for performing same-sex wedding ceremonies during that brief period of time when marriage was truly equal in California.

Spahr has been charged with "publicly, intentionally and repeatedly" violating Presbyterian Church doctrine by presiding over the weddings of some sixteen couples between June 2008 and November 2008, before California voters outlawed same-sex marriages.
In a written statement, Spahr said:

"To turn my back on the love and lifelong commitments of these wonderful couples would have gone against my faith, the ministry where I was called, and most of all, against God's amazing hospitality and welcome where love and justice meet together."

She has pleaded not guilty, explaining there are other parts of church doctrine that are just as important such as being welcoming and valuing diversity.

The Presbyterian church constitution, however, defines marriage as a covenant between a man and a woman, but its Diana Ross and the Supremes Judicial Council--okay, it's just Supreme Judicial Council, but my way sounds more fabulous--has ruled that ministers can bless same-sex unions as long as they do not call them marriages and the ceremonies don't mimic traditional weddings.

Po-TAY-to, po-TAH-to.

Seriously, what's in a word? Same-sex MARRIAGE was legal when Spahr perfomed the ceremonies, so how can she be punished for performinf MARRIAGE ceremonies?

From The Religious Front

A gay minister in the middle of a dispute about his appointment to a church in a Scottish city said he was “humbled” after the Church of Scotland upheld his appointment.

In a ground-breaking move, the Church’s ruling body voted by 326 to 267 in support of the Reverend Scott Rennie, the British Press Association reported Sunday.

The 37-year-old’s appointment at Queen’s Cross Church in Aberdeen, on Scotland’s northeast coast, provoked opposition from traditionalist members of the church and has led to fears it could cause a damaging split.

More than 400 Church ministers and almost 5,000 Church of Scotland members are said to have signed an online petition, organized by the Fellowship of Confessing Churches, against the appointment.

Papers lodged with the Church of Scotland’s General Assembly in Edinburgh claimed scriptures in the Old and New Testament describe same-sex activity as a “wrong choice.” However, Rennie’s supporters argued that the Bible does not directly address homosexual relationships, which are now “essentially a feature of modern society.”

We're here.

We're queer.

Get used to it.