Last week my denomination, the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) had its biennial General Assembly. The assembled ministers and elders (in equal numbers -- that's an important piece of our polity) made a large number of decisions, some of which give guidance to local congregations and clusters of congregtions called presbyteries, and some of which have more authority for the congregations. Some of their decisions now go to the presbyteries for ratification. In that latter category is a proposed change in our Book of Order to eliminate wording that some of us have always regarded as badly written as well as restricting marriage to "one man and one woman" and elevating sexual sins above other sins when discerning whether someone is able to be ordained as a minister, an elder, or a deacon.
I don't know what will happen in the presbyteries. I am in favor of the new language for a number of reasons. And that's not the decision that I'm most concerned about today. The decision that occupies my mind right now is the one General Assembly made to study the question of same-sex marriage, which effectively leaves ministers who reside in states where marriage equality is the law of the land in limbo -- the state says that these marriages are legal, but the church says that a congregation may not celebrate marriage between two people of the same gender. Which means that those who have been baptized and nurtured in a congregation may not have their most important relationships blessed by the very congregation that knows and loves them best.
I am not now, nor have I ever been, married myself. At this point in my life such an event is extremely unlikely. But I have observed many, many marriages from outside those relationships -- and those include a few same-gender marriages. I have observed some very healthy, spiritual, and loving marriages -- both heterosexual and homosexual. I have also observed many that seemed to me unhealthy, stifling, and destructive relationships. Same-gender marriage is no threat to heterosexual marriage -- heterosexuals have done a fine job of denigrating the spriritual nature of marriage without any help from their GLBT brothers and sisters!
For a long time now I have believed that the churches, synagogues, and mosques should get out of the business of being agents for the state when it comes to marriage. I think that, as is true in other nations, marriage ceremonies should all be conducted by the state, along with the marriage license, and that religious institutions may then decide which marriages merit the spiritual blessings of the congregations. I would leave this to the individual congregation, but then I have been existing happily as interim pastor with an American Baptist congregation for the last nineteen months ... so this particular portion of my plan wouldn't work in my own denomination. And I realize that this would not solve the problem for all ministers in states where same-gender marriage is legal but their denomination will not bless these unions.
My plan would also mean that one of the banes of my existence as a pastor, couples who want church weddings but who want no other part of the church, could be told that church weddings are only for those who are church members, because they demonstrate a congregation's love for, support of, and blessing toward a couple whom they know and love. I hope that it would also mostly eliminate the phenomenon that has grown exponentially since I entered the ministry 26 years ago: that of small attendance at the actual wedding ceremony and huge attendance at the reception -- the PARTY -- afterwards.
It seems to me that those -- especially politicians -- who yell loudest against "gay marriage" are often those who thumb their noses at the sacred nature of the marriage vows by betraying those vows in adultery. I think Jesus had something to say about such hypocrisy.
No comments:
Post a Comment