The next church.

April 15, 2009 by Dan Hooper.

I am still muttering internally about what to think about “Evangelical Catholic.” Is there a convergence there, if you take those terms as group names? We certainly saw at least an opportunisitic convergence last fall with the convergence of Rev. Rick Warren’s flavor of church-ianity being “in sync” with the Catholic bishops, all trying to defend traditional matrimony.

At the time I thought that Mormons, the traditional African-American churches, and Catholics each had something in their own dark past they wanted to play down by claiming the high moral ground about marriage (”Why Yes Won“).  In countless discussions since then with other marriage equality people, I have more reason to believe I was right on that. True “family” values, as experienced in those sectors, are not morally high values. Everything from polygamy to broken homes to child molestation is found there. Of course, those were not ideals, and not even the majority of families in those faith traditions, but I believe each of them wanted to play down their own sad failings/scandals by noisily carrying the flag for traditional marriage.

Everybody, it seems, is carrying different flags now. Faith experiences are shifting. We’ve juggled what emergent churches mean for everyone else, what conversion might be in the 21^st century, and why the larger world still admires Jesus and despises his followers. Every day I see new “Religion” headlines in print and on the net, and most of what makes the news in the world of religion either saddens me or makes me wince.

What is becoming of the Christian church I knew and loved and respected?  Is it now only a shrill, homophobic, legalistic finger wagging at America to return to “traditional values” that it has already left behind and even helped to undermine? Is the mega-church going to be the prevailing symbol of the Christian church in its last chapter of history?—a feel-good, prosperity club mesmerized by flashing lights and pop/rock Christian love songs? Is it strident allegiance to traditional bigotries, even while realignment with Nigerian or Sudanese bishops triggers lawsuits over the ownership of pricey upper-class properties? Is it televangelists owning private jets, buying diamond mines in South Africa, and operating ecologically offensive power plants in Southern California, in order to pay for “family programming” on TV?

In digging around more on the internet to see what “Evangelical Catholic” might really mean, in addition to some enlightening and thoughtful articles I also found a lot of smaller outfits —too small to be called “denominations”—which describe themselves as “evangelical catholic.” Some of them resemble “Old Catholics” or other off-brand splinters from the Roman Catholic Church: denominational side-shows. Others have clearly invented themselves out of thin air with the name of a single bishop who traces his consecration to somebody somewhere that could be thought of as legitimate.

Some of these groups are also rigid, inflexible, strident and legalistic, even while they think they can claim the moral high ground. Some of them are stridently anti-feminine and anti-women’s-ordination while still lauding Mother Mary as Queen of Heaven.

Clearly, the House of the Church needs a thorough Spring cleaning. Some realignment is probably good, because many of these communities, large or small, seem to have lost their way and floated into religious back-waters.

“What is truth?” asked Pontius Pilate. Jesus could have answered that question but it’s clear many of his people today cannot. I don’t like being negative, but I feel like I know what “the truth” is not. It is not fighting over church real estate, yanking congregations out of church bodies over single-issue disputes, denouncing lesbian or gay couples in order to puff oneself up. It is not shopping through a whole cafeteria of ecclesial orders, “communions” and episcopates in order to find a bishop one is comfortable with. It is not turning the call to discipleship into the name of a rock band, or reducing the Gospel to a sound byte or a bumper sticker.

Clearly I don’t have the answer as to what the Christian faith should come to be in the 21^st century, but I know whom it should resemble. What is truth, when it comes to faithfulness to the way of Jesus? It is the process, the search, the walk of those who carry his cross even if they haven’t yet discerned where that cross will be planted or how much blood will be shed. Maundy Thursday is still on my mind, with its call to obedience in love. We are not called to govern one another, to rise above one another, to criticize one another, or to compete against one another. We are called to love one another and keep following Jesus into the places of this world where our own egos will be forgotten and God’s mercy and love and grace can be lifted up.

—Pastor Dan Hooper, Los Angeles

Posted in Doctrine, Lesbian/Gay Marriage, Catholic matters, Ecumenical Issues, Fundamentalism, History, Faith, LGBT Christian, Spirituality | Print | No Comments »

Evangelical Catholicism?

April 14, 2009 by Pastor Dan.

Again yesterday another lapsed Catholic man contacted us. He has apparently been away from the church for quite awhile, and came to realize that he can’t go back to what he left.

Happily, a message planted by a parochial school teacher or nun (are they always nuns?) had stuck with him in catechism. If you can’t attend Mass or find a Catholic church on Sunday, find an Episcopal or Lutheran church.  (And he found us because we are in the neighborhood, not because of Google or any other informational source.)

Can he find the home he left here? Will he actually come to visit and attend Eucharist? Will he be surprised to find the Stations of the Cross on the sanctuary walls? Will he find grace here?  Can he grow in faith here?

“Can you drink the cup that I drink?” — Jesus

Lutherans like to say that we are “Evangelical Catholics” but that leaves both modern Evangelicals and Catholics confused. Wikipedia has an interesting article on this.  An excerpt: 

“In the era of Lutheran orthodoxy, theologians Martin Chemnitz and Johann Gerhard (especially in his Confessio Catholica) were deeply rooted in patristic theology. They saw the continuity of Catholicism in Lutheranism, which they understood not as a re-formation of the Church, but rather a renewal movement within and for the Catholic Church, from which they had been involuntarily and only temporarily separated.”

Who are the Lutherans?  This caller wanted to know if Evangelical Lutherans were different than “Evangelicals” which are so much in the news in present-day America. That was a conversation-starter.

More and more, there are not only “recovering Catholics” and “ex-Catholics” in my parish, but Catholics who still consider themselves fully Catholic and attend Mass, etc., and yet who also are drawn to our community as well. I am deeply serious about receiving and welcoming them, and concerned that I do not alienate those who are already wounded in some way with my over-anxiety to attract new people. At the same time, I am not on a “sheep-stealing” mission.

This man, whom I still look forward to meeting in person, is also gay—not surprising, given the numbers of both Catholics and gay people in America. In fact, if 10% of the population is gay, then there are more gay Catholics than the membership of the entire Evangelical Lutheran Church in America!

Having noted that, it fascinates me that the ELCA is still so exercised and preoccupied whether and how to welcome LGBT people into the Church. They have certainly spent 100 times the energy on this “issue” in the last 20-some years than they have on the question of whether and how to welcome Catholics into the Lutheran community.

I am concerned about both, and was given a mandate in my parish to be in ministry with LGBT people. As a “practicing homosexual” I could give lessons <faint laugh | old joke>. But I need to learn with much greater sensitivity what it actually means to be an Evangelical Catholic pastor in a parish which is increasingly weighted in favor of Catholic women and men who want to come back to the faith which was planted in them, but must find new soil in which it can once again grow and flourish.

— Pastor Dan Hooper, Los Angeles

Posted in Ecumenical Issues, Catholic matters, Fundamentalism, LGBT Christian, Ministry, Faith, ELCA | Print | No Comments »

Conversion and/or Convergence?

April 13, 2009 by Pastor Dan.

I’m not sure what it means to convert from one faith to another. Philip Jenkins’ article “The Sufi next door,” in the current (April 21, 2009) issue of Christian Century, by Philip Jenkins, again brushes on this sensitive issue of Christian–Muslim relations. He begins:

Many excellent scholars study Islam. Many other scholars explore the changing face of global Christianity. Rarely do those experts look at the two worlds— Muslim and Christian—side by side, which is a pity: when we do, we see some remarkable parallels and connections that shed light on both.

In truth, it is “side by side” that makes both sides nervous, because when we see parallels and connections, we are less likely to be absolutely sure of our own faith. Its uniqueness is usually a prop to help support its truthfulness. But if there is another religion out there, or another world view, which closely parallels our own but interprets things just somewhat differently, how can we be absolutely sure that we are right?

I am sure that, since long before the Crusades, Christians and Muslim both had little interest in understanding the other deeply. Certainly the Taliban in our own times, and the American Religious Reich, have no desire to dialogue.

In recent months I have had occasions for preliminary dialogue in my own community with Jewish people, specifically with a local Chabad rabbi, and with Jewish laymen. Several of my own Lutheran community members have Jewish spouses. It’s idiotic to avoid dialogue if it’s so easily at hand.

Of course, my insights won’t topple any millenniums-old barriers, but if those barriers are inside my own head, wouldn’t it be a good idea to listen, discuss, grow and mature on such matters? This year I was invited to a home Seder that sounded extremely fascinating (but sadly, it was held on our Christian Maundy Thursday, so we couldn’t attend).

On the Protestant side of the Catholic/Protestant divide, of course, entirely new forms of faith continue to emerge, attracting those who were perhaps uncomfortable in or bored by their received (upbringing) tradition. To some extent, there is convergence which was launched by the ecumenical movement several generations ago. Convergence may happen when two things are similar and each affords advantages. But it is far less likely that we will ever converge with what we fear.

In the LGBT community, of course, we already good at bridging chasms and knocking down prejudicial walls. Ethnic, religious and economic lines are more easily jumped once you have already crossed the no-man’s-land or the DMZ of sexual taboo.

But like Christians and Jews in dialogue, or Christians and Muslims in dialogue (Google: 270,000 results, oh my!), who find more in common than they do which separates them, heterosexuals and lesbian/gay people who dialogue find they have more in common than not. It seems scary, and a lot of fundamentalist/ heterosexist types don’t want to risk their strident certainty about masculinity or sexuality by actually talking with a sexual minority one-to-one.

It is tempting to smirk about their small–mindedness or inflexibility. But how many gay or lesbian people have risked building a bridge with a transgender person? What are we afraid of? After all, we may have more in common than we have that distinguishes us.

If we expect the general public, for example, to stop battling same-gender marriage with the argument that our marriage does not hurt anybody else’s heterosexual marriage, then what is it about our own lives that we think we might endanger if we get to know transgender people ?

Yet conversion is not that likely in the sexuality area. I’ve never known a heterosexual who was somehow tempted to experiment on the other side unless the homosexual disposition or orientation was there from early on. Right-wing Christians who push those “change”or “reparative therapy” ministries insist that gay people all suffer from some gender confusion.

But frankly, those of us who are Kinsey 6’s aren’t confused at all. No amount of dialogue with a transgender person is likely to prod me to change my gender. Ditto with straights. None of them have been able to recruit me, no matter how much they’ve tried, prayed or threatened. Most of my dialogue has always taken place with heterosexuals, and I’m still not drawn to “convert” to heterosexuality.

What converges through dialogue is the common will to understand, to set phobias aside, and to walk alongside others whom we used to loathe and fear.

— Pastor Dan Hooper, Los Angeles

Posted in Sex, Catholic matters, Ecumenical Issues, Fundamentalism, Public Affairs, LGBT Christian, Ex-Gay | Print | No Comments »

A Personal Resurrection Experience

April 12, 2009 by Dan Hooper.

Alleluia! Christ is risen.

He is risen indeed. Alleluia, alleluia!

I don’t usually dwell on personal issues, but this is a brief follow-up from last week about Carl. Thanks to the intransigence of insurance plans, he was sent home on Easter Sunday right as we began our morning festival worship service. We are still working out the details of home health care and logistics.

I am so grateful to God that he walks, he talks, he is able to ambulate and feed himself, and his body is functioning somewhat normally ~except of course for the fact that he wears the steel, plastic and velcro equivalent of a body cast from his hips to his chin, and will live with those indignities and discomforts for probably 8 more weeks.

The discomforts are from no less than six broken bones, and as I peruse the lengthy print-out of his treatment record, I am finding more and more things from the analysis of his MRI that could mean additional fractures have occurred.

But he is living! And we shall always remember Easter as God’s sign that our own resurrection is in God’s hands!

And I am dazed again by the power of the blog! It was from reading my April 5 blog that a dear friend in Oregon learned about Carl, and contacted mutual friends that I had not yet been able to tell. Thank you, Sarah. And thank all of you who have lifted Carl’s spirits, fed him before he could feed himself, and brought entire florist’s and card shops to his side, and offered entire prayer books of faith on his behalf. God bless you all.

— Dan Hooper, Los Angeles

Posted in PRAYERS, Spirituality, Recovery | Print | 1 Comment »

Jesus is not the only one despised and rejected.

April 10, 2009 by Dan Hooper.

About a year ago a young Muslim man came to my office to learn more about the Christian faith. (I blogged about this once before~ June 3, 2008) I was taken by surprise, and thought to myself, “Oh God, where to begin?” But we have several deep conversations. He helped me begin by asking me, “How did Jesus die?”—something which many Muslims have never been told about.

Today is Maundy Thursday. In this Holy Week, Christians recall the events of the final days of Jesus’ life, and especially his betrayal, arrest, mock trial and condemnation to death. Those events are fully told in the Gospels. But in the ancient prophesies, there are a series of “Servant Songs” in the book of Isaiah which Christians have recognized since the earliest times as prophetic of the suffering and death of Jesus.

In reading this passage from Isaiah 53:1–9, I began to imagine some parallels between the rejection and hatred of Jesus and the rejection (and secret suffering) of lesbian, gay or transgender people who also feel despised and hurt —especially young people who don’t have enough perspective on life yet to be able to stand up to homophobia and hatred:

1 Who has believed what we have heard? And to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed?I am going nuts, Lord. How do I know if you are with me or not, because my friends and my family think I am evil and sick, and people say I will go to hell for being gay.

2 For he grew up before him like a young plant, and like a root out of dry ground; he had no form or majesty that we should look at him, nothing in his appearance that we should desire him.

I can feel the hatred in their eyes, because they look at my like I’m some kind of freak. I’m only a teenager, and already my life is a mess!

3 He was despised and rejected by others; a man of suffering and acquainted with infirmity; and as one from whom others hide their faces he was despised, and we held him of no account.

This torture inside of me has been going on for a long time. I just knew I was different since I was a little kid. And no matter how I have tried to be good or to conform or “fit in,” people either disliked me or completely ignored me, like I’m not even a human being.

4 Surely he has borne our infirmities and carried our diseases; yet we accounted him stricken, struck down by God, and afflicted.

When they find out you’re queer, the first thing they think is like, “He’s got AIDS! Get away from me you fag!” And, “God is punishing you for being so gay!” Sometimes I have been hit or shoved into the wall. Once they kicked me.

5 But he was wounded for our transgressions, crushed for our iniquities; upon him was the punishment that made us whole, and by his bruises we are healed.

They think that by treating me with hate they are somehow better, like “holier-than-thou.” They think that by beating up on me or shouting obscenities, somehow they are more human that I am. Like, the guys are insecure about their masculinity, so they want to hurt me to prove they are “real” men.

6 All we like sheep have gone astray; we have all turned to our own way, and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all.

I can’t help it, Lord, but I feel like you have let all this hatred come down on me. I cannot carry this load, Lord. People say you never give us a load we cannot carry, but I can’t carry the load of hatred that has been put on my back.

7 He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; like a lamb that is led to the slaughter, and like a sheep that before its shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth.

So how am I supposed to remain quiet, and be nice to people who talk about me behind my back? Am I supposed to just let them hate me, be cruel, abuse me and kill me like they did to Matthew Shepard and Lawrence King and Gwen Araujo?

8 By a perversion of justice he was taken away.  Who could have imagined his future? For he was cut off from the land of the living, stricken for the transgression of my people.

I’ve heard about guys who went to jail “on a morals charge” just because they were gay! And anti-gay violence is getting worse. We are being killed just for being who we are!

9 They made his grave with the wicked and his tomb with the rich, although he had done no violence, and there was no deceit in his mouth.

O God, I feel like I could die. I mean, I feel dead, because people wish I was dead!! Protect me, and help me to not to go crazy. I want to live. you gave me life. Help me to go one living until there is better day, and not to hate those people back because they hate me.  Help me to survive!!

—Pastor Dan Hooper, Los Angeles

Posted in Homophobia, Gay Catechism, Violence, HIV and AIDS, Bible & Interpretation, PRAYERS, Faith, LGBT Christian, Coming Out | Print | No Comments »

Holy Week: About Jesus.

April 9, 2009 by Pastor Dan.

This being Holy Week, I am in a refelctive mode about the very core of our faith and our ability to proclaim good news.  Below is an article I wrote more than a year ago, and put it on our pamphlet rack.  Of all the materials put there, this one disappears most frequently. Maybe we should stop promoting ourselves and our programs, and just tell people About Jesus.

About Jesus and Our Faith in Him

We are not ashamed to tell you the real reason we’re here: Jesus Christ — who is the One for whom this and all Christian churches and communities exist. We want everyone to know some things about Jesus that many web sites and many churches neglect to say:  Jesus is God’s gift to humanity. The Holy Scriptures reassure us that Jesus came into this world for one purpose – to give his life for our sake – and to call us to come home to God, whom he vividly portrayed as our heavenly Father. “For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him may not be lost but have eternal life.” —John 3:16This congregation is an open, affirming, welcoming, reconciling church, not because of liberal tendencies and wishy-washy beliefs, but because Jesus was open, affirming, welcoming and reconciling in his life and ministry. He, too, was criticized for not being strict enough, or religious enough, or pure enough. In every case, he brushed aside that criticism because it misses the point.

  We proclaim and teach God’s grace, for Jesus’ sake. Yes, there are many strict, dour and condemn-ing words found in the Bible. But we are convinced by the Gospel (which means “Good News”) that God’s most important message in those inspired and ancient pages is the message of unconditional love and grace. God’s Word for us is always an invitation, not an ultimatum. Jesus is God’s Word in the flesh, the one who came to seek those who are lost, not to condemn them. For nearly 500 years Lutheran Christians have taught this based on the clear testimony of the Scriptures: that we and all human beings are justified in God’s sight, not because of our good deeds or best intentions, but because of God’s grace which we receive simply through faith in Jesus. No one earns God’s love. No one’s strict behavior or most diligent abstinence impresses God.

   We read and study the Bible, so we know about God’s wrath—repeated over and over in the law and the prophets. But, for Jesus’ sake, we do not need to run from God. Jesus encourages us to draw near to God’s “throne of grace.” We do not need to live in shame or fear of eternal damnation. One word often paired with “wrath” is “saved.” Christians like to talk about being saved from God’s wrath! Some Christians like to rely on good deeds (like silver stars pasted on a chart in heaven) to save them from wrath. They claim their good works like achievements, so they look down on others as under-achievers! But we know that the whole world was saved from God’s wrath by one single event: when Jesus gave his life for all upon the cross. He put a “stop” to the wrath, the suffering, the threat of eternal punishment, and the folly of religious “good works” with his own blood. Our blood and tears mean nothing, because his blood and tears were everything.So the full and true Gospel of Jesus is one of grace, not of condemnation. We claim the unconditional love of God, and try to live in a manner which is appropriate as God’s beloved people. We know it is not necessary to spend our whole lifetime worrying about whether God loves us, for Jesus clearly said so.  The message of grace is this: if we humbly recognize that we have wandered away from God’s love (and yes, every human being has sinned in ways which are big and small), all we need to do is to wake up to this: God still loves us; God has not abandoned us; God is seeking us, and wants us to come home. In this waking, seeking, returning and coming home, God’s grace awaits us in full measure. All is forgiven, because of the Cross of Jesus Christ.God hates no one! The love of God is not cancelled or erased because of human foolish-ness, excesses or willful errors. The church of Jesus Christ is a community of recovering sinners – we are not “saints” in the sense of “perfect people.” We are just those who know our need of grace, and have found the One whom God sent to announce love, reconciliation and peace to the world.How do you imagine Jesus? Although every artist for thousands of years have portrayed him, there are no photographs of Jesus. Every disciple, mystic, saint and believer has used his or her imagination. Yet through the testimony of many Christians —beginning with the letters and narrative stories in the New Testament itself—we have an enduring portrait of this amazing person. Jesus forgave, healed, taught, served, embraced, wept and bled for others.  Even more important than how we see Jesus is how he sees us! He saw the world upside down from the way people usually see it, with the hungry well fed, and the poor and oppressed liberated. He didn’t condemn those whoseexcesses and errors caused them shame. He stood between an adulteress and her would-be executioners. He pleaded with his followers to show mercy, to provide for the least important people, and to forgive everyone—even hundreds of times—and to do greater things than he was doing. In his last hour, he forgave those whose “duty” was to put him to death.   So, if Jesus is so gracious, loving, non- judgmental and accepting —whom the Scriptures tell us is the very image and presence of God Almighty in the flesh—then why is it that Christians are often so angry and threatening? Why are Christians “at each other’s throats” with criticism and condem-nation? Why are churches so competitive? Why does the general public have a positive view of Jesus but a negative view of “church people”? Given the huge difference between Jesus and his followers, does anybody think it is Jesus’ fault that he doesn’t resemble us more closely? Sadly, no, it is we who do not resemble him! Human beings are the victims of our own excesses, and this is certainly true when spirituality is dominated by religiosity.  Who is the real Jesus?At its worst, the medieval church was obsessed with sinfulness and guilt (which, it taught, sent Jesus to the Cross) it expected people to live with lifelong guilt, shame and sorrow, and to avoid every possible thing that might lead to committing a sin. The high morality of the earliest Christians quickly changed from being a self-discipline to a whole system of laws, sanctions, penalties and penitence—ultimately leading to capital punishment for sins.  Now the church in our times is getting lost in its own enthusiasm for marketing and “selling” Jesus the way products are sold. Jesus has become the most over-advertised and over-exposed individual in history! He is being re-made in our cultural image! Hundreds of “feel good” mega-churches have followed marketing consultants and produce a television show worship event featuring praise, optimism, glory and self-congratulation, mixed with American patriotism.Their testimony is often all “about us and How Great We Are for believing” rather than “about Jesus and how changed we are by his grace and forgiveness.” This modern “church” seems to have forgotten the call to discipleship, the call to “take up your cross and follow” the Jesus who humbled himself and accepted death to redeem the world.

Like medieval times, “successful” churches today seem to be all about puffing themselves up and building an empire of wealth, influence, and public respectability. So we need to ask ourselves, as a Christian community, whether we are following Christ closely enough to notice those for whom he stopped and stooped: the poor, those without hope, “sinners” who were rejected by others, strangers, foreigners and outsiders, prisoners, widows, the sick and dying. There is no “glory,” wealth, empire or self-congratulation that comes from this.

  But if we are really moved by and impressed by Jesus, then to serve God faithfully and to follow Jesus faithfully means to serve the people whom Jesus always puts in our path. “For I tell you, whatever you did for the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.” —Matthew 25:40The “bottom line” for a Christian congre-gation is that we are seeking out the lost and the least, with humility, as we try to be disciples who follow Jesus.God bless you as you seek to follow Jesus!

— Pastor Dan Hooper, Los Angeles

Posted in Doctrine, Bible & Interpretation, Faith, Living by Grace, Spirituality | Print | No Comments »

How’s that again, Newt?

April 8, 2009 by Dan Hooper.

Newt Gingrinch (yes, I can spell) is at it again. Like Palin, Phelps and other all-too-public figures, that has-been republican voice is still speaking long after he had anything to say. According to a Google News source, “Gingrich: Iowa ruling shows ‘judicial arrogance’”. Now that the Vermont Legislature has also given a green light to same-sex marriage, does this mean that Gingrich will smile approvingly? Or, one could hope, keep quiet?  But in his new Roman Catholic convert status, is he trying to claim the moral high ground to comment on public affairs?

This little nonsense hinges on that sound-byte, “judicial activism.” Like “natural law” there really is no definition, so only fools jump in to say what cannot be said with clarity or reason. What constitutes judicial activism? For one thing, courts do not go out and solicit cases to be brought to them. By definition, the are re-active, not active, because if no one brings a case, there is no day in court. I have yet to catch a single story that any court in this land is putting out a message that it wants test cases brought in.

If judges were activists for any specific set of causes, the Iowa Supreme Court ought to put that to rest. The decision was unanimous. All 7 justices, including the two Republican appointees, concurred with the decision that depriving lesbian and gay couples of the right to one of society’s most fundamental benefits is wrong.  (See Time magazine’s “The Meaning of Iowa’s Gay-Marriage Decision” by Michael Lindenberger.)

Original caption:  Jen BarbouRoske (R) and Dawn BarbouRoske, with their daughters, Bre and McKinley, react after learning of the Iowa Supreme Court ruling in favor of legalizing gay marriage.  Photo: Christopher Gannon / The Des Moines Register / AP

Newt is welcome to search the published case law for Iowa to see if he can find a legal opinion that suggests the Supreme Court was hungry for more gay cases, or more marriage cases. If ever there was an activist entity, it was the County which brought the appeal to the Supreme Court. The thing about activism – typically from the Plaintiff in an appeal – is that it can come from either side of the liberal/conservative spectrum.  Be careful what you sue for, because justice swings on its own hinges.

“It’s the height of judicial arrogance,” Gingrich said. “You have seven lawyers who have decided, on their own, to fundamentally change Iowa” (according to the Google news story).Well, Newt, calling them “seven lawyers” is a bit arrogant right there, if not contempt of court. We call them Justices in a highly honorific, time-tested manner because they are not “practicing law”, they are deciding it on the basis of the state’s or the nation’s highest principles.

Personally, what I found laughable is that “Gingrich … has been mentioned as a possible Republican presidential contender in 2012.”  Hey, go ahead, Newt. Have a primary fight with Sarah Palin, another bright moral light at the end of her own personal tunnel.

Sarah at least cannot be completely blamed for her daughter’s attitude about having a child out of wedlock. But Newt had his own affair outside of his marriage – a distinction he shares with other leaders who remain shameless — for which no one else but he can share the blame. The Washington Monthly’s “High Infidelity” article published in 2006 details some of this stuff for you, if you care.

What moral high ground does Newt Gingrich think he can claim by denouncing Justices in the heartland of America over gay marriage, when his own credentials, scant as they are, include straight infidelity and adultery?  Arrogance indeed!

— Pastor Dan Hooper, Los Angeles

Posted in Catholic matters, Lesbian/Gay Marriage, Sex, Public Affairs | Print | No Comments »

Well, God bless America!

April 7, 2009 by Pastor Dan.

Because of personal emergencies, I am woefully behind on e-mail, so I was caught off guard for the historic news this morning that Vermont’s legislature has overridden the governor’s veto of the bill to legalize same-sex marriage. Vermont, beginning September 1, will be the fourth state to legalize same-sex marriage, but the first to do it through the legislature. This courageous and historic moment rates at the top along with Vermont’s first-in the-union action to create civil unions.

(That honor could have been California’s too, except that our weak-spined Hummer driving photo-op governor vetoed the bill twice and of course left the door open for the opposition which led up to Proposition 8.)

According to 365Gay.com’s newscenter, the bill eked through the override procedure in the state House (100 yes to 49 no) but was an easy deal for the state Senate (23 to 5).

Nonetheless, this 2/3 majority makes it clear that the mood in the Vermont legislature is overwhelmingly positive for same-sex couples, where civil unions have been legal since 2000. (Existing civil unions will continue to be recognized, but new ones no longer will be granted after September 1.)

Governor Douglas attempted to rationalize his veto, in part, by suggesting that the bill does include any rights or benefits not already available in civil unions. Of course, he is trying to “protect” the word marriage from this homosexual onslaught. But as numerous courts have now said, enough times that even a conservative Republican should be able to understand, “separate is not equal.” That’s a sound-byte brief enough that even W could have mastered with a little practice.

But because there have been civil unions for 8 years, could it be that once the public got used to the idea of same-gender couples, it took the edge off the right-wing satanic panic?

Original caption from MSBNC coverage:  Gay marriage advocate Beth Robinson, center, holds back tears following the passage of a gay marriage bill in Montpelier, Vt., on Tuesday.  Photo:  Toby Talbot / AP

Meanwhile, as California hangs on waiting for our Supremes to decide both the fate of Proposition 8 and the estimated 18,000 couples who legally wed before November 4, 2008, the clock of social change continues to tick here also. Californians of all persuasion—including conservatives—will become more accustomed to seeing and knowing same-gender couples who are out, claiming and exercising our legal rights as married people.

The bottom line, for conservatives who want to hold on to their imaginary line of defense, is that as each month passes, there are in truth more married lesbian and gay couples in America. We’re here, we’re married. Get used to it!

And when Proposition 8 is gone (whether by the court’s action or by a reverse ballot initiative in 2010), California would come back on line as the fifth state in the Union for same-sex marriage. (Unless Maine and or New Hampshire join this group in the meantime.) But, five out of fifty states, hmmm. Seems I recall that 10% concept from an earlier stage of our movement. Could it be that God is really blessing these United States anew? Are we beginning to actually see the arc of the universe bending toward justice? Are we beginning to see the “tipping point”?

— Pastor Dan Hooper, Los Angeles

Posted in Lesbian/Gay Marriage, LGBT Rights, History, Public Affairs | Print | No Comments »

For better, for worse, in sickness and in health.

April 5, 2009 by Dan Hooper.

This is not a blog about gay marriage. Indwelling Spirit is about a lot of issues affecting LGBT people who are trying to follow Christ, and to remain in fellowship with other Christians who either reject us and hate us, or at the least are suspicious of us.

But we take the news of the day, and play the ball where it lies. In recent months the news has been jammed with the aftermath of Proposition 8, which (temporarily) dash the hopes of California becoming and staying the third United State to legalize same-gender civil marriage.

The news of my day has changed things, at least for a time. My lawfully-wedded spouse Carl is in the hospital, having suffered a disastrous fall on Saturday. He has four fractured vertebrae, one of them serious, and two fractured ribs. It appears now that this will not require emergency surgery, but what is coming next is still quite unclear.

Carl was climbing a tree in order to do some quick pruning in preparation for Palm Sunday. Now w have both missed the Palm Sunday service entirely, instead watching the hours tick by in the Emergency Room. At this hour he is completely immobilized with a neck brace, until the results of his MRI can be evaluated by a neurosurgeon.

Yet in the midst of all his pain, Carl has been capitalizing on our civilly-married status. Coming out all over again, he makes sure that each doctor or nurse attending him understands that I am his “husband”—a term I have yet to get used to when applied to myself, even though we have been a couple for decades. In fact, last October’s National Coming Out Day was the fourth time we have tied the knot in a ceremonial way.

After waiting in the rain overnight in front of San Francisco’s City Hall in February 2004, a quick view of our happiness.   The Lutheran magazine later mentioned us and our best friends in a news brief, “Married in the State of Grace.”

“He is fulfilling his marital vows,” Carl tells the nurse matter-of-factly, “to take care of me in sickness and in health.” As much as I have advocated for stable, permanent relationships among lesbian and gay couples, and now carried the flag for Marriage Equality in the streets and in my church (NoOn8Church.org), there is something almost monumental in just living as a married couple and in effect holding our heads up high as a married couple. Not just when the television station showed up at our wedding reception, but when we have to call the nurse (again) for some pain medicine.

The Supreme Court may speak any day now on whether it considers our pre-Prop 8 marriage “legal.” That nasty ballot measure insisted that only a marriage between a man and a woman is “recognized” in California regardless of when or where contracted (not the exact wording).  A month ago, the Justices closely questions attorneys on both sides in the oral arguments about what “recognized” might mean, and what it was intended to mean in the wording of Proposition 8.

But I am here to tell you that my marriage is recognized in our local Emergency Room, as it is in the congregation and the supermarket and the neighborhood and in our extended family circle. Ultimately, Proposition 8 cannot erase recognition for those who know that they have tied the knot securely and have already claimed their rightful status as “married.”

But please pray for Carl, and for all of us who have to keep coming out and claiming rights until the rest of the state “gets it.”

— Pastor Dan Hooper, Los Angeles

Posted in LGBT Christian, Lesbian/Gay Marriage, LGBT Rights, Living by Grace, Spirituality, PRAYERS, Coming Out | Print | No Comments »

An early spring in Iowa.

April 4, 2009 by Pastor Dan.

The tensions continue to rise in balkanized America over same-gender rights and rites. With the amazing news (read it in the Des Moines Register) that the Supreme Court of Iowa has ruled in favor of same-sex civil marriage, the opponents are even more determined to take away those rights.

Like California’s Supreme decision in May 2008, this one caught me by surprise. The last news story I remember seeing on the Iowa case was a November 27, 2008 L.A. Times article announcing that their 1998 state “Defense of Marriage” law was about to get its day in court. There is a back story we’ve almost forgotten: a Polk County court ruled in 2007 that marriage should be available to same-sex couples, and only one male couple was able to pull a license and tie the knot on August 31, before that judge posted a “stay” on his own ruling to allow the Supreme Court to have a look at the issues.

Original caption: Sean Fritz, left, and Tim McQuillan embrace Friday at the end of their wedding ceremony as the Rev. Mark Stringer looks on in Des Moines, Iowa.  Photo: Charlie Neibergall / AP]

Isn’t it fascinating that in state after state, beginning with Hawaii in 1993, justice-minded Justices have ruled that there is no reason to deny the right to marriage to couples of the same sex because it is not in the constitution? And beginning with Hawaii, the voters have been swayed hard by right-wing moral Nazis to put discrimination into the constitution. California is the latest state to fall to this kind of politico-moral pressure with the passage of Proposition 8 last November. The point is, conservative constitutions (and all constitutions should be conservative) did not embody prejudice until it was purposely put there by interests who continue to hold LGBT people in contempt and want to make sure that the law hates us too.

I have not yet read the whole Court decision, which is 69 pages. But the Summary statement from the Court’s communications officer reveals who carefully-reasoned their decision was. They have granted the rights of vil marriage, at the same time making it clear that the religious questions are not settled by their unanimous opinion and in fact, the role of the Court is to make sure that government does not tilt in favor of any religious opinion.

The best part of this development in America’s heartland is that it will not be easy for Iowa homophobes to reverse the court, no matter how much they wince and cry about “activist judges.” Unlike California’s presently wacko system (our amendment process needs to be amended), to amend Iowa’ constitution takes a proposal in their General Assembly to pass twice in successive legislative sessions, and then be presented to the voters for a majority vote.

The current Iowa legislature shows no inclination to put up such an amendment at all, let alone give one a pass vote. Observes first said it would take until 2012 at the earliest before Iowa voters could see such an amendment on their ballot. Now a loophole has been found, that in 2010 Iowa voters could have a chance (by simple majority) to call for a constitutional convention to rework the whole thing, and if anti-gay marriage was written in by drafters, it could be on the ballot in 2011.

But in the meantime, thousands of couples in Iowa could marry, and tens of thousands could go there to marry (there is no residency requirement in Iowa either). It could be that gay and lesbian marriage will be as ho-hum and banal by then as a field of Iowa corn.

Or not, if the homophobic politico-fundagelicals continue to bang their drum with enough hatred, ferocity and money. Public opinion is being molded all the time, but it shifts faster on Twitter and blogs than it does in legislatures. Most of us are aware that the march for fully inclusive rights is moving in our favor, so it is only a matter of time. So for social conservatives, time is of the essence to stop our rights before we have a chance not only to win them but to normalize them.

—Pastor Dan Hooper, Los Angeles

Posted in Lesbian/Gay Marriage, Fundamentalism, LGBT Rights, History, Public Affairs | Print | No Comments »

How do we fight hatred when they don’t want to see our love?

April 2, 2009 by Pastor Dan.

My spouse and I have been attending meetings of Love Honor Cherish, a grass-roots group in the Los Angeles area that sprang up before Proposition 8, in order to promote gay marriage. Men and women (although not enough women), straight, lesbian and gay (although not enough straight) are working from two basic premises: we are openly gay and we are openly pro-marriage.

Part of LHC’s work is crafted in response to the sanitized ad campaign which our side used to fight Proposition 8 on television. Did you see all the happy gay and lesbian couples portrayed in wedding outfits, or in their homes and with their families? Me neither.

It will be a struggle, and Love Honor Cherish is ahead of some other grass roots groups in preparing for D-Day — the day the Supreme Court of California will come down with its decision.

All the commentators are thinking the court is leaning toward upholding the proposition as passed on November 4 by a 52 to 48% margin. After all, the people have a right to draft policy and stuff it into the state constitution, even if it is horribly bad and cynically slanted toward taking away the rights of any minority.

Or not. We shall see when the Court speaks. Commentators are also pretty certain that the estimated 18,000+ marriages which were legally entered into between June and November will be left intact. Those of us who married our partners in that four month window will become artifacts, museum pieces of a struggle for rights that won, and then lost.

At issue is whether or not the people can justly narrow, shrink rights once granted. We sat through the hours of oral “arguments” in early March, and watched each attorney pretty much fail to make his or her case because the Justices interrupted them almost from the first sentence. Those of us watching almost forgot that the Justices, and the Other Side had already had ample opportunity to reach all the written arguments. Our side had submitted piles of amici briefs to support the view that no one can take away basic rights without in fact making a constitutional revision, not a simple amendment, so Proposition 8, they argued, should be consider invalid procedurally.

D-Day will come, and people will demonstrate and shout on both sides, no matter which way the court comes down. A lot of grass roots organizations will re-mobilize overnight (see my longer list of them at www.NoOn8Church.org/links.html. But the basic mission of Love Honor Cherish is simple: We will have to fight for our rights, not sit and wait for them to be given to us. There will be struggle ahead, and most bets are that it means another expensive ballot box measure to repeal Proposition 8, as early as November 2010. The same ballot on which we will elect a governor to replace that actor we’ve had playing the part. (Why do California voters always want to get in bed with B actors?)

Mike Roth, of Love Honor Cherish stated the mission pretty strongly but transparently a couple of weeks ago:

Equal Rights: Don’t wait for them. Fight for them.

The California Constitution had always existed to protect the rights of everyone until it was undermined by Prop 8. Now it explicitly discriminates against just one group of Californians.We have been waiting for the California Supreme Court to right that wrong by overturning Prop 8. If they fail to do so, then we will not wait any longer. It will be time for We The People to repeal Prop 8 at the ballot box in November 2010.

From this day forth: we fight for our rights. We don’t wait for them.

This country has seen lots of ballot box battles like Prop 8, where the LGBT community was on the defensive. But if we lose on D-Day, we take the offensive. We will go directly to our fellow Californians and say, “we deserve the same rights as you and we expect you to support us.” For the first time in history, we will win rights at the ballot box.If the court fails to restore our Constitution so that all Californians are treated equally, then on D-Day, the campaign to repeal Prop 8 begins.You tell it brother Mike.

— Pastor Dan Hooper, Los Angeles

Also see:

• Our [Next] Day in Court: March 5, 2009
• A courageous Voice, a Costly Sacrifice : March 4, 2009
• The validity of love and the authority of the state : October 2, 2008

Posted in Lesbian/Gay Marriage, LGBT Rights, Public Affairs, Coming Out | Print | No Comments »

Conversions, to and from Catholic faith.

April 1, 2009 by Pastor Dan.

A New Your Times web story yesterday reports that Newt Gingrinch [cf. John 19:22] has become a Catholic – converting from his native Baptist roots.

Katharine Q. Seelye’s headline is revealing: “Gingrich Gets (a New) Religion.” Is she referencing the fact that a lot of us were unaware that Newt had any religious faith. This was the political pit bull of the 1990s and, IMHO, the role model for Karl Rove. I wonder if Catholicism will bring any compassion, humility, restraint or civility to someone with more of a reputation for confrontational politics.

In the late Richard Neuhaus’ last book Catholic Matters, he makes the claim that (while Protestant churches are shrinking) Americans are converting to the Catholic Church at the rate of 200,000 a year. His book carries no footnotes, so we cannot know the source of his statistics.

Here in the wild west, it seems people are converting to no religion at a faster clip, but Neuhaus’ claim set me thinking. Is the Catholic faith so attractive that, after a strong 500 year strand of Christian tradition, people are leaving the various Protestant folds and returning to Rome?

Neuhaus was a conservative Lutheran pastor for years before he himself converted to Rome and entered its priesthood. His book is passionate boosterism for authoritative Catholic tradition, especially linked to the idea of a prevailing magisterium: the pope, cardinals and bishops as protectors and defenders of the faith. As a historian, Neuhaus is weak, and overlooks centuries of pathetic to despicable behavior on the part of the Roman hierarchy. (Not that any Protestant historical record is spotless.)

Neuhaus’ “growth” statistic stands in relationship to his claim that 63 million Americans claim to be Catholic. It would be more accurate to say that the Church claims them, keep tabs on every infant baptism, for example, but probably is not watching adult defections very closely. Be that as it may, 200,000 conversions would account for less than one-third of one percent growth.

I don’t want to belittle conversion, any time it happens, because it may mean that a person is now taking the new faith more seriously than she or he had taken the old faith. And I don’t draw a harsh or sharp line between Christian traditions. It is the same Lord we put faith in, even if our own faith practices morph or move on to a different expression.

But in the stories I am told — by people coming into my own congregation—the Roman church still expects and requires individuals (for example, who are about to marry a Catholic partner) to become Catholic and to raise the children Catholic. The Protestant “weakness” is that we don’t require any such thing. We don’t lay on anyone a moral obligation to attend Mass, for example, or dozens of other requirements. Maybe we are wimps, but maybe we emphasize God’s grace as completely outweighing church requirements.

But indeed does that mean that 200,000 people a year are quite content to come under a system of obligations and requirements? That they were not content with the freedom of the Christian life under grace? It would take more than a statistical approach to understand what is true here.

In my own parish, more than half of those who are coming into our community are coming from a Roman Catholic background. For one reason or another (divorce and remarriage, conflict because of sexuality and homosexuality, disaffection with church legalism, a personal search for meaning or a very individual experience of pain or abuse) they can’t or do not want to go back to the Roman church. Since Lutherans consider ourselves to be “Evangelical Catholics” we ought to be able to bridge this shift, and to show sympathy and understanding for anyone who is trying to find a spiritual comfort zone in our communion or another.

I am just grateful that the Gospel itself, and the pull of a faith community, still draws many people back from inactivity or lack of spirituality to a deeper sense of self, humanity and God. In an Associated Press story in March carried by 365Gay.com, the number of people with no religion continues to grow. And in the posted comments on the Daily Beast’s list of other well-known Catholic converts, a lot of anti-religious drivel abounds.

— Pastor Dan Hooper, Los Angeles

Posted in Ecumenical Issues, Catholic matters, Living by Grace, History, Public Affairs, Spirituality | Print | No Comments »