Last night, Integrity @ Trinity had a very productive and, dare I say, satisfying exchange and sharing with the Bishop of the Diocese of Arizona and the Dean of Trinity Cathedral Phoenix. Naturally, a great deal of discussion was centered around concerns for moving forward on the issue of full inclusion of LGBT persons in the life of The Episcopal Church (TEC) but also the conflicts and difficulties that have been brewing in the larger Anglican Communion.
One very valuable piece of information confirmed my suspicions that certain conservative persons have very consciously been using this issue to precipitate schism and division in TEC. While TEC has, for the most part, held to its commitment to abide by the provisions of B033, it is quite clear that some leaders of the conservative movement have simply ignored all pleas for "restraint" such as those urged by the Windsor Commission. To discover that one of "their" (formerly "our") bishops spoke quite openly before the consecration of V. Gene Robinson about his intent to use this issue to provoke a division of TEC, is exceedingly disheartening. If "listening" and "dialogue" seemed to meet no response from this individual and others closely associated with him, I should not be particularly surprised about that, inasmuch as the actions were not a "reaction" to events, but a carefully plotted and "premeditated" strategy to do just what has been done. It is, frankly, a shame that this is not more widely known.
At the same time, it encourages me to think that persons with such ill-begotten motives cannot represent all of conservatism in TEC. Clearly, some persons on the "right" are behaving in stunningly un-Christian ways as they defend views that really have little to do with Christianity. At the same time, I have known committed Anglo-Catholics who have deep religious convictions and lives of prayer who simply see the world in another way. I would hope that we may find room in TEC for both liberal and conservative individuals who are not simply motivated to do as Bishop Kirk put it, "blow the church apart."
I must also put in a voice of gratitude to Bishop Kirk for bringing up the one biblical passage that has troubled me most as we move forward to the formal recognition of full inclusion for LGBT individuals, specifically the discussion from St. Paul in his letter to the Corinthians centering around eating meat offered in pagan temples. Paul quite specifically seems to agree with the position that, as the "idols" do not really "exist," there could be no harm in eating the food. Meat was simply meat and could nourish just as well whether it had been offered in a pagan ritual or not. The difficulty seemed to come when those without scruples were critical of those who were not so clear on the issue and perhaps did not as clearly understand the distinction between the "false" gods of the pagan temples and the "true" God whom they now served and acknowledged. He urged that the "eaters" should have compassion for their "weaker" brethren. There is no doubt that this passage is on the minds of many of us who, at the same time as we wish to move forward "once and for all" on LGBT inclusion, do not wish to harm our "weaker brethren" who have, perhaps, simply not had enough time to understand and to reflect. We do not want, as it were, for our practice to become a "stumbling block" for them.
Quite frankly, this is a moral dilemma which has no pat solution that I can see. There is no doubt in my mind that the church needs to move forward with the "courage of its convictions" about the worth of LGBT persons and allow full access to all of the sacraments of the church. At the same time, we need to exercise compassion towards those who are shocked or surprised by this move. In a practical sense, I tend to suspect that many within the groups that have fragmented away from TEC were "looking for an excuse" to move out, and they probably would have done so over some other issue, if not this one. Once that dust has settled, I hope that we can continue to dialogue with those who have chosen to remain within TEC and try live in unity if not in unanimity. To that end, if we can do what the presiding bishop has suggested, that is to make a positive statement of inclusion, then we must also include those for whom this, hopefully inevitable forward movement, causes pain and continue to offer them the full support and resources of the church.
Ending with an anecdote. There is a person at Trinity Cathedral, an eastern European immigrant, who has been a member of the cathedral congregation for many years. Philip and I met her and have had a cordial relationship with her for over 10 years now. She has, it would seem, a very deep spiritual life and believes most strongly that her relationship with God has made her "clean all over." It is also clear that she reads the bible frequently and intensely and quite frankly believes that homosexuality is a sin. When she encounters groups of LGBT persons after the Sunday Eucharist, she will often give a "blessing" with a prayer that these sinful persons will be cleansed of their sin. (Sort of an involuntary exorcism) For some in the LGBT local group, this is quite frankly offensive. I suspect that, had we not already had a cordial relationship with this person, I might have found that also to be the case. It was, however, our relationship to one another, that neither of us is willing to abandon, which keeps our disagreement from being disagreeable. I simply thank her for her blessing in the spirit of compassion in which it is (from my viewpoint misguidedly) offered, and offer my own intentions to pray for her and her family as well. Once that is past, then our relationship continues to carry us on together, we share a coffee and talk about our families and other things that we hold in common. I hope that TEC can work to do something like this on the larger level as well.
Posts
