Ding Dong The Bells Are Gonna Chime!

While I won't be getting married in the morning, nor any time in the near future, same-sex couples will be able to legally marry in Connecticut soon, probably as early as next month. In a case resulting from a suit filed by 8 couples against the state Commissioner for Public Health after being denied marriage licences by Madison town clerk, the state supreme court ruled today "In accordance with these state constitutional requirements, same sex couples cannot be denied the freedom to marry."

Many headlines in newspapers around the country and throughout the blogosphere read much like this one from The Boston Globe: "Connecticut Supreme Court legalizes same-sex marriage." As a friend of mine pointed out,

The Connecticut Supreme Court did not legalize same-sex marriage but rather said that same-sex couples must be allowed to marry because marriage is a fundamental right. Gays and lesbians are a group who have a history of being discriminated against and therefore heightened scrutiny (California went one step further and said strict scrutiny) must be applied to any law which negatively impacts them. The Connecticut Supreme Court based their ruling on equal protection in the Connecticut constitution. Everybody deserves the equal protection of state law.

Essentially the court found that Civil Unions, which Connecticut has had for a couple of years, create a separate and unequal category of citizens.

If you are interested, here are the Supreme Court's decision and the three dissenting opinions:

• SC17716 - Kerrigan v. Commissioner of Public Health
• SC17716 Dissent - Kerrigan v. Commissioner of Public Health
• SC17716 Dissent - Kerrigan v. Commissioner of Public Health
• SC17716 Dissent - Kerrigan v. Commissioner of Public Health

How far we have come in the last 25 years since I returned to Connecticut after college and graduate school in the Midwest. Marriage was the last thing on our minds when the Connecticut Coalition for Lesbian and Gay Civil Rights worked toward passage of civil rights legislation. In fact, it was the issue of marriage that essentially fractured the organization after the passage of the so-called "gay rights bill." A number of members felt that marriage was the next logical step, while others saw marriage as an institution that had long outlived its purpose. While the Coalition fell apart, with a small remainder limping along, other organizations grew out of the fight for full marriage rights for same-sex couples. It became THE issue for a large number of lbgt activists, and for many conservatives, who used it in attempts to solidify their hold over our society.

This decision is a great stride forward for lbtq folks, but the struggle is not over. There is a question on the ballot this year in Connecticut, one required by the state constitution to be put before the people of the state every 20 years:

Shall there be a Constitutional Convention to amend or revise the Constitution of the State?

There is also the issue of clergy acting as agents of the state for conducting civil marriage. Not to mention the ongoing struggle in our religious institutions regarding the blessing of those marriages.

A lot of education, advocacy, and hard work remains, but for today, let us celebrate a tremendous step forward.

Peace,
Jeffri

Living In A Crucified Place

BILL MOYERS: You've even been criticized by some of your liberal colleagues in the American fellowship because you have called for a moratorium for a season on ordaining more gay Bishops. Why did you do that?
BISHOP KATHARINE JEFFERTS SCHORI: It was a very painful thing to do. My sense was that there might be hope of some kind of broader understanding if we were able to pause. Not go backwards, but pause.
BILL MOYERS: Is it fair to ask some aspiring gay or lesbian person who wants to become a Bishop, like Gene Robinson did in 2003, to wait?
BISHOP KATHARINE JEFFERTS SCHORI: Is it fair? No. It's not fair.
BILL MOYERS: But it's necessary?
BISHOP KATHARINE JEFFERTS SCHORI: It's a crucified place to stand.
--From the Transcript of Bill Moyers Journal, broadcast June 8, 2007

I am glad that Katharine sees that what is being asked of the lesbian and gay members (not to mention the bisexual and transgender ones) of the Episcopal Church--and of the entire Anglican Communion--is unfair. I am glad she recognizes the difficulties it represents by calling it "a crucified place to stand." I find myself feeling deeply hurt that she continues asking us to stand in this "crucified place" without truly understanding the realities of it.

From the time we first become aware of who we are, lesbians and gays do not just stand in a crucified place, we live in a crucified place. It begins with schoolyard taunts directed at us and others--taunts that we do not at first fully understand. It continues in classrooms where teachers refuse to recognize the hurtfulness of these taunts, or do not see them as hurtful as racial and ethnic slurs, when used by students and even other teachers. We endure it in our churches and the streets of our communities as grown men and women fling insults and misinformation. We even suffer it within our own families.

Faggot. Dyke. Queer. Homo. Lesbo. Fairy.

The name calling is only the beginning and just the surface of what it means to live in this crucified place. There is massive familial and social pressure to not be honest about who we are and the realities of our lives. As larger numbers of us have dared to leave the Closet to live openly and honestly, and to work for our civil rights, religious and secular conservatives try to make us scapegoats for the moral decay of society. Within many of our churches we are called many other hurtful things.

Sinner. Heretic. Possessed. Unnatural. Immoral. Diseased.

We have been taunted, blamed, beaten, and even murdered. Some of us have taken our own lives rather than live in this crucified place. If only we would choose to be "normal," we are told, then we would not be subjected to this abuse. If only we would remain hidden, then everything would be all right. It would be preferable to the conservatives--and, truth be told, many moderates--for us to live in the crucified place out of sight so that their comfort zones are not breached.

So the Anglican Communion continues to squabble about whether or not the Episcopal Church can remain a member if it continues to move toward full inclusion of its lesbian and gay members. And once again, in a public forum, we lesbian and gay Episcopalians were asked by the head of our church to stand in a crucified place. Yet again a supposedly supportive heterosexual person in a leadership position has asked us to pay the price of a place at the table.

We are familiar with this crucified place because we have been living here most of our lives. The mostly unspoken implication is that the entire Episcopal Church is being asked to stand here. It is not. Heterosexual bishops are still being consecrated. Opposite gender marriages are still being blessed. Unless there is a moratorium on all consecrations and all marriages while the Anglican Communion sorts through these issues, then the heterosexual members of the Episcopal Church are not standing in this crucified place.

Peace,
Jeffri

Of The Baptismal Covenant

I have often said that we Episcopalians do not believe our own prayer book. In response to the question “Who are the ministers of the Church?” our Catechism says, “The ministers of the Church are lay persons, bishops, priests, and deacons.” Note that the laity is listed first. Yet for all our proclaiming of “the ministry of all the baptized,” we don’t believe lay people do ministry, and we defer much of the ministry of the church to our bishops, priests and deacons. More than that, we seem to be abdicating more and more of our responsibility for the administration of our church to the ordained. I believe we can see this in the current struggles and our willingness to grant the Primates of the Anglican Communion so much power over the future direction of the Episcopal Church.

And, except for Bonnie Anderson, the president of our House of Deputies, our lay leadership seems remarkably silent when it comes to responding to the Primates’ Communiqué of February 19, 2007. Bishops on both sides of the issue, and from the “center,” continue issuing statements daily, and we await each one with eagerness. And our elected leader Katharine also seems willing to allow the Primates Gathered to be authoritative for the Episcopal Church—or at least have a sizeable say over the future direction of our church. She continues to ask, repeatedly, that we look at this time as a time of pause—to step back from the movement toward full and equal participation in the Episcopal Church for its lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender members. To many of us this seems to be a case of “justice delayed is justice denied.” For others, it does not go far enough.

Do we believe our Baptismal Covenant as it appears in the 1979 Book of Common Prayer, or not?

Celebrant Will you continue in the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, in the breaking of the bread, and in the prayers?
People I will, with God’s help.

It is clear that a significant number of us do not intend to do this. They refuse to come to the table and participate in the breaking of the bread with those who do not agree with them. There are congregations that refuse to allow their bishops to visit them, and there are bishops who refuse to visit congregations.

Celebrant Will you persevere in resisting evil, and, whenever
you fall into sin, repent and return to the Lord?
People I will, with God’s help.

So while the Primate of Nigeria vocally and visibly supports a bill in the Nigerian legislature that will outlaw even the right to gather and discuss lesbian and gay issues—and I feel relatively certain that bisexuality and transgender issues are not even a blip on the radar screen for the good Archbishop--the Primates consistently demand that the Episcopal Church comply with certain parts of their Lambeth Resolutions, the Windsor Report, and their Dromantine Communiqué but refuse to demand compliance to the rest of those documents by their own members.

Celebrant Will you proclaim by word and example the Good News of God in Christ?
People I will, with God’s help.

Good News? You mean there is Good News for us gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people? It is hard to hear the Good News when we are essentially being told to go back into our closets and let the rest of the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion talk about us and make decisions about our lives without speaking with and listening to us.

Celebrant Will you seek and serve Christ in all persons, loving your neighbor as yourself?
People I will, with God’s help.

The last time I looked, “all persons” included lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people. But maybe we can only be loved when we are second-class members of the church.

Celebrant Will you strive for justice and peace among all people, and respect the dignity of every human being?
People I will, with God’s help.

Apparently not, since we are being asked to step back from this striving. Quite frankly, if the reactionary factions of the Primates gathered succeed in banning lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people from consecration as bishops, then they will then seek to have us banned from ordination as priests and deacons. And once they succeed in that, can ordained women be far from their sights?

If we do not truly believe our Baptismal Covenant, which we all say together whenever a new person is brought into our community through the rite of Baptism, then we should take it out of the Prayer Book and replace it with “The Ministration of Holy Baptism” from the 1928 Prayer Book. Or why not return to ”The Ministration of Publick Baptism of Infants” in the 1662 Prayer Book? That is the version of the Prayer Book highlighted in the current proposed Anglican Covenant.

What part of ALL do we not understand?

Peace,
Jeffri

Of Pain and Reflection

The last few days have been painful. Anger, frustration, sadness, and much more fill the posts on my Episcopal/Anglican related email lists and blogs I read regularly. When Katharine spoke to the staff at the Episcopal Church Center last Friday, she said a couple of times in reference to the ultimatum from the primates, “We don’t need to decide now.”

Pause...

Time…

Reflect...

Reflection can be dangerous. It can lead to new, unexpected and scary places. Like thoughts of leaving the Episcopal Church. No matter what happens over the next seven months and at the September House of Bishops meeting, people will leave the Episcopal Church. Many have already left. More are leaving now. Some have left not only the church behind, but their Christian faith as well.

The song running through my head for most of today has been “Anatevka” from Fiddler on the Roof. If the House of Bishops submits to the primates’ ultimatum, and the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender members of the Episcopal Church are again asked to be the price of unity in the Anglican Communion, then perhaps that will be our equivalent of “the edict from the Tsar.” And many of us will leave. We’ll have to wait for justice (while fighting for it) someplace else.

Will I leave?

I don’t know.

I don’t have to decide today…

Peace,
Jeffri

"For I was hungry..."

Travelling to Dar es Salaam is expensive. Although I could find tickets for about $1,000, most were in the $5,000-$7,000 range. But let us assume that everyone attending the gathering of the Anglican Primates was a good steward and thus found a good fare and booked early. Even so, average transportation costs to Dar es Salaam would be approximately $2,000 per person (and that is probably a very low estimate). That adds up to $76,000 in transportation costs for the 38 primates.

Rooms at the White Sands Motel and Resort in Dar es Salaam average $130 per night. Most of the primates will have spent seven nights at the meeting, which adds up to $910 per room. Multiplied by 38 primates, lodging costs for the meeing will be approximately $34,600.

For the sake of simplicity, let us assume that each primate will accumulate $300 worth of incidental expenses during the course of the meeting (also probably a low estimate). Thirty-eight times $300 comes to $11,400.

To gather these 37 men and one woman for their meeting in Dar es Salaam is costing about $122,000. This does not include the number official guests, spouses, staff, the cost of security, or the members of the press who travelled to Dar es Salaam for the meeting.

Looking at the Episcopal Relief and Development Gifts for Life online catalog, here is what it would cost to make some very basic improvements for a village of 50 families:

Mosquito Bed Netting for All - $375
Clean Water and Basic Sanitation - $7,500
One Goat for Each Family - $4,000
Set of Tools for Each Family - $9,000
20 Trays of Seedlings for Each Family - $20,000
One Flock of Chickens for Each Family - $6,750
Total for Village - $47,625

Enough said.

Peace,
Jeffri