Saints at the River, Betsy Swift

Howe Caverns

My experience as a lesbian and as a Christian starts where all such stories start - in darkness. In one sense I refer to the darkness of the womb, for I have been all of this since before I was born. In another sense, however I mean of course the darkness of confusion, because nothing in my girlhood in a stereotypic Irish Catholic family prepared me to integrate sexuality and spirituality - much less an "alternative" sexuality! These matters were never spoken of, but heterosexuality was assumed, by family, community, and so by myself.

I am sure I never heard the words lesbian or gay growing up, but somehow absorbed the shame associated with being "that way," most likely from the pamphlet rack at the back of church. Nevertheless, I grew up in the church and it nourished my mind and spirit. When I later met the person I knew I wanted to marry, and it was another woman - I was immeasurably shaken, and began the journey of integration of sexuality and spirituality - but it began with the disintegration of all that I had held most dear up to that point.

A few years later, I had the great experience of visiting Howe Caverns in Central New York State. I had always been fascinated by the idea of these caves and rock formations underground, but this was my first visit. For $5.00 you get an elevator ride down 20 stories - the equivalent of a modest skyscraper, only down. I was thrilled by the tour of stalagmites and stalactites, the opalescent limestone, the constant year-round temperature of 57 degrees. What really surprised me, though, was the river. I didn't know that - there's a river running through the cavern, not stagnant, but flowing water - it's this river that has, over the millennia, carved out the cavern.

I was satisfied with having finally seen stalagmites and stalactites first hand, happy that I had made the time to take in this little natural wonder, but what stayed with me from the trip was that river. It haunted me, and became quite a useful image for me, in terms of articulating my experience of spirituality, as a lesbian in a sort of post-christian point in my life.

I came to think of spirituality as a great underground river - this underground river flowing through the whole human family, and the various religions as wells that tap down into that river from the surface. So, around these wells we learn as children to celebrate holidays and to associate the great truths we were taught with the seasons of the year. For example, near the darkest night of the year, Christians celebrate the birth of Jesus who is called the light of the world - and almost every culture on earth holds similar feasts celebrating the return of the light. So likewise as we in the Northern Hemisphere experience spring as rebirth, the celebrations of Easter and Passover became intimately connected to the experience of spring.

These experiences of religion on the "surface," around the well, take us down to the river - to the deep human experience of spirituality and connection to something beyond ourselves. The well gives us names for it, but at the river we are speechless.

So, when we lesbian and gay folk are told that we are sinners, that we are unacceptable as members of the community or as ministers, or that our families are defective - the pain of this rejection is not only that, but is the pain of loss and dislocation as well. The loss of access to our spirituality can be as painful as the loss of a family, or of one's whole culture.

Some of us find other paths, other wells, and find again a point of access to that river. But for some, those images and symbols etched deep in us in childhood continue to have the most power, and we resolve to find our way back home - without denying ourselves - either our gay and lesbian selves or our spiritual selves.

For those of us who were raised in the christian traditions this raises some interesting challenges: "Christian" is a scary word in gay & lesbian communities. Prominent "Christians" are often heard spreading disinformation about us in the media, railing against our right to exist, lobbying for the homophobia agenda, operating treatment centers to "cure" us. But "Christian" is also in some sense the name of my family of origin. I found that I could escape being Christian about as successfully as I could deny being Irish, or stop being one of the Swift kids.

As a catholic christian, I learned my prayers before I went to school, the smell of incense and the swish of vestments are among my earliest memories. The rhythms of the church seasons of repentance, celebration and waiting are part of my blood. I can't change that, that's what takes me down to the river.

As an adult, it's important to go beyond these primal memories. To go from the well to the river below. As a Christian, what I know about the river, I know about from the person of Jesus. That's where I found the key to reclaiming the name "Christian" from the forces of hate.

So the journey through the darkness of confusion, back home to a place of community and faith, was for me a process of reclaiming, reaffirming, owning my experience. My experience of my own humanity (sexuality + spirituality finally not in conflict) and God's word saying "It is good." Who can say exactly how that happened? It is the story of a life, it happens under the surface, like the secret life of mushrooms, so much more than ever meets the eye.

My partner Barbara and I found our way to the Episcopal Church where we are able to be open, and where we have found not only acceptance, but real participation in the life of the community. This has been soothing and healing, but the journey goes on. Just as Jesus sent the ones he healed to serve, or to carry a message, not just back to their same lives.

I am proud of the journey that the Church is also on, and pray that we will have the courage to live the truth of inclusion that the Spirit has shown us in community.

Betsy Swift is a parishioner at St. David’s, Cullowhee.

Day of Prayer, Bishop Katherine

With Rowan Williams in New Orleans

As we move toward a great gathering of bishops from across the Anglican Communion, I call this whole Church to a Day of Prayer on 22 June. The Lambeth Conference represents one important way of building connections and relationships between churches in vastly different contexts, and reminding us of the varied nature of the Body of Christ. I would bid your prayers for openness of spirit, vulnerability of heart, and eagerness of mind, that we might all learn to see the Spirit at work in the other. I bid your prayers for a peaceful spirit, a lessening of tension, and a real willingness to work together for the good of God’s whole creation.

As many of you know, the Anglican Communion is one of the largest networks of human connection in the world. Churches are to be found beyond the ends of paved or dirt roads, ministering to and with people in isolated and difficult situations. That far-flung network is the result, in part, of seeds planted by a colonial missionary history. The fruit that has resulted is diverse and local, and indeed, unpalatable to some in other parts of the world. Our task at the Lambeth Conference is to engage that diverse harvest, discover its blessings and challenges, and commit ourselves to the future of this network. We must begin to examine the fruit of our colonial history, in a transparent way and with great humility, if we are ever going to heal the wounds of the past, which continue into the present. With God’s help, that is possible. I ask your prayers.

13 Grandchildren, by Mary Burson

Illustration from the Lindisfarne Gospels

In response to Rick Lawler, “Don’t Panic” posted on May 22, I can truthfully say I am not panicking. I can also say that I am tired of having the church discuss my sexuality. And I remain patient because I believe there is a divine reason why this discussion is taking place.

My partner and I have been together for 35 years. During that time we raised eight children together. Today we celebrate sharing 13 grandchildren. I consider myself married to my partner even though this marriage is not officially blessed by the church or the state.

When I acknowledged that I was a Lesbian, I felt shamed by the Episcopal Church that I had grown up in and loved. I was told I was living in sin. I left the church for 20 years and at the same time turned my back on God. I died spiritually. It was a long journey back to God and to the church. I had to learn to accept who I am and how I live as being sacred and blessed by God. That has become my truth.

I still love my church. One of the things I love about it most is that reason serves as part of its foundation. By using reason as well as looking to tradition and the bible, the Episcopal Church has been historically open to change. The road has been rocky and the church still stands. And I have faith that it will survive this issue of human sexuality.

My hope is that all the churches in the diocese of Western North Carolina will send clergy and lay representatives to “A Call to Listen Workshop” on June 28. I will be there. I know it will be a safe place to speak my truth without fear; and I vow to open my heart to understanding and to listening with love to those who disagree with me. I also hope that many parishes will choose to make safe places to continue this conversation throughout our diocese. I want to have this discussion because, like everyone, I seek love and justice for all. I believe that is God’s will.

Mary Burson is a parishioner at St. James, Hendersonville, and a member of A Call To Listen committee.

On Toward Lambeth

Lambeth Palace, by Samuel Scott

"We appeal to the faithful of the Episcopal Church and the faithful in the wider, global Anglican family, to focus and celebrate our unity in the comprehensiveness of diversity. In union with Christian tradition through the centuries, we are willing to face challenges that precipitate struggle as a means towards reconciliation.

During our meeting we have been praying for a "daring charity and courteous understanding." With this intent and guided by the Holy Spirit, we go to the Lambeth Conference spiritually united and praying that God will sanctify our struggles and unify us for Christ's mission to a hurting world." From the House of Bishops, March 12, 2008 (Read More)

When We Disagree, by Gary Coffee

When conflict arises in a family, we all know that avoiding it is not a helpful conflict management strategy. In the same way, when there is conflict in the family of God, it is much better to talk about it than it is to avoid it. Certainly, issues of sexuality have caused conflict in the family of our Episcopal Church. Rather than avoiding the discussion, is it possible that the love of Christ is strong enough and compelling enough to more than hold us together when we experience conflict? We know that it is.

In I Corinthians chapter 5:14, St. Paul writes, “The love of Christ urges us on, because we are convinced that one has died for all; therefore all have died.” The love of Christ which indwells every one of us “urges us on.” This love keeps us from holding back when we need to be working together. It urges us on to find, to acknowledge and to preserve the unity that we have in Christ Jesus.

In thinking about this, I was reminded of the many “one another” references in The New Testament. We are called to “love one another with mutual affection; to outdo one another in showing honour.” (Rom. 12:10) We sing that renewal song, “They Will Know We Are Christians By Our Love.” We sing it, but is it so? Will we decide to love one another with mutual affection even when we disagree? Can we possibly outdo one another in showing honor when you think one way about an issue and I think another? With God’s help, we can.

In I Corinthians 12, St. Paul reminds us that we are all parts of the body of Christ. Using the analogy of a human body, he talks about how one part of the body cannot reject another part. He writes, “The eye cannot say to the hand, ‘I have no need of you,’ nor again the head to the feet, ‘I have no need of you.’” We don’t reject family members because we disagree with them. Neither can we reject each other in the Body of Christ when we disagree. Rather, as aggravating as it may be, we are called to “Bear with one another and, if anyone has a complaint against another, forgive each other; just as the Lord has forgiven you, so you also must forgive.” (Col. 3:13) St. Paul goes on to say, “Above all, clothe yourselves with love, which binds everything together in perfect harmony. And let the peace of Christ rule in your hearts, to which indeed you were called in the one body.” (Col. 3:14-15)

“Clothe yourselves with love.” When you and I are clothed with love, we are in synch with Christ in such a way that we tend to lay down our weapons. When we’ve laid down our weapons, then we can try and understand where persons are coming from whose understanding of God differs from ours.

Don't Panic, by Rick Lawler

So what would help us in our discussion of human sexuality as a Church? I’m assuming we all love God and seek God’s will. Something along those lines is the beginning. But it is clear well-meaning committed people can come to mutually exclusive conclusions regarding God’s will.

Gregory of Nanzianzus

So the next step is knowing ourselves and being true to ourselves. What has God said to us through scripture and experience? What has God revealed to us through our prayer and relationships? I think we need to be true to that whether it places us on the left, right, middle, or all of the above. We must speak our truth without fear. If we’re convinced God’s will is for the full acceptance and inclusion of Gay folks in the Church we need to live out that truth. If we’re convinced the Bible reveals gay people as somehow living an inherently sinful life we need to live out the implications of that truth. We must speak that truth without fear.

The questions that then arise are:

• Can we agree to disagree?
• Can we love our opposite-minded brothers and sisters and accept they have different perceptions of truth?
• Can we work together to follow and serve Christ in honest debate where necessary and dialogue where possible?
• Or is it time for some of us to leave?
• Or all the above?

I guess I don’t see the present issues as anything unusual for the Church. The Church has always struggled to articulate the faith. The Church has always had lots of different answers to essential questions. We’ve sometimes been able to stay together and sometimes had to let go and strike out in a different direction from our brothers and sisters. The mystery of the Church will survive, even if the particular form of the Church we have known changes, even dramatically.

I remember reading somewhere the idea that Gregory of Nazianzus with his fourth century eyes would have found the twelfth century Church of Francis of Assissi in some ways incomprehensible. Francis would likewise struggle with many aspects of Luther’s sixteenth century Church who would not know what to do with twenty-first century Christians. (Did I get those centuries even close?) But the point is we’re always changing and we need not panic because of the changes we are struggling with.

Maybe that’s my real sense of the way forward. First, don’t panic! Trust God to be with us all, through it all, in it all. Trust the Spirit to lead us even if we’re lead in different directions. How enormous that early split between Paul and the Jerusalem Christians must have felt. One branch died and another flourished. But does anything ever really die? Isn’t every death a seed going down into the ground to be raised by God into something else? So this is my thought. There’s nothing to be afraid of, don’t panic.

"For the Bible Tells Me So" --reviewed by Pattie Curtis

“Last week, I bought the gun. Yesterday, I wrote the note. Last night I saw your story on PBS and knowing that someday, somewhere, I might be able to go back into a church with my head held high. I dropped the gun in the river...”

When he read those words in the short email from a young gay man, PBS producer Dan Karslake, realized that he needed to create a film to “get the word out that God doesn’t hate gay and lesbian people; in fact, God loves them.” The result is For the Bible Tells Me So, a documentary film that explores the experiences of five families as they struggle to reconcile their Christian faith and accept their gay or lesbian children.

These five stories are told with tenderness and compassion. Deftly woven throughout are thoughtful commentaries by theologians on the historical teachings of the Church about homosexuality. As each family struggles to understand the references in the Bible that have long driven the conversation in the Church about homosexuality, the viewer is drawn in to their personal and powerful stories. This is a film about the overwhelming power of love to transform.

I had the privilege of meeting Dan Karslake as he was making this documentary. Throughout its production, Dan’s goal was to make a film that would move the discussion of religion and homosexuality beyond the polarizing and often stereotypical language which is too often used and has only the effect of diminishing any productive conversation. In this deeply moving film, he has succeeded. He has added a needed voice to the discussion of the place of homosexuality in the church.

The poignant stories told in this film draw the discussion of homosexuality from the abstract to the personal and concrete, giving faces and names to those who find themselves and their families caught in the ongoing debate and struggle within the church. These personal stories make this film a useful tool for any group wishing to have a meaningful and truthful conversation about the place of homosexuality in the church.

The Rev. Patricia Harris Curtis, Rector
St. John’s Episcopal Church
18 Jackson Street
Sylva, North Carolina 28779

A Copy of this film will be given to each parish choosing to use it in their own listening process.

Parish Dialogue, by Rob Field

Mosaic from Montecassino Abbey

When I came to St. Philip’s 10 years ago as rector, I quickly learned that we are a microcosm of the Episcopal Church as a whole. As I’m quick to remind folks here, the full spectrum of viewpoints is represented under our one roof.

This means that, after General Convention 2003 and the controversy over The Right Rev. Gene Robinson’s confirmation as Bishop of New Hampshire, we had a fairly urgent need for dialogue about “the issues.” My conviction was that we needed a structured forum of some sort, a safe place for self-described “traditionalists,” “progressives” and “centrists” to share with each other their beliefs about human sexuality and – perhaps – how they acquired them. After some anxious hand-wringing, I decided to organize a six-week event to promote this kind of dialogue.

Looking back, I can name a few things which I would do again under similar circumstances. I identified two men and two women in the parish I considered “bridge people” – folks with a track record of being slow to take sides or grind axes. They became the facilitators of the small groups, which were a central component of the dialogue. Then, I began to assemble articles, audio programs and videos which represented different sides of the issue. For every good argument made by a traditionalist, I looked for a counter-argument by a progressive and, if possible, a centrist. One of the best resources was a video curriculum produced by the Diocese of Atlanta. I don’t remember the title, but I do recall that it featured John Westerhoff. Of course, we had the usual ground rules for the small group discussions: speak only for yourself from personal experience, respect all members of the group, etc.

I was gratified that, at the end of the forum, the evaluations were uniformly positive. They indicated that a significant number of people had grown in their understanding of other people’s perspectives as well as their own. And, in the end, that’s exactly what I’d hoped our dialogue would accomplish. --The Rev. Rob Field

HOB Statement concerning Lambeth

ENS:
The House of Bishops, during its business session on Wednesday afternoon, March 12, at the Camp Allen Conference Center, Navosta, Texas, approved a statement concerning the upcoming Lambeth Conference.

Give to your Church, O God,
a bold vision and a daring charity,
a refreshed wisdom and a courteous understanding,
that the eternal message of your Son
may be acclaimed as the good news of the age;
through him who makes all things new,
even Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen. (1)

We, the House of Bishops of the Episcopal Church, approaching the forthcoming Lambeth Conference, are mindful of the hurt that is being experienced by so many in our own Episcopal Church, in other Provinces of our global communion, and in the world around us. While the focus of this hurt seems centered on issues of human sexuality, beneath it we believe there is a feeling of marginalization by people of differing points of view. Entering into Holy Week, our response is to name this hurt and to claim our hope that is in Christ. As the Lambeth Conference approaches, we believe we have an enormous opportunity, in the midst of struggle, to be proud of our heritage, and to use this particular time in a holy way by affirming our rich diversity. The health of such diversity is that we are dealing openly with issues that affect the entire global community. Thus, even as we acknowledge the pain felt by many, we also affirm its holiness as we seek to be faithful to our Lord Jesus Christ.

Even though we did not all support the consecration of the Bishop of New Hampshire, we acknowledge that he is a canonically elected and consecrated bishop in this church. We regret that he alone among bishops ministering within the territorial boundaries of their dioceses and provinces, did not receive an invitation to attend the Lambeth Conference.

We appeal to the faithful of the Episcopal Church and the faithful in the wider, global Anglican family, to focus and celebrate our unity in the comprehensiveness of diversity. In union with Christian tradition through the centuries, we are willing to face challenges that precipitate struggle as a means towards reconciliation.

During our meeting we have been praying for a "daring charity and courteous understanding." With this intent and guided by the Holy Spirit, we go to the Lambeth Conference spiritually united and praying that God will sanctify our struggles and unify us for Christ's mission to a hurting world.

(1) This Franciscan-inspired prayer was offered by our chaplains during this meeting of the House of Bishops.

Human Sexuality: Recent History of Conversation

WHERE DO WE STAND? – A Background Paper on Gay & Lesbian Inclusion in the Episcopal Church (Compiled by Susan Russell; updated 10/05)

SOME HISTORY: The Episcopal Church has been officially debating the issue of human sexuality, particularly as it applies to gay and lesbian people, since the General Convention of 1976 when resolutions passed by the Bishops and Deputies began to frame the parameters of the debate. In the intervening years resolutions have been passed and then amended as the church's position has evolved in response to the dialogue. In 1976, the General Convention asserted in a resolution that "homosexual persons are children of God who have a full and equal claim with all other persons upon the love, acceptance and pastoral concern and care of the Church." But there continues to be a wide divergence of opinion on just how we live out that understanding in the Church.

In 1991, at the General Convention held in Phoenix acknowledged its inability to resolve the complex issues surrounding human sexuality by means of the normal legislative process. The Convention opted instead for a process of continued study and dialogue across the whole church, with a report to be issued from the House of Bishops. That report, “Continuing the Dialogue,” was published in 1994 and is highly recommended as a resource for more detailed information.

While resolutions from General Convention are important aspects of our polity - the process through which we govern the church - they are generally perceived to be recommendatory and therefore lacking the force of a canon or law. The only canon to deal with the issue of homosexual orientation in any specific way was adopted in 1994:

"All Bishops of Dioceses and other Clergy shall make provisions to identify fit persons for Holy Orders and encourage them to present themselves for Postulancy. No one shall be denied access to the selection process for ordination in this Church because of race, color, ethnic origin, sex, national origin, marital status, sexual orientation, disabilities, or age, except as otherwise specified by these Canons." -- Title III, Canon 4, Section 1 of the Constitution and Canons for the Government of the Episcopal Church in the United States of America, p. 60

In 1996, the Court of Trial for a Bishop refused to hear charges filed against Bishop Walter Righter for ordaining a gay man living in a relationship. The court said there was no doctrine against such an ordination and that there is no canonical bar to gay and lesbian ordination in the Episcopal Church.

ACTIONS OF RECENT GENERAL CONVENTIONS

In 1997, the General Convention of the Episcopal Church, meeting in Philadelphia, APPROVED HEALTH BENEFITS FOR DOMESTIC PARTNERS, to be extended to the partners of clergy and lay employees in dioceses that wish to do so. It also voted to APOLOGIZE ON BEHALF OF THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH to its members who are gay and lesbian and to the lesbians and gay men outside the Church for years of rejection and maltreatment by the Church and affirm that this Church seeks amendment of our life together as we ask God's help in sharing the Good News with all people.

Meeting in Denver in 2000, General Convention approved the following resolutions: The IDENTIFICATION OF “SAFE SPACES” (A009), establishing a formal process for congregations to identify themselves as safe spaces for GLBT people; urging congregational CONVERSATION WITH YOUTH AND YOUNG ADULTS ABOUT SEXUALITY (A046); promoting DIALOGUE ON FIDELITY IN HUMAN RELATIONSHIPS (A080); and recommending that congregations engage in dialogue with the BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA REGARDING THEIR POLICY ON HOMOSEXUALS (C031).

Arguably the most influential resolution adopted in Denver was D039 “Human Sexuality: Issues Related to Sexuality and Relationships.” Passed overwhelmingly by a voice vote in the House of Deputies and by a 119-19 margin in the House of Bishops. An “8th Resolve” which called for the preparation of rites for inclusion in the Book of Occasional Services failed to pass by a narrow margin in both houses. However, this important resolution broke new ground by moving the Episcopal Church into conversations about relationship that transcend sexual orientation ... and set the stage for the 2003 General Convention in Minneapolis.

GENERAL CONVENTION 2003

What exactly was approved at General Convention 2003 regarding the Blessings of Relationships?

Resolution C051 – (* FINAL VERSION – Concurred)

Topic/Title: Rites: Blessing of Committed Same-Gender Relationships

Proposer: Diocese of Michigan

---

Resolved, the House of Deputies concurring, That the 74^th General Convention affirms the following:

1. That our life together as a community of faith is grounded in the saving work of Jesus Christ and expressed in the principles of the Chicago-Lambeth Quadrilateral: Holy Scripture, the historic Creeds of the Church, the two dominical sacraments, and the historic episcopate.
2. That we reaffirm Resolution A069 of the 65^th General Convention (1976) that “homosexual persons are children of God who have a full and equal claim with all other persons upon the love, acceptance, and pastoral concern and care of the Church”.
3. That, in our understanding of homosexual persons, differences exist among us about how best to care pastorally for those who intend to live in monogamous, non-celibate unions; and what is, or should be, required, permitted, or prohibited by the doctrine, discipline, and worship of The Episcopal Church concerning the blessing of the same.
4. That we reaffirm Resolution D039 of the 73^rd General Convention (2000), that “We expect such relationships will be characterized by fidelity, monogamy, mutual affection and respect, careful, honest communication, and the holy love which enables those in such relationships to see in each other the image of God”, and that such relationships exist throughout the church.
5. That, we recognize that local faith communities are operating within the bounds of our common life as they explore and experience liturgies celebrating and blessing same-sex unions.
6. That we commit ourselves, and call our church, in the spirit of Resolution A104 of the 70^th General Convention (1991), to continued prayer, study, and discernment on the pastoral care for gay and lesbian persons, to include the compilation and development by a special commission organized and appointed by the Presiding Bishop of resources to facilitate as wide a conversation of discernment as possible throughout the church.
7. That our baptism into Jesus Christ is inseparable from our communion with one another, and we commit ourselves to that communion despite our diversity of opinion and, among dioceses, a diversity of pastoral practice with the gay men and lesbians among us.
8. That it is a matter of faith that our Lord longs for our unity as his disciples, and for us this entails living within the boundaries of the Constitution and Canons of The Episcopal Church. We believe this discipline expresses faithfulness to our polity and that it will facilitate the conversation we seek not only in The Episcopal Church, but also in the wider Anglican Communion and beyond.

What does this resolution accomplish?

• It recognizes what we believe is one of the most distinctive features of Anglicanism: the ability to maintain unity without requiring uniformity. We are convinced that this resolution offers a way forward in the best spirit of Anglican comprehensiveness: recognizing that rites for blessing are and will be used by those who choose to offer them in response the pastoral needs of their constituency and providing room for theological consensus to emerge out of liturgical practice.
• We believe that the fuller inclusion of all the baptized into the Body of Christ is not an issue which will split the church but an opportunity which will move the church forward in mission and ministry – if we will claim it and proclaim it.
• We believe it is an opportunity for evangelism which will breathe new life into our work and our witness to those yearning to hear an alternative to the strident voices of the religious right who have for too long presumed to speak to the culture as representing Christian Values. We have Good News to tell and it’s time to get on with the business of telling it.

• No one is or will be compelled to bless same-sex unions in this church, but the church must also respect the theological judgment of those who wish to bless these relationships by providing such rites for the use of the church.
• It is true that many view this issue as fundamentally about the authority of Scripture, and therefore, central. At most, however, it is about the interpretation of Scripture, and if how we interpret Scripture is to split us apart, we are in for splitting on a whole host of issues.

· The larger question is whether or not this issue is so central to our common faith so as to split us apart. The answer is “no” according to the 2003 House of Bishops’ Theology Committee Report: [5.3] “We believe that disunity over issues of human sexuality in general, and homosexuality in particular, needs to be taken seriously by all members of the Church. And diverse opinion needs to be respected. But we do not believe these should be Church-dividing issues.”

What message is the Episcopal Church sending about sexual morality and traditional family values?

• The message we are sending about traditional family values is that those are the values that emerge from significant, committed human relationships, including, but not limited to, marriage.
• The message we are sending about sexual morality is that the expectations of fidelity, monogamy, mutual affection and holy love are the same for all Christians … gay or straight, bisexual or transgender.

Where’s “the theology?” What exactly does it mean for the church to give its blessing? (From the Claiming the Blessing Theology Statement, 2003)

“Blessing” is perhaps the most controversial word in the Church’s consideration of the treatment of same sex households in its midst. Because of this fact, we must take great care to be precise about what we mean when we use the word. The following are the building blocks for a theology of blessing: Creation, Covenant, Grace, and Sacrament.

Creation itself is the fundamental act of blessing. Creation is a blessing (gift) to humankind from God and humankind blesses (gives thanks to or praises) God in return. The Hebrew word for “blessing,” barak, means at its core the awesome power of life itself. A fundamental claim of the Bible in regards to creation is that there is enough, in fact an abundance, of creation, and therefore of blessing, to go around.

“Blessing” is a covenantal, relational word. It describes the results of the hallowed, right, just relationship between God and humankind. Blessing is what happens when God and humankind live in covenant. It is important to remember here that the relationships between human beings and the relationship between God and human beings cannot be separated. “Blessing” and “justice” are inseparable biblical concepts.

When we ask for God’s blessing, we are asking for God’s presence and favor. In Christian terms this favor is what we call “grace,” God’s disposition toward us that is not dependent upon our merit, but is a sure and certain gift to the believer in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

In our tradition, the Sacraments are the primary ways the grace/blessing of God is communicated to us (“a sure and certain means,” BCP, p. 857). The two “great” Sacraments “given by Christ” (BCP, p. 858) are Baptism and Eucharist. In them we see the two fundamental aspects of blessing: the blessing of life from God and the blessing of God for that life.

Five other rites are traditionally known as sacraments, but they are dependent for their meaning on the two Sacraments and are not “necessary for all persons.” A whole host of other actions in the life of the Church, and of individual Christians, are “sacramental” in nature, i.e., they mediate the grace/blessing of God and cause us to give thanks and praise/blessing to God.

In our tradition, priests and bishops have the authority to pronounce God’s blessing within the community of faith. They do so not by their own power, but as instruments of the grace (blessing) of God within the Church. Their authority to bless, too, finds its meaning in the two great Sacraments.

When the Church chooses “to bless” something it is declaring that this particular person or persons or thing is a gift/blessing from God and his/her/its/their purpose is to live in (or, the case of things, to assist in) covenanted relationship with God (and with all creation), i.e., to bless God in return.

To bless the relationship between two men or two women is to do this very thing: to declare that this relationship is a blessing from God and that its purpose is to bless God, both within the context of the community of faith. If the Church believes that same-sex relationships show forth God’s blessing when they are lived in fidelity, mutuality, and unconditional love, then this blessing must be owned and celebrated and supported in the community of faith.

=========================

Clearing up some questions:

Just what are we blessing when we bless a same-sex relationship?

We are blessing the persons in relationship to one another and the world in which they live. We are blessing the ongoing promise of fidelity and mutuality. We are neither blessing orientation or “lifestyle,” nor blessing particular sexual behaviors. “Orientation” and “lifestyle” are theoretical constructs that cannot possibly be descriptive of any couples’ commitment to one another. And every couple works out their own sexual behaviors that sustain and enhance their commitment. We don’t prescribe that behavior, whether the couple is heterosexual or homosexual, except to say that it must be within the context of mutuality and fidelity.

Isn’t marriage and same-sex blessing the same thing?

That they are similar is obvious, as is taking monastic vows, i.e., blessing a vocation to (among other things) celibacy. Each (marriage, blessing unions, monastic vows) grounds a relationship that includes sexual expression in public covenant which gives them “a reality not dependent on the contingent thoughts and feelings of the people involved” and “a certain freedom to ‘take time’ to mature and become as profoundly nurturing as they can” (Rowan Williams, “The Body’s Grace,” p. 63). The question remains as to whether “marriage” is appropriately defined as the covenant relationship between a man and a woman only, as is the Church’s long tradition. The Church must continue to wrestle with this issue. To wait until it is solved, however, in order to celebrate the blessing of a faithful same-sex relationship is pastorally irresponsible and theologically unnecessary.

Is same-sex blessing a sacrament?

We can say it is sacramental. Strictly speaking in our tradition there are only two Sacraments (Baptism and Eucharist). Five other rites are commonly referred to as sacraments because of the Church’s long experience of them. But in a sacramental understanding of creation, everything in creation has the potential to be sacramental—to mediate the presence/blessing of God. Priests and bishops “pronounce” blessing on those things the community lifts up as showing forth this blessing. The New Testament word for “blessing” is eulogein, literally “to speak well of.”

Sources

Eric B. Beresford, answer to “What would it mean for the Church to Bless Same-sex Unions?” (portions), Commission on Faith and Doctrine, Dialogue on Same-sex Unions, Anglican Diocese of New Westminster, pp. 13-190.

Walter Brueggemann, “The Liturgy of Abundance, the Myth of Scarcity,” in Deep Memory Exuberant Hope: Contested Truth in a Post-Christian World, (Fortress, 2000), pp. 69-75.

William L. Crockett, answer to “What would it mean for the Church to Bless Same-sex Unions?” (portions), Commission on Faith and Doctrine, Dialogue on Same-sex Unions, Anglican Diocese of New Westminster, pp. 20-21.

Leonel Mitchell, “”Baruk Attah, Adonai Blessing,” in “Theological Aspects of Committed Relationships of Same-sex Couples: Report of the Standing Commission on Liturgy and Music . . . for Discussion at the 73rd General Convention Meeting in Denver in 2000,” The Blue Book (Church Publishing, 2000), pp. 225-227.

Catherine M. Wallace, For Fidelity: How Intimacy and Commitment Enrich Our Lives (Vintage Books, 1999), especially chapter four.

Rowan Williams, “The Body’s Grace,” in Ourselves, Our Souls and Bodies: Sexuality and the Household of God, ed. Charles Hefling (Boston: Cowley, 1996), pp. 58-68.