A tall order for California.

March 2, 2010 by Dan Hooper.

Another pebble slipped off the slippery slope of official and public homophobia yesterday, when John A. Pérez was sworn in as the California State Assembly’s first openly-gay Speaker. (If you haven’t paid attention to LGBT officer-holders in Sacramento, click here.

Equality California wasted no time in congratulating Pérez. Geoffrey Kors issued a statement that said in part:

“Speaker Pérez is a role model and an inspiration to the LGBT community, especially to LGBT youth struggling to find acceptance at home and in school. We wish him the very best of luck as he embarks on this momentous journey and look forward to continuing our partnership with him in our mission to achieve full equality for LGBT Californians.”Pérez faces a time, however, when almost no sentient being puts any trust in California government, and that includes the Governor (27% approval ratings in December) and both houses of the Legislature. Districts are so gerrymandered to favor the incumbent party that no current office-holder and no candidate can really hope to sway anyone’s minds.

Recently I had opportunity to meet one of the candidates for the vacant seat in the Assembly’s 43^rd District, at a house party to introduce him to potential supporters. Mike Gatto further explained the brokenness of the Legislature by referring to the “third house” — not the Assembly or the Senate but the lobbyists who attach themselves to everything they can in Sacramento (and Washington, etc.), especially to every dollar that adheres to campaigns for public office.

Gatto knows that Sacramento is broken.  I question whether, even if he wins, he can have any impact on fixing it under current term limits law. (The predecessor in his district, Paul Krekorian, bailed out of the Assembly a few months early, because of term limits, and landed himself a seat on the Los Angeles City Council.)

What Pérez and young bucks like Gatto would need to fix is worse than gerrymandered districts. It includes our pathetically amended state constitution and its really screwed-up ballot-box legislating with one “initiative” after another.

(My personal view, which Gatto verbally endorsed, is that it is time to make it unlawful to pay for or be paid for gathering signatures for ballot measures. If an “initiative” actually started because citizens took the initiative, that would be one thing. But when big out-of-state money can literally buy a spot on the ballot to peddle reactionary social views, as has been done over and over with ballot Propositions, well, “… there ought to be a law!”

And if they have time, the Legislature needs to re-think sentencing laws for juveniles (SB 399) ; adopt SB 906 the Civil Marriage and Religious Freedom Act which would have taken the wind out of the religious liars’ sails when they purposely misled California voters in the Proposition 8 campaign; and seriously consider AB 1878, which require California to include gender identity and sexual orientation in state government forms.

Fixing some of the things that are broken might be a good way to restore confidence in younger voters that they should bother to pay attention to state politics and state laws.

–D.H.

---

---

Posted in Homophobia, History, Public Affairs | Print | No Comments »

Opposition 8.

February 23, 2010 by Pastor Dan.

It was encouraging to read an intelligently-framed and almost-timely presented Op-Ed piece in this morning’s Los Angeles Times. Dean Hamer, a molecular biologist, and Michael Rosbach, a medical investigator, wrote an article entitled “Genetics and Proposition 8.”

They present the case that there is constantly-increasing evidence supporting a biological basis for sexual orientation. There is no single “gay gene” that makes us gay, but neither is a single gene that dictates our height, the color of our skin or predisposition to many diseases. Whether we are left– or right–handed also has a genetic basis but there is no one gene that controls this.

Genetics, of course, plays a huge role in the discussion of whether gay or lesbian people choose to be sexually oriented to a member of the same sex rather than the opposite sex. And as we all know, choice constantly hovers in the background in the discussion of religion and of civil rights.

Civil rights are particularly singled out where there is the possibility of discrimination because of things we cannot choose, for example, having a particular ethnicity and skin color. Some things are protected from possible discrimination which are a matter of choice, however, such as religion. But in the current so-called Culture War, our opponents (dare we say “enemies”?) insist that being lesbian or gay is a choice and so try to make the argument that lesbians and gay men are not entitled to special rights.

Hamer and Rosbach’s pointed connection with Proposition 8 is that genetics was an “elephant in the courtroom” in the U.S. District case Perry v. Schwarzenegger when testimony was heard last month. (See a case profile here; we await further proceedings and Judge Walker’s verdict.)

One point made by the writers is worth singling out here, especially as we are still caught up in the passionate arguments about only one item on the so-called Gay Agenda: the right to enter into a civil marriage. Another major element of the Religious Reich’s agenda, you will remember, is to block any and all efforts to “teach homosexuality” in the schools.

The school angle has been part of their war chant ever since California State Senator John Briggs tried to ram through an initiative that would have prevented homosexuals from teaching in California schools. Such a move seems almost quaint now, except it was extremely real 30 years ago that drove thousands of lesbian/gay teachers deeper into their closets. One public opinion poll during the campaign showed the Briggs initiative leading 61% to 31%. Fortunately, the measure was defeated, in part because former governor Ronald Reagan reassured votes that the measure wasn’t needed to protect children. “We have the legal protection now,” he said, allowing voter bigotry to rest in the arms of complacency. (A sympathetic assessment of Reagan and gay people by Dale Carpenter can be found at the Independent Gay Forum.)

But ever since “protect our children” has been an anti-gay chant. It was used again quite openly in the arguments in favor of Proposition 8 in 2008. For example, the anti-gay ProtectMarriage.com site lists three bullet points on “Why Did Proposition 8 Win?”

“In the campaign, voters were told clearly that voting YES on Proposition 8 would do 3 simple things:  

• It would restore the definition of marriage to what the vast majority of California voters already approved and what Californians agree should be supported, not undermined. 
• It would overturn the outrageous decision of four activist Supreme Court judges who ignored the will of the people.
• It would protect our children from being taught in public schools that “same-sex marriage” is the same as traditional marriage, and would prevent other consequences to Californians who will be forced to not just be tolerant of gay lifestyles, but face mandatory compliance regardless of their personal beliefs.”

If homosexuals can marry each other, they argued, schools will be teaching homosexuality in our schools.On January 12, in Attorney Ted Olson’s opening statement in Perry in support of the lesbian and gay plaintiffs seeking to overturn Proposition 8, he drew attention to this gay marriage–schools connection:

“When voters in California were urged to enact Proposition 8, they were encouraged to believe that unless Proposition 8 were enacted, anti-gay religious institutions would be closed, gay activists would overwhelm the will of the heterosexual majority, and that children would be taught that it was `acceptable’ for gay men and lesbians to marry. Parents were urged to `protect our children’ from that presumably pernicious viewpoint.”

In the summer and fall of 2008, we thought the voters’ natural b.s. detectors would flag all that as a fraudulent argument. But we underestimated the power of a stupid idea to gain momentum through voter complacency corrupted by evil intent.What Hamer and Rosbach do is to pinpoint an aspect of the education issue and the gay agenda which many of us have not made clear to reasonable and intelligent minds.

“Recent studies in college classrooms show that exposure of students to information on the causes of homosexuality has a direct influence on opinions about gay rights. This fits with polling data showing that people who believe that gays are `born that way’ are generally supportive of full equality, whereas those who believe it is “a choice” are opposed.”

Here is where it gets really scary. Hamer and Rosbach go on to say:  

“One national survey found that 70% of those who think being gay is a choice favored the reinstitution of sodomy laws. This would turn some 15 million Americans into common criminals for simply being who they are.”

The point is this: it is not merely the (horror of horrors!) idea that if lesbian/gay people have any “special rights” and win the Culture War, little children will learn all about homosexuality and then decide to become queer (it is a choice you know!). It is the deeper homophobic fear that if students of any age learn all about homosexuality, they will simply be more tolerant and accepting of the reality of sexual variance and be disinclined to try to stamp it out through draconian legal measures.

The drum beat of homophobic fear has not relented–not after defeats such as the failure of the Briggs initiative, nor after victories such as Proposition 8. Our enemies continue to hammer away that the Gay Agenda must be stopped everywhere, because otherwise we will insidiously normalize everything about homosexuality. As I have argued elsewhere, the fabrication of  “choice” of sexual orientation is the linch-pin of the anti-gay wagon, and education (not same-sex marriage) is the slipperier slope, because an educated populace (not just children) will be measurably less bigoted.

—Pastor Dan Hooper

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

For the love of God, no violence!

February 12, 2010 by Pastor Dan.

Today is the second anniversary of the death of 15-year old Lawrence King, in Ventura, California, at the hand of a 14-year old classmate (see: “Who should be on trial? and Another senseless murder of a child.).

Thanks to GLAAD for urging everyone to remember his death and highlighting this sad fact of American life — gun violence is OK when used against sexual minorities, abortion doctors, or total strangers who crowd your lane on an L.A. freeway, etc.

I don’t know what saddens me more: the news stories of people who wrap themselves in the Christian Bible toting guns, or the news stories of gay or lesbian people committing acts of violence against their lovers, etc. All of us—gay or straight, this or that or any category you can mention—all of us have got to stop the cycle of violence that is in America. And the place to begin is to cry out loud when anyone tries to equate any act of violence with faith in God. 

If you think I exaggerate, just click around you.

—Pastor Dan

Posted in Violence, Homophobia, History, Public Affairs, Coming Out | Print | No Comments »

The Spirit moves among us.

February 11, 2010 by Pastor Dan.

I was quite astonished to read the following, because the subject matter in the e-mail didn’t completely display in my window. The parable in this is that you have to wait for the last word, in this case, “lifted.” I think my spirits are lifted, too.  — P.D.

Censure of Abiding Peace Lutheran Congregation LiftedBishop Gerald Mansholt, ELCA Central States Synod, has lifted the censure against Abiding Peace Lutheran congregation of Kansas City, Missouri, which had been imposed in March 2001 because the congregation called and ordained Pastor Donna Simon the previous October. Pastor Donna is rostered with Extraordinary Lutheran Ministries (ELM) and was ordained extraordinarily (meaning outside the normal rubrics of the ELCA) under a provision in the Lutheran Confessions allowing such ordinations when bishops can’‘t or won’‘t.

Pastor Donna has served that congregation since her ordination and call. That service and her ministry drew praise from the bishop. In his letter to the congregation, he said of Pastor Donna, a lesbian not yet on the roster of the ELCA, and her service as pastor for nine years: “…though ordained outside the established processes of the Church, Pastor Simon has been a gracious witness among us in this synod as well as in the larger Church. She has spoken the truth in love, and shared her witness and struggle as a baptized child of God, even as she has prayed for a day of wider understanding and acceptance in the Church.”

Bishop Mansholt, in notifying the synod of the lifting of the censure, repeated the above praise for Pastor Donna and commented on the faithfulness of the congregation at Abiding Lutheran: “As the Church studied, prayed and conversed with one another over the matters of gay and lesbian people in the Church, Abiding Peace Church might have walked away. But they remained in the Church and stayed in dialog with brothers and sisters who were trying to make sense of these issues in the light of the Gospel. They kept on praying for a better day, a time of wider awareness and acceptance. . . . I know the congregation also longs for the day when their pastor might be welcomed onto the roster of the ELCA.”

Emily Eastwood, Executive Director, Lutherans Concerned, said, “We are very pleased that the stalwart faithfulness and grace-filled witness of both Pastor Donna Simon and the congregation of Abiding Peace have at long last been recognized and uplifted by the Church and the body of Christ they serve so well. It is our fervent, prayerful hope and our continuing advocacy that more of the Church come to understand and honor the service of LGBT Lutherans as we continue the journey from ignorance, misunderstanding and oppression into the light of Christ Jesus.”

See http://tiny.cc/PE9ks for the full text of Bishop Mansholt’s letter to the Central States Synod.

Phil Soucy

Director Communications LC/NA

communications@lcna.org

Posted in LGBT Christian, Faith, History, Ministry, ELCA | Print | No Comments »

The bridge between faith and rights.

February 5, 2010 by Pastor Dan.

Full disclosure: this column is not about Sarah Palin or any other bridge to nowhere that politicians may have built.

Some of us who have been active in the LGBT rights movement for a long time can remember when activist organizations competed viciously against one another, or were torn apart internally because of strident competition between gay men and lesbians. Worse still, there seemed to be this unbridgeable chasm between civil and political activism and the world of faith and religion. No one built a bridge nor even wanted a bridge between them.

I have lived a significant period of my life with a split personality — keeping the “Christian self” apart from the “gay self”; I avoided situations where I would have to come out as gay to a Christian community or as Christian in the LGBT communities. There was something unspoken in me–in many of us–that believed these two distinct selves would never communicate.

It was not altogether accurate, however, and also not true to my faith to suppose that I could not be honest in both communities. As I have matured in faith, I am far less insecure in telling other LGBT people that I am not only a Christian, but a pastor of a Christian congregation.

In recent years we’ve begun to see much more cross-over between LGBT activism in the public/civil/political realm and the faith/spirituality/religion realm. It has probably come about because of another “tipping point” in social change when both camps realized how much we need one another. Case in point, the outcry from the religious communities of America against the evil and draconian legislation proposed in Uganda to annihilate all homosexuals. (For Christ’s sake, even our traditional enemies at Focus on the Family have spoken against it!)

Both the Human Rights Campaign and the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force have reached out especially to the LGBT/Christian movement for one clear and compelling reason: it is obvious that Christian extremism on the right (the Religious Reich) is the biggest single obstacle in America to LGBT people achieving the full and equal rights and benefits of a democratic society.

From the HRC Religion & Faith web site: “The Human Rights Campaign Religion and Faith Program mobilizes people of faith to advocate for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people. Learn more about HRC’s Religion and Faith Program and about the members of its Religion Council.” the site includes news, articles and resources.

The Revs. Eger, Robinson, Russell and Voelkel

HRC’s Religion Council of 13 significant faith leaders include two from the Los Angeles area: Rabbi Denise Eger, who for 18 years has served as the Rabbi of Congregation Kol Ami in West Hollywood, and Rev. Canon Susan Russell, who is Senior Associate for Pastoral Life at All Saints Episcopal Church in Pasadena. Both are extremely strong leaders in our environment; both continue to play important roles nationwide, as does Rt. Rev. V. Gene Robinson, Episcopal Bishop of New Hampshire.

Under the leadership of Harry Knox, HRC’s Religion and Faith Program has been issuing weekly preaching helps for ministers of welcoming Christian churches to proclaim the full breadth of each week’s Common Lectionary readings.

The Task Force keeps a “Faith” tab on its web menu, and hosts the Institute for Welcoming Resources and the interfaith National Religious Leadership Roundtable. I especially commend the brief “article of faith” by Rev. Rebecca Voelkel, “Why the pro-LGBT movement should welcome religion“, which this blog entry echoes:

“As LGBT religious folks, we often find ourselves in the midst of a squeeze-play between our religious communities and our colleagues in the secular LGBT movement. But, I believe that we, as LGBT religious folks, have a unique and powerful role to play.”In particular, our movement, as it engages our opponents who are overwhelmingly religious, must claim the theological and moral authority of our pro-LGBT voice….”Voelkel, an ordained minister in the United Church of Christ, is also on the HRC’s Religion Council and serves as Director of the Task Force’s Institute for Welcoming Resources, representing the open/welcoming/affirming/reconciling religious caucuses and movements in faith traditions. There is a wealth of resources on this site.This blog often keeps watch on the weirdos, but we need to keep watch with those strong people of faith who are moving us forward. I hope you will explore these links and plug in wherever is appropriate for you.—Pastor Dan Hooper

Posted in LGBT Christian, Ecumenical Issues, "The Closet", Faith, History, Coming Out, Public Affairs, Ministry | Print | No Comments »

One screwball after another.

February 1, 2010 by Pastor Dan.

Why didn’t I think of it? Queerty, who is more than a little irreverent over LGBT things, is still working on why the Chinese evangelical Christian known as Hak-Shing William Tam wants to get out of the Perry v. Schwarzenegger trial (Proposition 8). Could it be that as a defense witness he is doing more damage to the defense of Prop 8 than their already-weak case can stand?

Why Does William Tam Want Out of Perry? Because His ‘Sex With Kids’ Claim Is Hurting the DefenseHak-Shing William (”Bill”) Tam, who has, hilariously, so far not been granted his request to leave the Perry Prop 8 lawsuit, which he volunteered to join as an intervenor, became the star of yesterday’s courtroom when his public letter to Chinese-Americans church groups — arguing gay marriage was only a stepping stone in the radical homosexual agenda to get to the ultimate goal of legalizing sex with children — was presented.

And if California didn’t pass Prop 8? Then “other states would fall into Satan’s hands,” the letter read, as footage of Tam giving a deposition last month played for the court.

David Thompson, representing the defendants ProtectMarriage.com, argued that Tam wasn’t part of the official Prop 8 campaign, and thus his letter wasn’t valid to attach homophobic animus to the case. You know, notwithstanding that ProtectMarriage.com handily added Tam to the list of five defendants- intervenors in Perry.

Oh, so it’s Tam’s ridiculous characterization of the gay agenda that has the defendants looking to remove him? Got it.

Forty-eight days before the election, Tam sent this letter, according to Queerty, to Chinese -American Christians. It is utterly amazing. Dear Friends:This November, San Francisco voters will vote on a ballot to “legalize prostitution”. This is put forth by the SF city government, which is under the rule of homosexuals. They lose no time in pushing the gay agenda — after legalizing same-sex marriage, they want to legalize prostitution. What will be next? On their agenda list is: legalize having sex with children. I hope we all wake up now and really work to pass Prop 8. We have only 48 days left. Even if you have church building projects, mission projects, concert projects, etc, please consider postponing them and put all the church man/woman power to work on Prop 8. We can’t lose this critical battle. If we lose, this will very likely happen……

1. Same-Sex marriage will be a permanent law in California. One by one, other states would fall into Satan’s hand.

2. Every child, when growing up, would fantasize marrying someone of the same sex. More children would become homosexuals. Even if our children is safe, our grandchildren may not. What about our children’s grandchildren?

3. Gay activists would target the big churches and request to be married by their pastors. If the church refuse, they would sue the church. Even if they know they may not win, they would still sue because they have a big army of lawyers from ACLU who would work for free. They know a prolonged law suit would cripple the church. They had sued the California government many times before. They sue until they win. They would not be afraid to sue a church. The church would have to spend lots of money in defending the case. The court fight would be long and the congregation would be discouraged and leave — how long are they willing to shoulder the law suit costs. The church may give in and accept them, their membership would grow and take over the church. Then a righteous pastor would have to leave. Such scenarios have happened in Scandinavian countries. At that time, churches would keep quiet, hoping that they won’t be picked as the next target.

If your church is sued, don’t expect others to help your church. You would be in the battle alone, and chances are you would lose. If that happens, whatever nice building your church have built now would become meaningless.

In order not to let this happen, we better team up at the current battle to defeat same-sex marriage. Collectively, we have a chance to win. Right now, each church sacrifice a little. For 48 days, delay your projects, put your resources ($ and manpower) into Prop 8. We’d have great power if we pool our resources together. Let’s win this battle. After victory, your congregation would be energized and go back to the original projects with joy and cheer. They may want to give more and build a bigger building to thank God. Our God would be pleased and bless us more. But if we lose, our congregation would lose heart. They might not want to work as hard. Our opponents would be overjoyed. They would do more and change more laws so as to persecute us easier. Churchs would have a much much harder time to survive. We would be collecting offerings to fight law suits instead of building new buildings. I pray that day would not come. The choice is yours. Talk to the leaders of your church. Your actions would change the history in either direction.

Thanks for your efforts,

Bill Tam

Traditional Family Coalition

June 16, 2008, Del Martin and Phyllis Lyon became the first lesbian couple to wed legally in California. (Heterosexual) San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom looks on from behind the camera. Who would have guessed that these women, who were together for more than half a century, really wanted to have sex with children?

What can I possibly do to dismantle the right wing’s flaky case any more?

— Pastor Dan Hooper

Posted in Lesbian/Gay Marriage, Go figure!, Sex, History, Public Affairs, Uncategorized | Print | No Comments »

The devil you say.

January 20, 2010 by Pastor Dan.

I guess I am not through lambasting Robertsonian Christianity (fundagelical-blame-the-victim-praise-Jesus-cash-the-check theology). When I wrote recently, “Is he still totally nuts?” I hadn’t yet absorbed the fullness of the history lesson that wasn’t even in my college history textbooks.

Pat Robertson insinuated a “what do you expect?” view of the disastrous earthquake which has collapsed most of the infrastructure of Haiti, the poorest nation in the Western Hemisphere. The ex/wannabe reverend Robertson, who takes in hundreds of millions of dollars annual and has a personal fortune estimated to be near one billion dollars, is said to be quite compassionate for the people of Haiti: he called for prayer for them. Not he sent funds to help emergency life-saving efforts. He called for prayer.

Robertson gives a bad name to prayer and an evil name to what it means to be Christian. Why is he being singled out for criticism? For his remark that Haiti’s slaves in 1791 “made a pact with the devil” to obtain their freedom from the French. Mind you—this was a man who launched a campaign to run for President of the United States. Imagine how his foreign policy views would have shaped up.

Thank God for Elizabeth Palmberg’s blog entry on the Sojourners blog last week (and in posting it here I reproduce her important hyperlinks):

“So Pat Robertson, to whom the media are still inexplicably willing to pay attention, is saying that Haiti is being punished for an alleged pact with the devil?

“This might be a reasonable time to point out that, when Haiti threw out the French, it was the latter who were on the side of evil — first, as slave-owners (Haiti was the only modern nation created by a slave revolt). And then, when Haitians had finally attained freedom from plantation chattel slavery, France forced Haiti to pay reparations to the former slave-owners, to compensate them for their loss of ‘property.’

“You read that sentence right — the ex-slaves were forced to pay their former masters, the equivalent of $21 billion (billion-with-a-b) in today’s dollars. It took the tiny nation from 1825 to 1947 — that’s right, over a century — to finish paying off this “debt,” a crushing burden which bled away resources for education and economic development.

“I’ll leave it up to you to decide where the devil is in that history. But if you want to be on the side of the angels — and God’s Jubilee economics, as laid out in the Old Testament — then surf over to Jubilee USA and see their advocacy points for Haiti today.”

Now, what has this to do with an LGBT/Christian blog? It is not Pat Robertson’s inanities which need to be shamed somehow. But it is important that we who are open-hearted, “progressive” and compassionate Christians—whether sexual minorities or not—absolutely divorce ourselves from the evil theology that uses Jesus as a commodity to make money for the preacher not for ministry. Robertson is only an emblem of this kind of profitable evangelism. He is not the only one. But his misuse of Scripture and of God Above to blame the victim, shame gay/lesbian people, and now malign an entire nation, is irredeemably shameful.

—Pastor Dan Hooper

Posted in Fundamentalism, Violence, Go figure!, LGBT Christian, History, PRAYERS, Public Affairs, Ministry | Print | No Comments »

Living and fighting AIDS, Hollywood remembers.

December 1, 2009 by Pastor Dan.

Here we are again at another World AIDS Day (begun in 1987), and 25 million people have died of this disease. Progress in fighting it has been so remarkable that people don’t use the term “pandemic” any more, which is good.

But the burden and the horror of AIDS has shifted — from white homosexual males who transported HIV around like so much airline baggage, and shared freely if unwittingly — to the third world, to women, to children, and to minorities. The bad side of this generation-long struggle against AIDS is that access to health care is not fair, justice or equal. Those who can afford health care have gotten access to today’s wonderful medications which allow them to manage the immune deficiency and get on with their lives.

Those who cannot get access to such medications (including the millions in third world nations who can’t even get clean water) still suffer the same pain and the same potential future as those whose names are on the AIDS Memorial Quilt.

I am proud to be on the Board of Directors of a fairly new local non-profit entity here in Los Angeles, Hollywood Remembers. Two nights ago, in anticipation of World AIDS Day, Hollywood Remembers staged its third annual consciousness– and fund-raising event, premiering the new rock/blues musical “Red Ribbon,” conceived and written by Joe Lawrence and directed by Jerry Craig. It tells the courageous story of six people whose lives were so heavily impacted by HIV and AIDS in the early 1990s just as the red AIDS ribbon was becoming a national symbol of the fight.

At the end of the evening our Board present $2,500 to Women Alive L.A., a grass-roots organization helping mostly minority women in their struggle against HIV and AIDS. Executive Director Carrie Broadus was here to speak to the audience—preach, really, about the fight we will not give up until AIDS is conquered—and to receive the check. I am hopeful that when our annual accounting is done, we’ll be able to send Women Alive even more. Much of our work has been generously underwritten by corporate and other non-profit sponsors, including Thrivent Financial for Lutherans and Lutherans Concerned/Los Angeles, but many small donations at the door provided more than a thousand dollars and proof that people still care.

During the intermission, ushers collected scribe tickets on which people in the audience wrote the names of loved ones they have lost to AIDS. Every year I get teary just jotting down a few of the names of those friends I lost, but I was overwhelmed again this year to see that the enormous red ribbon on the banner (pictured above) being hoisted to the ceiling was not big enough to hold the names. Perhaps the heart of God is bigger than our banners, bigger even that the AIDS Memorial Quilt itself, which is the largest work of folk art in the world (nearly 1.3 million square feet).

If you’re in the Los Angeles area, the 576 square feet on exhibit at Hollywood Lutheran Church will be up through Sunday, December 6. Come and pay your respects, light a candle, and make a donation. It will be well used to help people with HIV/AIDS continue living and fighting.

—Pastor Dan Hooper

Posted in Hollywood, HIV and AIDS, Living by Grace, History, PRAYERS, Public Affairs, Uncategorized | Print | No Comments »

We’re here. We’re Christian. Get used to it.

November 23, 2009 by Pastor Dan.

The year 2009 has already been momentous enough in the world of faith, what with both the Episcopal Church and the Lutheran Church taking decisive left turns on sexuality issues. The Episcopal Church essentially ended its self-imposed moratorium of electing a lesbian/gay bishop, after the existence of out gay Bishop Gene Robinson set the world’s conservative Anglican into a firestorm of indignation.

Then a month later the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America did something almost unthinkable for a mid-America-dominated outfit of good decent folks: it lifted the 20 year old ban on the ordination of partnered lesbian and gay people into the Lutheran ministry. Since that momentous day in August, everybody seemed to threaten to stop talking to the Lutherans, including other Lutherans, Catholics, etc.

Every denomination of Christians knows full well that they already have lesbian and gay clergy in their ranks. But most of them have preferred the continuous hypocrisy of plausible deniability – that they are unaware or even sincerely believe that they do not have lesbian and gay clergy because, well, they don’t allow such a thing. (By the way, the word “plausible” has an interesting history of its own.)

At any rate, the outrage and indignation over the reality of sexual variation even among decent and God-fearing people, is at least the flashpoint for a lot of upheaval in the Christian world.

Upheaval is usually caused by a lot of light material being tossed around by stronger forces. (I imagine the example of, say, a card table full of champagne glasses is upset by a fast-moving house pet.) There is far less upheaval of any sort when something is built on bedrock, and I always thought that the Christian faith was built on bedrock. I was brought up to believe that. More on that later.

But upheaval there is, and many well-respected commentators have been suggesting now for years that what we see emerging is an enormous realignment in the world of religion. Breakaway groups from mainline Protestant denominations, for example, may simply team up and form new unions.

So as the CORE Lutherans announce they are moving ahead to form their own little churchbody, we can’t help wondering if they will eventually converge with the Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod if that latter can trust their conservatism, or even the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod (which is really not evangelical and not Lutheran in my humble opinion).

As a side note, I will watch with enthusiasm mixed with amazement to see how many ELCA congregations actually do go with the CORE movement. My count today on their web site is that 87 congregations are moving in their direction. Keep in mind that somewhere between 300 and 400 ELCA congregations have signed on with the Lutherans Concerned Reconciling in Christ program to publicly welcome lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people. So at the moment this doesn’t look like a serious realignment of apocalyptic proportions.

But the this ecumenical thing popped into the news, the so-called Manhattan Declaration which came out three days ago, that attempts to put up a barricade to the enormous social change of recent decades, over the signatures of Orthodox, Catholic and Evangelical Christians.

(It seems more than a little odd this group would grab the title from the climate change people who in 2008 issued the Manhattan Declaration in Manhattan. This month’s 7-page religious moratorium was actually released in Washington D.C., not New York. I suppose now anybody could just write up his or her own version of truth and issue it under the title “The Holy Bible,” and it would be okay, huh?)

But this seems to fit the pattern of that “strange bedfellow” coalition of Mormons and Roman Catholics who donated huge sums to “defend” heterosexual marriage in California and again in Maine.

Bruce Garrett, of Truth Wins Out has written a cogent piece (”Statement Of Conscience: Just Give Us The Money”) on the Declaration and warns of its blatantly anti-gay political agenda.

Is there a real Christian realignment going on? Realignment is hard to detect for certainty when things change at glacial speed. And you know how the media loves to exaggerate, hence the word “upheaval” when 87 out of 10,000 congregations pick up their marbles and leave the ELCA’s game.

Personally, I doubt that there is a grand realignment that will abide for very long. The Mormon/Catholic alliance over Proposition 8 was a marriage of convenience. Both, as I have said, did their best to take the moral heat off of their own houses (a wild history of plural marriages, and a current pattern of sexually-abusive priests and pedophiles) by amping up their indignation over same-sex marriage.

Even in the current Declaration, there is so little holding Evangelical and Catholics together theologically that I doubt it means a massive or fundamental realignment. There are still plenty of evangelical Christians who think the Pope is Antichrist, for example. And Benedict XVI hasn’t done anything to dispel that age-old antipathy. It was more than amusing to see the Catholic News Agency identify some of the writers who put the Declaration together as including “renowned Evangelical leader Charles Colson.” Charles Colson, of Watergate notoriety? Charles Colson, who wrote “Born Again” in 1976 after serving time in prison for obstruction of justice? Well, I guess so, because he got into bed with ex-Lutheran convert to Roman Catholicism (the late) Richard John Neuhaus to publish “Evangelicals and Catholics Together: Toward a Common Mission” in 1995. (You can get your used copy from Amazon right now for 59¢.)

And I suspect the Orthodox are not about to cave into Roman Papal authority any time soon, especially in light of its astonishing resurgence in post-Soviet Russia. The ecumenism of recent years on that front has Orthodoxy being cordial but not really trusting the Papacy. And Benedict is not likely to suggest parity with the Patriarch. His recent”generous” offer to welcome disaffected Anglicans back into the Roman fold, for example, smacks of canon law machinations: an Anglican bishop can become a Roman priest, keeping his wife but forfeiting his episcopate. Gee thanks, Ben.

If the Christian faith and witness is built on real bedrock, it is not the bedrock of Christian history nor a unified view of the divisive social issues in any era. It could only be the bedrock of the Lordship of Jesus Christ and the historic creeds and confessions of what it means to be Christian. (So there go the Mormons, who hold to some very odd beliefs about God, Jesus, Adam, and human beings becoming Gods, and who turn up their noses at the ancient statements of faith.) Clearly, the bedrock of Christian faith, and the “core” of Lutheran theological teachings, are about what God does for humanity in Jesus Christ. Those core believes including nothing about who is Pope or whether one needs a pope, a bishop or a priest. the core believes including nothing about human sexuality, homosexuality, or marriage, for that matter.

You can appeal all you want to tradition, and loyalty to the real Holy Bible, but unity of faith is grounded on a great deal more than widely-held prejudices and a quickly assembled outrage and bluster promulgated to grab the attention of the media. And most important, a 7-page statement drawn up by indignant traditionalists does absolutely nothing to make reality go away. And a significant part of reality is that there are lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and questioning human beings out there, many of whom were raised in Christian homes and in spite of all the conservative bluster still acknowledge the Lordship of Jesus Christ. We’re here, we’re queer. We’re Christian. Get used to it. Do I have to say that into Latin?

— Pastor Dan Hooper

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

Pope or poacher?

October 25, 2009 by Dan Hooper.

The man who walks in the “shoes of the fisherman” — Pope Benedict¹⁶ —has gone on a major fishing expedition that certainly raises more questions than eyebrows.

It is not surprising that Rome, under Ratzinger’s leadership, should try an opportunistic gesture to collect disaffected Anglicans back to Rome. After all, he doesn’t consider any Christian communion to be the genuine church unless it is under his authority. So it’s not surprising that his gesture of outreach to unhappy Anglicans and Episcopalians in this country fits with his agenda to strengthen and broaden his own personal authority.

But this latest may have the effect of actually weakening his authority, and this is where the surprises come from:

Rome has long has a curious dispensation to allow married Anglican priests (or, theoretically, married Orthodox priests) to come back to Rome and remain married. It seemed n anomaly of history and Canon Law when I first heard of that, since the Roman Catholic Church has enforced clerical celibacy for at least 800 years. (I have hundreds of pages in manuscript form that provide details on that). But this curiosity seemed all but a historical footnote until this latest gesture.

And Benedict is hurting for priests, as they exit the priesthood by old age and death, marriage, therapy or prison. I’ve been told on good authority (but it’s too broad to Google or Snopes this) that one quarter of all Catholic parishes globally have no priest.

But if the Pope wants to welcome married and disaffected Anglican priests back to Rome, with their wives, he has essentially reinforced the point that clerical celibacy is simply a rule of the church and has no real authority in Scripture or dogma. If it is simply a church rule that can be bent or relaxed by the guy who wears the authoritative hat, then why doesn’t he just get rid of the rule and welcome his own married ex-priests back to Catholic altars?

(It is hard enough to admit to a change of mind in public—the media and the opposition will tell you in a New York minute that you are “waffling”— but to change your mind and go against the last 90 Popes or 800 years, whatever, that takes nerves of steel.)

Benedict has also thrown in a bone to the Protestant Reformation by suggesting that disaffected Anglicans can keep their beloved Prayer Book, the very anchor of the Church of England since 1549, and as fiercely defended by Anglicans as the papacy is by Catholics. But if returning Anglicans can bring along their Prayer Book, in the English language, so much for the Roman Missal, the Roman Rite, and all the dogmatic baggage packed into the Mass. In other words, so much for Rome’s unblinking authority.

The third shocker is Benedict’s suggestion that Anglicans who come home to Rome can bring along their own bishops. If he thinks he will be expanding his authority by adding bishops under him, what becomes of Apostolic Succession? And come to think of it, this is backhanded gesture to undercut the authority and insult the person of Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams. It is as if to say, “since you can’t control your boys any more, I will take them off your hands.” Every Anglican Bishop that returns to Rome is one less Bishop under Canterbury.

Astonishingly, Rowan Williams seems content to accept this slap and spin it to sound like ecumenical progress! According to Steve Doughty of the U.K’s Daily Mail Online “Archbishop of Canterbury Dr Rowan Williams said it showed that relations between Anglicans and Roman Catholics were closer than ever.” Perhaps Archbishop (”Red Riding Hood”) Williams has mistaken Benedict for his own grandmother?

—Pastor Dan Hooper

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

Just Say Nope!

October 24, 2009 by Pastor Dan.

I offer somebody else’s blog and two comments.  i’ll save my comments until after I read some more news stories.  On its face, this is just too fascinating to pass up. — Dan Hooper

Pope Welcomes Disaffected Anglicans

Steve Benen points to the following.

“In a move expected to cause confusion within Anglican and Catholic parishes alike, the Vatican on Tuesday announced it would make it easier for Anglicans uncomfortable with the Church of England’s acceptance of women priests and openly gay bishops to join the Catholic Church. A new canonical entity will allow Anglicans ‘to enter full communion with the Catholic Church while preserving elements of the distinctive Anglican spiritual and liturgical patrimony,’ Cardinal William Levada, the prefect for the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, said at a news conference here on Tuesday.”

What it probably means is that married Anglican priests can become married Catholic priests because God knows that priestly celibacy can be thrown overboard when put in service of denying women priesthood or acceptance of gays within the priesthood. Sounds like the patriarchy circling the wagons again.

Posted by Mary at October 24, 2009 09:57 AM | Religion | Technorati links 

Comments

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith , previously known as the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Roman and Universal Inquisition… which means Cardinal William Levada is the Grand Inquisitor. How cool is that!

Posted by: JimD at October 25, 2009 10:24 PM

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

Where have we been?

October 22, 2009 by Pastor Dan.

Church of Sweden to Conduct Same-Gender Marriage Ceremonies

October 22, 2009 • Phil Soucy, Director Communications LC/NA

This morning the Board of the Lutheran Church of Sweden voted and announced that the church would conduct marriage ceremonies for same-gender couples, using gender-neutral liturgies for both LGBT and heterosexual weddings. The vote of the board of the church was taken at its meeting this morning and is reported as 176-62, with 11 abstentions and 2 absences.

Thirty years ago, Sweden declared homosexuality was not disease. The church has offered blessings for same-gender couples since 2007. In April, Sweden passed a law that granted marriage equality to all. That law went into effect in May.

Some in the Church of Sweden are of the opinion that marriage in the church ought to be reserved for man-woman unions, and argued for that position. Today’s vote ended that debate. The new ruling will go into effect on November 1, 2009. The news amazes even me.  I’ve been watching the European Lutheran churches liberalize much sooner and more completely than the American churches (the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod marching decisively into the past and the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod being theologically about where the Taliban is).

European churches started ordaining women as early as World War II ~ for lack of enough males to fill pulpits. The late Swedish theologian Krister Stendahl, who taught for many years at Harvard and then elected Bishop of Stockholm, was an early supporter of the full inclusion of gay and lesbian people in church and society. After retiring in 1989 he returned to Harvard and was a keynote speaker for LC/Los Angeles in the 1990s. When I talked with him personally, he was quite open about the fact that he had a lesbian on his episcopal staff in Sweden. Not long after, I received a phone call form Sweden asking for any resources I had on same-sex marriage rites.

In April Sweden became the seventh country in the world to legalize same-gender marriage. In May, the diocese of Stockholm elected a partnered lesbian, Eva Brunne, as bishop. Times have changed, and the church in many places is changing with it.

But I am sure the America Christian scene will go ballistic about this latest. I can hardly wait to hear what that hate-mongering Topeka preacher will say or do. He’s already banned from entering the U.K. ever again. I wonder if the tolerant Swedes will allow him in to protest the lesbian and gay weddings that are set to begin November 1.

It is easy to forget that America is not the center of the debates about LGBT people and the Christian faith. American Christianity has had very different experiences than other one-time Christian nations, and of late, thanks to fundamentalism and the corrosive mixture of religion and politics, American Christians have been dragging their feet for years.

According to Associated Press, “Sweden’s archbishop Anders Wejryd said he was pleased with the decision, while the Swedish Federation for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Rights described it as ‘a big step in the right direction.’”

But it still amazes me, and reminds me that those of us who are sexual minority Christians must live into the changing environment in our faith communities. We read the headlines with glee, but remain fearful or completely closeted. Or we go on with life and almost forget that in many quarters we are not as rejected or avoided as we were a decade or two back. If the world’s Christians are indeed loosening up, our emotional homework is to claim the grace we have always believed God has offered to us, and trust the Good News as well as the daily news.

— Pastor Dan Hooper

Posted in Lesbian/Gay Marriage, "The Closet", Ecumenical Issues, LGBT Christian, Living by Grace, LGBT Rights, History | Print | No Comments »

Systemic change comes to the Lutherans.

October 7, 2009 by Pastor Dan.

We’ve been laboring for fundamental change in the Lutheran church for decades. I personally got involved in the late 1970s, and started serious writing in the mid-1980s. But its still startling to see the results of the work of hundreds of faithful people to lead and guide (not push) their fellow believers to a genuine tipping point.

If you’ve been following the LGBT/clergy debate in the Lutheran or any other denomination, or if you’re just Googling in, you probably have heard that the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America was not quick to embrace sexual minorities. Officially, it made tentative gestures of welcome more than 15 years ago, but in 1990 it built a fence around the ranks of its ordained clergy.

No matter what we did to try to open up the gate in that fence, all that the ELCA would do is study the issues. I spoke to the first study task force on Human Sexuality in July 1990, for example. The only thing that came out of that months-long study was that, after the director had threats made on her life (we’re talking about a large Protestant church denomination here, folks, they simply withdrew the study documents from further consideration, and waited another decade until the national Assembly (convention)—the ELCA’s highest legislative authority—ordered the church to undertake another study.

In the midst of this, lay people and pastors and one Bishop Emeritus of the church were arrested for blocking the sidewalk with their protest signs at one of the national Assemblies.

The tipping point never came in 2007. Hundreds of us were in Chicago’s Navy Pier as visitors to watch the proceedings, pray for results, and lobby voting members (delegates). But then in Minneapolis this past August, the tipping point was reached. A respectable majority of members in the Assembly voted to lift the restriction against non-celibate lesbian and gay people from being or becoming Pastors of the church.

Two other denominational leaders were immediately enraged, although their warnings were grave and measured, one from President Gerald Kieschnick of the Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod (it figures) and the other from Archbishop Wilton Gregory, President of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (and that figures, too).

But this week, the real tip finally occurred. At its Bishop’s meeting October 1–6, national church staff people sat down with Bishops and (for the first time ever) with representatives of Lutherans Concerned/North America, Extraordinary Lutheran Ministries, and Goodsoil to discuss the implementation of the changes which were called for in August.

LC/NA’s Executive Director Emily Eastwood: “We are pleased that at long last we are being talked with, instead of just being talked about.” That is fundamental to the discernment process in which the church has always recognized the power of the Holy Spirit to move the Christian community forward. So even with the threat of continued controversy over its liberalizing decision last August, the ELCA is finally trusting the process which is modeled from the beginning of the Christian church (see Acts 15, again),and talking with the believers who are most affected by decisions being made. This is genuine systemic change.

ELM’s President, Rev. Erik Christensen: “Challenging conversations are ahead of us, but these are the challenging conversations waited for twenty years.”

Yet to be discussed, of course, is how the ELCA’s new standards will apply to those of us who have been admitted to the extraordinary (extra ordinem) Lutheran clergy roster, Extraordinary Lutheran Ministries. After being removed from the ELCA’s roster in 1991, I applied for and was admitted to the extraordinary roster in 2002 (known then as the Extraordinary Candidacy Project). None of us knows yet whether the ELCA’s executives, Bishops and Church Council will move to accept our roster into their roster as a whole, or whether they will expect each one of us to go through the protracted process of applying for certification alone.

I am adopting a wait-and-see attitude on that, because I am disinclined to reapply if I must prove myself again to some credentialing committee. I have been ordained for 35 years, and serving in my present position for more than five years. Yes, we have wait for conversations about the larger church’s ordination standards, but we have also moved forward in mission and ministry without the larger church’s permission or interference because the Gospel and the Spirit are driving the church, not the other way around.

—Pastor Dan Hooper

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

Politics and policy are driven by a culture of hatred.

September 26, 2009 by Dan Hooper.

I have decided to post this 9-15-2009 essay from Wayne Dynes, forwarded to me by Billy Glover, because it is compelling and thought-provoking about our relationship to international events and national policy.  There is much here to think deeply about, rather than to become partisan about. - DH

Homophobic killings

Thirteen years ago I joined a gay-conservative listserv on the Internet, consisting of about 60 members. I had never regarded myself as a conservative and found to my pleasant surprise that there were several other centrist (and liberal) members of the group. We were united by our common exasperation with the insufferable smugness and intolerance of the gay left, which had for so long dominated the Movement. Alongside this trend stood the “official” gay groups. These had no viable ideology at all, except for raising money and cosying up to the Democratic Party. No matter how much that Party ignored us, the official gays were determined to hang on. We see this sycophancy even today, when those folks urge “patience,” even though Obama has failed to deliver on any of his campaign promises to us.

For their part, the gaycons were uniformly in favor of the Iraq War. I tried ceaselessly to warn them against this stance, but my erstwhile friends were plugged into the DC establishment, and freely parroted the groupthink prevalent there.

The breaking point came when the double standard of the group became glaringly obvious.

In several newspapers and on his site direland.typepad.com, the independent journalist Doug Ireland had meticulously documented the state-sponsored executions of gays in Iran. For the gaycons, of course, Iran was a rogue state, so one could expect nothing good there.

When I reminded my little group of the death squads that were killing gays next door in Iraq, the gaycons wanted none of it. They would have had to admit that the US invasion and occupation of that country had been a disaster for women, Christians, and especially for gays.

As the US presence diminishes in Iraq, the peril that gay men face there has only worsened. An article in the British newspaper, The Guardian, provides some gruesome details (www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/sep/13/iraq-gays-murdered-militias.)

The Muslim extremist groups use young militants with computer training to hunt down gays on chat rooms on the Internet. “It is the easiest way to find those people who are destroying Islam and who want to dirty the reputation we took centuries to build up,” one said. Once the targets are found, arrangements are made to attack and sometimes kill them. The groups now active are believed to be responsible for the deaths of more than 130 gay Iraqi men since the beginning of the year alone. With a stream of homophobic epithets, the deputy leader of one Baghdad group explained its campaign. “Animals deserve more pity than the dirty people who practice such sexual depraved acts,” he told a reporter. “We make sure they know why they are being held and give them the chance to ask God’s forgiveness before they are killed.”

It has been suggested that the violence may be a consequence of the success of the government of Nuri al-Maliki. As militia groups see that their earlier function of providing local security is no longer needed they “shift their focus to the moral and cultural sphere, reverting to classic Islamist tactics of policing moral boundaries,” one observer remarked.

Under Saddam Hussein same-sex behavior was not criminalized, though there was repression, as occurs throughout the Arab world. Violence against gays started in the aftermath of the invasion in 2003. Since 2004, according to Ali Hali, chairman of the Iraqi LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender) group, a human-rights group based in London, no fewer than 680 gay men are known to have died in Iraq, at least 70 of those in the past five months. Actually, the figures may be higher, as most cases involving married men are not reported. Seven victims were women.

Rumor has it that the police are involved, but these reports have been denied. In recent days I received an email from a leftist gay group, noting only the killings in Iraq. This is the mirror image of the blindness of my gaycon friends. The lefties only want to hear about homophobic atrocities in Iraq, which are indeed terrible. They take this selective approach because their template is that all the troubles in the world are due to US “imperialism.” If only we would refrain, all would be well.. (As in Darfur, the Congo, Burma, North Korea, and other such stunning examples of Third World virtue.)

Since gays are being killed in Iran and Palestine, where there is no US presence, this cannot be the key variable. The essential factor is of course the fanaticism of Islamist extremists. Yet the left—and multiculturalists in general—are reluctant to criticize any aspect of Islam.

And of course they cling to their “blame America first” demonology. I would be glad if the US were less active in intervening throughout the world, but this would not mean that conditions would improve in most places. Kleptocracy and repression are rampant in much of the Third World.

Moreover, from Karl Marx to Hugo Chavez, the hard left has a long history of homophobia. That record is nothing to be proud of.

So why not just stop looking at these comments from both the right and the left? The reason I pay attention to them is that I have become disillusioned with the mainstream media. As a resident of New York City, I find that I am obliged to read the New York Times. But after that newspaper allowed the appalling Judith Miller free reign with her incendiary stories about Saddam’s Iraq, I no longer trust that newspaper—or indeed any establishment source.

The only remedy is to get your information from as many sources as you can.

Billy Glover’s forwarding comments (September 17):

I think I agree with your thinking. The problem is that I’m not sure that homosexuals were not as bad off before we invaded Iraq as before, because I agree that it is Islamic nonsense that is the factor. And that is why I supported the war and still do. There is no doubt in my mind that eventually we will have to confront all religious nonsense that is anti-homosexual.I saw a TV documentary, I think on National Geographic channel, on “Inside Islam.” It may be my lack of hearing it before, but I had never heard that there has been a study of the Koran like the Bible, and it came to the same conclusion: parts of the Koran have not only been mistranslated, but things have been added. Specifically, in a modern language translation words like tanks, etc were added, which obviously could not have been in the time it was “written.” (This in a text that supports war on non-Muslims.)

Another aspect is that, like the original Baptist belief, early Islam had no professional leaders, but each person was his own interpreter of the book. And it was pointed out that “Islam’ in non arabic nations is different from the Arabic ones and that, as we already knew, the worst elements are paid for by Saudi-Arabia, the Wahabis-the Islamic element like the right-wing “Christian” extremists in this country.

Need I remind anyone that lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons are still being attacked and killed in the United States of America, and that it doesn’t make any difference which party is in power in Washington? We Americans also tolerate a culture of hatred. It isn’t only extremists who are guilty of hatred. We all need to re-examine our mean-spirited and violence-driven rejection of those who differ from us, whether that is in gender or sexual orientation, race or ethnicity, nationality, political persuasions or just every day opinions. People differ from one another. God does not smile on our mean spirits or our culture of violence, hatred and rejection of anyone. Period.

— Dan Hooper

Posted in Violence, Homophobia, Fundamentalism, History, Public Affairs | Print | No Comments »

Missouri Synod weighs in on gay clergy.

August 24, 2009 by Dan Hooper.

First, this tidbit from KXMB CBS, in Bismarck, ND (with video?): “Update on the latest in religion news:”

“MINNEAPOLIS (AP) The president of the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod has told members of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America that their votes on gay issues will have negative consequences.”The Reverend Gerald Kieschnick (KEESH’-nik) addressed the churchwide assembly of the ELCA a day after its delegates lifted a ban on partnered gays and lesbians serving as clergy.

“Kieschnick said that decision will hurt relations between the nation’s two largest Lutheran denominations and “cause additional stress and disharmony within the ELCA.” Conservative Evangelical Lutheran congregations won’t be forced to hire gay clergy, but opponents nevertheless warned that straying from Scripture could result in a loss of members and finances.

“Lutheran CORE, a conservative group within the ELCA that fought the gay clergy policy, will hold a convention in Indianapolis next month to review its next steps.”  Sound: CUT ..235 (08/23/09)

I’ve been waiting for this since early Saturday — news from the Minneapolis Assembly about what “greetings” the head of the Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod would bring in light of the ELCA’s assembly actions in the days before.Next I quote from the blog letter from Phil Soucy, Communications Director for Lutherans Concerned/North America:

“‘Greetings’ were brought to the assembly by Reverend Dr. Gerald Kieschnick, President of the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod. … The Reverend Dr. did not smile, but began his message by quoting Paul in 2 Corinthians 15: ‘…we implore you, on behalf of Christ: be reconciled to God. For our sake, He made Him to be sin who knew no sin so that in Him we might become the righteousness of God. What a blessing it is to know that our sin is forgiven, removed from us as far as the east is from the west because of the atoning sacrifice of Christ on Calvary’s cross…’ . . .”He later quoted from the Kolb-Wengert translation of the Formula of Concord on doctrinal controversy and discord, to wit: ‘…for these controversies are not merely misunderstandings or semantic arguments where someone might think that one group had not sufficiently grasped what the other group was trying to say or that the tensions were based upon only a few specific words of relatively little consequence. Rather, these controversies deal with important and significant matters, and they are of such a nature that the positions of the erring party neither could nor should be tolerated in the church of God, much less be excused or defended. Therefore necessity demands explanation of these disputed articles on the basis of God’s word and reliable writings so that those with a proper Christian understanding could recognize which position regarding the points under dispute is in accord with God’s word and the Christian Augsburg confession and which is not. And so the Christians of good will, who are concerned about the truth, might protect and guard themselves from the errors and corruptions that have appeared among us…’

“His was a serious message of rebuke, delivered somberly and, as he said, ‘…in deep humility with a heavy heart and no desire whatsoever to offend. The decisions by this assembly to grant non-celibate homosexual ministers the privilege of serving as rostered leaders in the ELCA and the affirmation of same-gender unions as pleasing to God will undoubtedly cause additional stress and disharmony within the ELCA. It will also negatively affect the relationships between our two church bodies. The current division between our churches threatens to become a chasm…’”

I am not at all surprised by Dr. K’s grim and humorless chastisement of the ELCA for taking the courageous step of opening the gates to lesbian/gay/partnered clergy. Actually, I chuckled at the line that he said ‘…in deep humility with a heavy heart and no desire whatsoever to offend.” Well, Rev. Dr., you certainly offended a lot of us, then, without desiring to! Neat trick, doubtless grounded in backward thinking if not in passion or desire.This is the very heart of the deep divide which has opened in the last four decades between different groups of Lutherans. The Missouri Synod has become more and more 19^th century in its obsession about perfect agreement in all matters, even if it means continuing to cut all relationships with other Lutherans who differ. Perfect agreement in theology means nothing short of perfect thought control, and LC–MS seems to have achieved it. Kieschnick’s heavy-hearted remarks to the ELCA were not only a rebuke of us, but clearly a warning shot fired at his own churchbody. Don’t even think about raising any new discussions of human sexuality in the LC–MS. It is a settled matter which will not be revisited.

Kieschnick’s remarks, and the severe quotation from the Formula of Concord – which he obviously chose to lift out of its 16^th century context and attempt to apply it in the 21^st century – has all the marks of Missouri’s obsession about sin and evil, lockstep doctrinal conformity, and dire consequences for difference of opinion. Not only is he and his officialdom—to which the LC-MS churchbody has remained captive since J.A.O. Preus’ take-over of the LC-MS in the 1970s—unwilling to have any honest dialogue about where Christians disagree in matters of faith, he has chosen not to respect the deeply-held convictions of other fellow-Lutherans/fellow Christians who hold to those convictions by reason of their own conscience.

In other words, Kieschnick’s and LC–MS’s official interpretation of tough contemporary issues and matters of faith are the only ones which may have validity anywhere in Christendom. Any other point of view, according to his rough application of the quote from a document written in A.D. 1580, “should not be tolerated in the church of God.”

Has Kieschnick forgotten that the dispute back then which the Reformers could not tolerate were disputes with the Roman Catholic Church, not with fellow evangelicals? And has he not noticed that Pope Benedict XVI himself has basically said that all of us — all Lutherans and all Protestants and everybody else who are not under his personal authority are not even a “church” in the proper sense? In effect Kieschnick’s rebuke of the ELCA, a churchbody nearly twice the size of the LC–MS parallels Benedict’s rebuke of all other Christians. In Kieschnick’s case it is utter arrogance masquerading as doctrinal purity. In Benedict’s case it is utter arrogance masquerading as divine authority.

But Kieschnick’s quote is wrong for a more fundamental reason. Read this again, carefully: “Therefore necessity demands explanation of these disputed articles on the basis of God’s word and reliable writings so that those with a proper Christian understanding could recognize which position regarding the points under dispute is in accord with God’s word and the Christian Augsburg confession and which is not.”

Why I find this to be a deeply flawed application of a 440 year old document is that it refers to “these disputed articles”, meaning articles of faith. Do we need to remind Rev. Dr. Kieschnick that the Augsburg Confession (published in 1530) does not even contain an “article of faith” on human sexuality, let alone homosexuality? Should it not be pointed out to him that articles of faith are about God, Jesus Christ, the Holy Spirit, justification by grace through faith, etc., and not about anthropology, sociology, biology or psychology. Christians do not put our faith in these matters or in our current understandings of any of them, even if we are influenced by them because they change. And when matters of anthropology, sociology, biology or psychology change, our opinions and attitudes change with them.

Strictly speaking, our faith is never in ourselves (gay or straight, Catholic or Lutheran, woman or man, married or single, sinner or saint). But the LC-MS obsession, like other fundamentalist religious obsessions, is that they get to define with exactitude what is sinful and against the will of God and therefore cannot be tolerated in the church of God.

As. St. Paul says in 1 Corinthians 14:36, “Or did the word of God originate with you? Or are you the only ones it has reached?” Yes, it’s kind of funny that Paul said that as a rebuke of one congregation with whom he disagreed over allowing women to speak in church, a real issue of faith that also has divided the ELCA and the LC–MS since the 1970s. (Missouri Synod does not ordain women to the ministry, and tries to keep them out of all authoritative positions over men in the church from the local congregation on up.) Their reasoning is as fundamentalist as you can get: they can point to some verses in the Bible that they say with vehement certainty applies to the present times, and because of their own certainty they will not even grant the civility to talk with a sister or brother in Christ who differs in discernment of what applies or doesn’t apply. In doing so they completely bypass and ignore a lot of other Holy Writ that reminds us to listen to one another, to pray for one another, to bear one another’s burdens, and to draw near to Christ rather than searching the scriptures for a proof text. They ignore the divine permission which Christians are given to “bind and loose” even matters which are covered in the Scriptures.

Maybe we will, sadly, look back on 2009 as the year when Christianity definitely began to crack into two irreconcilable camps. Each of us believes that we are reconciled to God, but not by our own achievements, conformity, certainty or doctrinal purity, but purely and solely by grace. Think about that, Rev. Dr.

—Pastor Dan Hooper

Posted in Bible & Interpretation, Ecumenical Issues, Doctrine, Lesbian/Gay Marriage, Catholic matters, Environment, LGBT Christian, Public Affairs, History, Faith, LGBT Rights, Ministry | Print | No Comments »