Thursday, May 23, 2013
AKA "An Inch At A Time" ...
The word just in that the Boy Scouts have lifted their ban against gay scouts but will continue to discriminate against gay leaders calls to mind the challenge to "set audacious goals and to celebrate incremental victories." Today’s decision by the Boy Scouts is absolutely an incremental victory to celebrate -- even as we renew our commitment to work toward the audacious goal of ending homophobic based discrimination. Period.
Wednesday, May 22, 2013
TRINITY
We bumped into the Holy Spirit
On Trinity Sunday
She asked us what the fuss was about
We told her we were down with
The trinity deal
So far as it goes
She laughed at us
We could tell she was moving
Like the wind
She said we didn’t have to
Get it
So far as it goes
Amen.
by Kendall Lockerman (via Facebook)
photo: ruach | joshua.zeltman
Tuesday, May 21, 2013
A Prayer for the Human Family
"It takes courage to be a human being. I stand in awe of how resilient people can be, how they can absorb the impact of loss or grief, and then come back to find a way to carry on in spite of it all. I am honored to be part of a human family when I watch others rush to help strangers in need, giving what that they can to sustain the life of another. I believe we all have an instinct to be selfless, to protect our young, to confront disaster with dignity, to become hope for one another. It is not easy. It takes courage. It takes love. It takes us."
The Rt. Rev. Steven Charleston, Choctaw
Monday, May 20, 2013
Prayers for Oklahoma
O God of all creation, you stand as mysteriously behind the forces of nature as you are revealed in the frailty of humankind; accept our prayers for all those who suffer from the ferocity of the winds and the battering of the rains. May you restore all those who are lost to those who love them, give to those who mourn a sure confidence in your abiding love, and fill all of with strength to meet the days ahead with faith, hope, and love, for it is in such that we meet you and act on your compassionate behalf. Amen.
Wednesday, May 15, 2013
Happy Anniversary ...
Three years ago -- May 15, 2010 -- God willed and the people consented and the Diocese of Los Angeles gave the Episcopal Church two fabulous new bishops: Diane Jardine Bruce and Mary Douglas Glasspool. So Happy Anniversary to Diane and Mary ... and to ALL of us!
More on Marriage in Minnesota
Love this photo of the I-35 bridge lit up to celebrate the arrival of Marriage Equality in Minnesota yesterday, as the governor signed into law the bill passed by the Senate on Monday. It'll be August 1 before the "I do's" start happening ... but a great day and a great celebration.
Meanwhile there was this Nice piece in ENS today about Minnesota Bishop Brian Prior setting policies in place now that Marriage Equality has come to "the land of sky blue waters."
The first comment, unfortunately, was a misguided slam at those who will -- in the writer's opinion -- be "violating the marriage canons" by solemnizing same-sex marriages in Minnesota. (Or ... one suspects ... any other of the jurisdictions where now over 25% of Episcopalians live that have achieved marriage equality.)
Of course I had a few thoughts ... actually, lifted from an earlier post on this blog:
In point of fact, the current canons on marriage are inherently self-contradictory now that over 25% of Episcopalians live in states with civil marriage equaliy.
Let’s review. The canons begin with:
CANON 18: Of the Solemnization of Holy Matrimony
Sec. 1. Every Member of the Clergy of this Church shall conform to the laws of the State governing the creation of the civil status of marriage, and also to the laws of this Church governing the solemnization of Holy Matrimony.
… and then continue with a “check list” — which includes in (b) a description of marriage.
Sec. 2. Before solemnizing a marriage the Member of the Clergy
shall have ascertained:
(a) That both parties have the right to contract a marriage
according to the laws of the State.
(b) That both parties understand that Holy Matrimony is a physical and spiritual union of a man and a woman, entered into within the community of faith, by mutual consent of heart, mind, and will, and with intent that it be lifelong.
(c) That both parties freely and knowingly consent to such
marriage, without fraud, coercion, mistake as to identity of a
partner, or mental reservation.
(d) That at least one of the parties has received Holy Baptism.
(e) That both parties have been instructed as to the nature,
meaning, and purpose of Holy Matrimony by the Member of
the Clergy, or that they have both received such instruction
from persons known by the Member of the Clergy to be
competent and responsible.
It can be argued … and indeed, is being argued … that Canon 18.2b does not proscribe that marriage is exclusively between a man and a woman … rather it describes Holy Matrimony as “a physical and spiritual union of a man and a woman, entered into within the community of faith, by mutual consent of heart, mind, and will, and with intent that it be lifelong” at a time when that was indeed the case.
And it can be argued … and indeed, is being argued … that the values the make up the marriage transcend the gender of the couple committing to live out those values until death do they part.
It can be argued … and indeed, is being argued … that the descriptive nature of the language in Canon 18.2b does not “trump” the instructive nature of Section 18.1 to “conform to the laws of the State governing the civil status of marriage” — and that bishops are operating within the spirit of the law (canon) when they authorize the clergy in their dioceses to stand on right side of history by offering equal blessing and equal protection to the same-sex couples coming to them for the blessing and solemnization of their civil marriage.
All of this suffice to say there is plenty of work for the Task Force on the Study of Marriage to do … even as there are plenty of “happily ever afters” about to be celebrated in Minnesota, Delaware, Rhode Island, etc. etc. etc. And meanwhile, we wait on the Supreme Court ... (cue sound effects: tick/tock, tick/tock!)
Meanwhile there was this Nice piece in ENS today about Minnesota Bishop Brian Prior setting policies in place now that Marriage Equality has come to "the land of sky blue waters."
The first comment, unfortunately, was a misguided slam at those who will -- in the writer's opinion -- be "violating the marriage canons" by solemnizing same-sex marriages in Minnesota. (Or ... one suspects ... any other of the jurisdictions where now over 25% of Episcopalians live that have achieved marriage equality.)
Of course I had a few thoughts ... actually, lifted from an earlier post on this blog:
In point of fact, the current canons on marriage are inherently self-contradictory now that over 25% of Episcopalians live in states with civil marriage equaliy.
Let’s review. The canons begin with:
CANON 18: Of the Solemnization of Holy Matrimony
Sec. 1. Every Member of the Clergy of this Church shall conform to the laws of the State governing the creation of the civil status of marriage, and also to the laws of this Church governing the solemnization of Holy Matrimony.
… and then continue with a “check list” — which includes in (b) a description of marriage.
Sec. 2. Before solemnizing a marriage the Member of the Clergy
shall have ascertained:
(a) That both parties have the right to contract a marriage
according to the laws of the State.
(b) That both parties understand that Holy Matrimony is a physical and spiritual union of a man and a woman, entered into within the community of faith, by mutual consent of heart, mind, and will, and with intent that it be lifelong.
(c) That both parties freely and knowingly consent to such
marriage, without fraud, coercion, mistake as to identity of a
partner, or mental reservation.
(d) That at least one of the parties has received Holy Baptism.
(e) That both parties have been instructed as to the nature,
meaning, and purpose of Holy Matrimony by the Member of
the Clergy, or that they have both received such instruction
from persons known by the Member of the Clergy to be
competent and responsible.
It can be argued … and indeed, is being argued … that Canon 18.2b does not proscribe that marriage is exclusively between a man and a woman … rather it describes Holy Matrimony as “a physical and spiritual union of a man and a woman, entered into within the community of faith, by mutual consent of heart, mind, and will, and with intent that it be lifelong” at a time when that was indeed the case.
And it can be argued … and indeed, is being argued … that the values the make up the marriage transcend the gender of the couple committing to live out those values until death do they part.
It can be argued … and indeed, is being argued … that the descriptive nature of the language in Canon 18.2b does not “trump” the instructive nature of Section 18.1 to “conform to the laws of the State governing the civil status of marriage” — and that bishops are operating within the spirit of the law (canon) when they authorize the clergy in their dioceses to stand on right side of history by offering equal blessing and equal protection to the same-sex couples coming to them for the blessing and solemnization of their civil marriage.
All of this suffice to say there is plenty of work for the Task Force on the Study of Marriage to do … even as there are plenty of “happily ever afters” about to be celebrated in Minnesota, Delaware, Rhode Island, etc. etc. etc. And meanwhile, we wait on the Supreme Court ... (cue sound effects: tick/tock, tick/tock!)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
