Will disobedience be successful?

September 7, 2011 by Pastor Dan.

U.S. Catholic’s web site is running a story (thank you Eric for letting me know!) that trouble is brewing in the Catholic Church in Austria, where more than 400 priests are calling for disobedience if there are not massive reforms in the church.

Perhaps Martin Lutheran was nearly 500 years ahead of his time. Or not, since it is quite possible that official retaliation for disobedience will simply come down on the heads of at least some of these 400 priests. Remember who is Pope right now, after all.

But the issues, which all revolve around the church’s medieval attitudes on human sexuality and hierarchical authority, are worth reviewing: the celibacy rule, the treatment of lesbian and gay people, and divorced/remarried people.

From the British Tablet editorial on this disobedience, “point: “They are right that what Catholics hunger for, and not just in Austria, is a Church of integrity, without hypocrisy, doublespeak or pathological denial.”

The pastoral reality–the reality in the parishes and among faithful Catholics—and everybody else in the world of faith—is that official teachings are not only often at variance with how people need to live their lives, those teachings do not enhance the credibility of the core Christian message.

I am reminded of developments in the business world, where major corporations in the last several decades have spun off or sold off subsidiaries when times get tough. Often their official spokespersons tell us that the company will now focus more tightly on its “core business.”

Although the church is not a business, it does need to jettison what ever doesn’t serve its core message, and that message is the grace of the Gospel of Jesus, and the call to follow him in paths of generosity, mercy and compassion in this broken world. Upholding twisted or strained official rules of extreme moral strictness has become an impediment to telling the world about the love of God in Christ.

Yes, celibacy is an ancient Christian practice, but it never caught on universally until it was forced on the priesthood in the Dark Ages. Yes, the Scriptures frown on unchastity, divorce and remarriage, but the definitions of those terms has slipped over and over down through time, and Jesus never condemned the woman at the well who had apparently been married five times and was living with a man who was not her husband, nor did shame her for her difficult life. In other words, it was not a “deal breaker” for her hearing and receiving grace.

As for the treatment of gay/lesbian people (can we be more inclusive, with bisexual and transgender people, too?), history has ample evidence that the modern condemnations being read out of the Bible by conservatives and fundamentalists were not read that way for more than 1,000 years after Christ. I am still impressed with the scholarly work of Prof. Theodore Jennings, who authored The Man Jesus Loved, which lays open some of the covert gay stories of the Gospels.

We have struggled with the issues surrounding homosexuality in the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America for several decades, and the conclusion of thousands of people is that we simply cannot summarily condemn gay and lesbian people because of two or three references in the Bible any more than we can forbid Christian women from serving in ordained ministry because of one or two citations. The grace, acceptance and reconciliation of God overshadows everything else. Period.

John Paul II commented officially years ago that women could not be priests because Jesus chose only male disciples. Well, Jesus only had Jewish disciples too, so that logic would have kept both John Paul II and Benedict XVI out of the priesthood. My point is that arguing over the trivial rules of the church is ultimately not successful—even if the conservative side insists it has a lock-tight argument—because its logic, authority, high-handedness and even cruelty to individual believers is increasingly rejected by 21^st century people of faith.

One of the most appalling weapons used in the Catholic Church is to silence dissent with papal authority. Significant theologians have simply been banned form public teaching, speaking or publishing—not much different than burning dissidents at the stake as the Catholic Church did 500 years ago. I would not be surprised if the leaders of this “disobedience” move in the Austrian church will face similar silencing moves from the Vatican.

But how long will it take before all the thinking faithful are silent and faith itself will simply wither away because the content of what is left will only be faith in authority, not in the Gospel of God’s gracious reconciliation with humanity. Sooner or later, the church must also reconcile with the world as God has done, or it will continue to be working with futility against the will of God.

— Pastor Dan Hooper

Posted in Catholic matters, Doctrine, Bible & Interpretation, Ecumenical Issues, History | Print | No Comments »

Not all are negative on same-sex marriage.

August 31, 2011 by Pastor Dan.

Thanks to Elizabeth for this link. The Atlantic Wire (Atlantic Monthly Group) has a brief article on American attitudes on same-sex marriage ~ they call it “gay marriage” ~ that shows that not all religious people are of the same mind.

Well, duh! We knew that but it’s helpful when the general public is given information to help them separate the sheep from the goats on this issue.

According to the chart, based on a study from the Public Religion Research Institute (based on data collected in July 2011), Catholics and “White Mainline” churches line up as slightly positive on the issue (52 and 51% in favor), and Black Protestant and White Evangelical church people decisively negative on the issue (60 and 76% opposed respectively).

Three years ago in the post mortem hand-wringing as to why Proposition 8 passed in California, you will remember, it was these two groups which helped to push Prop 8 to victory. the LGBT community in California was especially dismayed that we had not communicated our core message effectively to the Black churches. That reality appears to prevail today, even while general attitudes and even “White mainline” Christians have been moving steadily into our column.

Read the article linked here, because the most important finding is not represented in the Atlantic chart:

” the main theme of the study was that younger people are supporting gay rights at much higher rates than their elders. It found “at least a 20-point generation gap” between 18 to 29 year olds and adults over 65 on every public policy issue concerning gay rights. And seven in 10 people in that younger age bracket say that religious groups that come out against homosexuality are alienating them.”

This last sentence confirms a finding from the Barna Group published four years ago. See Indwelling Spirit comments here, which was based on a September 2007 Barna news article.

Today, the most common perception is that present-day Christianity is “anti-homosexual.” Overall, 91% of young non-Christians and 80% of young churchgoers say this phrase describes Christianity. As the research probed this perception, non-Christians and Christians explained that beyond their recognition that Christians oppose homosexuality, they believe that Christians show excessive contempt and unloving attitudes towards gays and lesbians. One of the most frequent criticisms of young Christians was that they believe the church has made homosexuality a “bigger sin” than anything else. Moreover, they claim that the church has not helped them apply the biblical teaching on homosexuality to their friendships with gays and lesbians.

— Pastor Dan Hooper

Posted in Lesbian/Gay Marriage, Catholic matters, Ecumenical Issues, LGBT Christian, LGBT Rights, Public Affairs | Print | No Comments »

Is there a trend going?

May 23, 2011 by Pastor Dan.

Just weeks after the Presbyterian Church in the U. S. A. finally opened its doors to lesbian and gay clergy, today’s breaking news is that the Church of Scotland is doing the same.

The British Guardian reports the story, which also touches on the issue of same-sex marriage.

The Church of Scotland is the largest Protestant body in Scotland (although not large, only some 450,000 members). Since the Reformation four centuries ago, the Church of Scotland has been a part of the Reformed movement which is essentially Presbyterian in polity.

“The church’s general assembly, its law-making body, voted on Monday to lift that moratorium, officially allowing gay ministers to take on parishes for the first time since its formation 450 years ago.”

The story, however, dies not indicate whether the Church of Scotland voters were in any way influenced by the ratification of changes in policy in the PCUSA earlier this month.What is fascinating in the Guardian story are the competing predictions of potential disaster (before the vote was taken by the church’s general Assembly): the number of ministers and congregants who would leave the church if homosexual clergy are permitted, and the number of ministers and congregants who would leave the church if homosexual clergy are not permitted. It seems human nature cannot resist the making of polarizing threats.For the record, there were hundreds of clergy and thousands of believers in my own Evangelical Lutheran Church in America who never promised to leave or threatened anything for the decades it took to shift the thinking of the entire churchbody. Although we have certainly not won over every heart and mind, the scale tipped in favor of openness and tolerance in August 2009, and all efforts to rescind this new liberal policy have thus far failed miserably.

Although the Guardian story is too brief and vague, it notes that “In addition, the church has set up a commission to investigate the theological issues raised by the acceptance of gay clergy.” In contrast, the ELCA studied the issues almost to death, including the adoption of a comprehensive statement on Human Sexuality, before it recommended action two years ago.

We shall stay on the look-out for more information coming directly from the Church of Scotland.

—Pastor Dan Hooper

Posted in Doctrine, Lesbian/Gay Marriage, International, Ecumenical Issues, LGBT Christian, Ministry, Coming Out, History, ELCA | Print | No Comments »

An extraordinary moment of history.

May 22, 2011 by Pastor Dan.

I wish I could easily summarize the feelings I had participating in the ordination of my friend Guy Erwin to the ministry of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America on Wednesday, May 11.

With four bishops present and two choirs singing, Erwin was ordained in a moving ceremony attending by more than 500 people in Samuelson Chapel at California Lutheran University.

Erwin, who is a brilliant scholar and affable and effective teacher, holds the Belgum chair of Confessional Lutheran Theology at CLU in Thousand Oaks, California. He also serves as the ELCA’s representative on the Faith and Order Commission of the World Council of Churches. Although he is more than qualified to serve on the ELCA’s clergy roster, until the ELCA changed its anti-gay policies in August 2009, Erwin was never eligible to be called to an ordained position. He is gay and permanently partnered.

This ordination is historic for several reasons, in my view. First of all, he is the successor (although the title and scope of the position have changed over the years) at Cal Lu to Rev. Dr. Paul Wennes Egertson, who died unexpectedly last January, and before him to the Rev. Dr. Gerhard Belgum. I am old enough to remember Gerhard Belgum, and although these things were not spoken out loud in the 1970s, I remember hearing enough covert information to believe that Dr. Belgum was more than a little homophobic. Be that as it may, when Paul Egertson took up responsibilities in Thousand Oaks at what was then called the Center for Theological Studies, he became the bridge. Paul’s amazing first-born son Greg came out to the family and triggered the complete re-education of this central family in Southern California Lutheranism. (Paul’s father was also an esteemed Lutheran pastor; Paul served as Bishop of the Synod in Los Angeles and Paul’s cousin Howard Wennes served as Bishop in the Grand Canyon Synod of the ELCA.)

You can see a six-minute tribute to Dr. Egertson on Youtube which was produced as part of the first annual Clarence E. Anderson Peace and Justice Award.  Dr. Erwin narrates the video.

Once he clearly understood the personal, pastoral and theological issues at the center of the controversy about LGBT Lutherans, Paul Egertson “changed sides” with passion and determination and became a champion for opening the doors of the Lutheran Church to LGBT people and pastors.

Now the transition is complete, as Rev. Dr. Erwin inherits the mantle, not only as a key theologian at our local university, but as an eminently qualified teacher of the larger church. the second reason, in my view, that Erwin’s ordination is important is that a young but important academic institution of the whole church has participated fully and enthusiastically in his ordination, even though it is possible that the university’s “donor base” may include conservative or even homophobic people who will withdraw from active support of the university because a gay pastor holds an endowed chair in the University. To me this means that the regents are also claiming and participating in the shifting of the Christian paradigm from being anti-homosexual to welcoming and utilizing all people who have God-given gifts to serve.

I am delighted to have such an extraordinary man as Pastor Guy Erwin in the church I love and in such an influential setting as he has been given in the university.

By the way, in addition to the fifty or so pastors participating in the laying-on of hands for Pastor Erwin were ELCA Bishop Dean Nelson and Bishop Murray Finck, Episcopal Suffragan Bishop Mary Glasspool and Retired ELCA Bishop Howard Wennes. It was a splendid and remarkable moment in our faith community’s life.

—Pastor Dan Hooper

Posted in Ecumenical Issues, Homophobia, LGBT Christian, History, Ministry, ELCA | Print | No Comments »

Another close call coming, another earthquake?

May 10, 2011 by Pastor Dan.

More Light Presbyterians and Lutherans Concerned began their advocacy, education and support work about the same time, in 1974. Over the years we have had a great deal of dialogue about LGBT issues between the two bodies. I first met the late Dr. John Boswell at a Presbyterian event in West Hollywood not long after the publication of his blockbuster Christianity, Social Tolerance and Homosexuality in 1981. Chris Glaser, a Presbyterian pioneer in the gay/Christian movement, has worked tirelessly and written numerous books although he could never be ordained as a Presbyterian elder or minister.

All that may be about to change, if the Twin Cities Presbytery votes tonight to ratify a measure, Amendment 10-A, removing the ban on non-celibate lesbian/gay clergy in the Presbyterian Church U.S.A. In Presbyterian polity, a vote such as this in the General Assembly must be ratified by a majority of local presbyteries (smaller than Lutheran synods). According to Minnesota Public Radio, the Twin Cities Presbytery vote to rescind the policy would be the 87^th ratifying vote. Sixty-two presbyteries have voted against the change. Not all presbyteries have weighed in yet.

Because of the advocacy—lobbying—work of More Light Presbyterians and many others, the Presbyterian General Assembly (national convention) has three times voted to rescind the 1996 policy which expressly banned partnered lesbian/gay people from ordained service.

But we live in an era of domino-effect tipping points. The United Church of Christ, the Episcopal Church and the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America have all dismantled their gate-keeping rules that kept lesbian and gay clergy out. The ELCA, which is larger than the other three church bodies, changed its policies most recently, in 2009.

Even more interesting, the PCUSA is one of the “full communion” partners with the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America. And so are the United Church of Christ and the Episcopal Church. (And the Moravian Church.) Together this group of Protestant bodies represents close to 10 million members, and begin to present a common witness of sexual inclusivity.

But there are “wrinkles” in this witness. Another “full communion” partner of the ELCA, the United Methodist Church, has not budged on sexuality issues and is not likely to any time soon, largely because it is a global church body, and because it is a very rural church in the United States. So the changing attitudes of large urban centers in the United States will not be enough, culturally, to shift the anti-gay attitudes of the Methodists.

Another significant wrinkle, of course, is that every time a church body moves forward on a social issue, it leaves some people behind who refuse to move on. The Presbyterians in American, for example, split over the issue of slavery more than 150 years ago, and have never completely reunited all of their congregations into the PCUSA. The Episcopal Church lost a lot of people over the ordination of women to the priesthood, and is still engaged in a battle with its global partners of the Anglican Communion over the consecration of openly-gay and partnered Bishop V. Gene Robinson. The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America has lost somewhere around 100-200 of its 10,000 congregations because of its courageous tipping vote in favor of partnered same-sex clergy in 2009, and lost a considerable amount of revenue flowing to the national church from other congregations who are withholding their cash in spite.

The PCUSA faces a similar on-going breach with congregations and individuals who won’t move on about sexuality issues. A disgruntled group, Presbyterians for Renewal, already has its own executive director and will hold its own convention later this year in Minneapolis, even though its director concedes that Amendment 10-A is likely to be ratified.

But according to MPR, Presbyterian polity will make it harder for individual congregations to just “pull out” and form a break-away churchbody. The local presbytery holds all church properties in its area in trust, so a local congregation would have to buy their own church buildings (and I guess convince the presbytery to sell!), or else just be disgruntled out in the street.

These years of struggle to change the church are really the raw data of a massive realignment of Christian groups as they confront the extraordinary social change happening in our times in the world. I can’t help thinking of the shifting of the globe’s huge tectonic plates, as entire continents or ocean floors continue to either slide past or move over or under each other. All that movement is bound to cause quite a few earthquakes. So it is with communities of faith.

—Pastor Dan Hooper

Posted in LGBT Christian, Ecumenical Issues, History, Ministry, ELCA, Uncategorized | Print | No Comments »

Conversation with enemies in Christ.

February 10, 2011 by Pastor Dan.

I feel like I am sitting “behind enemy lines,” writing from the environs of Ft. Myers, Florida. The dominant culture of Bible-believing fundamentalism is everywhere to be seen, in a countryside awash in independent little churches surrounded by big parking lots.

In fact, I am already sweating where we can go to worship this coming Sunday, as an openly gay couple would probably be about as welcome as a fly in your sweet tea.

But the environment underscores the deeply-divided character of American Christianity. Having grown up in the Lutheran fold, I experienced first-hand the arrogance of a fine tradition that really did believe and teach it was “the only true church.” But with the rise of evangelical fundamentalism in the last two generations, I have had more of a taste than I wanted of arrogance coming from the religious right. The reactive and even hateful rejection of progressive denominations (still populated with faithful believers even in declining numbers) by those who push “decision” theology and “born-again” self-congratulatory piety, is annoying at best and deeply painful beyond words. I have often thought that if the only choice in the Christian church of the future were American fundamentalism, I would simply cease to be a practicing Christian.

Fundamentalists should not take this as a sign of my liberal or sinful theological weakness. But I still feel so strongly that fundamentalism is not the true Christian faith, and certainly not a faith I can live by.

But I stand as indicted as anyone. Too many of us are not as concerned about unity of witness and mutual love as we are about being right. And the “other guys” are, of course, not right in my (not-always humble) opinion!

Truth check: If what divides us gathers more power than what unites us as Christians, what divides us has become our idolatry.

God is all powerful. God wills our unity in Christ. We are not seeking

God’s will for the church if we continue to insist that we are right and other Christians are wrong. In other words, dismissing other Christians as wrong is not an answer to the premise that Christians are to be united in love. We cannot simply reject the faith of others as if it is not Christian.

But we are still left with the problem of how to tolerate those other Christians who disagree with us so profoundly. There is little choice, of course, except to be in conversation with people we don’t agree with and–because of the balkanization of the Christian world—don’t really like. I feel as much anguish about this as anybody. Conversation with those who seem to share the same faith but talk about us as if we are enemies, takes nerves of steel and confidence that we have received the grace of God and the guidance of the Spirit—that we are not misled or self-deceived. We must, in short, have absolute faith equal to the absolute faith of those who see the world so differently.

I am not ready to offer any keen new wisdom that resolves all of this, except to look back at my own thoughts about idolatry. If I want to steer clear of idolatry, I must be willing to steer clear of my own certitude or smugness, my own need to be right in every instance, and to put nothing in front of me except the will of God that we all have the same mind and heart as we have in Christ (Cf. John 17:20. Philippians 2:2, 5–11). Yes, it’s a tough assignment, but if the real good news of Christ is to ever reach the people of our times, it will only be if we can “get over ourselves,” turn aside from our own idolatry and do as Christ has asked.

Meanwhile, it’s Thursday and I need to find a place to go to worship on Sunday.

— Pastor Dan Hooper

Posted in Bible & Interpretation, Doctrine, Ecumenical Issues, Fundamentalism, LGBT Christian, Faith | Print | No Comments »

My life, my movement, my faith.

February 1, 2011 by Dan Hooper.

Associated Press is running an encouraging story today of new activism relating faith to the LGBT communities. Opening tomorrow in Minneapolis, the annual NGLTF conference will include working groups for people of color and people of faith in the movement for understanding and equality. NPR has the (print) story here. Also see: www.thetaskforce.org.

I am heartened to see that the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) is counted among the progressive denominations where the movement toward inclusivity and diversity means both ethnic/race issues and sexuality issues. As NPR notes, both the ELCA and the Episcopal Church now ordained openly gay pastors. Sadly, it did not mention that the United Church of Christ also does, and was the first protestant denomination to do so. (The ELCA is “in communion” with both the Episcopal Church and the UCC.)

People and cultures move at very different speeds, of course. We are all familiar with friends who grew up in a very conservative Christian environment —Baptist, Church of God or even Pentecostalists—who are resisting all conversations and studies which could lead to a more enlightened understanding of sexuality. the NPR story mentions a black gay activist who grew up in the Pentecostal fold who laments the distance or disconnect between the LGBT movement and the faith communities. Even more remote is the distance to Islam, as the NPR story notes.

At the bottom of this are the underlying assumptions that a life of faith—any faith—must be a life of conformity to a culturally-centered faith or belief system. That is tough even for Christians who primarily allegiance should be to following Jesus, not to following rules or social mores. Was not Jesus, after all, the ultimate role model for religious non-conformity?

I am living only one life, and I don’t have the opportunity to live two of them by different lights or guides and then compare notes. For better or worse, when I came to discern my sexuality, I decided to try to live the “me” I was dealt in life’s great card game, rather than to fake my life, live a lie, or destroy myself by alcohol, drugs or suicide. My life experience, as part of the LGBT movement, has deeply affected my faith. And while heterosexual conformist Christians may shudder at that thought, and where it might lead (the “slippery slope” of personal experiences and subjective theology), I am still faithful to the Christian faith and life.

As with ethnic and racial minorities, sexual minorities, and other marginalized people (think of those who have been bullied to death, for example) who have lived different lives from ours because of what life dealt to them, everyone needs to heard, everyone has a faith experience that, in some way, will enrich the faith of others.

—Pastor Dan Hooper

Posted in Doctrine, Bullying, Ecumenical Issues, Fundamentalism, Spirituality, LGBT Christian, Recovery | Print | No Comments »

Isn’t Christianity about love?

October 22, 2010 by Pastor Dan.

No Bull Productions has just released two parts in a series on Youtube for KAC Media. Months ago, I was interviewed for about an hour for these TV journalism pieces. It is a good treatment of the constant warfare between the right-wing born-again sign-wavers and those of us who are serving in the LGBT/Christian community.

The rejective/punitive crowd feels bound by its interpretation of the Bible to “warn” the rest of us about our “lifestyle.” That we are “playing in the middle of God’s freeway” and our “house is on fire” is about the most reasoned and compassionate thing they can find to explain why they keep it up with the signs and bullhorn at Gay Pride parades. Of course, these local folks—like the lonely man who came to hold up a sign the day I was officially installed as the pastor of my congregation—should not be confused with the wingnut cases in Topeka, Kansas who rant their “God hates fags” creed. (The shock value of that statement wore off about 20 years ago, but they are certainly faithful to their delusion.)

KAC Media tries to reach second-generation Korean-Americans by asking tough social/faithful questions that their parent’s generation don’t want to talk about openly. the second generation also speaks English, and easily crosses over the ethnic divide, so these interviews reflect today’s blend of cultural views of young people of any ethnicity.

These interviews—in the streets and the churches— can be seen in two installments at:

PART 1:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6PqndUJ8P4

PART 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZoMbS9B3FoM

Stay tuned. More episodes will be forthcoming, according to Producer Brian Kim.

—Pastor Dan Hooper

Posted in Doctrine, wingnuts, Bible & Interpretation, Ecumenical Issues, LGBT Christian, Fundamentalism, Coming Out | Print | No Comments »

Is the self-styled “cathedral” in danger?

October 19, 2010 by Pastor Dan.

In an interesting coincidence, right on top of the troubles of Rev. Eddie Long, the “bishop” of New Birth Missionary Baptist Church in Lithonia, Georgia, today we have news that Orange County’s Crystal Cathedral filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy.

The two mega-churches are more than a generation or two apart in developing. Rev. Robert Schuller built the “Crystal Cathedral” starting in 1955 with a rented drive-in movie parking lot. The “Hour of Power” and the power of positive thinking came next. Schuller’s kingdom grew alongside the explosive prosperity of Orange County itself.

Rev. Eddie Long started working with his congregation in 1987, taking it from 300 to 18,000 people in a decade. Although the two ministries have many things in common (pastoral personality cult, prosperity in newly-developing suburbs, vision and ambition in innovation) their troubles now have differences that couldn’t be more black and white.

Long is and serves a megachurch community which is African-American. He is seen as a character-builder and an ethnic pride beacon at a time when upper-middle class African-Americans were settling in upscale suburbs out of Atlanta. As Long’s kingdom expanded, he moved his congregation from Decatur out to a 240-acre campus in Lithonia that boasts a gym and spa, school, bookstore and 10,000-seat “cathedral.” Although he is mentioned with some derogatory comments about the “prosperity gospel” preachers (Joel Osteen in Texas comes to mind), Long was preaching and promoting the better material life to a class of people who have suffered at the bottom of society for generations.

The cross sure looks tiny in this “cathedral”

What is bringing Long to his knees in 2010 is, in part, his own success and ego which built it. He is being sued by four young African American men in his own flock who say he seduced them, with gifts and personal attention, into homosexual acts. Never mind the fact that he has received a $3 million salary and drives a Bentley provided by the church, Long has a lot of explaining to do about the sex thing.

The Schuller enterprise grew up two generations earlier on the strength of its leader’s charismatic personality. As big as the Crystal Cathedral is, it is not large enough for the human ego. Although the elder Robert Schuller was not accused of any sexual impropriety, his overreaching dream in the middle of fast-expanding Orange County are catching up with his successor now. Reuters reported last night that Crystal Cathedral Ministries has debts somewhere near $50 million (others say as high as $100 million)—$36 million of it in the mortgage for their glass box. Although it claims 20 million viewers for its broadcasts, Senior Minister Sheila Schuller Coleman presides over a congregation of a mere 3,000 members where revenues fell 27% in recent years. (Another source says 10,000 members; hmm?) The Daily News reports,

“Church spokesman John Charles said the church owes about $7.5 million to a host of vendors for services such as advertising and providing the use of live animals for Easter and Christmas services. The church was negotiating a payment plan with vendors but several chose to file lawsuits, the church said in a statement.”Financially, the Cathedral is rethinking the way it operates, according to Huffington Post, Now, the church is avoiding credit entirely and spends only the roughly $2 million it receives each month in donations and revenue, [Jim] Penner said. The church still hopes to pay all of the vendors back in full, he said. “What we’re doing now is we’re trying to walk what we preach, we’re paying cash for things as we go,” he said. [Penner is an assistant pastor and executive producer of the “Hour of Power.”]But whatever the bankruptcy protection will mean, ego issues still get in the way. As the New York Times explained last July, Robert Schuller, Sr., finally re-retired at age 83, two years after he had kicked out his son, Robert Schuller Jr. that most said had been groomed to take over for his father. A family feud that should never have happened, except that both the Schuller family and the Christian kingdom that it built can’t conceive of their church without the Schuller name at the top. So daughter Sheila Schuller Coleman will finally be senior pastor, after a year of sharing the limelight with her father, and Robert Sr. remains as the chairman of the CC’s board of directors or consistory.The Los Angeles Times story has a more revealing look at this. While many say the CC’s troubles are due to the recession, two other factors also loom large. One is the conflict of leadership—the power and ego struggle at the top—and the other is the aging of the congregation. Will other mega-churches start to shrivel when the generation that enthusiastically built them up begin to age and die off?Pam’s House Blend (”An Online Magazine in the Reality-Based Community”), by the way, has posts about Schuller and the CC’s attitude about homosexuality. One of them this morning is worth putting here: by: willyed @ Tue Oct 19, 2010 at 09:06:39 AM CDT“Whatever happened… To churches where the pastor knew and had an actual personal relationship with everyone there?  Since salvation is a person matter that does not require a church, the reason you have church is to help people be good Christians and good people in general, to support them, and correct them when they stray from the path. How can this be accomplished in a giant stadium environment where nobody knows who you are. I suspect that if Christ was walking around today he would be horrified by these industrial worship centers.”Here’s my bottom line: using the terms “bishop” and “cathedral” always makes me chuckle when they are self-styled. Rev. Schuller Sr. decided his church was big enough to qualify as a “cathedral.” Rev. Eddie Long allows or encourages his people to call him “bishop.” The terms have a fairly precise meaning among Christians, but neither of these qualifies. A cathedral is where the bishop sits, or presides. A bishop is an overseer, a person in authority over many churches, not one stadium or giant glass box (a glass elephant?). But the very nature of these mega-ministries is that they are independent of all the rest of the Christian world. Schuller is nominally in the Reformed Church of America, but hardly answers to its guidance or authority. The RCA has no bishops and no cathedrals. I can’t help wondering, if the CC still has ties with the RCA, why no one in the parent denomination tried to put the brakes on the CC’s high-spending ways decades ago.And there is no central authority among Baptists churches: local congregation can set the standards for ordination and ministry. Another megachurch, Saddleback Church in southern Orange County, is also a Southern Baptist Convention church: its pastor Rick Warren answers to no one except the community he has built himself. There are differences between Southern Baptist and Missionary Baptist, mostly not of interest except to insiders, which you can sort out here.

—Pastor Dan Hooper

Posted in Ecumenical Issues, History, Ministry | Print | No Comments »

Osama bin Jones.

September 11, 2010 by Pastor Dan.

Jones deserves the title because he is the latest extremist of the “Christian” faith who is trying to incite global conflict in the same way that Osama bin Laden has done with his plotting.

ObJ wants to make a name for himself. How else to explain his arrogance to think he can lay down an ultimatum for the imam of New York City, ten states away, with an “or else” condition that he will start burning the Muslim holy scriptures?

And it seems ObJ wants to compete for a place in the pantheon of arrogance, hubris and wacko Christianity with people like Fred Phelps—who wasn’t outrageous enough with his God Hates Fags routine and escalated his own rhetoric to God Hates America (for tolerating fags).

Aglow with the joy of knowing I’m right.

People have been sending him death threats, Korans to burn–and, I suspect, contributions, so this looks like quite a gimmick for his own institutional survival. According to the ABC News story, the congregation’s bank recently demanded repayment of their $140,000 mortgage. And also this from the same story: “According to the Gainesville Sun, Alachua County officials revoked part of the church’s tax-exempt status earlier this year, saying portions of the 20-acre campus are used in for-profit businesses. The property is valued at more than $1.6 million, but the 1,700-square-foot taxable portion is worth only $135,000, according to the Gainsville Sun.” ABC gave no link to the Gainsville Sun story.

Perhaps the most laughable thing is that ObJ heads the Dove World Outreach Center in Gainsville. A dove, I thought, would be a symbol of peace (doves are a very calm bird) as much as a symbol of the Divine Spirit— but ObJ apparently has a pistol strapped to his hip while on church property. And “World Outreach” is quite ambitious for a congregation of about 50 people.

So ObJ is milking his 15 seconds of fame for all its worth. It’s also possible that the feeble-minded wants to become a martyr to his own imaginary god. Meanwhile, local Gainsville Muslims are praying for Jones’ safety. According to this Gainsville Sun article, “‘I pray that nothing happens to him,’ Rizwan Mansoor said at the Hoda Center on Monday.”

This is classic Fundamentalism, of course. Fundamentalism is more than comfortable with religious grand-standing, and in fact seeks it. The fundamentalist Christian movement for more than a century has been trying to draw lines in the sand for what it considers orthodox. Unfortunately for all Christians, the lines they continue to draw are the least defensible lines one could draw—things such as the verbal inspiration and inerrancy of the Bible, etc.

It isn’t enough to say very strongly that ObJ and I would disagree profoundly on many things. As far as I am concerned, his version of Christian truth has virtually nothing in it that resembles the faith I live by. If he can find chapter and verse from the Christian bible to support the idea of inciting riot, stoking the fires of interreligious and inter-ethnic violence, endangering U.S. troops abroad, I am certain he would have to twist such verses entirely out of reality.

But the underlying issue here deserves to be mentioned. ObJ’s “World Outreach” flock is a charismatic independent non-denominational thing. I call them “Indy-Nondies” for short. While being “non-denominational” is touted as important in this era when mainstream (at least Protestant) denominations seems to be in decline, Indy-Nondies are in fact accountable to no one. Any partly-educated wack job can start his or her own “ministry” and claim some particular trait to emphasize in order to grab “market share” from other churches. People are gullible, and with the media’s help, will be drawn to the latest craze, even in the world of religion.

In the Dove World Outreach case, according to Wikipedia, it was founded in 1985 by Donald O. Northrup of the now-defunct Maranatha Campus Ministries. “Maranatha came under considerable fire during the 1970s and 1980s, largely due to its highly authoritarian structure. There were accusations of MCM being a cult with some former members reporting behavior similar to cults that frequently recruited college students during that time.”

The real cult here is the cult of personality. ObJ’s picture that keeps cropping up on the internet seems to indicate that he doesn’t have any personality, but looks can be deceiving. The fact that ObJ’ name is plastered all over the media but you have to dig to find out anything about his church (it’s web site is simply “under construction”) confirms that ObJ is trying to cultivate his own importance over the mission of his flock.

—Pastor Dan Hooper

Posted in Bible & Interpretation, Doctrine, Ecumenical Issues, Fundamentalism, Public Affairs, Uncategorized | Print | No Comments »

New language, not a new message.

September 2, 2010 by Pastor Dan.

I was reading an August issue of Christian Century this morning, and was drawn back twice to read the comments of Rev. Geoffrey Black, the new national president of the United Church of Christ. You may remember the UCC as that denomination that has run interesting TV and print ads with the “God is still speaking” slogan. It’s probably the most compelling answer to the fundamentalist”God said it, I believe it, that settles it” drivel.

If God is still speaking in our world—still creating, still controlling our world, then nothing is “settled.” The Word of God is not fixed like an oversize rock we can’t get around, but a living word which God’s people must constantly understand and interpret for themselves. And the ongoing religion wars that drive the so-called Culture War are an attempt to frame the discussion of a changing world through a fixed lens. In my own ministry, I remind people that we must often re-question, and re-answer many of faith’s big issues not because the holy Word has changed but because we human beings have changed. Our language has changed, so we cannot use the old language to speak to the world today.

Geoffrey Black articulates this very well. When asked how he interprets the declining membership of the UCC and other mainline Protestant denominations, his answer is thoughtful and very much on point:

“The Protestant mainline and the UCC are going through a period of rediscovering what makes us committed to and enthusiastic about the Gospel. We have to dig deeper. We cannot rely on the props of the past. America is changing, and we have lost the language that conveys the centrality and the compelling message of Christian faith. We have to find a new language that speaks to the realities that human beings are facing.”

The contrast with right wingnut Christian couldn’t be sharper. They clung tightly to the King James Version of the Bible (published in 1611) until nobody could understand it anymore, and only switched to new versions when the realized that they could manipulate the Bible to say what they want said, a la The Living Bible, and the New American Standard Bible, etc., which put the word “homosexual” on the lips of St. Paul even though the original Greek doesn’t say that.

President Geoffrey Black, I think, speaks to the real point for progressive Christians in 2010. We can’t go back to the past. We have to speak to the realities which humanity lives with today, in a language that can be understood. If mainstream churches are in decline it is, in part, because those who are disaffected and leaving may have been in church for the wrong reasons (the comfort of civil sanctity rather than the discomfort of following Jesus to all the difficult places he leads us), and the younger generation is not interested in picking up their tired old pious rhetoric. Religious forms with deeply-held conviction and passion for truth and purpose are simply dead. It shouldn’t surprise anyone that conventional churches are emptying out.

But there is reason to be passionate about the gospel, because it is the news of God’s reconciling with humanity as we are—often lost, broken or hurting–especially from self-inflicted wounds—sometimes depraved but sometimes noble, not disembodied angelic spirits but embodied human beings with dreams and energy, capable almost at the same time of compassion and creativity and stupidity and cruelty. But in the story of Jesus, we are accepted by God as fully human, and we are given an example of the highest purpose of human life. As Christians, our “righteousness” is neither pretense nor fake, nor is it piety and religion. Our “rightness” with God is grace, an undeserved gift which comes alive in our faithfulness.

In place of searching and striving for the divine in our lives, we often make the mistake of settling for piety and religion. The Gospel, however, includes the news that God seeks us, even when we are off-track, lost and oblivious.

Black goes on to say, “More than ever we need voices of reason and deep spirituality. The voices of intolerance and hatred are loud. We need to articulate an alternative.”

But talk is cheap, and the din of media, internet, twitter has made it even cheaper. Over and over I realize that more Christian energy needs to go into our faithful actions and much less into religious talk. The people who are being drawn to our church, I think, are more interested in what we do that tells the Gospel in our neighborhood than what we say. Actions speak louder than words, it is said. Actions also speak more truthfully than words.

— Pastor Dan Hooper

Posted in Bible & Interpretation, wingnuts, Ecumenical Issues, Fundamentalism, Faith, Spirituality | Print | No Comments »

Different histories in moving forward.

July 18, 2010 by Pastor Dan.

A couple of weeks ago (okay, I’m slow to process everything. I have a life and a “day job.”) the Presbyterians met in the same city as the Lutherans did 11 months ago, to conduct their periodic denominational business and to change their “gatekeeping” control over their clergy—specifically their LGBT clergy.

The Presbyterians aren’t getting as much press on their decision for a variety of reasons. For one thing, the Unitarians/Universalists, United Church of Christ, Episcopal Church and Evangelical Lutheran Church in America have beaten them to it, so the media become less interested. Secondly, this didn’t go as far as the Lutheran decisions, and this may not stick at all.

The action of the General Assembly is similar, in fact, to what their denomination attempted to do several years ago. On the up side 53% of the convention delegates decided to approve policy changes to permit same-gender clergy who are not abstinent—they are sexually active—to still serve as clergy.

But I’m not excited yet for my Presbyterian colleagues. This convention action doesn’t take effect unless a majority of the presbyteries (groups of local churches) agree. Two years ago, 94 of the 173 local presbyteries voted it down (54%). Weeks later, by the way, and that news was off the front page.

The other issue is that unlike the Lutheran decision, the Presbyterian one on July 9 was not connected to a thorough study and official statement about human sexuality that recognized the validity of same-sex intimate relationships. According to Associated Press, the Presbyterian delegates ” decided not to redefine marriage in their church constitution to include same-sex couples.”

Well, the Lutherans didn’t “redefine marriage” either but made some room for an understanding that gay or lesbian couples may have valid relationships. For all the years that Lutheran activists “belly-ached” about the ELCA dodging the decisions by sending out our lives for another study, the last study process actually paid off. It involved more people at more levels of the church in a sincere attempt to understand what LGBT people are about, and especially why we can be people of faith just like heterosexuals can be. In fairness, it’s important to know that many denominations, including Lutherans and Presbyterians, etc. have conducted studies of human sexuality and homosexuality. (Many of them take up chunks of drawer space in my filing cabinets because they were done before you could download them as a PDF file.) But it has been repeatedly observed that the only minds changed by sexuality studies are those who actually participated in them—usually the commission members who read, interviewed, debated and drafted the reports, not the official board which received the reports.

Although it now seems that the ELCA is more progressive than the Presbyterian Church U.S.A. or the United Methodist Church (which rejected gay marriage 15 months ago) continues to dig in its heels for similar reasons—there are thousands of country churches or small town churches that do not want to look at the sexuality issues at all), progress can be a double-edged sword. The partly-approved new Presbyterian policy would allow non-celibate (a misnomer for sexually active) individuals to be ordained and serve as clergy and presumably elders of the church. The ELCA action was more intentional in opening its gates to clergy who are either sexually abstinent or in a lifelong PALM or publicly accountable, lifelong, monogamous relationship—a far cry from sexual libertinism.

In effect, the Lutheran decision means that by recognizing the validity of committed same-gender relationships the church expects gay or lesbian people to be held to an ethical standard which is identical, except for the gender of the partner, to a heterosexual marriage. The Presbyterian measure apparently doesn’t go that far because the delegates didn’t want to affirm a redefinition of marriage.

So my gay Presbyterian colleague across town, if this policy is not rejected by 87 local presbyteries who shudder and wince at the thought of a West Hollywood or San Francisco, could be “recognized” as a non-celibate pastor. Since he is single and not coupled let alone married, he would slide into a normalized status without having to cross his fingers behind his back. But my Lutheran colleague across town who is officially “single” but sexually-active in a series of short-term, no commitment, quick-but-not-deep relationships, would likely be scrutinized carefully about his sexual expression and his non-permanent boyfriends. But since I am in a publically-accountable, lifelong monogamous relationship (monogamous for 34 years; the public accountability wasn’t possible until Domestic Partnerships became legal a few years ago) ??  I have nothing to fear from such scrutiny, which doesn’t afford me any smugness. Homophobic people wouldn’t care one whit about the distinction I have raised.  

Change has its costs as well as benefits. Plainly, if LGBT people want to be treated with respectability and to be able to not keep their sexuality and their relationships in a stifling closet, they have to get used to the idea that there are other ethical standards in the community which are broader and more important than the gender of one’s “significant other.”

So while the LGBT/Presbyterian activists may be disappointed that the marriage redefinition failed in convention, and may be further disappointed if the local presbyteries don’t support the one positive decision in Minneapolis, they may have two or more years to get used to additional levels of public accountability.

—Pastor Dan Hooper

Posted in Sex, Lesbian/Gay Marriage, Doctrine, Ecumenical Issues, History, LGBT Christian, ELCA | Print | No Comments »

We are not criminals.

May 29, 2010 by Pastor Dan.

I know “criminals.” They are people who have been convicted of crimes. All of us break laws, but criminals are those who are caught.

I recently learned (where have I been?) what a RAP sheet is.  It is an acronym for Record of Arrests and Prosecutions. It is part of my continuing education about crime and justice, especially in light of our congregation’s emerging Mariposa Ministry, its outreach to prisoners and parolees. We have developed relationships with more than a dozen current and former inmates in California prisons. And this year we expect to help –spiritually and tangibly– at least three men who will be paroled in Los Angeles County.

So I know criminals. But what I also know is that many ordinary people, who break laws, are never arrested or prosecuted largely because of privilege or good luck. It is sad to admit that the world is not divided between “good” people and “bad” people, but between privileged and lucky people and under-privileged and un-lucky people.

Decades ago, when I was dating, it was still a crime for two persons of the same gender to have sexual relations. This was long before Lawrence v. Texas, and the sodomy laws in almost every state had the authority to put decent, upstanding people behind bars. I was one of the privileged and lucky ones. Knowing my gay brothers who are in prison, I realize I could have been in prison myself in the 1970s and 1980s, simply for being who I am.

But our entire world is still struggling to enlarge its understanding of human diversity and to stop using laws as a moral bludgeon to punish or destroy what it does not understand or does not want to see.

This spring, as we have watched the blunt force of African nations, specifically Uganda, trying to blame perceived social ills as a Western degradation, with a proposed death penalty for homosexual acts, I have been encouraged that sane voices have spoken up world-wide.  Thank God for the likes of Anglican Bishop and Nobel Peace Prize recipient Desmond Tutu for leading this fight in Africa (see: Desmond Tutu leads fight to halt anti-gay terror sweeping Africa.”

The battle is not over. But at least two gay men in Malawi have now been spared a near-certain death sentence (14 years of hard labor) for pledging their love to one another.  Their pardon came about, apparently, because of world moral pressure in the form of a meeting of the Malawian President Bingu wa Mutharika with U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon.

The CNN story released today quotes the White House as saying that gay people are “not criminals and their struggle is not unique.”

We are still mid-struggle in America for LGBTQI rights, and one of the battles we fight is with other oppressed peoples (including but not limited to African-American people) who don’t want to bestow the honored label of “civil rights struggle” on our movement. All it would take, I know, for our Black brothers and sisters to stop being protective of their struggle is for more Black gay men and lesbians to come out to their families and their communities. African-American sexual minorities, who have very little to fear by way of criminal conviction in this country for their sexual orientation or gender identity, could put their faces on the world-wide struggle for dignity, purpose and freedom. I hope the example two brave gay men in Malawi, Steven Monjeza and Tiwonge Chimbalanga, will encourage them.

—Pastor Dan Hooper

Posted in Ecumenical Issues, LGBT Rights, Public Affairs, Coming Out, Uncategorized | Print | No Comments »

Milk on the Capitol steps.

May 24, 2010 by Dan Hooper.

I am passing this on from my colleague Kerry Chaplin. I’m sorry I couldn’t be in Sacramento for this. – Dan Hooper

You honor Harvey Milk’s memory on what would have been his 80th birthday. Harvey Milk would be proud of your courage. And yes, I believe God is proud of you too.

— Pastor Wilk Miller, First Lutheran Church of San Diego

Sacramento faith leaders, Rev. Brian Baker, Rev. Jason Bense, Rev. Doretha Flournoy, and Rev. Lindi Ramsden, mark the legacy of California’s first Harvey Milk Day on the Capitol steps.

What a meaningful weekend!

Over 30 congregations, from Riverside and San Diego to Vallejo and Stockton, honored the legacy of Harvey Milk in their worship services to mark California’s first ever Harvey Milk Day.

In San Diego, East and Downtown Los Angeles, Fresno, San Jose, San Francisco, and Sacramento, clergy inspired canvassers and activists to take Harvey’s message of hope to the streets.

In Los Angeles, Rev. Neil Thomas met with Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, emphasizing the unique role that people of faith play in our LGBT Movement.

I believe Harvey would be proud of our work. And as Rev. Miller has said, our Divine Power(s) is proud of us too.

Help us to continue to make sure LGBT seekers know that they are supported by people of faith, and to make sure Californians know that Divine Power(s) and equality for ALL people are symbiotic.

To Harvey’s Legacy,

Kerry Chaplin, Interfaith Organizing Director

Posted in Ecumenical Issues, LGBT Rights, Public Affairs, Uncategorized | Print | No Comments »

The Two Systems

April 16, 2010 by Pastor Dan.

Our Wednesday studies engage a wide diversity of people who are not (yet?) members of our congregation, but who find their spiritual centering in our midst. This week we were discussing this passage at the end of John 3.

31 The one who comes from above is above all; the one who is of the earth belongs to the earth and speaks about earthly things. The one who comes from heaven is above all. ³² He testifies to what he has seen and heard, yet no one accepts his testimony. ³³ Whoever has accepted his testimony has certified this, that God is true. ³⁴ He whom God has sent speaks the words of God, for he gives the Spirit without measure. ³⁵ The Father loves the Son and has placed all things in his hands. ³⁶ Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever disobeys the Son will not see life, but must endure God’s wrath.

We have talked in the study many times about the overarching power of grace, and the danger of “works righteousness.” Some people “get it,” and others don’t, because they seem to have a great deal invested in their own sense of personal righteousness as dutiful, believing Christians. As I try to probe with them what it is they are “hanging on to” this explanation began to unfold itself for me.

It seems there are basically two rules or systems which may govern our relationship with God and one another. The one is the rule of rewards and punishments. The other is the rule of grace. In the Bible, of course, we find language that is descriptive of both, and so it takes enormous discernment to give weight to each of these and to decide by which rule we will live.Under the rule of rewards and punishments, we will always strive for reward and try to avoid punishment. We will measure our achievement and calculate our relationship both to God and to other human beings on the basis of how we can gain rewards and what we might lose or suffer. The bottom line is that we will expect our behavior and good works (or our abstaining from bad things) counts for something, and that in the end—the judgment day—we will receive the ultimate rewards of eternal bliss, a heavenly mansion, a heavenly banquet, a crown, etc.

But under that rule of rewards and punishments, we become more like Muslims than different from them, for they too hope to receive entrance to Paradise on the judgment day, except of course that their doctrine affords them no advance certainty that God will grant to them the eternal reward.

The rule of grace, on the other hand, cares little about rewards or punishment. We stop measuring our performance against a standard which is impossible. We simply live under grace, honest in the knowledge that we do not deserve it yet confident that we have already received it without measure. Under grace, we are not ultimately terrified about damnation, for the scripture assures us that we may draw near to the throne of grace with confidence.

Moral theology, especially under the definition of the medieval Catholic system, would attempt to marry these two rules together, but in fact that results in a tragic, upended mishmash in which grace must be subordinated to law. When Lutherans insist— relying on where St. Paul tells us that all have sinned and fall short of God’s glory, and that all are justified by God’s grace apart from the law— we do not mean that grace is merely the strength we need from beyond ourselves to perform all the required works and deeds and abstinences of moral law. Rather we mean that we are wholly and completely justified —not by any effort on our part nor by refraining from anything, nor even confessing to our sinful nature and our manifold iniquities—only and totally as a free and undeserved gift from God for Christ’s sake.

If it is not the melding of these two rules, which I think is destructive at best, here is the bottom line: It is left to each of us to choose under which rule we will order our lives—whether under the rule of rewards and punishments, or under the rule of grace. If we voluntarily choose the system of rewards and punishments, we may be caught up in a giddy hopefulness for an exclusive parcel of eternal real estate, but in this life we will be preoccupied with fear of punishment and with being given credit for each correct moral choice we make and the sum of our accomplishments.

But if we voluntarily choose the rule of grace, all those things pale before the wonder-filled knowledge of God’s generous love and forgiveness, whereby gratitude for God’s gifts of grace so overwhelms our hearts that our life itself overflows with generosity and compassion.

This topic will be more fully explored on my other web site Gay Catechism. 

—Pastor Dan Hooper, Los Angeles

Posted in Doctrine, Gay Catechism, Bible & Interpretation, Ecumenical Issues, Living by Grace, Fundamentalism, Spirituality | Print | No Comments »