warrior n 1. One who is engaged in or experienced in battle. 2. One who is engaged aggressively or energetically in an activity, cause, or conflict. (The American Heritage College Dictionary, 4th Edition, 2002. p. 1546.)I suppose you could say that as a person participating in the Rainbow Presence that I am "one who is engaged aggressively or energetically in an activity, cause, or conflict," but I never really thought of simply wearing a rainbow sash or insignia as being particularly aggressive, or even energetic for that matter. Of course, it all depends on your perspective. If the presence on Easter Sunday of someone in your congregation wearing a rainbow sash disturbs your comfortable little world, then I guess you could call it an aggressive action.
The intent of the Rainbow Presence is simply one of visibility. If you are going to talk about us, then you must have faces and names to talk about, because we are not some faceless, anonymous "they." You cannot have a discussion about our place as baptized members in the church without including us in that discussion. You cannot make judgements about our lives and our faith without talking WITH us and not AT us (something even we liberal Christians sometimes need to be reminded of as well). And if our mere presence in church makes you uncomfortable, then I would say that is your problem, not ours.
The conservatives have drawn a line in the sand and made the issue of sexuality a battle for the soul of the church. The liberals, on the other hand, continue to challenge the church to BE the church. I hope someone in Matt's congregation in Binghamton, NY is brave enough to wear a rainbow to church on Easter Sunday. It would not be the first time someone was denied communion for challenging the church, and it would not be the last.
Peace,
Jeffri
Let me explain my reasoning.
ReplyDeleteThe rainbow presence, I think, is an abuse of the Lord's Table. It turns the holiest day and the holiest moment into a venue for political maneuver. I cannot think of a lower form of sacrilege.
Moreover, as I noted in the article you link, the "rainbow presence" represents the following: a public declaration that those who wear rainbow insignia: 1. unrepentantly and willfully reject the clear teaching of both the Scriptures and the Church and/or 2. that they are themselves willfully and unrepentantly engaging in homosexual sex.
In that case, according to both the scriptures and the BCP, to commune them will do a great deal of harm to those making this public declaration and to the Body as a whole.
It is as if a promiscuous man were to present himself at the communion rail with his mistress while his wife and children sat in the back and perhaps, a group wearing green armbands, promoting heterosexual promiscuity and encouraging his adultery were to come up with him. It would be a horrible terrible thing to enable and facilitate the self-destruction of this man and his supporters by allowing them to abuse the body of Christ in this way.
The rainbow presence is way beyond the pale. I have never shied away from public discussions of this issue in my parish or elsewhere with non-celibate GLBT people or with their supporters and I have always been open to debate in public forums. Why do this thing at Communion? Why do this thing on Easter, the holiest day of the year. It appears to be pure political agitation and it simply forces those who disagree with you into an impossible situation.
Is this what you call dialogue? If so, then you should not be suprised when those who disagree choose not to engage.
Matt Kennedy
Matt,
ReplyDeleteI thought your reasoning was perfectly clear in your post on the Stand Firm site. That is why I linked to it, so that folks could read it in it's entirety. I respect your position, but I also disagree with it.
Let us be clear here, those choosing to wear the rainbow on Easter Day are rejecting YOUR interpretation of what is clear in Scripture. There are many things that are "clear" in Scripture that good and faithful Christians no longer believe to be relevant to lfe as a Christian. I am sure you are as, if not more, conversant in the various sets of laws in the Old Testament as I am. When you are following all 613 mitzvot from the Old Testament, then I will seriously consider your argument about the three or four pertaining to homosexuality.
As for the teaching of the church, that has proven to be fluid over the centuries. The "Councils of the Church" have repeatedly reinterpreted and changed it down through the year--clear back to the early church.
Why do this at Communion? Actually, I thought we were just talking about being visible in church. There is nothing in any statement by the Rainbow Presence about disrupting Communion. If some clergy seek to disrupt it by calling out those wearing rainbows, that is their choice, not ours.
Why Easter? Why not Easter? I could name several theological, religious, and political (since you seem to see this as a primarily political act) reasons for choosing Easter, but none of them would be acceptable to you. And quite frankly, no matter which Sunday was chosen for the Presence, I am quite certain you would find it equally objectionable.
As for forcing people with whom one disagrees into an impossible situation, I would say that is exaclty what the Primates' Communique has done to the Epsicopal Church.
Peace,
Jeffri
Matt,
ReplyDeletePlease do make sure that none of your parishioners sit with or come to the Table with thier spouses or children. To do so would only politicize the Feast Day and the Table.
And be sure that no one wears a wedding ring as a means of self identification. Any such self identification turns the most Holy of Christian Feasts into a political statement in support of one life-style over another.
Blessings,
Bryant
You know what, Jeffri? Matt Kennedy doesn't get it.
ReplyDeleteLove him anyway.
Matt Kennedy will deny Eucharist to LGBT people who dare to be honest about who we are when we comne to the table, and he'll do that in defiance of what our Lord commanded.
Love him anyway.
Matt Kennedy will ridicule LGBT people and persecute you and say all manner of evil against you for the sake of the One he understands to be Jesus.
Love him anyway.
We are called by the One who is Love Incarnate, Love Divine to love those who hate us and persecute us and intend to do us great harm.
Love - anyway - and great will be your reward in heaven.
And, as for Matt Kennedy? Well, he already has his reward.
Pray for him.
And, love him anyway.
BTW, Jeffri, my congregation is busy sewing rainbow stuff for Easter Day - scarfs, ties, bows, etc.
You are doing a wonderful thing here. You are clearly blessed, that you may continue to be a blessing.