A Prophet in Pink Sneakers

"Burning Down the House!"

2012-03-11T06:32:00.002-04:00

"Burning Down the House!"

The Third Sunday of Lent

Revised Common Lectionary Reading: John 2:13-22 (The Inclusive Bible)

"Since it was almost the Jewish Passover, Jesus went up to Jerusalem. In the Temple, he found people selling cattle, sheep and pigeons, while money changers sat at their counters. Making a whip out of cords, Jesus drove them all out of the Temple - even the cattle and sheep - and overturned the tables of the money changers, scattering their coins. Then he faced the pigeon sellers: 'Take all of this out of here! Stop turning God's house into a market!' The disciples remembered the words of Scripture: 'Zeal for your house consumes me.' The Temple authorities intervened and said, 'What sign can you show us to justify what you've done?' Jesus answered them, 'Destroy this temple, and in three days time I will raise it up again.' They retorted, 'It has taken forty-six years to build this Temple, and you're going to raise it up in three days?' But the Temple Jesus was speaking of was his body. It was only after Jesus had been raised from the dead that the disciples remembered this statement and believed the Scriptures - and the words Jesus had spoken. While Jesus was in Jerusalem for the Passover festival, many people believed in him, for they could see the signs he was performing. But Jesus knew all people, and didn't entrust himself to them. Jesus never needed evidence about people's motives; he was well aware of what was in everyone's heart."

Our dear friend John does like to confound us! As nearly always our John has placed this story of Jesus, and what is referred to as "The Cleansing of the Temple," out of sync with the other three Gospel narratives of the event. Matthew, Mark and Luke place the event at the end of Jesus' ministry, whereas our dear friend John, has placed the event at the beginning of Jesus' ministry. There's great theological debate regarding which versions are the more accurate. Some side with numbers saying that the versions of Matthew, Mark and Luke placing the event at the end of Jesus' ministry is the more accurate time line. Others vehemently disagree and defend John's placement at the beginning of Jesus' ministry as being the appropriate time line. There are a handful of other theologians who say that there were actually two Temple Cleansing events enacted by Jesus and that John writes of the first event occurring at the beginning of Jesus' ministry and that the other three Gospel narratives are referring to the second Temple Cleansing event which occurred at the end of Jesus' ministry. Yeah, I kind of have a problem with that one: Jesus might have done this one time, but he would have never done it a second time! I also think that the event, in all likelihood, occurred at the end of Jesus' ministry not at the beginning. I don't hold this opinion based on grand theological evidence. Instead I hold this opinion based on John's literary style. John's Gospel is so different from the other three Gospels because, in my opinion, John was a story teller first and a theologian second. John wanted to tell a good story and as every good story teller knows, you take "literary license" in telling your version of the story because you want to tell a really entertaining story! You want to capture your audience's interest from the very beginning of your tale and I hold the opinion that is what John does with his version of events. This really isn't all that unusual. Especially for a writer of John's time. Scholars of every area of study know to take the recorded events of antiquity, even those from the most noted authors, with a grain of salt. The historian Josephus is a case in point. He was a contemporary of the author of the Gospel of John and although he is known as being a historian, he does what every author of this time does: re-arranges the information to suit his story line. Even in modernity this is a standard practice. Think of the movie epic The Ten Commandments. Hollywood did NOT use the Hebrew Scripture time line in the making of their movie. The events are in many instances out of sequence for the sake of making a better movie. That's why Hollywood adds a disclaimer to their movies saying "Based on actual events." John's narrative of the events of Jesus' life should carry the same notation: "Based on actual events." I know this knowledge is disturbing to Scripture purists and literalists. There are many who like to think that the Bible (and especially the Gospels) where written by the men named as the authors and that they picked up a feathered, quill pen and God Divinely took control of their hands and guided the writing of their words across the parchment. Unfortunately, no matter your view of the creation of the Bible, reality to some degree steps in. As in this instance, there are discrepancies between all of the Gospel narratives. Sometimes they are small discrepancies, sometimes large, however, they do exist so we must address them. I don't believe that the discrepancies are all that big of a problem. I think that as with all Scripture, these are stories meant to inspire the faithful not proof texts of events. With all due respect to Thomas, I am not a "Doubting Thomas." I don't need to put my hand into Jesus' side nor do I need to put my finger into Jesus' nail wounds in order to believe. It is from the teachings and life events of Jesus which I find inspiration and from which I draw spiritual strength, not the definitive answer regarding which time line of events is the more accurate. So, for me, it is the question "Why did this event occur and what significance and application can I draw from it to apply to my life" which holds importance.

It is in the process of answering this question that I base my belief that the event occurred at the end of Jesus' ministry as opposed to the beginning. This was an event of grand - monumental - importance. The actions of Jesus in the Temple were not a flippant occurrence. This event, when placed at the end of Jesus' ministry, holds such great importance because it becomes the legal basis for the arrest of Jesus and his eventual trial, torture, and execution by the state. With this event, Jesus violates the "Prime Directive" of the Roman Empire. He breaks the Pax Romana: The Peace of Rome. For a time period covering approximately 207 years, the Roman Empire justified its presence in the countries it occupied based on its propaganda that Rome, and Rome alone, maintained the peace of the world. If Rome was not capable of keeping the peace, there was not any legitimate reason for their occupation. That is why insurrections where so violently put down. The insurrectionists where not given a second chance. To be guilty of breaking the Peace of Rome carried a death sentence. Peace at the point of a sword. Or in the case of Jesus, peace by crucifixion execution. That's why I am more prone to accepting the event time line of the other three Gospel narratives as opposed to John's time line, because John's time line just don't fit with historical reality. That's also why I don't think that there were two such instances. Jesus broke the Pax Romana once, but it did not happen a second time. Jesus was fully aware of the possible consequences of his actions. I don't believe that Jesus wanted to die (the Gospel narratives attest to this given the words of his prayer prior to his execution wherein he asked of God that "this cup be removed from me"), however, there is no doubt from the Gospel narratives that Jesus was determined in his actions. The Gospels record that "Jesus set his face towards Jerusalem." He could not be dissuaded from his course of action. He purposely chose the time and place which carried the most impact on his expression of condemning injustice in all its forms, including imperial and religious injustice.

Although the traditional renderings of this passage are in regard to framing it as being a denunciation of Jesus in regard to business practices, I'm not convinced that is the case. I think there are multiple things occurring in regard to this passage. As referenced earlier, the Roman garrison in Jerusalem was ever ready to keep the Pax Romana at any cost. They were especially bristling for confrontation at the yearly time of Passover. This had historically proven to be the time of the year chosen by the discontent to give voice to their grievances against Rome and all that Rome represented. Such was the case that the higher governing authority for the region, who was answerable directly to Caesar himself, and who had his headquarters in the area north of Palestine in the region of Syria, would yearly send additional Roman troops to Jerusalem in order for the Roman presence to be more strongly represented during the season of Passover. In addition, because of the historical occurrence of disturbances during the Passover season, the Roman troops would daily march forth through the streets of Jerusalem in a show of Imperial might. This was not a simple parade. The Roman troops would march out from their garrison in full military regalia and their presence would cover the entire street from building to building leaving no room for anyone to pass by. If people did not get out of the path way of the marching phalanx of troops, the troops did not stop. The troops - en masse - would march over the unfortunate individuals who were not able to get out of the path way of the soldiers. This in itself was meant to send a visual message: Anyone who is in the way of Rome will be crushed by the military might of Rome.

Occurring simultaneously, are the acts of religious injustice taking place within the Temple confines. Contrary to popular belief, I'm not entirely convinced that the actions of Jesus in the "Cleansing of the Temple" are in regard to a blanket condemnation of all business affairs. Instead, I hold the opinion that the actions of Jesus (in light of his overall framing of his ministry as being one of addressing injustice in all its forms) are a direct confrontation with the unjust practices occurring as the Temple authorities have joined in partnership with the merchants who were plying their trade in the Temple area. This was a money making system for everyone involved - everyone that is excepting for the faithful and especially the faithful poor person. When an individual came to the Temple to offer a sacrifice, the individual was to bring an offering for sacrifice, in most instances this was an animal sacrifice although for certain occasions the sacrifices were grain offerings. The animals presented for sacrifice were required by religious law to be perfect in presentation. Think something along the lines of the winning animal at a country fair. The faithful could not present an animal for sacrifice which has any physical deformity. The animal had to literally be "without spot or blemish." The sacrificial system at the time of Jesus, however, was ensconced to take advantage of this religious legal loophole. In most instances, no matter how perfect in presentation was the animal brought to the Temple by the faithful, it was going to be rejected. This wasn't something up for appeal. The word of the Temple authority was final. The only alternative for the faithful was to purchase (at an exorbitant cost) an animal pre-approved for sacrifice which was ever so conveniently for sale within the Temple confines. The act of purchasing this pre-approved animal at the Temple gift shop, was not so simple a transaction. The transaction had to occur with only Temple approved coins. The Temple would not accept coins bearing any "graven image" and all Roman coins, as well as all coins from other localities, carried images of Caesar as well as images of other deities. So, before you could purchase your perfect animal, you first had to exchange your coins for the pre-approved Temple coins. Unfortunately for you, however, most especially if you were poor, this system was set up for everyone to make a tidy profit. The money changes did not ply their trade for free. There was a fee attached to their exchanging your coins for Temple approved coins. In addition, the Temple got a cut from the money changers. By the time your coins were exchanged, minus the money changers fee and the Temple's fee, what the faithful were left with was a deficit of the true value of their original coins. The faithful had less money to buy the more highly priced, yet Temple pre-approved, sacrificial animal. Everybody made money on this system, excepting of course, the poor faithful who went home all the poorer for being faithful.

In this instance, all the elements of "The Perfect Storm" become joined: 1) Jesus has "set his face towards Jerusalem" in a determined "Occupy the Temple" moment. 2) The Pax Romana - the Peace of Rome - has been violated. 3) Religious injustice has been, in a way which cannot be ignored, given a very public thumping. The Empire, the Temple and Jesus. Someone is going to win and someone is going to lose. From this moment on, this storm hurdles towards what seemingly is finality in the execution of Jesus.

We, however, as Paul Harvey would always say in his radio broadcasts, know "the rest of the story." It is not injustice which comes out the winner. The Resurrection is coming!

Think on these things during your Lenten season. There comes a time for all of us when we are faced with the opportunity of standing against injustice. Sometimes it's something simple like the ballot box. Sometimes it's much more difficult and we, as did Jesus, pray that "this cup pass from me," yet still make the arduous decision to confront the powers of injustice.

My prayer for us all is that we not lose hope! The Resurrection is coming!

Blessed Be

The Second Sunday of Lent

2012-02-28T07:10:00.001-05:00

If you're in the Boston, MA area, please join us at Metropolitan Community Church of Boston on Sunday March 4, 2012 at 6:00 PM where I will be preaching. My sermon for the Second Sunday of Lent will be titled "For Your Love!"

The First Sunday in Lent

2012-02-26T06:35:00.000-05:00

The Baptism of Jesus. (1300 C.E.)

The First Sunday in Lent

Revised Common Lectionary Reading

Mark 1:9-15 (Inclusive Bible)

It was then that Jesus came from Nazareth in Galilee and was baptized in the Jordan River by John (the Baptizer). Immediately upon coming out of the water, Jesus saw the heavens opening and the Spirit descending on him in the form of a dove. Then a voice came from the heavens: "You are my Beloved, my Own. On you my favor rests." Immediately the Spirit drove Jesus out into the wilderness, and he remained there for forty days, and was tempted by the Evil One. He was with the wild beasts, and heavenly beings looked after him."

*My apology, everyone, for not posting a reflection this week. I have been battling a cold and haven't been up to reading and writing. I will be posting next week. Blessings!

"Walking on Sunshine!"

2012-02-22T08:19:00.000-05:00

"Walking on Sunshine!"

Ash Wednesday

Mark 2:1-12 (Inclusive Bible)

Jesus came back to Capernaum after several days, and word spread that he was home. People began to gather in such great numbers that there was no longer any room for them, even around the door. While Jesus was delivering God's word to them, some people arrived bringing a paralyzed person. The four who carried the invalid were unable to reach Jesus because of the crowd, so they began to open up the roof directly above Jesus. When they had made a hole, they lowered the mat on which the paralyzed one was lying. When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the sufferer, "My child, your sins are forgiven." Now some of the religious scholars were sitting there asking themselves, "Why does Jesus talk in that way? He commits blasphemy! Who can forgive sins but God alone?" Jesus immediately perceived in his spirit that they reasoned this way among themselves and said to them, "Why do you harbor such thoughts? Which is easier, to say to this paralyzed person, 'Your sins are forgiven.' or to say, 'Stand up, pick up you mat and walk?' But so you all may know that the Promised One has authority on earth to forgive sins..." Jesus then turned to the paralyzed person..."I tell you, stand up! Pick up your mat and go home!" The paralyzed person stood up, picked up the mat and walked outside in the sight of everyone. They were awestruck, and they all gave praise to God and said, "We have never seen anything like this!"

Very nearly every theological treatise I have read regarding this section of the Gospel narrative places the focus of the story on faith, most particularly on the faith of the four friends of the paralyzed individual. However, as I read this passage it was not faith which was the paramount theme of the narrative. As I read this story, one sentence in particular stood out and became, for me, the focus of this story:

"Now some of the religious scholars were sitting there..."

As I wrote about in an earlier reflection ("I Put A Spell On You!"), Jesus had made Capernaum the base of his ministry. Jesus had left Capernaum to minister in neighboring towns and villages and as this scene opens, Jesus has returned to Capernaum. In his absence, word regarding the uniqueness of his ministry has filtered back to Capernaum and the people of the town are clamoring to see him. He has entered a private home where he is speaking to the throng of people when, suddenly and unexpectedly, a hole opens in the roof and a paralyzed individual, lying on a sleeping mat, is lowered through the roof opening into the midst of this crowd. Word of Jesus' ability to heal sickness had reached Capernaum and the four friends of the paralyzed individual seize the opportunity of placing their friend in front of Jesus in the hope of Jesus being able to offer physical healing to the paralyzed person.

What perturbs me about this story is WHY the four friends had to go to such extreme measures for their paralyzed companion: Their way was blocked because "...the religious scholars were sitting there." As a member of the clergy, it angers me to read these words in the gospel narrative. It angers me because, sadly, in so many instances, access to the Divine is blocked by the members of the religious-ocracy. Television evangelists who billow their own definition of sin from their electronic pulpits, all the while practicing the opposite in their off screen lives. Buying jet airplanes which they use to transport diamonds from Africa to the United States, conveniently not declaring them to either customs or the IRS. Preaching extreme hatred of same gender loving people while hiring same gender sex workers for personal gratification. Soundly proclaiming that "those who don't work, don't eat" while at the same time taking the Social Security money from widows. Teaching a false theology of prosperity based upon the taking of specific Scripture passages out of context, all the while building empires to themselves. While the world revolves carrying hurting, dejected, demoralized souls into deeper hurt and desperation; shamelessly, those who should be the ones helping them to find justice - whether that justice is physical, medical, financial, legal or spiritual - are, instead, "sitting there" blocking the path way to justice.

My theory, from the nuances of the Gospel narrative, combined with the historical theological view held prevalent in the particular day and time, suggests that the paralyzed individual could possibly have been suffering in a severe mental state which manifested itself physically, thus, contributing to the individual's paralysis. The theological dictate of the day (and one which in all likelihood was applied to the individual in the story from the same religious scholars who where blocking his path to healing justice) was that an individual's illness was a result of the individual having sinned. The person had violated religious laws thus allowing an evil spirit access to the individual and the result was physical illness. This theology is mentioned several times within the Gospels. At one point Jesus is pointedly asked, regarding the blindness of an individual, "who sinned that this man was born blind? Was it him or his parents?" The paralyzed person in the story was known in Capernaum. In a town of approximately 1,500 persons, the individual was someone who would have been known to most people. The person was also known to the religious scholars. One aspect of their jobs was to also act in a quasi-medical capacity. Again, this is also alluded to several times in the Gospels as Jesus occasionally instructs some individuals whom have been healed of physical problems to "go and show yourself to the priests." This is why the religious scholars are so incredulous when Jesus tells the paralyzed individual, "My child, your sins are forgiven." What the religious scholars did not understand is that their theology could have contributed to the individual's paralysis. Guilt is a heavy burden which can become debilitating. Self blame and self hatred are monumental obstacles for anyone to overcome. I think that Jesus realized this and this is why instead of telling the individual, "You're healed," he tells the person that their sins are forgiven. Jesus gives the person the justice which they needed most. He releases the person from the bondage of religious oppression. The person had become what they had been told they were: a sinner who was paralyzed because of their sin. Jesus gives the person release from this mental slavery which had entrapped the person's body.

Today is Ash Wednesday, the first day of the Lenten season. There will be many of us today who make decisions considering those things which we should abandon in order to help us on our spiritual journeys towards Resurrection. Perhaps instead of giving up chocolate for Lent, we should give up apathy and begin to stand up to religious oppression. Instead of giving up our favorite food or drink for Lent, maybe it's better that we give up prejudice, or bigotry. Maybe it's better for us to give up homophobia then to give up eating meat. If you want to make a Lenten vow, then may your vow to be to give up a life of ease. Give up being the person who is sitting - blocking access to Divine justice - and become the person who opens the whole in the roof of society so that those who cannot find justice on their own have your support in finding Divine justice.

My prayer for your Lenten observance is that you may find yourself becoming more spiritually attuned as you give of yourself in helping to meet the needs of others.

Blessed Be!

"A Love Story"

2012-02-12T05:48:00.000-05:00

The Gospel of St. John 15:12-13 (Inclusive Bible)

Jesus said to them, "This is my commandment: Love one another as I have loved you. There is no greater love than to lay down one's life for one's friends."

February 14th is the Feast Day of St. Valentine. We all know what that means: We buy cards, flowers and candy for those we love. We go out to eat at our loved one's favorite restaurant. We might go away to an extremely expensive hotel or resort. If we REALLY love the other person, we buy them jewelry! The more expensive the jewelry, the greater the degree of our love for the other person. Chubby winged angels carrying bows and arrows, heart shaped boxes of candy, a dozen roses and a big diamond: this is Valentine's Day.

Yeah. Not so much.

At least this was not the intent of honoring the day a priest of the early church was tortured and executed in Rome on February 14, 270.

St. Valentine exemplified for the church the definition of love: He stood up to the face of oppression, power, and injustice. He refused to back down even to the point of sacrificing his own life for others.

St. Valentine is the Patron Saint of engaged couples, bee keepers, those who suffer epilepsy and those who are prone to fainting, happy greetings, happy marriages, love, lovers, travelers, and young people. He is always pictured with birds and roses.

In all likelihood, Valentine lived sometime between approximately 220 or 230 C.E. and the time of his death on February 14 in the year 270 C.E. Because of his very early martyrdom in the church's history, exact details of his life do not exist. Archaeologists, however, are convinced of his existence because they found the buried remains of a church built around 300 C.E. which was constructed and dedicated to honor his deeds.

Valentine lived during a time of persecution of Christians by the Roman government. He became well known for his compassion and willingness to help anyone who came to him. He was known for not turning away anyone who sought his help. It didn't matter whether the individuals who sought his help were either Christians or non-Christians. All who came to him, he aided. His good deeds became too well known and the Roman authorities arrested Valentine for violating the laws which forbade aiding Christians. He was so well known that he came to the attention of the Emperor Claudius. Claudius, fascinated as to why someone would risk their life to aid those of the outlawed Christian sect, had him brought from his prison cell to meet him. Claudius, in talking with Valentine, began to like him and would frequently have lengthy discussion with Valentine. Valentine would most likely have saved his life based on this budding friendship with the Emperor, however, Valentine made a mistake which sealed his fate: He tried to convert the Emperor. The Emperor became so enraged that Valentine would try and convert him to Christianity, that he ordered Valentine's torture and execution. While imprisoned awaiting his death, the warden of his prison sought Valentine's aid in helping his daughter who had recently lost her eyesight. The story goes that Valentine prayed for the warden's daughter and her eyesight was restored to her. Apparently a relationship of some nature (no one knows if it was romantic in nature or not) developed between Valentine and the warden's now sighted daughter. On the night before his execution, Valentine asked to see the warden's daughter one last time before his death. but his request was denied. So, instead, he wrote her a lengthy letter and signed it "Your Valentine." It is upon this action that the tradition of sending a note (or card) to someone we care about is supposed to have been born.

What I find most fascinating about Valentine's story are the actual criminal charges against him and which for their violation he was arrested, imprisoned, tortured and executed by the state: He was found guilty of performing illegal marriage ceremonies.

Valentine's crime was performing the marriage ceremonies for those whom Rome decided to be unworthy of the right of being married: Christians. The Roman Empire, in its effort to try to eradicate Christians, declared that marriages occurring between either two Christians or between a Christian and a non-Christian to be illegal unions and anyone who officiated over the weddings of Christians was guilty of violating this imperial law; the penalty for which was torture and execution. As far as the Roman Imperial Government was concerned, Christians were not deserving of the right of having their unions recognized as valid. Christians, in the eyes of the Roman Empire, were sub-human and their joining in legal unions was not something for which they were worthy. Christians, to Rome, were vile and abhorrent. They were considered so because they were practitioners of incest and cannibalism. They were considered to be practitioners of incest because they called each other brother and sister and they greeted their brothers and sisters with a kiss telling their brothers and sisters that they loved them. They were considered to be cannibals because they ate the flesh and blood of their god/man during their religious meals. It was clear to the civilized Romans that Christians were an abomination and they did not want the Christians recruiting good, civilized Romans into their abominable lifestyles.

The Prefect of Rome promised the Emperor Claudius that he would be able to make Valentine renounce his faith, yet after extended degrees of torture, Valentine remained adamant in his refusal to do so. Seeing his various methods of torture ineffectual, the Prefect then resorted to having Valentine beaten with clubs. It was only after this too proved ineffectual did the Prefect give up his efforts to force Valentine to renounce his faith and ordered Valentine decapitation which occurred immediately. Valentine's beheaded body was buried outside of Rome and his grave site became the location of the church which was built in his honor and dedicated to his memory.

Sadly, the life, works, great deeds and ultimate sacrifice of Valentine, and many others whose lives were martyred for their obedience to the command of Jesus Christ to "love one another as I have loved you," is lost to most of North American Christianity. So many North American Christians carelessly throw around the word "persecution," and in doing so insult the thousands of women and men who lost their lives because they felt it more important to obey the teachings of Jesus Christ then to preserve their own lives. Valentine was tortured, clubbed, and beheaded. The Emperor Nero would impale Christians alive onto wooden spikes and then set them on fire to use them as human torches to light the garden at his Imperial palace. My own Quaker ancestors were persecuted by other Christians both in Europe and in North America. One ventured into Puritan New England were to be a Quaker was a crime. He was tied, spread eagle, to the spokes of a wagon wheel and the wagon was driven many miles to the border of the then colonies of Massachusetts and Rhode Island where he was unceremoniously tossed bloodied, bruised and broken into Rhode Island. Yet, North American Christians, ignorant of their own history, cry that they are persecuted because at a public football game, at a public high school, paid for by the tax dollars of every citizen, they are not given the privilege of elevating their religious expression above that of the other people of the community by saying a publicly broadcast prayer ending "in the name of Jesus."

Perhaps if the predominant expression of North American Christianity were aware of its own history, it's adherents would follow the example of Saint Valentine who was known for never turning anyone away who sought his help, non-Christians and Christians alike, and paid with his life for obedience to the teachings of Jesus Christ. Perhaps if the predominant expression of North American Christianity were aware of of it's own history, that they were persecuted with real, torturous persecution as a subjugated minority deprived of their life, liberty, property and even the right to marry all because of adhering to the teachings of Jesus Christ; the adherents would be not be so ready to do unto others as was done unto them. Sadly, even if they were aware of their own history, this would probably not be the case because they have the words and teachings of their founder, Jesus Christ, written out for them in their Christian Scriptures, yet they do not obey his words and teachings: "This is my commandment: Love one another as I have loved you."

My prayer is that this St. Valentine's Day as we rush about trying to find the perfect card, trying to buy the perfect gift, trying to buy the perfect dozen roses; that we - just for a moment - remember the life and sacrifice of the man for whom the day is named: Saint Valentine. May his life and good deeds be an inspiration to us and may we find the ability to try to follow his example and obey the teachings and commands of the one whose name we name: Jesus Christ.

Blessed Be!

"One Town's War on Gay Teens"

2012-02-09T06:31:00.002-05:00

If you are a regular reader of my blog, you know that I do not normally post links to articles, yet this is one that is well worth reading. The article, from Rolling Stone magazine, deals with the subject of gay teen suicide and it's correlation with the marriage of conservative politics and conservative Evangelical/Fundamentalist Christianity.
As you read the article, I encourage you to prayerfully allow the Spirit of God to speak to your soul. Have any of us contributed to this tragedy? Do we support politicians, political parties, and religious organizations whose hands are bloodied by the deaths of innocent gay teens? Does our silence contribute to this continued hatred of God's gay children?

One Town's War on Gay Teens

Prophets Gone Wild: Isaiah's Naked Truth

2012-02-05T07:41:00.002-05:00

Prophets Gone Wild: Isaiah's Naked Truth

The Fifth Sunday After Epiphany

Revised Common Lectionary Reading: Isaiah 40:21-31 (Inclusive Bible - Selections)

Do you not know? Have you not heard? Was it not told to you from the beginning? Have you not understood since the earth was founded? YAHWEH sits above the vaulted roof of the earth...YAHWEH stretches out the skies like a curtain, and spreads them out like a tent for humanity to live under! YAHWEH reduces the privileged to nothing and throws the rulers of the world into chaos! How can you say tribe of Leah and tribe of Rachael, "My destiny is hidden from YAHWEH! YAHWEH ignores my rights!" Do you not know? Have you not heard? YAHWEH is an everlasting God! YAHWEH is the creator of the ends of the earth. YAHWEH does not fail nor does YAHWEH grow weary! YAHWEH gives strength to the weary and empowers those who are powerless. Young women may grow tired and weary, young men may stumble and fall, but those who wait on YAHWEH find a renewed power; they soar on eagles' wings, they run and don't get weary, they walk and never tire.

"America is a Christian nation!"
Especially, in this election year, are we even more so told.
Do I believe that American is a Christian nation? Without a doubt!
As long as by the expression; "America is a Christian nation," you mean that America's expression of Christianity is mainfested in the form of America's de facto state religion, which is North American nationalist Christianity, than, yes, indeed, I do believe that America is a Christian nation! A hybrid expression of Christianity which is chock-a-block full of denigration of the other; bearing false witness against your neighbor; belittlement of the non-privileged; jingoism of a level seldom seen; nationalism of extreme expression; xenophobia which over rides the teachings of the founder of Christianity, as well as, the Scriptural mandate in regard to how "the stranger in your land" is to be treated; homophobia bound up in extreme sexual repression and a overwhelming, nearly pathological, need to hold onto with a death grip, heterosexual power; and racism, particularly in reference to the language used in regard to the President; along with a warrior/imperialism mentality (just to name a few) defines North American nationalist Christianity in regard to "America is a Christian nation."

If, however, you mean by "America is a Christian nation" that America is a nation state which strives to fully and completely embody the teachings of Christianity's founder, Jesus Christ, than my answer would of course have to be a resounding NO! The idea of Jesus is liked, it's just his teachings, commands to his followers, ethics and morals that get in the way. As long as "Jesus" is a blond haired, blue eyed facsimile of a heteronormative, North American, Anglo-Saxon, Protestant whose artist rendition picture hangs on Sunday School classroom walls and not, however, someone whose teachings and dictates we actually have to follow, then "American is a Christian nation." If, however, we are commanded, by Jesus, to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, shelter the homeless, release the captives from prison, give medical care to the un-insured, surrender our swords, and a plethora of other "socialist" ideas, then, no America is not a Christian nation. It's extremely interesting that the North American nationalist expression of Christianity which has as one of it's mantras "the Bible says..." and employs it as the holy, divine justification for every form of oppression of the other, will completely embrace the words of television evangelists and will give them precedence over and above the authoritative words and teachings of Jesus Christ as stated in the Christian Scriptures.

The Hebrew Scripture writings attributed to the prophet Isaiah declare the purpose of God's calling and commissioning of Isaiah's work as a prophet in it's opening verses "Comfort my people!" Isaiah begins his work at a time of great political and social turmoil. The nation-state of the Jewish people is being attacked and absorbed by imperialist and oppressive powers. The very identity of the Jewish people is at risk of being lost. The decisions of the government, however, are not decisions which are in the best interest of the people, they are, instead, decisions which allow those in power to hold on to their power. Sound familiar? Isaiah goes to the most extreme measures imaginable to try and convince the government of the injustice of their political decisions. For three years Isaiah walks the streets of Jerusalem completely and utterly naked. In the heat of summer. In the snows of winter. In the rain and in the dry seasons, he walks the streets of Jerusalem preaching his prophetic message: This is what will happen to the people, they too will be naked, hungry and wondering the streets homeless, he tells the government, if you don't stop your injustice.

It becomes very tiring being the oppressed, being the 99%, being a minority, being a person of alternate gender expression, being a same gender loving individual, being poor, being hungry, wondering from month to month how much longer you can continue to pay your rent, watching prisons fill at alarming rates while the prison industrial complex rakes in astronomical profits. You understand the words of Isaiah: "young women grow tired and weary, young men stumble." Isaiah must of felt the same way. I cannot imagine living three years wondering the streets homeless and naked preaching a message which is ignored. Isaiah was told that no one would listen to his words, that no one would believe him, yet he had to do it anyway. The words of God in regard to injustice must continue. It's the same today. Those who are on the receiving end of injustice are not heard. They are ridiculed and denigrated by politicians whose only aim is to hold on to their power. "Homosexuals are barbarians and need to be treated like barbarians." "Food stamps only empower welfare mothers and give them an excuse not to work." "Social Security is government theft." "I don't care what happens to poor people." "America is a Christian nation!"

"For I was hungry and you fed me; I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink. I was a stranger and you welcomed me; naked and you clothed me. I was ill and you comforted me; in prison and you came to visit me." Then the just will ask, "When did we see you hungry and feed you, or see you you thirsty and give you a drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in; or clothe you in your nakedness? When did we see you in prison and come to visit you?" Then the Chosen One will answer them, "The truth is, every time you did this for one of these, the least of my family, you did it for me!" Then the Chosen One will say to those on the left, "Out of my sight! I was hungry and you gave me no food! I was thirst and you gave me nothing to drink! I was a stranger and you gave me no welcome! I was naked and you gave me no clothing! I was ill and I was in prison and you did not comfort me nor did you come to visit me!" Then they in turn will ask, "When did we we see you hungry or thirsty, or homeless, or naked, or ill, or in prison and not take care of you?" The Chosen One will answer them, "The truth is, as often as you neglected to do this to one of these, the least of my family, you neglected to do it to me!" Jesus

Thankfully, there are those, like Isaiah, who do not give up! They tirelessly work (and often without reward) for the betterment of society. They live the words and teachings of Jesus. They find a supernatural renewed power, they are able to rise above and soar on eagle's wings, their strength does not fail them and they are able to run and not be weary, they are able to walk and never get tired. Like Isaiah, their strength comes from their Divine calling and commission - they serve others in the name of YAHWEH and they comfort God's people.

It doesn't matter whether America is a Christian nation or not. It matters what you do with the words of God in regard to speaking to injustice. It matters what you do with the words of Jesus in caring for the powerless. My prayer for you today is that instead of striving to make America a Christian nation, you strive to make yourself the living embodiment of the teachings of Jesus Christ.

Blessed Be!

A Blessing of Couples

2012-01-30T08:30:00.000-05:00

Metropolitan Community Church of Boston

The Metropolitan Community Church of Boston will be hosting a Couples Blessing at the service on Sunday Evening February 12, 2012 at 6:00 pm.

Join us as we celebrate God's blessing of all of our expressions of love in all of our relationships. Your husband, your wife, your partner, your significant other, your best friend!

The service will be officiated by the Rev. Robert Coats

The Metropolitan Community Church of Boston is located at Old West Church 131 Cambridge Street, Boston between Government Center (Green Line) and Charles/MGH (Red Line) subway stations.

"I Put A Spell On You!"

2012-01-29T09:50:00.005-05:00

"I Put A Spell On You!"

The Fourth Sunday After Epiphany

Revised Common Lectionary Reading
Mark 1:21-28 (The Inclusive Bible)

"They came to Capernaum, and on the Sabbath Jesus entered the synagogue and began to teach. The people were amazed by his teaching because Jesus taught with an authority that was unlike their religious scholars. Suddenly a person with an unclean spirit appeared in the synagogue. It shrieked, 'What do you want from us, Jesus of Nazareth? Have you come to destroy us? I know who you are - the Holy One of God!' Jesus rebuked the spirit sharply: 'Be quiet! Come out of the person!' At that the unclean spirit convulsed the person violently, and with a loud shriek it came out. All who looked on were amazed. They began to ask one another, 'What is this? A new teaching, and with such authority? This person gave orders to unclean spirits and they obey!' Immediately news of Jesus spread throughout the surrounding region of Galilee."

A lot goes on in Capernaum! The Gospel record concerning the life of Jesus would indicate that Jesus chose Capernaum as his home, as well as, the de facto base of operation for his ministry. It is from Capernaum that Jesus first asks of his disciples Andrew, Peter, James, John and Matthew to become his followers. It is in Capernaum that we learn that Andrew, Peter, James and John were fishermen by trade. We learn that Peter is married because it is in Capernaum that Jesus heals Peter's mother-in-law of an illness. We know from the Capernaum narrative that Peter and Andrew are brothers; that James and John are brothers and that their father is named Zebedee. We also know from the ministry activities regarding Capernaum that Matthew is an agent of the Roman Empire employed as a tax collector.

So, why Capernaum? Why this town of moderate size located along side the Sea of Galilee? There doesn't seem to be any indication in the Biblical record as to why Jesus makes the choice of Capernaum as his home and base of operation for his ministry, however, there are a few Biblical and non-Biblical clues which may allow us to speculate as to the possible rationale behind Jesus' reasoning for choosing Capernaum.

Extra Biblically, we know that Capernaum was, at the time of Jesus, the largest town in the region. Archaeologist have estimated that at the time of Jesus the population of Capernaum was most likely between 1,500 and 2,000 people. We also know extra Biblically, and from the Biblical narrative, that Capernaum was a town in which many of its inhabitants were connected with the fishing industry. The archaeological record seems to indicate that Capernaum was probably the center of the fishing trade for the Galilee region. As such, we can understand why Matthew was there as an Imperial agent: For religious as well as economic reasons, fish was one of the main dietary staples for the people of Judea. Fish was the major dietary protein source for the vast majority of people. It therefore follows that where there was industry, there would be money being made. Additionally, where there was money being made, Rome was there to collect their share in tax revenue, thus the presence of Matthew. In all likelihood, not only would Matthew have been there as the Roman tax assessor, there would have been some sort of contingent of Roman military, either in Capernaum itself or quartered nearby, in order to enforce Matthew's tax collection work as well as to protect the money collected as it was sent on its way to Rome. We also know from the archaeological record that Capernaum was the religious center for the region. Fishing, as an industry, made money and the benefactors donated part of their profits to the construction of an ornate Synagogue. If there were the first century equivalent of a "mega-church" (a large, ornate center of religious authority) the Synagogue in Capernaum would have been it for the Galilee region. It is to this Synagogue that Jesus enters on the particular Sabbath mentioned in the Lectionary reading and begins to teach.

One other Biblical clue as to why Jesus may have chosen Capernaum as his home and base of ministry, is the name of the town itself: Capernaum - the Town of Nahum or Nahum's Village. So, who was Nahum and why would he have been of any importance to Jesus and Jesus' very particular ministry? Theologically, Nahum is referred to as a "minor" prophet. Personally, I don't care for this theological application in reference to Nahum (or to any of the other prophets being referred to as "minor" either). The label "minor" is attached to Nahum, and other Hebrew prophets, owing to their limited space in the Scriptural narrative. The term "minor," however, at least to my ears anyway, no matter how unintended it's reference and purpose may be, suggests that the particular prophet was not of great importance. Nothing could be further from the truth! Every prophet, regardless of the space allotted them within the Scriptural cannon, is of no more or less importance than any other prophet! Their messages are of equal gravity and importance! We know that there were Hebrew prophets who are never mentioned by name in the Scriptural record. We know that some may only be mentioned in passing. We know that some were women (the prophet Anna). All, however, were called by God for very specific and very important reasons. An element of Nahum's uniqueness is his prophetic name. Nahum means "the comfort of Yahweh" and Nahum's unique and important prophetic messages was to "bring comfort and consolation" to the people of Judah. Nahum was a prophet at the time of another imperial, aggressor power which was subjugating the people of Palestine. At a time when all seemed hopeless, at a time when there didn't seem to be an end to the imperial oppression of Assyria, Nahum's message was to tell the people of Judah that Yahweh had not forgotten them in their distress and that Yahweh longed to comfort them. Nahum's message gave the people hope and as Nahum predicted, the Assyrian empire did fall and a time of some relative peace did come to the region. The unique ministry and message of Jesus mirrored that of Nahum - to bring the comfort and consolation of Yahweh to the people - and in that Capernaum was "the Village of Nahum," perhaps the significance of each one's unique message of comfort and consolation was reflected in Jesus' choice of home location.

It is the unique message and ministry of Jesus that is seen in the Lectionary reading: For the Judean region, Capernum represents a place of some relative economic business prosperity. It represents a place of regional religious importance. It is a place representative of Roman power and oppression. It is a microcosm for the entirety of the occupied Palestinian area. Yet, with its relative wealth, religious importance, and imperial power; for one man, there was not any comfort or consolation offered him, there was no release from the demons which afflicted him, until, that is, he encounters Jesus in the beautifully adorned Synagogue.

It was the belief at the time of Jesus that both physical, and what we refer to today as psychological problems, where the result of demonic oppression of an individual. The theological reasoning was that the individual had violated a religious law thus making themselves religiously unclean at which time an evil spirit possessed them and the possession was manifested either physically in the form of sickness or physical deformity; or it was manifest psychologically, as seems to be the case with the individual who meets Jesus in the Synagogue. I think it would be safe to assume in a town with a population of 1,500 to 2,000 people, a man who is shrieking, yelling and convulsing, would be somewhat well known to his neighbors and the other people of Capernaum. Yet, where is this man's comfort and consolation? He doesn't receive any from the wealth of the industry in the town. Business isn't the answer to his problem. He isn't comforted by the presence of an ornate religious edifice. The donations used to build the large and ornate Synagogue don't offer this man any relief from his malady. Obviously from the Lectionary narrative, the religious professionals who make their living at the Synagogue are not able to help this man. The narrative refers to their not having any authority. The power and presence of Imperial Rome does not offer this man any comfort or consolation. The taxes collected don't go into offering this man medical or psychological help. This man has been separated from his community by his psychosis. Something completely beyond his control, but something for which he is held at fault, causes him to be ostracized from all others. Jesus, however, offers this man the comfort and consolation of Yahweh and restores this man to mental and community wholeness. This man receives mental health justice from the work and words of Jesus.

My prayer this day is that we consider who in our communities, for reasons beyond their control, do we ostracize? Who is homeless and without warmth because business and government has failed them? Do we comfort and console them with the comfort and consolation of Yahweh? At whom do we point accusing fingers and label with the ugly and ostracizing term of being "demon possessed?" Are we not called as those who name the name of Christ to follow the example of our leader? It is our commission to restore ones such as these to the community. It is our Divine commission to ensure that we are offering the comfort, consolation and justice of Yahweh to all.

Blessed Be!

We Will Survive!

2012-01-17T15:18:00.000-05:00

‎"We Will Survive"

Metropolitan Community Church of Boston is offering a five week Bible study focusing on how the Bible came to be; its formation and history. We will take a queer lens to infamous passages used against LGBTQ people and discuss how we have survived these interpretations. This series of classes is being taught by Rev. Robert Coats. It is free and open to the public. Everyone is welcome to attend any or all of the classes.

The Classes run consecutively Sunday afternoons Jan. 22, Jan. 29, Feb. 5, Feb. 12, Feb. 19 from 3:45pm - 5:00pm.

Rev. Robert will also be preaching at our 6:00pm service on January 22nd. His sermon title will be "The Fishin' Hole!"

If you are unable to attend our Bible study, but you know someone who might be interested, please feel free to share our invitation!

MCC Boston is located at Old West Church 131 Cambridge Street, Boston, MA between Government Center and Charles/MGH subway stations.

"Can You Hear Me Now?" God

2012-01-16T05:59:00.002-05:00

The Second Sunday After Epiphany

Martin Luther King Day

Revised Common Lectionary Reading
1 Samuel 3:1-10 (Inclusive Bible)

Now young Samuel was in the service of YHWH under the priest, Eli. In those days, the voice of YHWH was rarely heard - prophecy was uncommon. One night Eli, whose eyes had grown so weak that he could no longer see, was sleeping in his bed. The lamp of God had not gone out, and Samuel was sleeping in the Tent of Meeting, near the Ark of the Covenant. Then YHWH called to Samuel. Samuel answered, "Here I am!" and ran to Eli saying, "You called me! Here I am!" Eli said, "I didn't call you. Now go back to sleep." Samuel went back to sleep. A second time YHWH called Samuel, and he got up and went to Eli. "Here I am!" Samuel said, "You called me!" Eli repeated, "I did not call you. Go back to sleep." At that time Samuel had not encountered YHWH, and the word of YHWH was had not been revealed to him. YHWH called Samuel a third time, and Samuel got up, went to Eli, and said once more, "Here I am! You called me!" Then Eli realized that YHWH was calling the boy. So he said to Samuel, "Go back to sleep, and if you are called, say, 'Speak, YHWH, for your servant is listening!'" So Samuel went back to sleep. And YHWH called, "Samuel! Samuel!" And Samuel replied, "Yes, YHWH, I am listening!"

Beyond this, I am in Birmingham because injustice is here. Just as the eighth-century prophets left their little villages and carried their "thus saith the Lord" far beyond the boundaries of their hometowns; and just as the Apostle Paul left his little village of Tarsus and carried the gospel of Jesus Christ to practically every hamlet and city of the Greco-Roman world, I too am compelled to carry the gospel of freedom beyond my particular hometown. Like Paul, I must constantly respond to the Macedonian call for aid.
Moreover, I am cognizant of the interrelatedness of all communities and states. I cannot sit idly by in Atlanta and not be concerned about what happens in Birmingham. Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly affects all indirectly. Never again can we afford to live with the narrow, provincial "outside agitator" idea. Anyone who lives inside the United States can never be considered an outsider.
You deplore the demonstrations that are presently taking place in Birmingham. But I am sorry that your statement did not express a similar concern for the conditions that brought the demonstrations into being. I am sure that each of you would want to go beyond the superficial social analyst who looks merely at effects and does not grapple with underlying causes. I would not hesitate to say that it is unfortunate that so-called demonstrations are taking place in Birmingham at this time, but I would say in more emphatic terms that it is even more unfortunate that the white power structure of this city left the Negro community with no other alternative.
The Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Letter From Birmingham Jail

When I reflect in this blogg in regard to my having intimate knowledge and experience in reference to North American expressions of Evangelicalism and Fundamentalism, many people assume that my knowledge is limited and anecdotal. This is not the case. Throughout my existence in the American South East (covering the geographical area from Washington, D.C. south to Florida and west as far as Texas, as well as experiences outside this region to include Oklahoma, California and New York state) my knowledge and experience, regarding the North American expressions of Evangelicalism and Fundamentalism, is vast and extensive!

In my past, as I struggled with my same gender sexuality, it was Mel White (I provide a link to his website, Soul Force, in my blogg under the heading: LGBTQ Affirming Resources) and his books (What the Bible Really Says About Homosexuality, Stranger at the Gate and Religion Gone Bad) who, more than any other person, propelled me towards understanding who I was as God created me to be; which, in turn, gave me the strength to come out, attend Divinity School and to begin my work ministering to God's Lesbian, Gay, Bi Sexual, Transgender and Queer people. Much of the reason why Mel's books were so effective in speaking to me, was that my experience so mirrored his own. As Mel wrote about his experiences in Evangelical circles, it was as if we had been in the same locations at the same time. When he wrote about his experiences with specific Evangelical ministries and the personalities which drive those ministries, I knew what he wrote was true and accurate because they had very much been my experiences. Nearly all of the Evangelical ministries of which Mel wrote, I had, in some capacity either as a participant, volunteer or as a paid employee; been intimately associated. I had attended their conferences, bought their books, volunteered at their seminars and crusades, sung in their choirs, donated my time and money to their causes, took their classes, bought their tapes, had their autographed works (which in most cases had been ghost-written by Mel), and counseled their followers. Just prior to my becoming familiar with Mel and his books, I was working as a paid Christian Counselor at the television network of one very popular mega-televangelist (of whom, Mel writes of extensively in his books having had personal contact and involvement with the televangelist). In my employment for this individual's television network, I met with, either in person or, most frequently, via telephone, individuals who sought answers to their spiritual question. My last day at this job, I was in the midst of a telephone counseling session with a man who had called saying that he had prayed with the televangelist who that day, as occurred on many days, had a "Word of Knowledge" regarding individuals who, as they were praying with him via the television, were being "freed from the bondage of homosexuality" and were being "delivered from the demons of homosexuality." The man on the telephone said that he had "claimed the Word of Knowledge for himself," yet nothing had happened. He still felt the same sexual desires as before. He wanted to know, among other things, why he had not been freed from his homosexuality? I spent nearly three hours on the telephone with this man, giving him every bit of advice I could muster. I read passages of Scripture to him, I prayed with him, I spoke with him at length, and all the while I was hating myself because I was such a fraud. I was identical as the man who was calling. I was asking the same questions. I had prayed all the prayers, bought all the books, attended all the seminars and conferences, and had even been through three years of "conversion therapy" (praying away the gay), yet, like the man on the other end of the phone, I also wondered why nothing had changed in me? Where was my miracle? All the advice I gave the man, all of the Scripture passages I read to him, all of the prayers I prayed with him, were absolutely meaningless. My sense of frustration at being such a fraud was so overwhelming that I literally, in mid sentence, hung up on the man. I got up from my desk, I went to the time clock and clocked out, I went home and I never returned there again.

I believe wholeheartedly that my finding Mel's Soul Force website was a Divine appointment. In addition to my discovery being the beginning of my journey towards spiritual freedom and wholeness, it was also through Mel's writings that I discovered the words and works of Dr. King. In my Evangelical/Fundamentalist spiritual upbringing, the theological idea of there being a Social Gospel was ridiculed and denounced as a fraudulent theology, as well as was Dr. King who I frequently heard referred to in disparaging terms both alluding to his personal integrity as well as his "non-Christian" belief system. It was, however, when for the first time I read Dr. King's Letter From Birmingham Jail, that I literally experienced a spiritual epiphany. I was shaken to my soul as if I was, like young Samuel, hearing God calling for the first time and also like Samuel, my response to the voice of God was, "Yes, God, I am listening!"

In most Biblical reference works, as well as in most sermons regarding this passage from the Hebrew Scriptures of Samuel and Eli, the emphasis is placed on what is occurring with Samuel and how he did not recognize the voice he heard calling him as being the voice of the Divine. As you well may imagine, however, I depart from this traditional reading, for although Eli, the Priest, is most usually praised for giving Samuel guidance in helping him respond to the voice of God, in total Scriptural referencing of Eli, I find this man most troubling. I find Eli, as someone who was a professional clergy person, not an individual to be praised. Eli is a Priest who can not hear the voice of God. The message Samuel receives from God is not for Samuel, it is for Eli and his two sons, who were also Priests. Eli and his two sons profited from injustice. They were stealing from the offerings which people brought to be sacrificed. This was an injustice against the people who worked hard to provide costly sacrifices, which were not offered up on behalf of the people to God, but were instead used to enrich the lives of Eli and his two sons. Eli had become so fat, literally, eating the rich and choicest of the sacrifices stolen by his two sons, that later in the narrative Eli falls off of a stool and breaks his neck. Eli is sadly representative of many professional clergy. He had become spiritually deaf. He could not hear the voice of God. He had profited from injustice. Like Eli, and like the men to whom Dr. King writes in his Letter From Birmingham Jail, a great many of the clergy, including many who lead the predominant expressions of North American Evangelicalism, have become fat off of the sacrifices of the faithful. Cathedrals made of glass, television networks, private airplanes, mega-churches, diamond mines, racing horses, and Universities (which are monuments to individuals), stocks, bonds and inflated bank accounts have all been bought at the price of injustice. More and more money must be raised to keep these monuments afloat and this is done by ridiculing and demonizing the other - the marginalized. Whether it is demonizing those who cannot speak English, or those who do not have the appropriate papers which allow them to work, or those whose expression of faith is different from that expressed by North American Evangelicalism and Fundamentalism, or, those who are in love with someone else of their same gender; it is at their expense - it is by the high price of injustice - that the pockets of many are lined with wealth.

As Dr. King wrote: "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly affects all indirectly." If you imagine that you are safe from injustice, that your expression of faith is the right one, that your expression of love is towards the right person, that you speak the right language; you are sadly mistaken. You are scarred with the same sword of injustice as marks the lives of those against whom you preach. Your scars may not be visible, but like Eli, as you turn a blind eye to injustice, your spiritual scars multiply.

My prayer for us all this day is that as we remember the great work of Dr. King and the high price he paid for the cause of justice, that we will pray to God that we never become so deaf to the cries of injustice that we become like Eli and can no longer hear the voice of God calling to us!

Blessed Be!

"We Three Kings!"...Yeah...Not So Much

2012-01-08T06:42:00.004-05:00

"We Thee Kings!"...Yeah...Not So Much

The Epiphany

Revised Common Lectionary Gospel Reading
Matthew 2:1-12 (Inclusive Bible)

After Jesus' birth - which had happened in Bethlehem of Judea, during the reign of Herod - astrologers from the East arrived in Jerusalem and asked, "Where is the newborn ruler of the Jews? We observed his star at its rising and have come to pay homage." At this news Herod became greatly disturbed, as did all of Jerusalem. Summoning all the chief priests and religious scholars of the people, he asked them where the Messiah was to be born. "In Bethlehem of Judea," they informed him, "Here is what the prophet has written: 'And you, Bethlehem, land of Judah, are by no means least among the leaders of Judah, since from you will come a ruler who is to shepherd my people Israel.' Herod called the astrologers aside and found out from them the exact time of the star's appearance. Then he sent them to Bethlehem, after having instructed them, "Go and get detailed information about the child. When you have found him, report back to me - so that I may go and offer homage, too." After their audience with Herod, they set out. The star which they had observed at its rising went ahead of them until it came to a standstill over the place where the child lived. They were overjoyed at seeing the star and, upon entering the house, found the child with Mary, his mother. They prostrated themselves and paid homage. Then they opened their coffers and presented the child with gifts of golf, frankincense and myrrh. They were warned in a dream not to return to Herod, so they went back to their own country by another route.

Christianity has a predilection for sanitizing things. Stories, people, events; they like to clean them up and dust them off in order to make them better fit the "company line." Some things which you'd image that Christians would like to sanitize, instead they glorify: violence, death, destruction, and hell are big on the glorification lists; most especially if they can be tied in with the perceived "Judgement of God!" then there is orgasmic jubilation at the violence, death, destruction and hell meted out upon the deserving sinners! The death of Jesus is glorified, yet the instrument of his torture and death is sanitized. The bloodier and more violent the images of Jesus' death, the better. The cross itself, however, a brutal instrument of execution by an invading imperial power, Christians make of gold, encrust with jewels and hang around their necks where people "Ooh!" and "Ahh!" over them saying things like "Oh, what a pretty cross!" Anything perceived to be associated with human sexuality (which, according to most Christians, is dirty and sinful) is always sanitized (unless, of course, it has to do with same gender sexuality then it is degraded and vilified with a sanctimonious passion which borders on fixation), thus, no matter how bloody, bruised and broken we make Jesus appear in popular images; we must always cover his genitals! It doesn't make any difference that both the Christian Scriptures, as well as historical accounts of Roman crucifixions, describe the condemned individuals as being killed without clothing (this was an added element of Roman crucifixions which served to even further humiliate the executed), Jesus, however, must always wear a nice, neat, white loin cloth. It's the same with the story of the birth of Jesus: Instead of a dark, dung filled, cave-like, lean-to which was most likely what the "stable in Bethlehem" actually was (based on historical and archaeological evidence); instead the scene is sanitized: There's no dung, the animals are not behaving in an animal-like fashion, instead they are all conveniently quiet and mesmerized by the baby Jesus. There are not any signs of a woman having just given birth, instead in all of Christianity's imagery, Mary is kneeling next to the baby Jesus, dressed in spotless white, with her head modestly covered with a blue veil and surrounded by a golden halo. I suppose Mary must have also remembered to bring formula and bottles for feeding the new born baby Jesus because there is no way under heaven that Christianity would ever allow the Mother of God to have breast fed the baby Jesus!

The narrative relating the appearance of the Magi is one such religiously sanitized story. There were individuals known as Magi. They could very well have visited Jesus, Mary and Joseph. In all likelihood, if they did visit them and if they did bring gifts, the ones mentioned in the Gospel narrative would have coincided with the religious practices of the Magi. Otherwise, all else commonly held in Christianity in relation to these individuals is complete and total fantasy having no basis in Scripture and virtually no basis in any historical fact:

They were not kings. The Magi were observant of a religious system combing elements of science, mysticism and theology (both their own and those elements borrowed from other's and incorporated into their own religious paradigm). In addition to astrology, they were practitioners of magic arts (thus the reference in their title, Magi), which was specifically forbidden in the Jewish law code as well as in traditional Christianity. The gifts mentioned in the Scripture passage of presenting "gold, frankincense and myrrh" were mystical/magical gifts used in their worship practices to indicate that they held the birth of Jesus to be equal in importance to that of a person of royalty (gold), incense in the same way incense is used in many worship traditions (frankincense), and that Jesus' birth held unique importance in that he was an anointed individual, as well as, this could have also been a prophetic image reference of a future anointing possibly including at the time of his death wherein specific funeral spices were used to prepare his body for burial (myrrh).

The notion that there were three Magi is pure speculation based solely on the Christian Scripture reference of three specific gifts. There could have been more than three, or even as few as two Magi. We only know there was more than one because the plural is used in referencing them.

The Magi did not appear at the Bethlehem stable at the same time as the shepherds although popular creche images huddle the Magi in alongside the visiting shepherds. As is specifically mentioned in the Scripture passage, they visit the family of Joseph while Mary, Joseph and Jesus are residing in a house not the stable used at the time of Jesus' birth.

In all probability their appearance was not any resemblance to the images used in the Christmas creches of there being one who was white, one who had an olive skin tone and one who was African. Those images are based on fictional accounts of their visit. They, in fact, came from the area which in modernity is the area of Iran and Iraq. The individuals who appeared at the house where Joseph, Mary and Jesus were residing in Bethlehem would have, in all likelihood, have appeared, in skin pigmentation and hair color, in resemblance to the individuals with whom the United States has been at war with in Iraq and Afghanistan for the past ten years. Additionally, their religious belief system employed the use of bodily piercings and tattoos as elements of their worship, both of which are forbidden in the Jewish law codes and, in much of Christianity, denounced as "sinful."

Lastly, we know historically, there there is a possibility that one (or more) of the Magi could have, in fact, genetically been women. Their religious system allowed for women to be practitioners of their faith, however, those women who were practitioners of their religious system, were women who lived their lives, in all outward appearance, as if they were men including the wearing of clothing reserved for men as well as making use of false beards. This historical fact was mentioned in a 2007 report issued by none other than the august religious person, the Archbishop of Canterbury, in which the Archbishop's office explained that the singing of the traditional Christmas carol "We Three Kings!" was a theological fallacy.

You can see why Christianity felt the need to sanitize the story of the Magi: Having tattooed, pierced, genetically born women who dressed and appeared as men, who practiced astrology and magic, show up at the birth of Jesus, presenting him with mystical and magical gifts, is not going to fly either in the Vatican or in the local Southern Baptist Church! It is also why, among all of the Christmas story characters, I can see myself in these persons. They would not have been accepted by traditional Judaism, nor would they be accepted by traditional Christianity. Their appearance, regardless if they were genetically born as women or not, is not that of the heteronormative, power majority. Nothing about the "life style choice" of these individuals would be accepted of, or approved of, by traditional Christianity, yet here are these wonderful people who recognize the uniqueness of Jesus and pay homage to him.

When these unusual appearing individuals show up on the door step of Joseph and Mary, they are not turned away. They are welcomed into Joseph's and Mary's home. A lesson in hospitality and acceptance lost on traditional Christianity.

My prayer this day for all of my Gay, Lesbian, Bi Sexual, Transgender and Queer family is that you may find yourselves reflected in the appearance of the Magi. May you know that although traditional religious systems may turn you away, you are welcomed in by Jesus and his parents!

Blessed Be!

"...Two Turtle Doves and a Partridge in a Pear Tree!"

2012-01-01T06:03:00.005-05:00

"...Two Turtle Doves and a Partridge in a Pear Tree!"

The First Sunday After Christmas

Revised Common Lectionary Gospel Reading

Luke 2:21-40 (Inclusive Bible)

"When the eighth day arrived for the child's circumcision, he was named Jesus, the name the heavenly being had given him before he was conceived. When the day came for them to be purified, as laid down by the Law of Moses, the couple took Jesus up to Jerusalem and presented him to God. For it is written in YAHWEH's Law, 'Every first born heir is to be consecrated to YAHWEH.' They likewise came to offer a sacrifice 'a pair of turtle doves or two young pigeons,' in accord with the dictates of the Law of our God. Now there lived in Jerusalem a man named Simeon. He was devout and just, anticipating the consolation of Israel, and he was filled with the Holy Spirit of YAHWEH. She had revealed to Simeon that he wouldn't see death until he had seen the Messiah of YAHWEH. Prompted by Her, Simeon came to the Temple; and when the parents brought in the child to perform the customary rituals of the Law, Simeon took the child in his arms and praised God saying, 'Now, O God, you can dismiss your servant in peace, just as you promised; because my eyes have seen the salvation which you have prepared for all the peoples to see - a light of revelation to the Gentiles and the glory of your people Israel.' As the child's mother and father stood there marveling at the things that were being said, Simeon blessed them and said to Mary, the mother, 'This child is destined to be the downfall and the rise of many in Israel, and to be a sign that is rejected, so that the secret thoughts of many may be laid bare. And a sword will pierce your heart as well.' There was also a woman named Anna, the daughter of Phanuel, of the Tribe of Asher, who was also a prophet. She had lived a long life, seven years with her husband, and then as a widow to the age of 84. She never left the Temple, worshiping day and night, fasting and praying. Coming up at that moment, she gave thanks to God and talked about the child to all who anticipated the deliverance of Jerusalem. When the couple had fulfilled all of the prescriptions of the Law of YAHWEH, they returned to Galilee and their own town of Nazareth. The child grew in size and strength. He was filled with wisdom, and the Grace of God was with him."

Two of my great-grandfathers were Baptist ministers, both of whom, due to extreme personal hardships, abandoned the church and turned their backs on Christian ministry. Both of their wives had died: One in child birth, the other during an influenza epidemic. Both were beyond reconciliation with their grief. Both abandoned their faith saying that they would not serve a God who would allow their wives to die. One became an alcoholic and went on to eek out an existence as a not too successful house painter, the other became a farmer of some very small degree of success just scraping by a subsistence existence. One was the father of my maternal grandmother, the other was the father of my maternal grandfather. Although both had been ministers, their children (who would later in their lives meet, fall in love and become married) had never entered a church until well into their adult lives.

I often worry that I will follow in the foot steps of my great-grandfathers in that circumstances beyond my control my present me with no alternative other than to abandon ministry. I don't have any desire to abandon ministry, however, making a living as an open Queer minister whose ministry is to the Lesbian, Gay, Bi Sexual, Transgender and Queer community; is very nearly an economic impossibility. My work is full time plus, however, my pay is less than part time. It's not that the people to whom I minister are cheap; it's that they just don't have the money to pay me any more than they already pay. The myth that gay people have lots of disposable income, is another heteronormative fantasy. Very nearly all of the LGBTQ people to whom I minster are "middle class" at best, living pay-check-to-pay-check with very little disposable income. When I am confronted with asking myself, as happens with frequency, "How am I going to pay my rent this month?" I have a great understanding as to how my great-grandfathers must have felt and why they made the decisions they made.

In trying to find a way to make a living as an open Queer minister, I have interviewed with several denominations which present themselves as being "open and affirming" denominations, that is, denominations which welcome LBGTQ people into their churches and which allow for open gay people to serve in ministry. One denomination told me that I am too old to become part of their denomination. They told me that their cut off age for bringing in new ministers is 50 years old and that since I am 50 I had reached that cut off age, so, I am not eligible to be considered for ministry in their denomination. One denomination told me that I am "too gay" saying that before they could consider making me a minister in their denomination, I would need to demonstrate my ability to "reign in the gay thing" because, according to them, I would "offend many of [their] straight members." One denomination told me that they "didn't want the face of their church to be another middle age, white, gay man." One denomination told me that I "wouldn't relate to young people." So, I became left again asking myself the question "How long can I continue to work as a full time Queer minister to LGBTQ people when I cannot financially afford to do so?"

If I were younger and had the physical ability to do so, finding an outside source of income would not be problematic. Unfortunately, because I have a partial physical disability, I cannot both work full time and minister full time. I can do one or the other, but not both. I do have another option (which is the one most frequently recommended to me by others) and that is going back into the closet. Doing so would allow me to minister full time in any number of churches. As long as I remain silent in regard to my same gender sexuality and I don't speak openly in any affirming way regarding other same gender loving individuals, the doors to full time ministry are open wide for me to walk through. As one straight minister told me, "I've never preached a sermon on my being straight. I've never preached a sermon telling the people of my church to be proud that they are straight. So, why is there any need for you to preach a sermon about being gay or to preach a sermon telling people to be proud for being gay?"

I have one advantage over my great-grandfathers: Hope. My great-grandfathers lost all hope in their circumstances. They could not envision a proverbial light at the end of the tunnel. On the other hand, to date, I have not lost hope in the midst of the extremes of my circumstances. Each time I am at the point were I feel that there is no alternative for me other than to abandon ministry and to seek employment in another field, a degree of hope, usually in some unexpected way, arrives at just the exact moment when all feels hopeless. My family, my faith community, and my close friends continue to encourage me to persevere. One of my friends - a man who describes himself as being "non-religious and non-spiritual" recently told me as I was discussing this paradigm with him, "I'm not even a religious person and I have more faith than you!"

Recently I have been receiving encouragement from the same gender loving people of Eastern Europe. A friend, who observes his faith in the Greek Orthodox Church, sent me a link to a GLBT affirming Orthodox website which I posted on my blogg. In just a matter of days after posting the link, I began to get hundreds of hits per day from LGBTQ people in Eastern Europe. They wrote thanking me for posting the link and they also began to pass around some of my reflections. When I posted the link, I was not aware that the Eastern Orthodox churches, in tandem with the governments of Eastern European countries, albeit in complete and total violation of the Constitution of the European Union; have been encouraging extreme measures of hatred and violence against the LGBTQ people of Eastern Europe. In St. Petersburg, Russia; the municipal government, being fully encouraged by the Russian Orthodox Church, has enacted the most proscriptive laws against LGBTQ persons since the fall of the old Soviet Union. Using the age old homophobic lie that they "need to protect children" from gay people, the municipal government of St. Petersburg has made it a crime to openly speak in any affirming way in regard to LGBTQ people - this includes churches and/or Bible studies - it also includes possessing or distributing any literature which is affirming or supportive of LGBTQ people. It is also a crime for LGBTQ people to publicly demonstrate any degree of affection for each other including simply holding hands. These proscriptive laws are being discussed and enacted in other Eastern European cities. Without the internet, as these laws spread, same gender loving people in Eastern Europe will not be aware of any affirming words in their regard.

As our New Year was eminent, I was spending some of my time trying to figure out a way to economically survive 2012. The longer I spent in frustrating absence of answers to my economic questions, the more hopeless I felt. I was tentatively approached by a church in Norfolk, Virginia regarding a possible position at their church; the sticking point, of course, being my same gender sexuality. Being confronted with a lack of finances, coupled with the idea of working full time in a church that would pay me a full time salary, and being back in my home town, made the prospect very appealing. All I need do is go back in the closet. No more affirming sermons about gay people, and I could be a considered a candidate for the job. I needed to give them an answer as to my interest, so I thanked them for their consideration, however, I told them that I could not agree to their terms and would not be submitting my resume. They were polite, yet told me that they could not understand my "need to preach about gay people." They told me that all I needed to do was to "preach about Jesus instead of gay people" and I could be considered for their opening.

There is no way for heteronormative people to understand that for me "preach[ing] about Jesus instead of gay people" is an impossibility, for in my "preach[ing] about Jesus," I am required to preach about the hatred, persecution, violence and injustice directed at same gender loving people. In the Hebrew Scriptures, individuals would describe how if they tried to silence their prophetic voice, they would become physically ill in the attempt. As they were to discover, when an individual has been commissioned with a specific ministry, running or trying to hide from the "Hound of Heaven" was an impossibility. In all the years I was closeted and literally frozen with terror with the prospect of my secret same gender sexuality being discovered, I never was without a doubt of the prompting of She who is the Holy Spirit of God toward specific ministry. Yet, I find myself as equally frozen with terror when confronted with the economic realities of existence as I was with the debilitating fear of the world knowing what had previously been my same gender sexuality secret. The Divine has a unique way of pushing us out of our nests and propelling us in the direction in which our paths lead. As I was reading the Gospel passage for today - New Year's Day - I felt great empathy for Joseph and Mary in this narrative. No matter to what degree they wished to have some sense of anonymity, they were propelled towards their commission in God's plan.

In most instances, those who venture forth today in attending services in a great many liturgical churches, if this particular passage is pontificated upon today, they will most likely hear the emphasis of the passage placed on several likely elements: 1) The naming of Jesus in which a homily will be heard regarding the special aspect of the name of Jesus to those who are followers of Christ. 2) The words of Simeon in regard to the heart of Mary being pierced. Or 3) The words of the Prophet Anna in regard to recognizing the uniqueness of the baby Jesus. Although these elements of the narrative are those which are traditionally sermonized, however, because of my life experiences in regard to both economic and religious injustice, I find tiny clues within the Luke narrative which I feel compelled to highlight.

The writer of the Luke narrative specifically indicates that the "time for THEM" to be purified had arrived. It is not just Mary, as a woman who has given birth and is, therefore, ritually unclean, to be purified; the THEM used by the Lukeian author refers to the fact that Joseph must also be ritually purified. Joseph, being the only other person present in the stable in Bethlehem to help Mary in her delivery, has, by his actions, made himself ritually unclean by helping in the delivery of his son and he must also become ritually purified. This is a religious/societal system in which women are second class citizens at best. Men did not assist in the birthing process. Within this society for a man to do so made him less of a man. He was submitting himself to doing something which was relegated specifically to women. Joseph was within his religious and societal rights to have refused to assist Mary in the birth of Jesus, yet, I feel it speaks volumes to the character of Joseph, as well as the love he had for Mary and his new born son, Jesus, that he willingly goes against societal convention and thereby makes himself religiously unclean. This societal and religious separation of men and women, although not specifically mentioned, is, none the less, evident in mentioning the circumcision of Jesus. The Temple in Jerusalem was a gender, race and class segregated structure. Women were only permitted within what is referred to as the Court of Women. Gentiles where not permitted within the Temple confines at all, however, observant Jewish women could enter the outer court of the Temple which was a segregated space reserved for women. As Mary and Joseph approach the Temple to have Jesus circumcised, it is only Joseph who, as a man who has ritually purified himself, can enter the inner courts of the Temple with Jesus to have him circumcised. Imagine what it was like for Mary who, eight days earlier, has given birth to her first child, is now required to relinquish her child into the care of another, because the societal and religious segregation laws do not allow the mother to accompany her infant son into the inner court of the Temple. Imagine what the emotional experience is like for Mary? Especially in that her new born son will for the first time in his very new, very short life, experience great pain as a surgically-sharp implement is applied to the removal of his flesh. Yet, Mary must stand there and watch Joseph place Jesus into the arms of a waiting Priest and then they walk off into the Temple where Mary cannot see her son or observe what is happening to him.

Economically, this entire process was one which was a financial burden as well as a blow to one's psyche. Luke describes how the ritual offering of "a pair turtle doves or two young pigeons" must be made. Mary and Joseph offered two young pigeons. The offering was divided along economic class lines: A pair of turtle doves was exorbitant beyond the means of most people. This was the offering made by the rich and powerful. The Hebrew Scriptures record how even during the time of Moses, this cost was so beyond the ability of most people to pay that the people approached Moses asking for relief from the burden of this religious tax and Moses amended the requirement of the law allowing the poor to offer two young pigeons instead of a pair of turtle doves. When a you approached the Temple with your offering, you, in effect, advertised your economic standing in society by what you brought as your offering. If you presented two young pigeons, as I am convinced did Joseph and Mary, you announced your lower economic status. Although, traditionally, Joseph has been referred to as a carpenter, the most recent scholarly works indicate that the interpretation of the word used to describe Joseph as a carpenter may not be accurate. A carpenter was a skilled trade and would have been a step up from the word used to refer to Joseph, which instead of carpenter, is more closely interpreted as someone who was a day laborer. When you examine the parables of Jesus, he speaks several times to day laborers who were hired for the day to perform specific tasks, paid for that day and the next day hoped to be hired for another job. Very much like the system in place today for many undocumented workers. Jesus, in his parables, doesn't speak to the work of a carpenter, yet, he does, in several different instances, describe how day laborers where hired and paid. If the word has been misinterpreted over the years and Joseph was in fact a day laborer, it makes much more sense as to why Jesus speaks to the condition of day laborers in that it would have been a system in which he was intimately acquainted. This is also why, I am convinced, that Joseph and Mary offered the offering of the poor of two young pigeons.

These things speak to me because I have experienced them. I know what religious and economic separation is like because I live it. I can't pass into the inner confines of the heteronormative Christian temple because as an open Queer man, I'm considered less then heteronormative men, because the religious/society structure of North America relegates same gender loving individuals to second class citizen status at best. When I offer my offering, I must give the offering of the poor because the economic gender structure of Christianity will not allow me the opportunity for ministry on a level playing field.

So, on this first day of 2012, I make my resolution: I resolve to follow the call of God on life for ministry to the Lesbian, Gay, Bi Sexual, Transgender, and Queer people of my community to the best of my ability both spiritually and economically.

I don't know where this will lead me, but it should be an interesting year!

Blessed be!

"I Heard the Bells on Christmas Day!"

2011-12-25T06:12:00.001-05:00

"I Heard the Bells on Christmas Day!"

The Nativity of Jesus

Revised Common Lectionary Gospel Reading

Luke 2:1-7, 8-20 (Inclusive Bible)

"In those days, in order to assess taxes, Caesar Augustus published a decree ordering a census of the whole of the Roman world. This first census took place while Quirinius was Governor of Syria. All the people were ordered to go back to the towns of their birth to be registered on the tax rolls. And so Joseph went from the town of Nazareth in Galilee to "the City of David" otherwise known as Bethlehem, in Judea, because Joseph was of the house and lineage of David; he went to register with Mary, to whom he was engaged to be married, who was pregnant. While they were there, the time came for her delivery. Mary gave birth to her first born child, a son; she put him in a simple cloth wrapped like a receiving blanket, and laid him in a feeding trough which was used to feed cattle, because there was not any room for them at the inn. There were shepherds living in the fields in the same area keeping night watch by turns over their collective flocks. A heavenly being of God appeared to them and God's brilliant glory surrounded them; and they were very much afraid. God's heavenly being said to them, "You have nothing to fear! I have come to proclaim good news to you! News of great joy! News to be shared by the whole people! Today in David's City a savior - the Messiah - has been born for you! Let this be a sign for you: You'll find the baby wrapped in simple cloth and laying in a feeding trough." Suddenly there was a multitude of God's heavenly beings who were all praising God and saying, "Glory to God in God's high heaven! And on earth let there be peace on all those on whom God's favor rests!" When the heavenly beings returned to their realm, the shepherds said to one another, "Let's go directly to Bethlehem! Let us see this event which God has made known to us!" They hurried to find Mary and Joseph, and the baby, just as they had been told, laying in a feeding trough. Once they saw this, they reported everything the heavenly beings had told them concerning the child. All who heard them were astonished at the words of the shepherds. Mary, however, treasured all these things and reflected on them in her heart. The shepherds went away glorifying God and praising God for all they had heard and seen, just as they had been told."

I Heard the Bells on Christmas Day!
Henry Wadsworth Longfellow (December 25th, 1864)

I Heard the Bells on Christmas Day
Their old familiar carols play,
And wild and sweet the words repeat
Of peace on earth, good will to men.

I thought how, as the day had come,
The belfries of all Christendom
Had rolled along the unbroken song
Of peace on earth, good will to men.

And in despair I bowed my head:
"There is no peace on earth," I said,
"For hate is strong and mocks the song
Of peace on earth, good will to men."

Then pealed the bells more loud and deep:
"God is not dead, nor doth God sleep;
The wrong shall fail, the right prevail,
With peace on earth, good will to men!"

Till, ringing singing, on its way,
The world revolved from night to day,
A voice, a chime, a chant sublime,
Of peace on earth, good will to men!

I don't particularly preference using the labels "secular," "non-secular," "religious," etc., in terms of music. I feel that music need not particularly carry the designation label of being "religious" in order to speak to us on a spiritual level. Although, something of a more frivolous nature - something like Grandma Got Run Over by a Reindeer - may not, in and of itself, have a deep spiritual significance or carry a profound message of theological importance; there is, however, no denying that the need for the human spirit to have times of laughter and joy is as important as is our need to feed our souls. In the same way, anyone who is not moved when hearing a recording of Karen Carpenter's angelic voice singing Merry Christmas, Darling would indeed have to be a very Grinch-like individual!

Particular songs which carry Christmas seasonal religious messages are referred to as carols so as to designate their unique standing among Christian hymns. Songs such as God Rest Ye Merry, Gentlemen; Away in a Manger; Oh, Little Town of Bethlehem; and Hark! The Herald Angels Sing, just to name a few, were composed in specificity as distinct Christmas hymns. One popular Christmas carol, however, Issac Watts' Joy to the World, was not originally written to be used as a Christmas carol. Watts actually wrote the hymn as a theological reference regarding the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. None the less, it was adapted by Christianity as a Christmas carol and thus it stays in perpetuity.

Having spent most of my life in the religious tradition of Southern Evangelicalism, testifying, or giving one's testimony, was a large component of this religious paradigm and the Christmas season was always a major motivator for individuals offering up testimonies. People would stand up in the services on the Sundays prior to Christmas and recount how particular Christmas carols were spiritually significant to their faith journey. Away in a Manger and Silent Night were always the Christmas carols that brought tears to the eyes of the faithful. Courses of "Amen" and "Thank you, Jesus" always followed the singing of these particular carols and the ensuing testimonies which would recount how God had used these carols to "touch my heart and bring me closer to Jesus."

For a large part of my life Christmas carols, as well as Christmas itself, was not something to which I looked forward. As a small child I did relish the magic of Christmas - the lights and decorations, the presents - as I matured, however, Christmas quickly became something I just hoped to be able to endure. Each year I dreaded the time between Thanksgiving and New Year. If I could have found a genie in a lamp and been granted three wishes, one of them would have been to relieve me of the burden of the Christmas holiday season. Unlike others who dread the holidays because they do not desire to spend time with their families, for me, this was not the case. What I dreaded about the Christmas holiday season was the societal imprint of heteronormativity which accompanies the season. As a deeply closeted and self loathing gay man, who was terrified (in every sense of the word) of having my secret sexuality discovered, I did not have the freedom to express my innate self in regard to the festivities which surround Christmas as does most of Western/North American heteronormative culture. I did not, nor could not, ask or bring the person to whom I was intimately drawn to my Christmas party at work or to the Christmas parties to which I received invitations. I was not able to share the joy of shopping for someone I loved. There was no one for whom I could place an intimate gift of love under the Christmas tree to be opened on Christmas morning. There was no one for me to kiss under the mistletoe.

It was the Christmas of my 13th year when I first heard - or remember hearing - the carol whose words were originally composed in the form of a poem by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, I Heard the Bells on Christmas Day. If I had heard this carol sung either in our church, or elsewhere for that matter, prior to my 13th Christmas, it either did not have any impact on me or else I had forgotten it completely. That Christmas, however, as we sang this carol in the Sunday evening church service just prior to Christmas day, the words washed over me like an ocean wave. The words reverberated in my mind and soul as loudly as did the bells Longfellow had heard on the Christmas day in 1864 when he was moved to write his poem. Longfellow had been deeply impacted by the events surrounding his life in 1864: The United States was still in the midst of the horror of the Civil War and Longfellow had personally been closely impacted by the war as a few months prior to Christmas his son had been killed in the war. Additionally, just a few weeks prior to Christmas, Longfellow's wife had died as the result of an accidental house fire. On Christmas day in 1864, Longfellow, feeling overwhelmed by the depression which engulfed him, had gone for a walk through the streets of Cambridge, Massachusetts. As he was walking he began to notice the church bells of the churches of Cambridge ringing loudly to announce Christmas. As he writes in his poem, Longfellow did not share the Christmas message of Peace in that the Civil War was being fought on bloody battlefields, his son had been killed on one of those battlefields, and his wife had recently died. It was, however, as he continued his walk that the Spirit of the Divine spoke to his soul on that Christmas morning and he began to find a glimmer of Divine hope:

"Then pealed the bells more loud and deep:
'God is not dead, nor doth God sleep;
The wrong shall fail, the right prevail,
With peace on earth, good will to men!'"

It was at that time that the words of Longfellow, set to music in the form of a Christmas hymn, become my favorite Christmas carol. I am often asked as I share my story "Why didn't you just throw down your religion? What made you hold on to it through out all of those dark years of oppression?" My answer is that I, like Longfellow, had the Spirit of the Divine speak to my soul and although the dark events which surrounded me continued, I somehow knew in my soul that God was not dead and that neither was God asleep. The soft, gentle voice of God spoke to my soul and I knew that no matter what words of hate were hurled at same gender loving individuals from the pulpits of Christendom, God was not pleased with these hate filled expressions in God's name. Although at the time I did not have anyone with whom I could share my hope, I knew in my soul that I was not denounced or abandoned by God. I knew in my soul that I was loved by God and approved of by God. I knew that if there were an abomination it was not I, it was the words of hate wrapped in the name of Jesus - Jesus whose birth we celebrate - which were the abomination.

At the time that Longfellow penned the words of his poem, he did not know that in a few months the American Civil War would be concluded with the surrender of Lee to Grant at Appomattox Court House in far away Virginia. As I heard the words of Longfellow and felt encouraged by the Spirit of God to hold onto hope, I could not envision a time that same gender loving individuals would win freedoms to join in unions, to be able to live together, in some places, openly, or to, in some places, openly hold jobs and live their lives with any measure of freedom. These things were beyond my comprehension, yet, within my life time, I have seen that "the wrong shall fail and the right shall prevail!" Change is slow in occurring, yet I cannot abandon the hope that more change is on the way and that, with God's approval, justice will be forthcoming.

My Christmas prayer for my same gender loving family around the world is that you do not give up hope! No matter how dark the time, no matter how oppressive the circumstances, I pray that you may come to know in the name of God who created you, in the name of God who loves you and in the name of God who approves of you; that the Spirit of the Divine may touch your soul, and that you may know that "God is not dead nor doth God sleep!"

Amen

"I Heard the Bells on Christmas Day!"

"All You Need Is Love!"

2011-12-18T08:36:00.002-05:00

"All You Need Is Love!"

Love

The Fourth Sunday of Advent

Revised Common Lectionary Reading
Romans 16:25-27 (Inclusive Bible)

"To God - God who is able to strengthen you in the Good News that I proclaim when I proclaim Jesus Christ, the Good News who reveals the mystery hidden for many ages, but has now been manifested through the writings of the Prophets, and by the command of God, has now been made known to all the Gentiles, that they may believe and obey - to God who alone is wisdom, may glory be given through God's child Jesus Christ to endless ages. Amen!"

This weekend is the anniversary of an event in my life, which in my earlier days, I believed to have been an impossibility. This weekend is the anniversary of my ordination.

It has been for me a very reflective week of some good memories, some joyous memories, memories of those who have loved and supported me, and memories of my detractors who worked (and, in some instances, work) tirelessly to impede my call to ministry to my community (Lesbian, Gay, Bi Sexual, Transgender, Queer, same gender loving individuals, and persons of alternate gender expression).

I have arrived at a point where I am able to, if not appreciate, accept the difficulties leading up to my ordination; not as occurrences which I used to wish I could go back and un-do, but as occurrences which have developed my effectiveness in ministry. If any single happenstance or difficulty had not occurred, something I need to be a more effective minister would be lacking in my arsenal of spiritual tools.

I used to view my detractors as being the most difficult obstacles in my journey to ministry, however, I now believe my most difficult obstacles, which necessitated my conquering in order to achieve any degree of effectiveness in ministry, were my internalized homophobia coupled with my self imposed loathing and shame in regarding to my same gender sexuality.

I was a slave to a religious system whose foundation is not the love of Jesus Christ but is instead, the twins shame and fear. I was paralyzed with my inability to free myself of their chains. My prison was the mental and spiritual stone walls and iron bars which held me captive to a theology which is not life affirming. A large part of my finding freedom from this system was the struggle to free my soul from the false idol created by this theology: the Bible. The Hebrew and Christian Scriptures combined in form to constitute the volume we refer to as the Bible, has been, within this religious paradigm, created as the fourth entity of the God-head. Along with the "Father, Son and Holy Ghost," the Bible has been elevated to god status, worshiped, adorated, and deified. It was when I realized that as a practitioner within this religious paradigm that I was guilty of Bibliolatry - worshiping the book - as opposed to worshiping the God of the book; that I was able to begin to take my first steps toward freedom from the overwhelming fear and oppression with which I was heavily weighted down.

The unconditional love of God assumed humanity in the person of Jesus, not in the form of a leather bound, gold leaf edged, book (red letter edition).

The Word became flesh and dwelt among us. The Word did not become a text. The Word did not become the Authorized King James Bible.

For God so loved the world that God sent God's child into the world. God did not so love the world that God sent a book into the world.

If Jesus Christ was not sent into the world to condemn the world, then using a book to hurl condemnation is meaningless.

The Bible is a book to be taken seriously and reverently. It is a book of grand poetry which was inspired by many person's great love for God. It contains Godly wisdom and advice. It's overall message is of the great, unconditional love of God for God's children - all of God's children - who were created in the image of God. To dissect it - to methodically cut it apart - humanity created verse division by humanity created verse division does a disservice to the entirety of the book and, I believe, it is disrespectful to the message of God contained between it's pages.

The message of Christ could not be any more clear! "Love God with your whole being and love your neighbor as you love yourself!" "By this shall all of humanity know that you are my followers in that you have love one for another!" Sadly, however, humanity's perception of Christianity as a whole is encapsulation by the sentiments of one who told me this past week "Reverend, I could never be a good Christian. I'm not able to hate enough."

My prayer for you during this last week of Advent, is that in preparation for the day observed by Christianity in memoriam of the birth of Jesus, that instead of searching the Bible for words of condemnation, that you search Bible for words of affirmation.

My prayer is that you may reflect on the words of God's heavenly beings who announced "Behold! I bring you tidings of great JOY!"

May you find the love of God in your life.

Amen

"All You Need Is Love!"

"You've Got A Friend!"

2011-12-04T11:08:00.003-05:00

"You've Got A Friend!"

The Second Sunday of Advent

Comfort

Revised Common Lectionary Reading:
Isaiah 40:1-11 (Inclusive Bible)

"Console my people, give them comfort," says YAHWEH
"Speak tenderly to Jerusalem's heart and tell it that its time of service is ended, that its iniquity is atoned for, that it has received from YAHWEH's hand double punishments for all of its inequities."
A voice cries out, "Clear a path through the wilderness for YAHWEH! Make a direct path through the desert for YAHWEH! Let every low pace be filled in, every high place be made low; let every precipice become level, and all the high ridges become a valley! Then the glory of YAHWEH will be revealed, and all of humanity will see it." YAHWEH has spoken! A voice commands, "Cry out!" and I answer "What will I say?" - "All flesh is grass and its beauty is like the wilderness: the grass withers and the flower wilts when the breath of YAHWEH blows on them. How the people are like grass! Grass withers, and flowers wilt, but the promises of YAHWEH will stand for eternity! Go up to a high mountain you who bring good news! Shout with a loud voice, you who bring good news! Shout without fear, and say to every town, "Here is YAHWEH!" YAHWEH, O Superior One, you come with power, and govern with a firm hand. You bring your reward with you, and your reparation comes before you. Like a shepherd you feed your flock, gathering the lambs and holding them close for safety, and leading their mothers with gentleness."

Although the principal focus of my attention in ministry is to my own community (that being the Lesbian, Gay, Bi Sexual, Transgender and Queer community) there are those among my community who see me as a traitor - a sell out - to our community. They do so because of my being a follower of Jesus Christ. Like most of the world they equate Christianity, the religion, and someone who is a follower of Christ, as being one and the same. Sadly, this is not always true! The institutional religion of Christianity and being a follower of Christ are not necessarily the same things. As difficult as the concept is to grasp, one can be a member of the institutional Christian religion and not be a follower of the teachings of Jesus Christ. Conversely one can be a follower of the teachings of Jesus Christ and not be someone who embraces the established, institutional religion of Christianity.

In all fairness to those persons of my community who see me as being a traitor to my community, I can truly appreciate, in the fullest extent of understanding, as to why they would feel this way: Christianity, the established, institutional religion is not (and except for a very few examples and most of them in modernity), and has not been, a friend to same gender loving individuals or any persons of alternate gender expression. In fact for me to say that the institutional religion of Christianity "has not been a friend," is disingenuous of me, for the fact is that for most of the past millennium the institution of Christianity has been, without a doubt, in very nearly all places in which it has manifested itself, the primary enemy of same gender loving individuals and persons of alternate gender expression.

There are times that it's actually easier coming out as a gay man to heteronormative persons as opposed to coming out to the LGBTQ community as a Christian, let alone as someone who is a Christian minister! My holding onto my faith in Jesus Christ has, at times, been costly for me on a personal level among other gay men. In that I have not taken vows of celibacy, as I have met and dated (or tried to date) other gay men, I have been reluctant to "come out" to them as a Christian. I know what follows when I do: A look of disbelief, a myriad of questions usually something along the lines of "How is that possible?" or "How can you be a minister and be gay!?" No matter how much I try to explain that I am out, open and proud, it seldom goes very far in soothing their anxieties. Their only knowledge or experience with Christianity, Christians, and Christian clergy has been one of being on the receiving end of hatred, abuse (physical, spiritual, and psychological), and condemnation.

They have never been comforted by Christianity, only hated.

They have never received blessings from Christianity, only cursing.

Because of the hatred, shame, degradation, abuse and persecution received by Lesbian, Gay, Bi Sexual, Transgender and Queer persons from the institution of Christianity and from it's members, it's no wonder that so many LGBTQ persons have either abandoned any pretense at spirituality or they have sought out faith practices in which they are accepted or at least not hated. Many LGBTQ persons have found spiritual homes in faith expressions such as Buddhism or Wiccanism to name only two. I understand why so many LGBTQ persons do not seek a faith path within expressions of Christianity, even those which express themselves as being "open and affirming." To ask or even expect LGBTQ persons who have exited and rejected all forms of Christianity to return to that faith, even in progressive and liberal denominations, is akin to asking an abused person who has escaped their abuser to return to, and embrace, their abuser. No matter how much the abuser tells their victim "I've changed!" "I'm not that way anymore!" It's too painful and difficult a thing to ask of someone who has been abused and LGBTQ persons have been greatly abused by Christianity.

Although I understand why so many LGBTQ persons abandon expressions of spirituality, and although my experience has been similar to many of my LGBTQ family in regard to treatment received by Christianity and Christians, I never wavered from my faith path in Jesus Christ. Obviously, I cannot say the same for my experience with established, institutional Christianity and its adherents, however, I can unequivocally say that I haven't either forfeited my faith in Christ nor have I ever had the experience of feeling that I have been abandoned by Christ. Throughout every degree of horribleness received at the hands of established, institutional Christianity and its adherents, my faith in Christ has been my one true, continuous element in my preservation of life, limb, sanity and spirituality.

About two weeks ago I received a query from a friend asking me if I believed in the possibility of the supernatural spiritual phenomenon of a salvation experience as expressed in the concept of becoming "born again?" I believe, from the overall nature of my friend's total inquiry, that my friend did not necessarily accept the possibility of it being a real or genuine experience. In that I am seen as being, at the least, someone who is theologically progressive, or, at the most, as a theological extremist, or, even more so, as a heretic, I'm afraid my answer to my friend may be somewhat surprising and unexpected! In addition, because this spiritual experience has been co-opted by, and is seen as being the exclusive purview of, a theological paradigm which presents itself as being the ultimate antithesis of being open and accepting of any and all LGBTQ persons, one would most likely assume my answer as being a rejection of this spiritual experience. My answer, however, is yes, I do believe in the possibility of an individual having the supernatural spiritual phenomenon of a salvation experience (i.e. becoming born again). I can say that I do believe the possibility to be true because my basis for saying so is the same reason as to why I have never wavered from my faith in Jesus Christ: As incredulous as it may sound and as difficult as it is for other's to accept, I have had a supernatural spiritual experience of salvation or, if you will, I have had a "born again" experience.

I share my experience not because I present it as being better than the experiences of others. I do not believe that other's need to share my experience. That is what our detractors do with the experience. As with the concept of Christianity, nearly everyone believes that to have this type of spiritual faith experience necessitates that one buys into the dogma of those who profess to be the owners of the experience. Sadly, the experience has been used, historically, as a weapon: Either the individual must become born again in exactly the way prescribed by the presenter in that the individual must be accepting all of the conditions, faith practices, definitions and beliefs of the presenter, or, otherwise, the individual will go to hell.

Unique spiritual experiences are gifts from a loving God to God's children. They are neither owned or defined by any one group. Some may be in particular need of these experiences in order to progress along their particular faith path. Others may not have this need and instead my be similar to a faith path as described in the Christian Testament book of James whose author wrote that the individual needs to "work out your salvation." Having a spiritual experience or not having a spiritual experience does not make one of God's children any better than any other of God's children neither does it make one's faith path more genuine then that of any other.

My experience has been the comfort I needed when no comfort was ever forthcoming from institutional Christianity or its adherents. My experience was not, for me, the end of the spiritual road. It was only the beginning! The further away I have become removed from the traditional dogma of established, institutional Christianity, the stronger my faith in Jesus has become. With each new reclaiming of the hijacked faith of Jesus by institutional Christianity, the greater and deeper my faith walk with Christ finds expression. At times I feel that it is not possible for my faith in Jesus to expand to greater horizons, yet, with each step I take away from the deathly confines of institutional Christianity, my faith grows exponentially.

I share my experience in the hope that my LGBTQ family will be comforted. Be comforted in knowing that others do not own the spiritual gifts afforded to us in Christ Jesus! Be comforted in knowing that you are loved by the God who created you! Be comforted in knowing that you are loved by Jesus who redeemed all of you - the entirety of your being - including your expressions of same gender love and sexuality! Be comforted in knowing that She Who is the Holy Spirit has also come as your comforter!

In the spirit of anticipation which is Advent, my prayer for my same gender loving family and my family members of alternate gender expression is that you may know that God is...

"our Abba God who is the the Source of all mercies and the God of all consoling, who comforts us in all of our troubles so that we can also comfort those who are in any trouble with the same comforting which God has given us."

Amen!

"I Hope You Dance!"

2011-11-27T11:39:00.001-05:00

Chaz Bono

The First Sunday of Advent

Hope

"I Hope You Dance!"

Revised Common Lectionary Reading
I Corinthians 1:3-9 (The Inclusive Bible)

"Grace and Peace from our Loving God and our Anointed One, Jesus.
I continually thank God for you because of the gift bestowed on you in Christ Jesus, in whom you have been richly endowed with every gift of speech and knowledge. In the same way, the testimony about Jesus has been so confirmed among you that you lack no spiritual gift, as you wait for the revelation of our Anointed One, Jesus. God will strengthen you to the end, so that you will be blameless on the day of our Anointed One, Jesus. God, through whom you have been called into intimacy with Jesus our Anointed One, is faithful."

I never learned how to dance. I do feel a sense of having missed out on something special because of it. I did not attend my Senior Prom in High School. I did attend an "alternative Christian banquet" - no dancing, but we did hear a hell fire and brimstone sermon about how we would all go to hell if we had sex before we got married. See, the reason as to why I never learned how to dance is the same reason as to why I did not attend my Senior Prom in High School: I attended a church which held as one of it's principal tenants that dancing was a sin, therefore I could not learn to dance nor could I attend my Senior Prom.

It seems incredulous to some that such a notion existed (and continues to exist), yet it was just one of many sins observed by my church along with any card games, very nearly all movies (except for some G rated Disney movies and, of course, all Billy Graham evangelistic religious films even though the actors in them were mostly horribly second rate performers at best). Alcohol of any kind was one of the big sins and we were told that people who attended churches which permitted their members to drink alcohol (even including communion wine) were not "real" Christians. The lists of what constituted sin were endless. At one point watching TV was a sin, however, my parents drew the line at that one - they were not about to get rid of their new 27 inch Zenith color TV (especially after my father had climbed up on the roof and installed an outdoor antenna) even if the preacher said watching it was a sin.

I used to secretly watch American Bandstand (which was a also a sin - listening to secular music was a sin and when coupled with the sin of dancing, one was on thin ice indeed) on that forbidden and sinful TV set. I secretly had great admiration for the people on American Bandstand who displayed such amazing freedom in being able to so freely express great joy in dancing and enjoying music. When my sister was married in the church which my family attended, there was not any dancing at her wedding. Neither was there a luncheon or dinner afterwards. THOSE types of wedding celebrations were also considered to be sinful because they were seen as being excessive and hedonistic - the sin trifecta: secular music, dancing and alcohol! My sister's post nuptial celebration was what any "good" Christian bride would have: cake and fruit punch in the church's Fellowship Hall. The church gave my sister and brother-in-law a Bible as a wedding present. In that sex of any kind (expect for procreation and even then, it became sinful if you happened to enjoy it) was also a sin, I suppose they were supposed to read it on their honeymoon.

It wasn't that my church's views of what constituted sin were considered to be extreme. Within the parameters of Southern, Evangelical, Fundamentalism; very nearly all of my church's views were the norm. Most of my friends were entirely familiar with such views of sin in that they also attended churches holding similar or identical views. My great uncle, who was an Independent Fundamental Baptist preacher, preached a famous sermon (which at one point was printed into a booklet) titled "The Sin of Pantyhose." His sermon was so popular that he received many invitations to preach his message at many churches. I never heard his sermon preached nor did I ever read his sermon in booklet form so, unfortunately, I cannot tell you why pantyhose were considered to be sinful.

Growing up within this kind of religious paradigm was, for me, extremely stressful and oppressive. Every day I felt an overwhelming sense of guilt in that I was always afraid I had somehow, even unintentionally, been guilty of committing one of the many sins which were preached against from the pulpit of my church. Prayer was an extended check list of checking off which sins I had committed, which sins I had avoided committing, and which sins I may have accidentally committed. Sin, sin, sin! Existence was an overwhelming burden of sin. There was no escaping it. Intentionally or unintentionally, I was always violating some rule or regulation.

It is for this reason that even today, although I have spiritually and emotionally recovered from the religious oppression of my youth, that I have trouble with humanity created rules and regulations which permeate churches of every religious denomination, observance, and theology. To "Love God with your heart, soul, mind and all of your being, and love your neighbor as yourself" does not seem to be enough for humans. We enjoy creating lists of rules, regulations, and sins. Very sadly, most always within the confines of churches, no matter the justification for their need, our lists of rules, regulations and sins most usually have an unforeseen impact: They can rob us of our joy, our exuberance, and our hope.

For many, the season of Advent is an observance which feeds their spirituality, yet, even in the observance of Advent, it can be a season which holds the possibility of robbing some of us of our joy, our exuberance, and our hope. This was especially made evident to me as I was sitting in on a church's Ministry Committee meeting in regard to the planning for their services for the month of December. As the plans unfolded, the people assembled around the table were reminded of the rules observed in their church regarding the observance of Advent. These included the use of particular colors, and for this committee, what decorations could be used in the church as well as what type of ornaments could be used on the church's Christmas tree. At one point, one of the committee members asked if more Christmas carols could be included in the services in the weeks leading up to Christmas. The committee member, who was a new addition to this church, was told that to do so was a violation of the rules which governed the observance of Advent. As I sat there listening to this committee's conversation, I watched the joy, the exuberance and the hope slowly fade from the committee member who had asked about the singing of Christmas carols.

Advent, Lent, and even Christmas are religious observances which do not occur in Scripture. The fact that they do not appear within the confines of the pages of the Christian (or Hebrew) Scriptures, does not in any way (contrary to the views of extreme Protestants) make their observances wrong. The earliest writings mentioning Advent within the Christian church date from the late 4th century C.E. The first homilies in regard to Advent observances date from the 5th century C.E. and it wasn't until 590 C.E. that a Church synod established the calendar dates for the observation of Advent (which at that time was an eleven week observance). Like the observance of Lent, the observance of Advent was meant to be a preparatory season which was looking forward to something of greater significance. For the early church, the event of greater significance was the Second Coming of Christ. The time in which they lived was so pervasive with the persecution of Christians that their hope was based in what they believed to be the eminent second appearance of Christ. Over the ensuing centuries the observation of Advent has evolved and changed being influenced by particular times and locations in which Christians have been observant.

Please don't for a moment infer that it is my intention to dissuade anyone from any religious observance or practice! I whole heatedly ENCOURAGE anyone's spiritual practice which feeds their soul and nourishes their spiritual growth. What I do, however, suggest is what I suggest in regard to all practices of the established Church and that is for us to take the opportunity of asking of ourselves are we being inclusive or exclusive in our celebrations and observances? Exclusivity has been used as a great weapon by the Church. We have excluded people who dance. We have excluded people who listen to secular music. We excluded people from the table of fellowship with great abandon. We have gone to great extremes to exclude same gender loving individuals and individuals of alternate gender expression from the celebrations and observances of the Church. We hold onto our exclusivity with great reasons and justifications all the while forgetting the words of the Hebrew prophet:

"It is not true that YAHWEH desires burnt offerings and sacrifices more than obeying the voice of YAHWEH. To obey the voice of YAHWEH is better than to sacrifice. Listening to the words of YAHWEH is better than burnt offerings and sacrifices."

My prayer for you during this season of Advent is that in your observance, your spirituality grows and flourishes as you prepare for the Feast of the Nativity. I also pray that you would learn to be gentle with those of us who may not be as diligent in our observance. Please learn to forgive us if we sing the wrong song at the wrong time, if we don't use the appropriate decorations on our Christmas tress, and please forgive us if we dance!

Amen

"Jesus Christ, Superstar! Do you think you are what they say you are?"

2011-11-20T08:16:00.004-05:00

Byzantine mosaic. 545 C.E. Christ sits enthroned appearing as he was traditionally represented for most of the first millennium of Christianity, as a beardless, short haired youth.

The Season After Pentecost

The Reign of Christ

Transgender Day of Remembrance

Revised Common Lectionary Gospel Reading
Matthew 25:31-46 (Inclusive Bible)

Jesus said, "At the appointed time the Promised One will come in glory, escorted by all the angels of heaven, and will sit upon the royal throne, with all the nations assembled below him. Then the Promised One will separate them from one another, as a shepherd divides the sheep from the goats. The sheep will be placed on his right hand, the goats on his left hand.
"The ruler will say to those on the right, 'Come you blessed of my Abba/Amma God! Inherit the kin-dom prepared for you from the creation of the world! For I was hungry and you fed me! I was thirsty and you gave me drink! I was a stranger and you welcomed me! I was naked and you clothed me! I was sick and you comforted me! I was in prison and you came to visit me!' Then these just ones will ask, 'When did we see you hungry and give you food? When did we see you thirst and give you something to drink? When did we meet you as a stranger and invited you in giving you a place to stay? When did we clothe your nakedness?' The ruler will answer them, 'The truth is, every time you did this for the least of my family members, you did this for me!.'
"Then the ruler will say to those on his left hand, "Out of my sight! You are accursed ones! Into the everlasting fires of Gehenna which are burning for the Devil and the fallen angels! I was hungry and you did not give me any food! I was thirsty and you did not give me anything to drink! I was a homeless stranger and you did not welcome me into your homes! I was naked and you did not give me any clothes to wear! I was sick and in prison and you did not give me any comfort or come to visit me!' Then they in turn will ask, 'When did we see you hungry? Or thirsty? Or homeless? Or naked? Or ill? Or in prison? When did we not take care of you?' The answer will come, 'The truth is, as often as you neglected to do these things for one of the lest of these my family, you neglected to do these things to me.' They will go off to there eternal punishment, and the just will go off to eternal life."

Jesus has some things terribly wrong here! Obviously he does not realize that what he is referring to here - feeding hungry people, health care for people without hospital insurance, taking care of homeless people - this is socialism! This isn't the American way! Doesn't he know our motto? "Those who do not work, do not eat!" If these people are hungry, let them get a job and buy food! We cannot empower their laziness by giving them handouts. That only makes them dependent on us to provide for them. If they don't have homes, then they are not trying hard enough! Home ownership is the American ideal! Every hardworking American can buy a home. We can't go around giving homes to people who refuse to help themselves! If they are sick and don't have health insurance, then it's their own fault for not being prepared! Expecting me to provide for these people is like putting a gun to my head and stealing money from my pockets. I worked hard for what I have. Let them get a job and work for it too! If any of these people are in prison, well, they obviously belong there! Don't break any laws, do what the police tell you to do and you won't go to prison! It's the environment of free food, free housing, and free handouts that gives these people nothing to do, so they get themselves into trouble, get arrested and go to jail! They have no one to blame but themselves! Even then, it's not like they have it hard! They get three meals a day while sitting around watching cable TV! Prisons are like country clubs! Bring back the chain gangs and let them find out what it meas to work then maybe they'll think again about going to prison! Actually what we need is more prisons! Get all these homeless, undesirables off the streets!

Before you start sending me emails, know that the words stated above are NOT my views. These are quotes by American citizens. Many of them are quotes by American politicians. Some of them are quotes by American politicians who are candidates for election to the office of President of the United States. How could Americans - whose defacto state religion is Christianity - believe and say things like this if they are followers of Jesus? Many of the American politicians who say these things also say that Jesus told them to run for office and even that Jesus told them to run for President. So, how could the same Jesus who is quoted in the Gospel reading for today also endorse American, Christian politicians who hold beliefs which are so blatantly contrary to the teachings of Jesus? How is it that American citizens - who also claim to be Christians - can hold such harsh views which are so extremely opposite of the words of Jesus? It's actually very easy. American nationalist Christianity is an invention. The tenants and theology of the belief system are a bastardizations of the teachings of Jesus Christ. The Jesus who is worshiped by American nationalist Christianity is an idol - an invention. The idol Jesus is worshiped, whereas, the Jesus of the Christian Scriptures is not followed. Worship is easy. Following is difficult. To actually follow - obey - institute - the teachings of the Jesus of the Christian Scriptures requires a fundamental cultural change. It requires a change of a person's entire way of being. To follow the Jesus of the Christian Scriptures require one to "take up your cross" and to literally follow Jesus. To follow Jesus means to "sell all that you have and give the money to the poor." To follow the Jesus of the Christian Scriptures requires an abandonment of allegiance to a nation state, it requires a literal internal state of forgiving every person who we have perceived to ever have wronged us, it requires a total abandonment of the notion of retaliation. That's why is so easy to worship Jesus - a Jesus created in our own image: A Jesus who blesses the United States with great material wealth for some and dire poverty for others. A Jesus who endorses state sponsored warfare, state sponsored murder, and the denial of the basics of life - food, shelter, clothing, health care - because to actually follow the dictates of the Jesus of the Christian Scriptures means that we would have to essentially stop being who we are as individuals, as a people, and we would need to strive to become like the Jesus of the Christian Scriptures.

If nationalist Christians were to follow the Jesus of the Christian Scriptures instead of worshiping the idol Jesus created in the image of white, heterosexual, protestants; one of the most fundamental changes - and one which would literally take a miracle of God to accomplish - a miracle on the level of the parting of the Red Sea - would be the abandonment of condemnation, hatred, and persecution of same gender loving individuals and persons of alternate gender expressions. It would require that, like the Jesus of the Christian Scriptures, the expectation of "loving your neighbor as you love yourself" would have to be implemented. It would require an examination of the heart - an examination of the deepest recesses of the psyche - to find out why such extreme hatred exists in the heart and soul of an individual who names the name of Christ, who worships Christ, and yet who rejects the teachings of Christ. It would require a self introspection as to why someone who names the name of Christ finds it necessary to reject the teachings of Christ in order to satisfy a need to persecute, hate and condemn same gender loving individuals and persons of alternate gender expressions. Such levels of internal self introspection are something too frightening to implement. To do so would require entire money making ministries, which have been built on the precept of Jesus blessed hatred of same gender loving individuals and individuals of alternate gender expression, to collapse. It would require their supporters to stop giving millions of dollars to perpetuate the myth of Jesus endorsed persecution of same gender loving individuals. Most difficult of all to do, such extreme levels of self introspection, and an adherence to the actual teachings of the Jesus of the Christian Scriptures; would require those who profess to be Christians to apologize. It would require of them to ask the Lesbian, Gay, Bi Sexual, Transgender and Queer communities - on a global level - to forgive them for the seeds of hatred sown by the Christian church for nearly a millennium and a half. All of the deaths at the hands of Christians would require a denunciation and an act of contrition. How could a proud, stiff necked, self righteous people ever be expected to do something so demeaning as to humble themselves and ask for forgiveness from a group of people who they hate and despise?

If there were ever a day which so reflects the extreme juxtaposition of being a follower of Jesus as opposed to being a worshiper of Jesus, it is this day! On the Christian church's liturgical calendar, today is observed as the Reign of Christ Sunday. A day which is dedicated to the glorification of Jesus Christ as King. It is interesting to note, that in the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Sweden, the day is observed as the Day of Doom. The Lectionary Reading for today is reflective of this day: Christ as King sits upon the throne of heaven surrounded by all the angels of heaven. The Day of Doom has arrived! The day which Christ the King acts as Christ the Judge. All of the nations of the world are assembled at his feet. Christ begins the process of separating the just (the righteous) - those who have observed the teachings of Christ - from those who have worshiped Christ yet have not implemented his teachings or example. I leave it to you (and Christ the King) to decide based on the evidence, as to which category America would find itself.

This day is also Transgender Day of Remembrance. The day which is observed by the LGBTQ community as a memorial to all of our family who have been bullied, harassed, attacked, and murdered because they are individuals who are Transgender. The day was first observed in 1989 as "Remembering Our Dead." It was a day set aside to reflect on the multitude of unsolved murders of Transgender individuals. They are unsolved because police departments don't put very much emphasis or resources into solving them. They remain unsolved because our society does not deem the deaths of Transgender individuals to be of any importance. Our Transgender family members are disproportionately represented as the recipients of extreme acts of hatred and murder in regard to all members of our LBGTQ community. It is estimated that at least one Transgender person per day is physically assaulted or attacked, and that at least one Transgender person is murdered each month of the year. Since statistics have been kept in regard to Transgender violent attacks, the numbers have grown exponentially and yet the Christian church as a whole does not stand in the breach - it does not stand between those who perpetuate murder and Transgender people. Instead the bombastic rhetoric which flows from the pulpits of the majority of Christian churches is a catalyst for these crimes of hatred.

So then, in light of the twin observances of this day: the day when the Christian Church observes the reverence of Christ the King and the day observed by the LGBTQ community as Transgender Day of Remembrance; where does the Christian church as a whole fall in relation to being an institution which follows and adheres to the teachings of it's founder Jesus Christ?

Worshiping Jesus is fun! You get to sing great songs, clap your hands, and it makes you feel really good inside! Following Jesus is difficult. It requires of you to take stands which go against popular perceptions. People reject you - even family and friends. It requires of you to stand between murders and the innocent. Yet, within the teachings of Jesus he instructed his followers to "worship God in spirit and in truth." Like a set of scales heavily weighted in only one way, to do one and not the other makes our Christianity unbalanced.

The decision to worship Christ or to follow Jesus need not be exclusive. My prayer for you is that the scales of your spirituality be balanced in regard to the two aspects of being one who names the name of Christ. May you this day make the decision not to be only a worshiper of Jesus and to instead to also be a follower of the teachings of Christ.

Amen

"So You Think You've Got Talents!"

2011-11-18T06:19:00.005-05:00

The following is the text of a sermon I preached at Metropolitan Community Church of Boston on Sunday November 13, 2011. I type my sermons in such a way as to make them easier for me to read when I am in the pulpit. I have not edited my presentation copy for publication, so it may seem a bit unusual to view and read.

“So, You Think You’ve Got Talents!?”

The Season after Pentecost

Revised Common Lectionary Reading: Matthew 25:14-30 (Inclusive Bible)

Jesus said, “Again, it’s like a wealthy landowner who was going on a journey and called in three workers, entrusting some funds to them. The first was given five thousand dollars (talents), the second two thousand dollars (talents), and the third one thousand dollars (talents), according to each one’s ability. The landowner went away. Immediately the worker who received the five thousand went and invested it and made another five thousand. In the same way, the worker who received the two thousand doubled that figure. But the worker who received the one thousand instead went off and buried the money.

“After a long absence, the traveler returned home and settled accounts with the workers. The one who had received the five thousand came forward and bringing the additional five thousand, saying ‘You entrusted me with five thousand; here are five thousand more.’

“The landowner said, ‘Well, done! You are a good and faithful worker. Since you were dependable in a small matter, I will put you in charge of larger affairs. Come, share my joy!’

“The worker who received the two thousand then stepped forward with the additional two thousand saying, ‘You entrusted me with two thousand; here are two thousand more.’

“The landowner said to this one, ‘Cleverly done! You too are a good and faithful worker. Since you were dependable in a small matter, I will put you in charge of larger affairs. Come, share my joy!’

“Finally the one who had received the one thousand stepped forward and said to the landowner, ‘Knowing your ruthlessness – you who reaps where you did not sow and gathers where you did not scatter – and fearing your wrath, I went off and buried your thousand dollars in the ground. Here is your money back.’

“The landowner exclaimed, ‘You worthless, lazy worker! So, you know that I reap where I don’t sow and gather where I don’t scatter, do you? All the more reason to deposit my money with the bankers, so that on my return I could have had it back with interest! You, there! Take the thousand away from this lazy worker and give it to the one with the ten thousand.

“ ‘Those who have will get more until they have abundance while those who have not will lose what little they hold of value. Throw this lazy one outside into the darkness, where there is crying and great distress.’

“I want you to always wear the tightest jeans possible and I never want you to do anything that would make you inconspicuous!”

Harvey Milk

The first openly gay person elected to public office in the United States.

Born: May 22, 1930

Killed by an assassin’s bullets: November 27, 1978

Would you please join me in prayer?

May She who is the Holy Spirit

Bless our minds that we may gain knowledge

Bless our souls that we may grow in faith

And

Bless our hearts that we may learn to love one another even as Her son, Jesus, loved us.

Amen

Our community struggles to exist between two worlds:

On the one hand we strive to be free to celebrate our love for someone of our same gender.

On the other hand we strive for acceptance by the greater heteronormative majority which makes up the world which surrounds us.

It is a struggle which, for each of us, drives us on various levels and in different ways and for each of us becomes manifested in our lives in different ways.

One of the often heard self-descriptive phrases by gay men

– and please excuse me, by exclusively referring to gay men, I don’t mean in using this particular example to exclude anyone of our community who is lesbian, bi sexual or transgender – however, in that I am a gay man, my knowledge of meeting and dating is limited in this instance in that I can only speak to that which I have personal knowledge –

so, within the gay male community, an often heard self-descriptive phrase is that of the individual as describing himself as being “straight acting.”

If you read the personal descriptions on any gay male dating website, you will find numerous personal ads replete with this phrase.

Now I know what someone is intending to convey with this phrase,

It is the intention of the individual to try and convey the fact to the reader of their personal advertisement, that they present themselves in their actions, behaviors, mannerisms, appearance, and speech as being someone who meets the western ideal of masculinity.

They want it understood by anyone who may be interested in meeting them, that should the reader decide to contact the individual who presents himself in this phraseology, that they will meet someone who does not publically, outwardly, appear to be anyone other than someone who is very masculine.

You will also often read this phrase coupled with the adjective “discreet.” The person is both “straight acting” and “discreet” and the person wants to meet and date other gay men who also “straight acting and discreet.”

In this instance the adjective “discreet” usually conveys the message that the person does not draw attention to themselves by their actions, mannerisms, or speech and does not want to draw unwanted public attention to theirself by being with another gay man who will, either purposely or inadvertently, draw attention to either of them by being indiscreet with the way they dress, with the way the speak, with the phrases they employ, or with their mannerisms.

The idea that a gay man – weather one who is closeted and wishes to remain so or one who considers himself to be out and open – wishes to be seen as someone who is masculine is the – if you will – “gold standard” – the ultimate indication of male attractiveness.

This masculine ideal is reinforced by our culture and is reflected in media.

Television and film producers will cast a straight man as a gay character but in most instances they refuse to cast an openly gay man as a straight character because society as a whole does not view a gay man as being the ideal of masculinity.

Hollywood is praised for films like Brokeback Mountain; however, even in the graphic sexual scenes the behavior is extremely aggressive to the point of being seemingly brutal in order to portray an ideal of masculinity.

And in Western culture, what male character is more so the ideal of male masculinity then the American cowboy?

Now, please don’t misunderstand me. I’d rather have a film like Brokeback Mountain then not, however, it is an example of the Western male ideal of masculinity – two gay men who are “straight acting.”

Two straight men that portray two gay men.

Although Hollywood – in both TV and in film – believes that only a straight man can portray a gay man, they will, however, cast an openly gay man in the role of the stereotypical gay character. The stereotypical gay character is one who is usually comedic, is seen as someone who is flamboyant in their expressions and mannerisms, who is usually an interior decorator, a florist, or a wedding planner – or, in many cases the openly gay character is a psychopath as you will remember from the film Silence of the Lambs.

No matter how much the Hollywood entertainment industry touts itself as being a friend of the LGBTQ community and no matter how much the LGBTQ community praises and supports the Hollywood entertainment industry, Hollywood – except in a few rare exceptions – does not cast someone who is openly gay in the role of a straight man because the Hollywood entertainment industry believes that film and television consumers will not accept an openly gay man as being believable as someone who is playing the part of a straight man.

It shouldn’t be so surprising that the Hollywood entertainment industry produces works which support the western ideal of male masculinity – after all, they are in the business of making money and they produce what the market demands – and the dollars spent by the gay male community supports this assumption.

Yes, that’s right – the gay male community at large speaks with their dollars and their dollars indicate that they too support the western ideal of male masculinity.

This is based on not only their Hollywood entertainment dollars but also

– and here please forgive me for mentioning this supposedly taboo subject in church –

By the dollars spent by the gay male community on adult entertainment supports the western ideal of masculinity.

One of the questions I am frequently asked is “What kind of minister are you!?”

Well, to partially answer that question, I am a minister who has experienced having spoken with several adult entertainers in regard to their questions of spirituality.

It always shocks people – even in the LGBTQ community – that a minister would have contact with individuals who work in the adult entertainment industry, however, I assure you that even those who work in the adult entertainment industry have spiritual issues with which they are dealing. My point in mentioning this is that, in terms of dollars spent by the gay male community – the most profitable productions in film and video are those productions which present the performers as being straight but who, for the sake of money, are willing to perform in either film or video with someone of their same gender.

I’m not at all unfamiliar with the personal use of the self-descriptive phrase of being “straight acting” in that – in the past - I too have used the phrase in personal self-description.

Over time, however, as my seIf image has changed and also as my spirituality has changed I have stopped using the phrase “straight acting” to describe myself.

As I was discussing my rationale for this decision with a friend, he jokingly told me as I discussed this with him, “Well, no one would ever take you for straight anyway, so no problem there!”

None the less, I have stopped using this phrase for several various reasons, one of which is that I am neither straight nor am I acting, therefore, I do not feel that the use of that particular phrase is one which is appropriate for me to use.

The second reason why I have chosen not to employ this phrase also partially answers the question I am frequently asked “What kind of minister are you!?”

In that the driving forces in my life are spirituality and justice. In that my life – my profession – my calling – my ministry are all in relation to the two issues of spirituality and justice, my decision to no longer employ the phrase “straight acting” as a self-descriptive phrase is framed within my concerns in regard to spirituality and justice.

In terms of justice, the use of this phrase, I believe, does a disservice to our community.

We are choosing to describe ourselves in terms of a social paradigm that does not reflect who we are as a community.

We are choosing to employ a phrase which reflects a heteronormative definition of what it means to be a man.

We are choosing to employ a phrase which reflects a heteronormative definition of what constitutes masculinity and attractiveness.

When we are choosing to use this phrase, we are, in effect choosing to deliberately keep both part of ourselves, and part of our community, in the closet for the sake of holding onto the mistaken belief that in so doing we will be accepted and approved of by the greater heteronormative majority.

By using this phrase we are enforcing a stereotype which tells some of our community that they are not considered as being either attractive or desirable because their clothing, their patters and inflections of speech, their mannerisms, their hand gestures, are all things that are not desirable either within our community or our society at large.

It isn’t, however, this seemingly innocuous phrase which does an injustice to our community, it is reflective of a larger and more insidious problem and that is one of discrimination within our own community. For within these same personal ads where we choose to employ this phrase, we also read phrases like

“white only,”

“height and weight propionate only,”

“healthy only,”

“hiv neg only,”

and

“no fats, fems, or fairies.”

Please know that I am fully aware that we all have our own tastes in the persons to whom we are attracted. We each have certain aspects of attraction for which we seek in possible partners, yet, as we all know, words do matter!

Words matter because they are a reflection of our true thoughts and attitudes.

Words matter because they have the ability to do hurt and harm to others.

Words matter because they can inflict pain which can be more sever and more long lasting then can physical pain.

Words matter because not only are we hurting other members of our own community, in choosing to employ hurtful language, we are also hurting ourselves.

We cannot expect of society’s heteronormative majority to extend to us the courtesy of using words that are not harmful and hurtful of us, if we are not willing to do the same thing in regard to members of our own community.

We are quick to condemn a straight person who uses harmful and hurtful words when speaking of same gender loving individuals. We don’t have any problem at all of instantly pointing the finger and yelling “Homophobic!” Yet our community is replete with our doing the same thing to other members of our own community.

No one expects us to be receptive to the interests of everyone we meet. Our attractions and desires don’t work that way. Yet, at the same time, we can choose to take the extra step, to go the extra mile, and we can choose to describe our likes, our dislikes, what we find attractive in another person by choosing not to use demeaning phrases.

In regard to matters of spirituality, the Scriptural passage we heard read tonight is reflective of this.

In the parable, the story, which Jesus relates to his followers, he describes how three different workers are given talents by their employer who is going away on a long journey.

The word talent, when used within the Gospel narrative, is a reference to a measure of weight. When Jesus refers to the workers as receiving talents, he is referring to a particular system of weights and measures wherein a talent is a unit of measure for weight for precious metals most usually silver or gold.

So, when these three workers receive, respectively, five, two and one talents, they are receiving from their employer five, two and one talents of silver or gold.

It is not accidental that the use of the word talent in modernity comes to us from being a unit of measure for something precious, something valuable, such as either silver or gold.

So it is with each of us. When we were created, God placed within each of us something very valuable, something precious, a talent unique to us.

God gave to some of us the gift of being able to love someone else of our same gender, and equally important, for us to be able to receive the love of someone else of our same gender.

Hand in hand with this unique gift – this unique talent – which God birthed within each of us, is our prophetic voice.

This is our ability to speak to power, to speak to injustice because we have experienced it within our own lives as a result of our God given gift of same gender sexuality.

To offer yet another answer to the question often asked of me “What type of minister are you!?”

I can answer that I am a minister who has received as a gift from God the gift of same gender loving sexuality. In turn this gift, birthed in me at my creation, enables me to have a unique outlook on the world around me and it further gives me insights into the injustices which come from power and the abuse of power.

What I am not is a minister who is someone who frequently preaches on the concept of sin.

My prophetic voice allows me to see sin not in terms of the traditional definition as sin being “those acts which we commit that in turn separates us from God.” Instead, for me, if we are going to consider the concept of there being sin, I see sin as being something completely different then does most of the rest of traditional, orthodox Christianity.

For me sin is not that we love someone of our same gender. Instead for me, sin would be taking the gift which God placed within each of us and burying it as did the worker we heard about in tonight’s Gospel passage reading.

Just as the employer in the Gospel passage did not give the same gift to each of his workers, God does not give the same gift to each of God’s children.

In the narrative the employer gave different talents – different abilities – different unique gifts to each individual worker. The problem was not that each worker received different talents; the problem was what they did or did not do with their talents.

Just as the last worker buried his talent, we do the same thing when we deny our God given gift of same gender sexuality.

When we bury our gift – when we deny our gift – when we try to hide our gift - when try to curtail our gift by imposing standards and ethics onto our community which in any way inhibit the full expression of the gift which God place within us, to me if that is a sin.

For when we, as a community, try to impose societal standards of masculinity, of beauty, of sexuality onto our community, it’s no different than trying to fit a square peg into a round hole.

They don’t work for us, because no matter how hard we try to be like the majority society around us, we are not.

Simply by the fact of who we love, we will always be a unique minority in society.

That’s why I so love the quote I read earlier by Harvey Milk:

“I want you to always wear the tightest jeans possible and I never want you to do anything that would make you inconspicuous!”

When we try to make ourselves inconspicuous, we bury our talent, we try to live with one foot in the closet and one foot out.

What’s even sadder is that when we work to make ourselves inconspicuous, we silence our prophetic voice.

We become silent.

My prayer for you tonight is that you can find within yourself the ability to accept the talent which God gave you at your birth.

May you discover the freedom which can be yours when you celebrate your talent.

May you come to realize the great love your Heavenly Parent has for you!

May you never desire to bury your talent!

And, as Harvey said,

“May you always wear the tightest jeans possible and may you never be inconspicuous!”

Amen!

"I Got the Wedding Bell Blues!"

2011-11-06T10:52:00.000-05:00

"I've Got the Wedding Bell Blues!"

The Season After Pentecost

Revised Common Lectionary Reading
Matthew 25:1-13 (Inclusive Bible)

Jesus said to them: "Then again the Kingdom of Heaven could be likened to ten attendants who took their lamps and went to meet their bridal party. Five of them were wise; five were foolish. When the foolish ones took their lamps, they didn't take any oil with them, but the wise ones took enough oil to keep their lamps burning The bridal party was delayed, so they fell asleep.
"At midnight there was a cry: 'Here comes the bridal party! Lets go out to meet them!' Then all of the attendants rose and trimmed their lamps. The foolish ones said to the wise, 'Give us some of your oil, for our lamps are going out.' But the wise replied, 'Perhaps there won't be enough for us; run to the dealers and get some more for yourselves.'
"While the foolish ones went to buy more oil, the bridal party arrived; and those who were ready went to the marriage feast with them, and the door was shut. When the foolish attendants returned, the pleaded to be let in. The doorkeeper replied, 'The truth is, I don't know you.'
"So, stay awake, for you don't know the day or the hour."

A few years ago, before I left Virginia, a dear friend of mine and I were on a car ride in the mountains of Virginia and my friend chose to take the opportunity of our time together during the car ride to ask me questions he had about the end times - the second coming of Christ, the Christian Testament book of Revelations, etc. He had been raised in a very strict Southern Baptist household and as a boy he had spent all of his summers away from home at a Southern Baptist youth Bible camp. He explained that both at home and away at camp, he had experienced what most of us who grew up in religiously conservative/Fundamentalist/Evangelical households had experienced: An extremely large dose of RAPTURE theology. His knowledge was an exact recitation of the particular theological view point regarding this distinct interpretation of this eschatology (end of time theology): The second coming of Christ (the rapture) would be foretold by distinct signs and warnings. Jesus would return "in the clouds" to rapture, or take up to heaven, all of the people who were saved (born again) leaving behind on earth everyone who had rejected Jesus Christ as their personal Savior. With this occurrence, the Anti-Christ appears on the world stage, marks everyone's forehead or the back of their hand, with the Mark of the Beast (the number 666). At this point seven years of unspeakable worldwide terror is unleashed against the planet, and those who were left on earth after the rapture, in the form of divine judgments from God. At the end of this seven year period, Christ returns to earth again, only this time he physically descends to earth (as opposed to appearing in the clouds as he did seven years previous), at which time he defeats the Anti-Christ in a final battle. After this, one thousand years of peace occurs on earth as Jesus Christ personally rules over the planet as King.

At the end of my friend's ensuing and lengthy questions regarding this theology, his real question revolved around one central, and very sad, question:

"When Jesus comes back, will I be left behind because I'm gay?"

During out lengthy and extended conversation I explained to my friend that the theological interpretation which he had recited so succinctly, was only one interpretation. I told him how theologians of the previous millennium had interpreted the same Christian writings in light of their experiences with the persecution they had faced at the hands of the Roman empire. I told my friend how throughout the history of Western Christianity, various theologians had also interpreted the exact same writings in terms of their own experiences: The theologians of the middle ages were convinced that what they were seeing happen around them as the Black Plague swept through Europe was indeed the end of time and as late as World War II, theologians wrote extensive books in regard to Adolph Hitler being the Anti-Christ and his actions were interpreted as ushering in the end of the world. Yet, there was little I could do to dissuade my friend of his overwhelming fear that because he is gay, he will be left behind when the rapture occurs. Try as I might to calm his fears, I did not feel I was successful. My friend finally asked me "Well what are you going to say to Jesus when he returns!?" My answer left my friend aghast as I told him "When Jesus returns I will say 'Hey, Jesus!'"

My answer to my friend was not one of being flippant. Throughout most of my life, I had experienced the same overwhelming dread and fear as my friend in regard to struggling with trying to meld my Christianity and my sexuality in light of being "left behind" when Jesus returns. As a teenager struggling with my sexuality, my fear of being "left behind" was so overwhelming at times that very nearly every Sunday at church at the end of the service when the Pastor invited people to come forward to the altar to "make their lives right with Jesus," I went forward so often and so many times that the Pastor actually told me to stop coming to the altar every Sunday. The fear of being "left behind" became nearly irrational. If I came home to an empty house because my family were unexpectedly not at home, the thoughts would run through my head wondering if the rapture had occurred.

If you want to know a person's theological belief system, you need only to be aware of their end time theology. Within the religious paradigm of conservatism in which my friend and I both grew up, end time/rapture theology permeates, drives and very nearly dictates the entirety of the theology. It is foundational to understanding the theological point of view: All who are truly saved (born again) will be reward by being raptured to heaven while God's most dreaded wrath is meted out to the very deserving non-born again people left on earth. All perceived injustices against born again Christians will be righted. All non-saved will receive the punishment they deserve and all who had the spiritual insight to become saved will rule with Christ on earth (including, by the way, golden crowns which raptured born again believers will receive as rewards for all their hard work in getting people saved before the end of time).

This theology is why Evangelical Christians are so extremely supportive of the nation state of Israel. According to their theology, when the nation state of Israel came into existence in 1948 a divine count down clock for the return of Christ to rapture the born again Christians away from earth was started. In order for the alarm on this divine count down clock to sound (which will be the moment when Christ appears in the sky to remove all saved Christians) the nation state of Israel must be supported and preserved at all costs. It's this theology which does not allow the religious right politicians to be able to discuss any real, meaningful solution for the issue of Palestine. They see any support for Palestine and it's people to be contrary to their theological understanding of the end of time.

This theology is why discussing things like homelessness, universal health care, and the ecology are all dismissed by most religious right politicians. What matters is getting people saved! Nothing else matters! What's more important? A home here on earth or an eternal home in heaven? What does universal health care matter if a person isn't saved? What's more important? Their eternal souls or their earthly bodies? This was demonstrated very vividly during the administration of Ronald Reagan and his Secretary of the Interior James Watt who, as a born again Christian, was not supportive of environmental issues saying that there would be a new heaven and a new earth when Jesus returns.

This theology also serves to explain the hatred of same gender loving individuals. Within the theology of the religious conservatism people chose to sin. The belief is that people are born sinful and make the choice to stay that way unless they become born again (saved) from their sin. When this salvation occurs, the individual becomes a new person and no longer sins. If the person makes the choice to sin, they do so of their own free will. They chose to rebel against God. They become a "backslider" - a person who chooses to sin and to remove themselves from the salvation of God which they received when they became born again. Therefore, the theology dictates that if a same gender loving person is saved (born again), they cannot continue to be with persons of their same gender because to do so nullifies their salvation experience. In this theological paradigm, all same gender loving individuals choose to be with persons of their same gender and this is part of the reason why Christ will be forced to return to rapture out the born again Christians. The "sin of homosexuality" (according to this type of end time theology) will become so prevalent and thus so utterly pollute the earth that God will have no other choice then to remove the Christians from the earth and to divinely judge those who remain because of their choice to be with persons of their own gender as well as anyone who supports, or approves of, "their lifestyles."

You would imagine that this theology would also prevent Evangelical Christians from being supportive of the nation state of Israel. After all, this theology makes the assumption that Jews, as non-Christians, would also be deserving of divine retribution. Not so! Unlike same gender loving individuals, Jews will all receive a special dispensation at the end of time ("all Israel will be saved")! Accordingly, at the end of time, Moses and Elijah will return to earth and tell the Jewish people that Jesus really was the Messiah. When they realize this, they too will become saved (born again) and thus escape punishment. Sadly for those of us who are same gender loving individuals, we do not receive this last minute ticket out. For those of us who supposedly make this "life style choice," our sin is such that it is described in sermons as being "a stench to God's nostrils" and therefore so offensive to God that God must, as a matter of divine justice, condemn us without mercy to hell.

You can see why those of us like my friend and I who were raised on this nearly round the clock feeding of theological end time rapture theology were (and many still are) obsessed with the thought that we will be "left behind." We never heard any other interpretation of Christian scripture taught or preached to us. It was all we knew. Today's Lectionary reading is an example of this: The traditional interpretation of this passage is that Jesus is using a parable to teach about the end of time. In the parable the bride groom who comes in the middle of the night represents Christ and the second coming. The five wise wedding attendants represent those who are saved, born again. They know the bride groom (Christ) will be coming (although not at what precise time) and they prepare themselves by having oil for their lamps (their salvation) accomplished. The five foolish wedding attendants are those like me - same gender loving individuals - who know that the bride groom (Christ) is coming and we know that we should have oil for our lamps (become born again and stop being same gender loving individuals), yet in our foolishness we don't prepare and we are locked out of the wedding banquet (heaven).

Seems reasonable, right? Yes, if you don't try to compare it to history and you see that perhaps one possible explanation is that Christ is speaking guardedly of events surrounding the condition of his homeland at the time of the Roman imperial occupation and the fact that he is set on his path to continue on to Jerusalem and to force a conflict with the imperial government as represented in those who made the choice to cooperate with their oppressors (the Jewish High Priest and other religious leaders who serve by appointments from Rome). Perhaps the traditional interpretation seems reasonable if you choose to not consider it's meaning in light of all of the other teachings of Christ. How does this teaching compare to Christ's other teachings regarding who he "knows" and does not know. In other of Christ's teachings Christ indicates that those whom he does not know are those who refuse to give a cup of water to the thirsty, or not give clothing to the naked, or not provide shelter to the homeless, or those who do not visit people in prison. So, in comparison to the other teaching of Christ, perhaps the "foolish" wedding attendants are those who know what is expected of them by Christ (to visit the prisoners, to do justice, to love mercy, to feed the hungry) yet, choose not to do any of these things.

Fear is a powerful weapon. It keeps people's behaviors in check and thus helps to keep oppressive religious leaders and repressive religious systems in power. To be free of fear removes other's ability to control you. They become powerless. Remember the first words which announced the birth of Christ were "Fear not!" The message of Christ is not one of fear, but of hope.

My prayer for you is that you may find in Christ "the perfect love which casts out all fear" and that you may also be able to say to Jesus when he returns "Hey, Jesus!"

"Teach Your Children Well"

2011-10-31T06:19:00.002-04:00

"Teach Your Children Well"

The Season After Pentecost

Revised Common Lectionary Reading

Matthew 23:1-12 (Inclusive Bible)

Jesus told the crowds and his disciples, "The religious scholars and the Pharisees have succeeded Moses as your teachers; therefore, perform every observance they tell you to. But don't follow their example; even they don't do what they say. They tie up heavy loads and lay them on other's shoulders, while they themselves will not life even their little finger to help alleviate the crushing burden.
"All their works are performed to be seen. They widen their phylacteries and wear huge tassels.* They are fond of places of honor at banquets and the front seat in synagogues. They love respectful greetings in public and being called 'Rabbi.'**
"But as for you, avoid being called 'Rabbi.' For you have only one Teacher, and you are all sisters and brothers. And don't call anyone on earth you 'Mother' or 'Father.' You have only one Parent - our loving God in heaven. Avoid being called leaders. You have only one leader - the Anointed One.
The greatest among you will be the one who serves the rest. Those who exalt themselves will be humbled, but those who humble themselves will be exalted."

The last two weeks have been a theological puzzle for me. I admit to being lost in a fog as to what to write and publish, thus my absence over the past two weeks. It wasn't that I had writer's block, nor was it the case that I wasn't motivated to write, it was that I was overwhelmed with information and literally didn't know how to condense it into the limits of a blogg. I attempted to divide it over two Sundays, however, that too proved to be a Herculean exercise. For the two weeks I was preparing for the Revised Common Lectionary Alternate First Readings from the Hebrew Scriptures, the Book of Leviticus 19:1-2, 15-18. It wasn't so much the particular section itself which was problematic, the problem was that it was from the Book of Leviticus. Have you ever actually sat down and READ this book!? It is a mind boggling adventure into the absurd. My only comfort was that even the most scholarly and respected of academics and theologians don't know what to do with this book! What I did find, particularly from commentators on the far ends of the theological spectrum - both the religious right and the religious left - is that both do the same thing with Leviticus: Avoid it!

The religious left and the religious right both, coming from their respective religious view points, suggest tossing it out and just ignoring it. That wasn't so much of a surprise to me for the commentators of a left leaning theological paradigm, after all Leviticus has been the source of much, if not most, of the religious hate and violence (particularly from Christians) thrown at the world. If you're looking for a license to rape, kill, destroy, enslave, and persecute anyone, just start your journey through Leviticus and you will find the theological license to inflict whatever your particular prejudice and hatred is onto others! Within it's pages God permits slavery (including the right of a parent to sell their children into slavery), the subjugation of women as second class citizens (who exist on a level only slightly higher than that of slaves), rape (as long as it is inflicted onto the women of your defeated enemy, it's all good), as well as genocide as long as it's not your own people - you just have to make sure you declare some other group of people as being "the enemies of God" (that's super easy to do! It works for any person or group of people who worship differently then you and you've got instant enemies of God) and you're good to completely annihilate every last man, woman (except those who you want to rape and enslave), and child (yes, that's correct, children are fair game too). With this in mind, I can easily see why commentators from the religious left just throw up their hands with this theological mystery called Leviticus and basically give the advice "Just ignore it completely!" What surprised me, however, is that in their own way, yet coming at it from a different theological lens and for completely different theological reasons, this is also the advice of the commentators on the religious right.

I suppose I shouldn't have been surprised that religious right commentators would also suggest tossing Leviticus out, it was, however, their reasoning which differed from that of the commentators of the religious left which was the surprise. Whereas the commentators from the religious left are appalled at the hatred and violence of Leviticus, for the most part, the commentators on the religious right applaud the God blessed destruction of Leviticus! They are all for it! There are actually some who suggest, most particularly those coming from the Dominion Theology school of thought, that it is entirely proper for Christians to exercise the destruction and violence as outlined in Leviticus! What is most confusing, however, is that the religious right commentators are VERY selective as to which particular parts of Leviticus should be enforced and which parts should be ignored. Their rationale to this is based on their theological belief that Jesus fulfilled all of the requirements of the Hebrew Scripture laws and, therefore, Christians are exempt from being required to observe them - that is except for one and that one is the supposed Leviticus prohibition against male same gender sexuality. This one, they claim, remains forever fixed and unmovable. So much so that even Jesus' miracle working death, which totally and forever completely freed ever Christian from every place and every time, from ever being required to observe any of the Leviticus laws, was not enough to remove this supposed law. This Leviticus law is forever fixed in time and space, established before the foundation of the universe was laid and not even the power of the sacrificial death and the resurrection from the dead of Jesus can change it.

Very convenient for them! After all when you build your theology on the backs of dead gay men, it's kind of hard to justify your theological license which otherwise completely violates every teaching of Jesus!

It also makes it very convenient to ignore history. Yes, history! That pesky, little thing called historical fact! It so gets in the way of hate filled theology! See, for over a 500 year period of time - let me say that again - for over a five hundred year period of time - the supposed, inviolate Leviticus law against male same gender sexuality was not interpreted as being a prohibition as is it now seen. The idea that the prohibition was a blanket one in regard to all male same gender sexuality developed over time! During that pesky 500 year period of time, the supposed unmovable Leviticus prohibition regarding all male same gender sexuality was interpreted as being in regard to incest. The supposed prohibition is surrounded by other verses outlining what constitutes incest within the family relation paradigm, so for a little over 500 years, scholars, theologians and clerics, who obviously did not know the proper interpretation, actually taught that the Leviticus prohibition regarding same gender male sexuality was in regard to sexuality between male members of the same family - incest. (A great work which touches on the topic is a book by one of my former Professors, Mark D. Jordan at Harvard Divinity School, The Invention of Sodomy in Christian Theology).

With this kind of absurd rationale in place, it's no wonder the LGBTQ community so readily sides with the commentators of the religious left and say "Ignore it!" After all, this ridiculous, convoluted reading of the Leviticus narrative by the religious right has been the foundation for all of the religious hatred. One commentator from the religious left wrote "the Leviticus text is not redeemable." I completely understand the frustration felt by the commentator, however, the difficulty with the idea of ignoring Leviticus, whether from the religious left or from the religious right, is problematic in that Jesus quoted Leviticus. I think, however, his quote from the Leviticus text, as well as his words in today's Lectionary reading, are indicative of how, even for Jesus, this work is also a conundrum. How was it possible for Jesus to justify his teachings to his students when his teachings seemed to be in contradiction to the letter of the law which is Leviticus? The teachings of Jesus seem to stand in opposition to the Leviticus text. Whereas the Leviticus text demands the punishment of death for certain violations, Jesus teaches mercy. Whereas the Leviticus text requires stoning a person to death for certain violations, Jesus teaches to "let the person who has no sin throw the first stone." The Leviticus text requires death for the person who violates the Sabbath law, yet Jesus heals on the Sabbath, allows his students to pick grain on the Sabbath, and instructions those whom he has healed to violate the Sabbath laws by telling them to "pick up your bed and walk!" The law teaches that those who do not work, do not eat. Jesus tells his students to feed, clothe and house everyone. The law teaches personal vengeance. Jesus teaches his student's to "turn the other cheek." The law teaches warfare. Jesus teaches his student's to be peace makers.

When Jesus is approached and asked which is the greatest of the Leviticus laws, Jesus answers by quoting from Leviticus: "Love God with all the power of your being and love your neighbor as you love yourself. On these two precepts rest all of the laws and all of the prophets." When Jesus responds "Love God with all the power of your being and love your neighbor as yourself," he is quoting directly from Leviticus. I believe that his next statement "On these two rest all of the laws and all of the prophets," is Jesus' way of dealing with the problematic Leviticus text. Jesus, as a teacher, does what he suggests the teachers of his day did not do, as well as the teachers of today do not do, and that is relieve a burden of laws which is a morass of confusion. Trying to make heads or tails of it, let alone actually trying to justify it's use in modernity, is a burden which is too great to put on anyone, so do the best that you can do and that is to "Love God with all the power of your being and love your neighbor as yourself" and by so doing, all the other confusion which surrounds the text will take care of itself.

It's called GRACE, by the way.

"Come Out, Come Out Wherever You Are!"

2011-10-11T07:32:00.004-04:00

'Gay brothers and sisters,... You must come out. Come out... to your parents... I know that it is hard and will hurt them but think about how they will hurt you in the voting booth! Come out to your relatives... come out to your friends... if indeed they are your friends. Come out to your neighbors... to your fellow workers... to the people who work where you eat and shop... Once and for all, break down the myths, destroy the lies and distortions. For your sake. For their sake. For the sake of the youngsters who are becoming scared by the votes from Dade to Eugene.'
"That's What America Is," speech given on Gay Freedom Day. June 25, 1978 in San Francisco

National Coming Out Day Tuesday October 11, 2011

The Season After Pentecost
Revised Common Lectionary Reading
Matthew 22:1-14 (The Inclusive Bible. Selections)

Jesus spoke to them again using a moral story, he said, "Paradise is like this: There was a certain sovereign who prepared a feast for the wedding of the family's heir; but when the sovereign sent out workers to call the invited guests, they wouldn't come. The sovereign sent other workers, telling them to say to the guests, 'I have prepared this feast for you. Everything is ready, come to the wedding!' But they took no notice and didn't come...Then the sovereign told the workers. 'The wedding feast is ready, but the guests I invited won't come and now I see they don't deserve the honor. Go out to the crossroads in the town and invite everyone you see.' The workers went out into the streets and collected everyone they met, the good and the bad alike, until the wedding hall of the sovereign was filled with guests."

In 1987 there was the Second National March on Washington for Lesbian and Gay Rights. Sometimes referred to as the Great March because of it's vast size and number of participants, the 1987 march was a direct response to three issues directly and adversely impacting the Lesbian, Gay, Bi Sexual, Transgender and Queer communities in the United States:

1) The AIDS epidemic.
2) The Ronald Reagan administration's nearly universal lack of acknowledgement of the AIDS epidemic.
3) The 1986 United States Supreme Court decision in Bowers v Hardwick which upheld the criminality laws of the state of Georgia regarding sexual intercourse as they applied to sex between two consenting, adult men (it wouldn't be until 2003 in Lawrence v Texas that the Supreme Court would overturn it's own decision and decriminalize same gender sexual intercourse between consenting adults).

The following year, in recognition of the anniversary of the Second March on Washington for Lesbian and Gay Rights, October 11th was chosen as the date for the observance of National Coming Out Day. The goal of the day was that it would be observed as a day specifically set aside for the open and honest discussion of issues relevant to the lives of Lesbian, Gay, Bi Sexual, Transgender and Queer individuals and as such the day would be a unique day which would allow those Lesbian, Gay, Bi Sexual, Transgender and Queer individuals who lived their lives secretly to be able to reveal their true identity or as is commonly referred to "come out of the closet."

For the most part, National Coming Out Day is observed internationally in Western nations among those being the United States, Canada, the U.K., Switzerland, and Germany. This has been seen by many as being significant in that a day which has transpired to become observed as a day to celebrate a person's coming out, instead makes it a process which lends itself to being an event celebrated by persons living in areas of power and privilege. Although I do believe this general observation has merit, I also know it to be applicable to persons in the west including the United States.

A nationally known GLBT (Gay, Lesbian, Bi Sexual and Transgender) organization issued a report in which they graded all of the major U.S. television networks (cable and otherwise) in regard to the number of GLBT characters seen in their programs. What was troubling for me, however, is that the report lent some degree of credence to the proposition that coming out may be an event of privilege because nearly all of the characters of nearly all of the television networks were characters who were nearly all white, mostly all male, almost all young and the Hollywood ideal of beauty, and nearly all were portrayed as either coming from privileged backgrounds or as holding jobs which provided substantial financial incomes. A far cry from reality.

For most people, coming out is not an episode of Will and Grace.

Most GLBTQ persons are not (contrary to popular stereotype and Hollywood portrayal) young, white, thin, stylishly dressed men with effeminate mannerisms, who are clothing designers, florists, hair stylists, performing artists or wedding planners with vast reserves of "disposable income."

We are all of all nations. We occupy the world. Our lives are as varied as are human beings. We are of all ages. Our ethnicities are all encompassing. We are of all times, all places, all peoples.

In the United States there is an epidemic of homeless LGBTQ youth. According to the Federal Government's own figures, although LGBTQ youth make up between 5% and 7% of the total youth population, 40% of all homeless youth are LGBTQ meaning that the number of homeless gay youth nationwide is approximately 2.8 million persons and that number is growing yearly by 320,000 to 400,000 persons. Of the 2.8 million homeless LGBTQ youth, the average age is 14.5 years old. 62% have been sexually assaulted. 90% were physically victimized and bullied in school. 88% were physically victimized by their own family and were evicted from the family home when they came out to their families. 58% were physically victimized and/or sexually victimized when they were in any type of government assistance program (i.e. foster homes or other youth shelters). 66% support themselves as sex workers. 68% are substance abusers.

Of the 88% of homeless LGBTQ youth who were physically victimized, and evicted, by their own families; nearly all of the families justify their physical abuse of their LGBTQ children based on religious reasons: The Bible told them to do it.

For most there is a priced to be paid for coming out. We lose friends. We lose families. We lose our homes. In many places we can legally lose our jobs as most states do not protect sexual orientation in the work place. For those of us who name the name of Christ, we lost our churches when we came out, or as was my occurrence, my church kicked me out. They literally opened the church doors, told me to leave and revoked my church membership. They did, however, send me a letter after the fact telling me that they had to kick me out of the church and revoke my church membership because "they loved me."

My coming out was a slow and arduous process. I didn't begin my coming out process until I was 37 years old. A combination of abject fear and internalized homophobia (self hatred) kept me closeted until late in life. Up until that time, I had only had one same gender romantic experience and that was as a teenager in high school. Yet, there was never a time in my life that I didn't know that I was somehow different then other boys. I did not always have the vocabulary to put a name to my feelings, however, my earliest memories are those of knowing intuitively that what I would later be able to identify as my sexuality, was not that of others of my gender.

The first person I came out to was a person I met through the internet via an AOL chat room. I had purchased my first desk top computer and with my very slow dial up modem, I began a conversation with someone who remains a dear and close friend today. I was able to ask him questions and he never laughed at me or indicated them to be silly. He was always a kind and patient friend no matter how many questions I asked. It was through him that I made my first gay friends and it was to this group of five gay men that I began, in earnest, my coming out process. Coming out for me was not a one time occasion. Over many years and through my personal, spiritual and psychological introspection, I was able to reach the point in my life where I was able to proudly announce to the world en masse, "I'm gay!"

Coming out as a Christian gay man was something I knew I had to do. It was not a question of remaining closeted although my journey out of the closet was prolonged. I could not rectify my Christian witness with living a lie. I compromised not only my personal integrity, I also compromised my Christian witness. Until I was able to be true to my self, I was not able to be true to others. I was not able to be effective in Christian ministry from closeted seclusion.

Although I cannot compare the price of my coming out cost to me in terms of comparison to the price paid by others, none the less, I am daily well aware of the continued cost. I have been denied jobs (even by religious institutions which proclaim to be open and affirming) because they told me that I was "too out of the closet" and that I "make straight people uncomfortable." I have been told that I need to doctor my resume, not to inflate my self, but to deflate my self. I have been advised not to include so many references to "gay work" and "gay ministry." I have turned down jobs with churches when told by them that they would hire me if I would "tone down the gay thing." My coming out, like so many others, came with a price and for me that price has been my choice to be true to myself and my Christian witness at the cost of my ability to make money.

You would imagine that given the statistics which I cited regarding the epidemic of homeless LGBTQ youth in the United States as well as my own story of personal financial cost that I would caution against coming out. You would imagine that at the very least I would advise caution before taking the leap out of the proverbial closet. You would imagine that I would tell someone to think carefully about the decision and to weigh the pros and cons before deciding to come out.

You would be wrong.

To quote Shakespeare "To thine own self be true!" or better yet, to quote Christ "What does it profit an individual to gain the whole world and yet lose their own soul?"

I don't intend to sound flippant in saying this; I do so with great weight of conviction. I am not just quoting platitudes for the sake of quoting. This is an issue to which I give great weight and seriousness, however, if you are asking my advice, be certain you really want to hear what I have to say before asking! To remain hidden in needless shame and fear empowers your enemies. To remain hidden in needless shame and fear will destroy you. You carry around a burden God has never asked you to carry.

You may not be in a situation where for your personal safety you are not able to come out in the way you would imagine, but come out you do need to do! You need to do it for your own peace of mind and to claim your own soul. Find someone who you know you can trust. Find a LGBTQ organization and come out to them. Come out to your cat or dog! Tell someone! For your own salvation, open the closet door just one tiny crack and whisper into the ear of a trusted friend "I'm gay!"

You have been invited by God to join in a celebration of life! A banquet of amazing life, experiences and people await you. You may not be able to come out to the world today, but the journey of a life time of happiness begins with one small step. My prayer for you is that in God you find the strength to be the person God created you to be! Embrace your God given gift of same gender sexuality! Embrace the God who loves you unconditionally! Embrace God who created you as a reflection of the Divine! Take one step toward the light!

In the name of Christ,

Amen!

"Come Out, Come Out Wherever You Are!"

"Take a letter, Maria."

2011-10-02T14:04:00.001-04:00

"Take a letter, Maria."

The Season After Pentecost

Revised Common Lectionary Reading
The Letter of Paul to the Philippians 3:4b-14 (The Inclusive Bible)

"Yet, I can be confident even there! If they even think they have the right to put their trust in external evidence, I have even more right! I was circumcised on the eighth day, being of the stock of Israel and the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrew origin; in legal observance I was a Pharisee, and so zealous that I persecuted the Christians. I was above reproach when it came to observance to the letter of the Law, settling all matters based on the Law.
But all those things I used to consider gain, I now count as all things lost for the sake of Christ. What is more, I consider everything a loss in light of the surpassing knowledge of my Savior Jesus Christ, for whose sake I have forfeited everything. I count everything else, all the things I considered important, as refuse, so that now only Christ is my wealth. Indeed that I may be bound in Christ not having any justice of my own based on observing every letter of the Law. The justice I possess is that which comes through faith in Christ. It originated with God and is based on faith. All I want is to know Christ, and the power of the resurrection...
It's not that I have reached perfection yet, or have already finished my life's course; but I am still running in the race in order to grab hold of the prize if possible, since Christ Jesus grabbed hold of me. Family, I don't think of myself as having reached the finish line. I give no thought to what lies behind me, but I continue to push ahead. My entire attention is based on reaching the finish line as I run toward the prize - the high calling of God in Christ Jesus."

People have a love/hate relationship with the man we refer to as Saint Paul. There are very few instances of people having a middle ground with respect to Paul. People either love him or they hate him. Historically, among most heteronormative Christians, he's loved, embraced and exalted very nearly to idol status. Among minorities, the aversion to Paul ranges from dislike all the way to extreme hatred and revulsion. It shouldn't be surprising that so many people have such a hatred of Paul, after all, the words attributed to Paul have been used to endorse and perpetuate slavery, the subjugation women, and as every gay person knows only all too well, they are used as the basis for the homophobic justification for the spiritual, psychological and physical abuse of Gay, Lesbian, Bi Sexual, Transgender and Queer people.

I once heard one of my spiritual mentors, Rev. Peter Gomes, relate the story of his grandmother and her own aversion to Paul. Peter's grandmother was a very devout, Baptist Christian. According to Peter, she was one of the great spiritual influences in his life. Peter told us that when his grandmother passed away, he was bequeathed his grandmother's Bible. He said that he was surprised when he received it to discover that his grandmother had taken scissors and cut all the words of Paul out of her Bible! She left a note to Peter explaining that the words of Paul were not the words of Jesus!

There are more words attributed to Paul in the Christian New Testament than there are words attributed to Jesus. The words attributed to Paul have become the basis for the incarnation of the Christian church. What is referred to in modernity as the Church is a Pauline institution. Christianity has taken the words of Paul and made them the laws of their institution. The theology and doctrine of the Western Christian Church are based primarily on the words attributed to Paul. The head of the Church in Jerusalem was James, sometimes referred to as James the Just, or as the brother of Jesus. Yet, there is only one Christian New Testament letter attributed to James. Church tradition teaches that Peter held the "keys to the kingdom." He is said by many Christians to have been the first Pope, however, there are only two New Testament writings attributed to Peter. The writings attributed to Paul, on the other hand, are the majority of the Christian Testament. There were many writings attributed to many of the persons mentioned in the Christian Gospels. There are Gospels attributed to Peter, Thomas, and Mary, yet none of them made the final cut. Paul, however, was given a place of preeminence primarily because the words of Paul are great Empire language! When the Emperor has picked obscure and historically persecuted Christianity out of all of the multitude of religions covering the Empire to be the Empire's official religion; you kind of lean towards making sure that the writings you pick are good Empire language and Paul fits the bill! "Fear God and honor the King!" "Submit to authorities whether Kings or Emperors for they are put in place by God!" "Slaves obey your masters!" "Women keep silent in Church!" Really good Empire language! Language liked by Emperors! Language liked by oppressors. Sadly for the people who are the oppressed, historically, there has been little recourse for them to escape their oppression. The Christian church declared the words of the Bible to be "God breathed" and perfect. They "mean what they say and they say what they mean." There was no questioning, arguing, or violating them because to do so meant that you were a heretic and Christians liked tying heretics to wooden stakes and burning them alive. That the words of Paul are declared by the church as being "God breathed" is one of the reasons why it's so difficult to have discussions with those who embrace this infallible, without error view of the Bible, because as they will tell you, you're argument is not with them, your argument is with God! Pleas for justice, spiritual or otherwise, fall on deaf ears. What is equally sad for everyone is that the words of oppression attributed to Paul are only a segment of the entirety of writings which carry his name. Within the writings which carry Paul's name there are words of comfort, encouragement, and amazing stories of people who were outside the majority yet found their spiritual paths based on the words and ministry of Paul, all of which, however, gets lost because oppressors pick and choose which words to highlight and which to ignore. Meanwhile those who are the victims of the oppressors do not embrace the words of Paul which offer comfort, encouragement, and enlightenment because they have been so harmed and attacked by the words embraced by their oppressors that they "throw out the baby with the bath water."

The Christian church was originally seen and described as a branch of Judaism, yet that spiritual heritage has all but virtually disappeared from Christianity. The requirement of the church was for Gentiles to first convert to Judaism and to adhere to the laws and precepts of the Jewish faith in order for them to then become Christians. Paul, however, did an amazing thing for Gentiles! He basically theologically invented a new version of Christianity for Gentiles. Paul tells Gentiles that they are not required to follow the laws of Judaism. Paul places Gentile Christians under GRACE instead of the law. The letter of Paul to the Gentile Christians in Galatia is the Gentile Gospel! It is one of the most astounding pieces of theology in the history of Christianity! It's significance, however, is lost on both oppressor and oppressed alike. The Christian Church has made the choice to ignore the words of Paul to the Galatian Gentile Christians and instead to require of their members to follow strict sets of rules, regulations, laws and requirements that are the antithesis of GRACE! Every rule, every regulation, every law, every requirement set and established by the Christian church negates Grace. To violate a rule, regulation, law or requirement is the basis for going to hell. Keeping every rule, regulation, law and requirement is the basis for going to heaven. Neither of these propositions is required by Grace. Grace means that there is no rule, no regulation, no law, no requirement which I can keep that will grant me access to heaven and conversely, Grace means that there is no rule, no regulation, no law, no requirement which I can break that will keep me out of heaven. Grace is free! That's the definition of Grace = if it costs, then it's not free! This is the Good News!

I spent most of my life in the Christian tradition of the Christian Scriptures being infallible. I struggled for most of my life in a state of self hatred and self imposed shame because I believed what I had been taught regarding the inerrancy of Scripture. No matter how I tried, I was unable to rectify my sexuality and my spirituality. I memorized the Hebrew and Christian Scriptures knowing them verbatim chapter and verse. I knew what they said and since they where inherent I could not imagine or fathom the possibility that there could be any other interpretation, reading or explanation regarding what I had always been taught, that Paul condemned gay people. Period. End of discussion. Fortunately for me, in a fit of fervored prayer, I was able to find the website Soul Force (http://www.soulforce.org/article/homosexuality-bible) and I became a born again Queer! I read with total amazement the booklet written by the Rev. Dr. Mel White and offered at the Soul Force website, What the Bible Really Says (and Doesn't Say) About Homosexuality. I found out that there ARE other interpretations to the words attributed to Paul! I was also able, in my spiritual journey, to rediscover the teachings of my Quaker ancestors who taught me that the words of God could be found in the Bible, but that the Bible is not God. They taught me that just because the church declared the Bible to be closed, inspiration and teaching could be found elsewhere! Additionally, they taught me that my reliance upon the meaning of the Scriptures should be based on the leading of the Spirit of God. They also taught me that any part, any verse of the Bible can best be understood in the light of the whole, so that care should be taken in the use of passages removed from their contexts and that a detailed understanding of the Bible can be reached only through study of the times and circumstances of the writing, in the light of various commentaries and translations. Yay, George Fox, for helping to rescue one of your own descendants!

The message of God is one of redeeming. It's a message of taking those whom humanity declares to be useless and Divinely declaring them to be created in the image of God and loved without condition. So, too should the words of Paul be redeemed! There are many diligent people who have done a great deal of work in this regard. I was fortunate in my Divinity school studies to have access to some of the greatest collections of theological writings in the world! I know, however, others are not as fortunate to have access to great theological libraries, thankfully, however, there is the internet and much of the work done to redeem the words of Paul can be found, or purchased, through it's portal. In addition to the work of Mel White, two other very readable works are one by Rev. Jeff Miner, The Children are Free. Reexaming the Biblical Evidence on Same-Sex Relationships (http://lifejourneypress.cc/products/the-children-are-free) and the other by a European theologian Martti Nissinen Homoeroticism in the Biblical World. A Historical Perspective. If you are someone who is struggling with the words of Paul in light of your sexuality and your spirituality, all three of these works make great starting points for you to discover a new life and freedom in Christ.

Dear Queer people of faith, you no longer have to be afraid of the words attributed to Paul! You no longer have to tolerate being beaten over the head by people who use them as a club to attack you! There are other interpretations of the meanings of his words and writings! I pray that in your spiritual journey that you will be able to be led by the Spirit of God to discover them and by so doing, that you may discover the peace and love available to you in the Divine!

Blessed Be!

"Take a letter, Maria."

"Oh, the Lady in Red!"

2011-09-25T07:25:00.001-04:00

"Oh, the Lady in Red!"

The Season After Pentecost

Revised Common Lectionary Reading (The Inclusive Bible. Selections)

Matthew 21:23-32

Jesus said to them, "The truth is, tax collectors and prostitutes are entering into the kingdom of God before you! When John the Baptizer came walking down the Road of Justice, you didn't believe his message, but the tax collectors and prostitutes did! Yet even when you saw that, you still didn't repent and believe!"

I didn't know my paternal great grandmother very well. When I was a small boy she was already in her 80's, so the number of times I spent with her, as well as my memories of her, are both very few. I do, however, remember two very distinct things about her: 1) She adored my father and would happily tell anyone listening that my father was, by far, her favorite grandchild. Unfortunately she would also tell this to her other grandchildren! 2) Granny (which was how my father referred to her, therefore, so did I) was a very...forceful...individual!

In 1920 when the 19th Amendment to the Constitution became enacted guaranteeing women the right to vote, the Minister at Granny's church preached a very opinionated (yet widely held view among many Christians of the time) sermon telling the women of his congregation that it was a sin for women to vote and that he had better not find out any of them would be voting during the upcoming Tuesday Presidential election! It really wasn't such a good idea for any man, Minister or otherwise, to tell Granny that she couldn't do something! Doing so guaranteed that she would do it! My great grandfather found this out when had also told Granny that she couldn't do something: Granny had admired a bright red dress - a color not worn by "respectable" women! - and my great grandfather told her that she was forbidden from buying the red dress she had admired.

The second Tuesday in November arrived - voting day - and Granny achieved some small degree of local notoriety. One local paper indicated that Granny was the first woman to vote in the City of Norfolk, Virginia. Another local paper noted that she was "one of the first." Either way, she voted! Not only did she vote, she did so wearing her brand new bright red dress!

The idea of the color red being associated with sex workers, and, therefore, in the eyes of my great grandfather an inappropriate color of dress for my Granny to wear, dates to antiquity. Scarlet women, the red light district, prostitutes displaying a red light in their window all descend from the actions of an ancestor of Jesus - a fallen woman, a harlot, a prostitute: Rahab. One of only two women (excepting his mother, Mary) who are named in the genealogy of Jesus, Rahab, forever titled Rahab the Harlot, was supposedly a sex worker in the City of Jericho. As Joshua was preparing his famous march around the fabled indestructible walls of Jericho, Hebrew spies were reconnoitering the city. Trapped within the city walls and about to be discovered by the city authorities, Rahab strikes a bargain with the Hebrew spies: In exchange for her hiding them from the city authorities, the spies (who, by the way, just happen to be visiting the home of a sex worker! I'm certain there were a lot of military secrets in Rahab's home for the Hebrew spies to discover!) promise to rescue Rahab and her family from the destruction of the city, and it's inhabitants, which was about to occur. In order for the invading Hebrew army to know which home was that of Rahab's, and thus spare her life, Rahab hangs an identifying scarlet (red) cord out of her window, thus the tradition of red forever being associated with sex workers is born.

Although Rahab is one of the more well known of the Judeo-Christian fallen women, her theme is an often repeated one in the faith tradition of Christianity. The Hebrew and Christian Scriptures are replete with the stories of women who are in one way or another mired in sin of some sort, most usually sexual in nature, but are rescued by righteous men. After Rahab, one of the most famous of these women is Christianity's Mary Magdalene.

Mary Magdalene became one of the most celebrated of Jesus' disciples. Considered by many to have been a leader in the Jesus Movement, she is, none the less, and again excepting for Jesus' mother, the most influential of all of the women followers of Jesus. Her presence is most well known during the final earthly days of Jesus' ministry. At the execution of Jesus, after all the male disciples had abandoned Jesus, and except for Jesus' mother and "the disciple who Jesus loved," she is present. She is recorded as being the first disciple who saw Jesus after his resurrection. Additionally, the Gospel narratives record that she was the disciple from whom Jesus cast out seven demons.

Both in Christianity and in popular cultural belief, if you ask anyone for what is Mary Magdalene best know the answer is quickly given: She was a prostitute! There's just one problem with that: That supposed fact is not recorded in any of the Christian Gospels. There does not exist a single reference in any of the four Gospel narratives - Matthew, Mark, Luke or John - to Mary Magdalene being a prostitute. In fact Mary is not referred to in this way until 500 years after the time of Christ. It is a man, Pope Gregory the Great, who in a Papal encyclical in 591 CE, who first authoritatively gives reference to this non-Gospel stated belief. Gregory bases his assumption of Mary being a prostitute based on his confusing two different women, both named Mary, who are separately mentioned in the Gospel narratives. Gregory speculates that the seven demons which Jesus casts out of Mary Magdalene represent seven sinful vices, among which, and because Mary is a woman, is of course sexual sin, i.e. prostitution. Secondly, Gregory confuses Mary of Bethany, the sister of Lazarus and Martha, who pours expensive perfume onto Jesus' feet, with Mary Magdalene. Gregory goes on to explain that only a prostitute would own expensive perfume which she would use to anoint her flesh in order to entice men to sin sexually with her. In 1969, however, the Vatican belatedly corrected Gregory's mistaken assessment by issuing a statement saying that there were in fact two separate women named Mary and that Mary Magdalene was not a prostitute. Sadly, by 1969, the notion of Mary Magdalene being a prostitute has forever been ensconced in the minds of humanity.

If there's one thing at which Christians excel, it's in their skill at labeling people! It has become an art form for Christians! Homeless people are "lazy." Gay people are "sexual beasts and pedophiles." People who use Food Stamps are "thieves." People without health insurance "failed to plan and should be allowed to die." Strong women, like Mary Magdalene, are "whores, harlots, and prostitutes." Sadly for the name of Christ, these labeling-Christians are, in actuality, spiritual bullies intentionally doing harm to those weaker than themselves. Like all bullies, they do this in order to feel better about themselves. They must degrade others to non-human status through their labels in order to inflate their spiritual pride. They hide behind pulpits, TV cameras, and most shamefully the Bible, hurling hate and spiritual violence at the very people of whom Christ commanded that his followers were to give care.

Labeling-Christians justify their cowardly and bullying activity based on their mistaken belief that Christ did the same. Nothing could be further from the truth! They are blind to the fact that Christ never condemned those whom he commanded his followers to minister! Christ did, however, condemn the religious authorities of his day! Those who are held up in the Christian Scriptures as being the spiritual bullies of their time, Christ is recorded as condemning without hesitation. They were the equivalent in their day of modernity's televangelists, mega church leaders, the Moral Majority, Focus on the Family, as well as the Tea Party and most of the Republican Party, just to name a few. All spiritual bullies intent on promoting themselves at the cost of doing harm to others. As I have repeatedly stated in the past, my calling is not one of politics, therefore, do not confuse my mentioning political affiliations with my promoting political agendas. I am not a member of any political party. Those who know me are fully aware that I have spoken out against some of the policies of the current Presidential administration as vocally as I have Tea Party members and Republicans. There are spiritual bullies hiding behind the name of Christ in all political parties, the most pronounced of which, however, are the shameful behaviors of the Tea Party members and the Republicans. I would speak to such despicable behavior of anyone of any political party who have built their political careers by standing on the necks of others all the while hiding behind the name of Christ.

I challenge every spiritual bully: If you're not a bully, come out from behind your pulpit, go down to your local Social Service office, stand in the lobby and say the same things about the homeless, about undocumented workers, about the non-insured and about those who use Food Stamps as you do from behind the safety and comfort of your podium. If you are not a spiritual bully, find a gay bar, a gay health clinic, a gay service organization; go into the building, enter the bar, stand in the full waiting room and say the exact same things to the people there as you do in the safety of your church building gripping the sides of your pulpit. Go to the headquarters of the National Organization of Women (NOW) and tell the strong, proud, fierce women there, that like Mary Magdalene, you label them with the same labels the church has used to label Mary Magdalene.

You see the difference between what I do and what spiritual bullies do is that I do go to places where I am the minority (and often times an unwelcome minority) and speak to Gay, Lesbian, Bi Sexual, Transgender, Queer and justice issues. At the risk of being self aggrandizing, I speak at colleges, public high schools, religious bodies, etc., where I (and often with great fear!) do my best to speak truth to power. You see, I really am cowardly! I don't like pain! I do not have the gift of martyrdom, but, in the name of Christ, I cannot be silent. I cannot stand by idly while politicians pronounce that the uninsured should be allowed to die, that the homeless are lazy and chose to be homeless, that those who must use Food Stamps are thieves, that the state should employ murder as a means of justice. Afraid as I am of violence, I cannot remain silent when the children of God are told that God does not love them and that God, unmercifully and spitefully, condemns them to hell because of who they may love.

I hope that I do Granny proud! I like to think of her standing in the voting line, in her bright red dress, and voting! I hope that I inherited her fierce nature! I hope that I can always be as strong and brave as was Granny!

I like bright red also!

In the name of Christ!
Amen!

"Oh, the Lady in Red!"

"Oh, the shark, babe, has such teeth, dear!"

2011-09-18T06:34:00.005-04:00

"Oh, the shark, babe, has such teeth, dear!"

The Season After Pentecost

Revised Common Lectionary Reading
Numbers 21:4-9 (The Inclusive Bible. Selections)

The people complained against the Divine help given to them by YHWH. They said to Moses, "Why have you brought us out here into the desert? We could have stayed in Egypt where there are leeks and cucumbers. We don't like the awful food - the manna - which God provides for us.
So then YHWH allowed venomous snakes among the people. The snakes fatally bit many of the people. So the people again came to Moses and said, "We have trespassed against the goodness of YHWH and against your leadership. Please intercede for us and ask God to not allow the snakes to be among us."
So Moses interceded on behalf of the people. And YHWH said to Moses, "Make a bronze snake and put it on a pole. Raise it high above the people so they must look up to it. Then whenever the people are bitten by one of the venomous snakes, when they look up to see the bronze snake they will live."

During the Fifth Century of the Common Era, the Christian church began, in earnest, to venerate those whom they considered to be Saints. Chapels, churches, cathedrals, and shrines were constructed and dedicated to specific Saints. Accompanying this religious fervor surrounding the honoring of those whom the church deemed to have lived extraordinary lives for the cause of Christ, and most especially those who had been martyred for their faith, was the high water mark for the development of the Christian artwork we refer to as icons. These works of art - sometimes paintings, sometimes mosaics - were meant to inspire the faithful. They were to be used to prompt those who observed them to remember the lives and sacrifices of the Saints depicted in the icon. The icons were created in such a way as to depict a highly significant occurrence in the lives of the Saints - a small vignette of a particular event which was to inspire those who observed the icon. Original icons are now considered major works of art. The icons, most often constructed with valuable materials (gold, silver, precious and semi precious gems) are today considered art treasures and are collected both privately and by museums.

One of the most curious icons from this era resides in a museum in Kiev, Ukraine (formerly Russia). The icon, dating from the fifth century CE, was originally an altar piece (a large icon which was hung in a place of honor above a church altar) is from St. Katherine's monastery in Israel. The icon is of a marriage - a wedding - of two Saints. The wedding ceremony is unique to the eyes of modernity in two ways:

1. The officiant (the individual performing the rite of marriage) of the wedding ceremony is Christ.
2. The two Saints being married are both men.

The icon (pictured above) is of the wedding ceremony of Saint Serge and Saint Baccus.

Serge and Baccus, according to church history, were soldiers in the Roman army. They were also secretly Christians at a time when it was forbidden for Christians to serve in the military of Imperial Rome. Their religious views were discovered when they were ordered to offer sacrifices to the Roman gods. They refused to do so and became martyred for their faith. Baccus was flogged (beaten) to death. Serge was tortured and beaten. Boots with nails driven upwards through the soles of the boots were forced onto Serge's feet and he was forced to march in them. He was later beheaded and his body was supposed to have been devoured by wild animals, thus denying him the rite of Christian burial. Additionally, also according to church history (yep, you read that correctly, according to church history) the two martyred Christian men were also a same gender married couple. The Bishop of Antioch, Severus, (512 - 518 CE) refers to Serge and Baccus as "sweet companions and lovers" who were both "joined in life and joined in death." Severus employees a very specific Greek New Testament term to refer to Serge and Baccus: erasti. The term is very specific, rare in use, and very unique to same gender, male, lovers. Additionally, Serge and Baccus are referenced by none other than Saint Jerome (347 - 420 CE) who describes them in terms of romantic love.

In a building (which was formerly a church) in Istanbul, Turkey (formerly Constantinople) there is a massive mural adorning the ceiling and the space above what would have been the altar which depicts the marriage of the Emperor of the Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire, Basil I. Basil was a warrior Emperor who is seen by historians as being one of the best rulers of the Eastern Roman Empire. The mural in the former church in Istanbul depicts the "holy union" of Basil to his "companion and lover" John. It wasn't that Basil was allowed this union with John in a Christian church officiated by a Christian Priest because he was the Emperor, it was because, contrary to modern Christian myth that marriage is ordained by God to be the joining of "one man and one woman," there was a time when the Christian church blessed and conducted same gender unions. Oh, and by the way, Basil's marriage to John was his third marriage. He divorced his first wife, married a second and was also married to John at the same time as being married to his second wife. All three marriages where conducted in Christian churches and officiated over by Christian Priests.

Although none other than the august Church Father Tertullian refers to these church blessed same gender unions as "nuptials," it's not accidental that most of the historical evidence in Western Christianity regarding these church blessed unions has greatly disappeared. It is fortuitous, however, that most of the historical evidence of the Christian church's same gender marriage ceremonies resides with the Eastern Orthodox Christian churches! The Western Christian church, both in antiquity and in modernity, REALLY doesn't want you knowing the history of the church during the first millennium! They're much happier with you imagining that the entirety of the history of the first millennium of Christianity is what you read in the pages of the Christian Testament! See, things like same gender marriages, ordaining women, and women Bishops, are all kind of embarrassing to Western Christianity because they have worked long and hard - for a thousand years in fact - to convince you that all of these things never existed! The problem for Western Christianity is that the Eastern Orthodox Christian church split from the Western Christian church. This made it impossible for the Western church leaders to either hide or destroy the historical evidence in the East as they did in their own Western churches. Additionally, in the West there was the Protestant Reformation. The Protestants hated virtually everyone and everything! Especially anything to do with sexuality because for Protestants sex was (and is) at the top of their sin list. It was, therefore, paramount that same gender loving individuals, who for the Protestants represented the ultimate in their perverse idea that anything to do with sex was a sin, had to be burned alive as did witches, Catholics, Jews, Quakers (who, incidentally, where my ancestors), Anabaptists, and anyone else (which was most of Europe including other Protestants) who they hated. When you spend that much time and effort burning people alive you really need to make sure it was worthwhile! You can't have people going around second guessing you! Hypocrisy kind of undermines authority. Yet, even with the full force of missionary zeal at work, there still exists some historical records in the West of the church conducting same gender marriage ceremonies. One of the most noted of these historical records actually resides in the Vatican. In 1578 a marriage ceremony was conducted, consisting of thirteen same gender couples, during a High Mass in Rome. In addition to the late historical date of the event what is even more startling in regard to this ceremony is its location which was in St. John Lateran church. St. John Lateran is the Cathedral seat of the Bishop of Rome, who is the Pope, and holds the Papal throne thereby ranking it above all other Catholic churches including St. Peter's Basilica in the Vatican. Although the Pope did not conduct the service himself, the historical record indicates that it was officiated by Priests "sent by the Vatican" who performed the service "using the nuptial Scripture" and "serving communion to all of the couples."

As I have stated in the past, and contrary to popular belief, it's not for the reason of championing the rights of same gender loving individuals to marry that I reflect on the historical significance of same gender loving individuals having in the past had their relationships blessed by the Christian church. In fact, as my close friends and associates know, and for which they routinely castigate me, I have certain qualms in regard to the modern incarnation of same gender unions. Please don't misunderstand me, it's not that I am against same gender unions, it's that I fear we all too easily fall into the trap of believing and promoting, even unintentionally, the idea that the only valid and recognized relationships are those which come with a state issued license. As was our motto championed in my youth during the 1960's "We don't need a piece of paper to prove our love!" Instead the reason why I so vehemently reflect upon the historical significance of there having been same gender loving unions publicly occurring and being blessed by Christian clergy in Christian churches, is because the modern Christian church is guilty of hatred, persecution, and baring false witness against their Lesbian, Gay, Bi Sexual, Transgender and Queer neighbors. As such the inequity of their prejudiced, violent and destructive work cannot go unanswered and unchallenged.

In the same way that the history of the Christian church is not that which we have been told it is in regard to same gender loving people, within the Lectionary text of the Hebrew Scripture passage for today, God does not behave in the ways we are told God is supposed to behave. There are two distinct actions of God in response to the paradigm presented in the Scripture passage: 1) God does not change the innate behavior and actions of God's created beings and 2) God's behavior is completely contrary to that which humanity teaches God has declared to be an inviolate Divine commandment.

When the Hebrew people approach Moses asking him to intercede on their behalf in regard to the "venomous snakes" within their camp, they ask for the Divine intervention of God to prohibit the snakes from being among them. They cannot envision there to be any other solution to the their predicament. Humanity teaches that snakes are vile, abhorrent creatures; very often equated with evil and are portrayed as the embodiment of that which is the enemy of God. God, however, does not behave in the fashion which humanity expects of God. God does not "pray away the snakes." God does not remove them from being among the Hebrew people. God does not curse them, destroy them, condemn their innate behavior, nor does God condemn them to hell. God does not change them in any way from the beings God created them to be. God, does however, do something completely unexpected:

God takes that which has been declared by humanity to be profane and makes it holy.

The Hebrew people could not fathom the snakes to be anything other than destructive and deadly. Yet, God lifts them up and makes them that which is the symbol of healing. God does that which violates that which is declared to be God's own law: God instructs Moses to make a graven (carved) image and to lift it up to be looked on as the source of Divine healing. We are told that God declared - established as a Divine Commandment:

"Do not make for yourselves any carved (graven) images or likenesses of anything in heaven above or anything on the earth below or anything in the waters under the earth." Exodus 20:4

Yet, God specifically instructs Moses to create a bronze snake, to place it on a pole, and to raise it up so that the people must to look up to it for their Divine healing.

The overwhelming opinion of Christianity is that same gender loving people are in violation of what they perceive, teach and believe to be God's law. The ask of God to curse us, to destroy us and to condemn us to hell. God, however, does not behave towards God's same gender loving people in the ways which Christianity has historically told the world God behaves. God does not "pray away the gay." God does not remove from people the gift of same gender sexuality which God created in some of us. God does not curse us, destroy us or condemn us to hell. All of these things - cursing, condemnation, destruction - all occur at the hands of humanity toward same gender loving individuals. Instead God takes those of us who are definitively declared by humanity to be profane, and through the Grace extended to all of humanity through God's great love expressed through God's child, Jesus Christ, declares us to be God's own loved and blessed children.

My prayer for you this day is that before you ask of God to behave in a way in which you think God should behave, to remember that the great unconditional love and Grace of God does not confine God to a box. Remember that God is not bound by the expectations of humanity. Remember that God takes those whom humanity has declared to be profane and God declares them to be God's own, blessed children.

Blessed Be!

"Oh, the shark, babe, has such teeth, dear!"

*AUTHOR’S NOTE: In response to my email inbox having been inundated with responses to my reflection, I would suggest the seminal work by Yale Professor, John Boswell, Same Sex Unions in Pre Modern Europe, as an excellent starting point and resource for further investigation into the topic.

"A Time For Peace, I Swear It's Not Too Late!"

2011-09-11T07:31:00.001-04:00

"A Time For Peace, I Swear It's Not Too Late!"

The Season After Pentecost

Revised Common Lectionary Reading

The Christian Scriptures
The Epistle to the Believers in Rome
Romans 14:1-12 (The Inclusive Bible. Selections)

"Welcome those whose faith is not that of your own. Don't argue with them. The faith opinions of people range from those who believe that they may eat any sort of meat to those whose belief is such that they eat only vegetables. Those whose belief is such that they believe that they are free to eat everything including every kind of meat must not despise those who abstain from eating meat because their belief is such that they eat only vegetables. The ones who abstain from eating meat because of their faith belief must not pass judgement on those whose belief it is that they can eat meat. It is God who welcomes all."
"One person considers one day more sacred then another, another considers all days to be equally sacred - and yet both are equally certain of the rightness of their own beliefs! The person who observes special days as sacred days does it because they love God. Whoever eats meat does if because they love God and they give thanks to God for it. Whoever abstains from eating meat does it because they love God and they also give thanks to God."

"It took me a long time to learn that God is not the enemy of my enemies. He is not even the enemy of his enemies." Martin Neimoller

Grief and loss. Our lives are a series of coping, in varying ways and life strategies, with instances of grieving and with loss. We usually associate grief and loss with the process of death and dying, yet, we experience grief and loss in a myriad of other ways: Divorce, the loss of job, economic loss, the death of a beloved pet. Observing the way health care givers reacted and responded to critically ill patients, was the impetus for Dr. Elizabeth Kubler-Ross to begin her psychiatric research and work revolving around how we each deal with the process of grief and loss. Dr. Kubler-Ross observed that the heatlh care providers in the medical facility in which she worked tried to avoid intimate and prolonged contact with critically ill patients. What was most disturbing to Dr. Kubler-Ross was that it was most especially during the last stages of life that people are in need of intimate and prolonged human contact. Dr. Kubler-Ross began to force the medical providers for whom she was directly responsible to interact more closely with terminally ill patients. It was the experience of her interaction with critically ill patients and observing the ways in which the medical providers interacted with the patients in their care which became the catalyst for Dr. Kubler-Ross' now famous book On Death and Dying.

One of the chapters in Dr. Kubler-Ross' book has become embedded in the social psyche of modernity: The Five Stages of Grief. Dr. Kubler-Ross observed in the terminally ill patients with whom she worked that they, as well as their friends and families, experienced five stages in the grief and loss process:

Denial "This can't be happening!"
Anger "Why me!?" "This can't be happening to me!" "Who is to blame!?"
Bargaining "I'll do anything for this not to happen!"
Depression "What's the point!?"
Acceptance "It's going to be OK."

Since Dr. Kubler-Ross' initial work others in the field of mental health have built upon, and expanded, her work. In the process, mental health workers have found that it is not only individuals who experience these five stages of grief, but it is also groups of people. Families, communities, and even nations go through the grief and loss process. We've seen this in our life time in occurrences such as the Oklahoma City Bombing, the Space Shuttle disaster, Columbine High School, and as we observe today, the ten year observance of the 9/11 tragedy.

It is the inability of an individual, family, community or nation in not being able to work though, over time, these stages - being trapped in one stage - which is most dangerous to our emotional well being. Sadly, for the United States, we are trapped, collectively as a nation, in the stage of anger. In the ten years since the great loss and tragedy of 9/11, our collective national decision making process has been through the lense of anger. We deal with other nations through anger. We deal with each other through anger. We are angry at the world. We are angry with each other. We are angry with life. Anger and hatred are first cousins and it is our inability to process and work through our anger in our national grieving process which has led us to join hands with hatred. Our national collective mental health is trapped and sinking in a sea of anger and hatred.

As my clerical colleagues can attest, most especially if we are out and about wearing any of our clerical badges - our white clergy collars - people approach us for a variety of reasons. Conversations with strangers during these occasions is the norm. I can't remember how many times I've been approached on the street, bus or subway by people engaging me in conversation. Many of these conversations have been blessings. Often times people pour out their hearts and ask for prayer. Sometimes people, for numerous reasons, are angry with the religious institution, the church, and because to them I represent that institution, they tell me of the reasons for their anger. A few times individuals have wanted to argue a particular religious point. Sometimes people ask for money. The reasons why people approach and begin to converse are as varied as the individuals themselves. Earlier this week I was approached by an individual who mistakenly believed that their particular religious beliefs and mine were the same since, in the individual's way of thinking, we being both Christians, and therefore, had to share similar theologies. Yeah. Not so much. The individual told me in the process of conversation that Jesus was in fact on the side of America. It wasn't the person's political beliefs which were most disturbing to me, it was their theology of believing that Jesus had chosen sides and that amongst all of the nations states of the world, he had decided on the rightness of America. When I tried to explain to the individual that although we are both Christians, I was not someone who held this theological belief, the individual became very agitated and told me that if I didn't acknowledge that Jesus was on the side of America then I had joined the side of America's enemies.

In that this is a particularly politically driven year, we have seen this combining of the theology that Jesus is on the side of America, coupled with anger and hatred, give birth to a political party which has made it's mission to harness the power of the American government to deal with all of their perceived enemies in the most harsh and extreme ways. This political movement mirrors the sentiments of the individual with whom I had the particular encounter mentioned above; that anyone who does not join their concept of Jesus being on the side of American, has, therefore, joined those whom they perceive to be their enemies.

Sadly, the individual is not alone in their theological belief that Jesus is on the side of America. Its been an underpinning of our national psyche since the nation's founding. It gave rise to the concept of Manifest Destiny in which the belief was that it was the destiny of America to occupy all of the continent from ocean to ocean. It was the belief of Jesus being on the side of America which prompted the Spanish American War. President McKinley told Congress that God had told him that America was to go to war with Spain. The tragedy of 9/11 watered and nourished this belief and when this belief has been fed by our national inability to move past the anger stage of our grief, we have developed the identity of being blessed by God to wage war both inside and outside our borders. What to me is so extremely frightening in this theological/political paradigm is that it is embraced by so many Americans. Members of Congress, state Governors and legislators, Mayors and City Council members have been elected who all embrace this theological/political doctrine. The most prominent Presidential candidates who are battling for the right to position themselves to run against President Obama in the next election are those who have adopted this notion and perpetuate it to the electorate.

The popular political phrasing is to refer to ourselves as a "Christian nation." Sadly, so very sadly, however, nothing in the message of Christ is reflected in our anger and hatred or in the accompanying political philosophy. We do not love our neighbors. We do not pray for our enemies. We do not forgive those who "trespass against us." We feel entitled to seek revenge. We are harboring our anger and hatred with, literally, a death grip because if we cannot release our anger and hatred it will be our destruction. Forgiving others is not for the well being of the other person so much as it is for our own healing process. Our own collective national psyche needs to be healed of our burden of anger and hatred.

On this ten year observance of the tragedy of 9/11, my prayer for this nation is that we can find the ability to allow ourselves to move past the anger and hatred of the results of the event. We are suffering more, as a nation, from our internalized anger and hatred then we have been from the sad aftermath of the tragedy which was 9/11.

Oh, God our help in ages past, our hope for years to come, our shelter form the storms of life and our eternal home. May we as a nation be able, with your Divine help, release the anger and hatred we have for others and which drives our lives. May we in you, Divine One, find the peace which is necessary for our well being. May we truly learn to embrace the words of your Child, Jesus, and "forgive those who trespass against us."

Blessed Be

"A Time For Peace, I Swear It's Not Too Late!"

"I Really Wanna Know! Who Are You!?"

2011-09-04T10:30:00.004-04:00

"I Really Wanna Know! Who Are You!?"

The Season After Pentecost

Revised Common Lectionary Readings:

Matthew 18:15-20 (Selections. The Inclusive Bible)

"The truth is, whatever you declare bound on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you declare loosed on earth will be loosed in heaven."
"Again I tell you, if two of you on earth join in agreement to pray for anything whatsoever, it will be granted you by Abba God in heaven. Where two or three are gathered in my name, I am there in the midst."

One of the most oft made statements to LGBTQ persons is:

"Why is it necessary for you to tell people you're gay? I don't go around telling people I'm straight!"

It isn't really a question for which the person asking the question expects an answer. The person asking the "question" isn't in fact asking a question at all, but is instead making a statement which speaks more to their homophobia then it does to the gathering of relevant information or to the expanding of one's intellectual horizons. The speaker making the statement is uncomfortable with our announcing our true selves to the world and it's another, although seemingly disguised and, therefore, socially acceptable; homophobic way of saying "Back in the closet with you, you awful abomination you!" For the speaker who utters the statement, it is evidence of their being someone who is used to heteronormative power, prestige and privilege. The statement is a demonstration of someone who has no understanding as to what the life of a LGBTQ person entails. Society's default sexuality is heterosexual and society assumes we are all the same unless a LGBTQ person has enough bravery, enough courage, or has had enough heterosexual bullying and is able to stand up to the face of power and say, "No, I am not like you!"

A same gender loving individual does not, contrary to popular belief, "come out" only one time in their life. A person may make an initial declaratory statement as their way of voicing their truth; that they are NOT of the power, privileged, and prestigious heteronormative majority, and that they are instead, a distinct minority. Each day, however, of a same gender loving person's life is a day in the coming out process. It is a life long event. It never ends. Each new job is an exercise in one asking one's self "Is today the day that I can safely tell my co-workers that I am gay?" No, if you are heterosexual, you don't need to tell the people with whom you work that, at some point in your life, you discovered your sexual attraction to persons of your opposite gender. Society has already assumed that you are heterosexual unless you correct their mistaken assumption. Because society assumes everyone is heterosexual, society treats everyone as heterosexual. For the same gender loving individual, however, it is an uncomfortable exercise in being put in situations which are contrary to their God given creation gift of same gender sexuality. We, who are gay males, don't like being shown a picture of your sister with the "really nice personality" and with whom you would like for us to take out on a date. If you don't think that is an uncomfortable situation for us, how would you feel if you are heterosexual and society assumes that you are gay? In their assuming that you are gay, we walk up to you showing you pictures of our brothers and sisters, nieces and nephews, cousins, and in-laws, all of whom have "wonderful personalities," but they are the same gender as are you and we want you to take them out on a date? Would that make you uncomfortable? Then why do you assume that it does not make us uncomfortable? One reason we have to make the decision to tell you that we are gay so that you will leave us alone! We don't want to hear your graphically homophobic jokes. We don't think they are funny. We are appalled by them. We don't want to hear your telling us how you think "them there homos are sick." You are talking about us. We have to make the decision to either tell you that we're gay and hope that we will be allowed to work in peace or we have to endure your vulgar jokes and statements at our expense.

With each new job, each new home, each new social setting; we are continually evaluating each situation as to if the situation is conducive to our revealing our true selves or if, for our personal safety, or our job security, or any number of other reasons; it is necessary for us to remain secretive and, therefore, to endure your treating us as if we are like you. When we move into a new apartment, attend a new school, meet new people or a host of any other social situations in which society assumes that everyone is heterosexual; we are forced to confront the fact that we are not part of the majority and, therefore, we must respond differently to every situation. All of these things you, as a heterosexual, take for granted, but which can, for us, alter our lives in the voicing of our truth. When you are asked "Are you married?" it's a simple thing for you to answer if you are heterosexual, it's not an easy question for us to answer without revealing our personal truth. Do we answer, "Well, yes, in some states I am married"? Do we answer, "I have a partner" hoping that you understand that my partner is the same gender as am I? We cannot even simply say, "No, I'm single" because in so doing you (heterosexual) immediately start trying to fix us up on a date with the same sister, brother, cousin, in-law with whom you tried to get us to date at work!

Another vital reason why it is necessary for us to tell the world our truth is because silence is deadly. Silence allows for bullies to flourish, prosper and continue their abuse. Silence allows for closeted, frightened and self hating same gender loving youth to take their own lives. Silence allows the societal lie to continue that to be anything other than heterosexual is to be abnormal. One of the reasons why I didn't begin my coming out process until late in life was that, because of silence, I was convinced that within the culture in which I lived that there wasn't anyone else like me. In my culture, fear kept same gender loving people secretive and confined to the shadows. Silence kept same gender loving people confined to the night where, out of fear, they felt a measure of safety in being enveloped in darkness. The silence of same gender loving individuals not speaking their truth to power kept me from being able to accept my own truth and instead I tried, thank God unsuccessfully, to become something which God had not intended for me to be with my creation.

The fear based self imposed silence of same gender loving individuals to speak their truth, spurred on in me a self hatred and internalized homophobia which was taken and manifest in my life in it's most extreme fashion. I was so convinced that I was abnormal because I was not heterosexual, that I sought out a program in Reparative Therapy. This bastardization and corruption of Psychology and Theology is that faux counseling program which is commonly referred to as "praying away the gay." For three years I submitted myself to this program, which is denounced by the American Psychological Association, which is in fact a program of spiritual and psychological assault. It was my experience in this program which, when I saw the Revised Common Lectionary Gospel reading for today, made me pause and reconsider my reflection for this week. Within the Reparative Therapy program of which I was a participant, the above noted Matthew passage was one which was commonly employed in the idea of their conversion process for an individual to convert from being a same gender loving individual to become a "normal" heteronormative individual. It is a passage which is difficult for me to reflect upon with any degree of objectivity. It became for me, because of my experience with Reparative Therapy, another "clobber passage" which is used to beat up same gender loving individuals.

The program of which I was a participant, and which in various guises is embraced by most of American Evangelical Christianity (that religious movement of my past), was associated with the church I attended. It was advertised as a "ministry of the church." As such it employed the American Evangelical Christian theology in regard to prayer which is encapsulated in the Matthew Gospel passage above. The particular theology of prayer within the vast segment of American Evangelicalism, is the idea that God is either bound, or can be bound, by reminding God of God's "promises" contained within the Hebrew and Christian Scriptures. The process is one in which the supplicant seeks out particular Scriptural passages which the individual interprets as being promises of God and which are applicable to the particular need for which they are praying. The supplicant then "claims" the applicable verse and reminds God of God's promise contained in the verse and God is then bound to grant the supplicant's prayer. The Matthew passage indicated above is foundational in this prayer process. The supplicant reminds God of the words of Jesus. In the Reparative Therapy process, God is reminded that God is required to bind the same gender loving desires of the supplicant and that additionally since the supplicant is in agreement with others within the program, God is further required, based on the promise of Jesus, to Divinely make the supplicant stop having same gender sexual feelings and to further make the supplicant Divinely become heterosexual. I, however, find this theology akin to making God a genie in bottle who, when rubbed the right way with the appropriate Scriptural passage, is bound (forced) to grant the supplicant's wish.

It's very easy, when one takes a verse or two out of context, to infer that the particular words of Jesus are indeed a magic formula for getting anything we want from God. Unfortunately, when the verses are read in light of the entirety of the passage - all of the dialogue which comes before them and all of the dialogue which comes after them - I cannot contemplate how these verses constitute a magic prayer formula. In all of the passage before and in all of the passage after these verses, Jesus is addressing how those who claim to be followers of his teachings are to relate to each other on an interpersonal level. Jesus instructs as to how we are to relate to children and to each other as well as how often he expects each of us to forgive each other when we perceive that we have been wronged by another. What Jesus is instructing us to "bind on earth" and to "bind in heaven" are the hurt feelings we harbor towards each other. What Jesus is instructing us to do is to PRAY with those who we feel have wronged us in some way. Jesus is giving a formula, not for magical prayer, but instead how to take the hand of someone we see as our enemy, to pray for each other and in the process we are binding our hurt feelings and we are loosening our ability to genuinely love other individuals. It is in this coming together that Jesus, expressed in love, is in our midst.

My prayer for you this day is to no longer seek a magic prayer formula for changing another person into what you believe a person should be. Instead, I pray that you may be able to hold that hand of another person, who is created in the image of God, but who does not resemble you, and to ask for the love of Jesus to be present between you.

Blessed Be!

"I Really Wanna Know! Who Are You!?"

Sometimes a Hurricane is just a Hurricane

2011-08-29T13:00:00.002-04:00

The latter part of this past week was, for me and most others on the East coast of the United States, occupied with preparations for the coming of hurricane Irene. As such, I was delayed in being able to post my weekly reflection. However, after reading this morning's plethora of responses from literally all over the world suggesting that the deaths, injuries, homelessness and destruction caused by this natural disaster was a judgement from God caused by Lesbian, Gay, Bi Sexual, Transgender and Queer people, I decided, instead, to re-post a previous reflection which speaks to this horribly flawed, hurtful and dangerous theology.

The following links are that reflection:
"Put Your Hand in the Hand of the Man who Stilled the Waters!"
http://therevsisterbishop.blogspot.com/2011/05/put-your-hand-in-hand-of-man-who.html

Sunday, Sunday!

2011-08-21T09:53:00.000-04:00

Dear Ones,
I am taking a week off!
I am always very appreciative of you taking a few moments of your valuable time to read my musings, so it is with a heavy, yet August heat weary, heart that I ask your indulgence for this week.
As wonderful, blissful summer wanes, my prayer for you is that you enjoy each bright, warm day with those you love!
Until next week!
May the blessings of the Divine live with you!
Robert Coats

"He Ain't Heavy, He's My Brother!"

2011-08-14T10:04:00.006-04:00

"He Ain't Heavy, He's My Brother!"

The Season After Pentecost

Genesis 45:1-15 (Selections. The Inclusive Bible)

Joseph Makes Himself Known
Then Joseph was no longer able to hold back his feelings and emotions in front of his attendants and he cried out to them. "Leave me!" So, none of his Egyptian attendants were present when Joseph made himself known to his brothers. Joseph, however, wept so loudly that all of his Egyptian attendants heard him and the news of Joseph and his brothers quickly reached all the way to Pharaoh's palace. Then Joseph said to his brothers, "It is I! Your brother, Joseph! Is our father really still alive!?" Yet, none of Joseph's brothers could answer Joseph, so dumbfounded where they.
Joseph said to his brothers, "Report quickly back to our father! Tell him how I am highly honored here in Egypt! Tell him all you have seen! Go quickly now and bring my father to me!" Then Joseph threw his arms around his brother Benjamin and wept and Benjamin embraced Joseph and wept also. Then Joseph embraced each of his brothers, weeping over them and kissing each brother as well. Then he and his brothers were able to talk."

I hadn't intended to have a reflective series in regard to Joseph and his family, yet whether by design or by accident, my reflection this week is again based on this very...unique...family. My first two reflections,

"I'm Getting Married in the Morning" http://therevsisterbishop.blogspot.com/2011/07/im-getting-married-in-morning.html

and

"Walk Like an Egyptian!" http://therevsisterbishop.blogspot.com/2011/08/walk-like-egyptian.html

commented in part concerning the very unusual marriage of Joseph's parents and his extremely unusual relationship with his brothers. I had intended to deviate away from this...family...but as I began my research on the Revised Common Lectionary readings for this week, I was compelled, yet again, to return to the Joseph narrative.

In most commentaries and nearly all Biblical interpretations of the scripture passage in use for today, at the head of the chapter which contains the particular verse readings, there is a publisher's or editor's note in similarity to the one which I have included with today's reading: "Joseph makes himself known." In fact within the entire narrative, there is actually phraseology resembling the publisher's/editor's notation indicating the fact that in some fashion or form, Joseph revealed his true identity as being the brother of the men present. However, I am not so certain that it is actually at this point in the Joseph story that "Joseph makes himself known" to his brothers. I have a suspicion that Joseph had done this earlier in his life and it was his "making himself known" which may have been the impetus for the extreme hatred and contempt which Joseph's brother's had for Joseph.

In the Lectionary reading for last week, two things were specifically noted in relation to Joseph and his brothers:

1) Joseph's brothers held Joseph in such disdain and professed for him such extreme hatred that when Joseph comes to visit them, essentially at their job site, they kidnap Joseph, strip him naked, throw him into the bottom of a dry well, decide to murder him, however, at the last minute, spurred on by the idea of profiting from Joseph's disappearance, they sell Joseph into slavery to some passing merchants for eight ounces of silver. The merchants, in turn, drag Joseph naked across the desert to Egypt where he continues in slavery being sold to an official of Pharaoh's court.

2) In the process of kidnapping Joseph, distinct attention is paid within the narrative to the fact that Joseph's bothers violently tear off of Joseph the "highly ornamented garment" Joseph is wearing before tossing him, sans clothing, into the bottom of a dry well.

It is this violent tearing off of Joseph's "highly ornamented garment," as well as the further humiliation of Joseph's forced public nudity, which is, I suspect, an outward manifestation as to the reasoning behind Joseph's bother's extreme hatred of Joseph.

The traditional reading of the Joseph narrative has always been that Joseph's brother's are jealous of the fact that their father pays special attention to Joseph, in effect, spoiling Joseph. The evidence of this spoiling of Joseph above his older brothers is their father's gift to Joseph of Joseph's "coat of many colors." Coupled with the fact that Joseph has very specific prophetic dreams which portray all of Joseph's family - parents and siblings - bowing down, at some point in the future, to an exalted Joseph. The traditional reading places the emphasis on the source of the animosity of Joseph's brothers as being extreme jealousy.

Jealousy. Of Joseph's coat. Yeah. Not so much.

This traditional reading of the Joseph narrative, is an example of a sanitized, heteronormative reading of Hebrew and Christian scriptures. The reason I can say this is because there are distinct references and phraseology used within the narrative which indicate a pronounced non-heteronormative bend to the narrative. This is especially true in regard to Joseph's "highly ornamented garment" or as is traditionally referenced as, his "coat of many colors."

The Hebrew phraseology employed in reference to Joseph's garment is very unique. It only appears three times in all of either Hebrew or Christian scriptures. The phraseology is so unique that it's use in referring to Joseph's garment cannot be mistaken as simply being a "coat of many colors." The Hebrew phraseology in descriptive form cannot be interpreted in one word or one phrase. The term refers to a distinct garment which would have been known and recognized to the reader of the Hebrew narrative. The garment described is in reference to a gown type garment which covered the wearer from neck to ankles with the sleeves extending below the wrists, covering a portion of the wearer's hands. The garment was highly ornamented, brightly colored and, additionally, multi-colored in something approaching a rainbow type hue of colors. It would have been a very expensive garment to produce given its range of dyes and decorations. It would have been recognized within contemporary society as being a garment distinct to nobility, in particular, as one being worn by the children of nobles. The male children of nobility, however, would have worn a separate distinct garment which signified their relationship to their noble heritage. The garment referenced in regard to Joseph would not have been worn by the male children of nobles. It was a distinct, and recognized, garment worn by the female children of nobility.

In addition to the reference in the Joseph narrative regarding the wearing of this very distinct garment, it's use appears a second and third time in II Samuel 13:18-19 in which the garment is described in even more exacting detail then it's first appearance in the Joseph narrative:

"She (Tamar, the daughter of King David) was dressed in a richly ornamented garment - the kind worn by the virgin daughters of the King. Tamar put ashes on her head and tore her richly ornamented garment. She covered her face with her hands as she left, weeping loudly."

So, to un-sanitize the narrative: Joseph is wearing a distinct, recognizable and known, woman's garment which was worn and recognized as that belonging to "the virgin daughters" of nobility. His brother's hate him for his wearing it. His very strong, very masculine, very heterosexual brother's despise their brother with such hatred as to prompt them to contemplate his murder because Joseph wears women's clothing. The tipping point comes in the narrative when Joseph appears at their job site, where all of their friends and co-workers see Joseph in his very recognizable women's clothing. Their hatred for Joseph's non-gender conforming attire prompts them to violently tear the garment off of him, and, to drive home the fact that he is genetically male, they violently and very publicly expose him naked for their society to observe his male genitals.

As a note of caution, we always have to be careful in modernity in trying to apply our definitions to ancient cultures. We immediately want to claim Joseph as one of our own! We identify with his experience and in seeing our experience reflected within his experience, we want to refer to Joseph as possibly being gay. Additionally, in that later in the narrative, we know that Joseph marries a daughter of Pharaoh and has children, we want to label Joseph as being bi sexual. In that the Hebrew phraseology of the narrative specifically indicates Joseph wearing a garment reserved for women, we want to claim Joseph as being, at the least, a cross dresser, possibly a drag queen, or, as possibly being transgender. Yet, we simply do not know Joseph's sexual orientation or his gender identity. There are, however, without question, both Biblical and extra Biblical proofs which lend themselves to the distinct possibility that, at any rate, Joseph's appearance within society was NOT specific to his gender.

Biblically we know that Joseph is gifted with a unique dream interpretation gift. This gift is demonstrated multiple times within the Biblical narrative. Extra Biblically, we also know that in many cultures, both ancient and modern, persons with unique mystic gifts such as interpreting dreams and prophetic dreaming, often present themselves, in appearance, as not being representative of the dress code culturally assigned to their gender. In North America, we see this evidenced within the Two Spirit people of the indigenous cultures. In many cultures, these mystically gifted individuals are put into places within their societies as being the arbitrators of matters involving medicine, healing, government, and justice. Biblically, Joseph holds many of these positions within the Egyptian government. Was Joseph possibly recognized by the Egyptians as being such an individual?

Extra Biblically we know that within certain society classes of ancient Egypt, persons dressing and appearing outside of their assigned gender clothing was common place. Female rulers of Egypt routinely dressed in the court dress of male rulers even so far as to the wearing of false beards. Men within the upper classes of Egyptian society routinely wore varying kinds of cosmetics including ancient variations of what we would refer to as rouge, lipstick, eye shadow, mascara, as well as, finger nail and toe nail polish. If Joseph was a person who was comfortable dressing in clothing not specific for his birth gender, for whatever his reasoning, he would have been very comfortable in his appearance in the Egyptian culture, and especially within the court of Pharaoh.

Lastly, Biblically, we know that Joseph is referred to as being beautiful in appearance. He is not referred to, as men are traditionally, as being handsome, but is instead referred to as being beautiful. If we take all of these clues, Biblically and extra Biblically, into account, the famous Potiphar's Wife portion of the Joseph narrative makes a lot more sense. Potiphar is the court official of Pharaoh who buys Joseph when Joseph is brought to Egypt. Potiphar immediately recognized Joseph's unique abilities and skills and places Joseph in charge of his household. Potiphar's wife, however, has sexual designs on Joseph and very nearly rapes Joseph in an attempt to force him to have sexual intercourse with her. Joseph, however, has no desire to have sexual intercourse with her and runs away from Potiphar's wife. In the process of fleeing from Potiphar's wife, however, Joseph's clothing is ripped off of him when Potiphar's wife violently grabs Joseph's garments as he is trying to flee, ripping them off of Joseph. For the second time in the narrative, Joseph's male genitals are on public display driving home the fact that, regardless of his outward dress or possible appearance, he is in fact genetically male. In modernity, we who are either gay, lesbian, transgender, bi sexual, or non gender conforming, have either had ourselves, or we have friends or acquaintances, who have had experiences resembling Joseph's with Potiphar's wife: A person of heteronormative sexuality decides that they can change us if only we have the experience of having sexual intercourse with them. We have been told, "You just haven't met the right man!" or "You just haven't met the right woman!" In many instances, as was Joseph's, the experiences can become physically and sexually violent.

All of these varying examples from the life of Joseph are why I postulate that it was not at the point in today's Lectionary reading that Joseph "makes himself known" to his brothers. I think that his brother's knew Joseph's true identity as someone, for whatever his reasoning, who desired to be gender non-conforming in appearance within his cultural paradigm. In modernity, the number one reason for homelessness among gay, lesbian, bi sexual, transgender, and Queer youth is their "coming out" to their families. Their families, like Joseph's brothers, sometimes react violently assaulting their family member and physically ejecting them from the family home. Even if the reaction is not physically violent, the reactions are often psychologically violent, or a the very least, the GLBTQ child is ejected from the family home. "There's nothing new under the sun."

My prayer for you this day is that you never assume!
Never take the traditional interpretations of the Hebrew and Christian scriptures at face value!
Like St. Photina (a.k.a. the Woman at the Well), question authority!
Investigate the hidden meanings of the Hebrew and Christian scriptures for yourself!
May you this day, and every day of your life, find within yourself, as did Joseph, the strength and ability to be true to your identity.
May you have the bravery of Joseph to "make yourself known" to your family!

Blessed Be!

"He Ain't Heavy, He's My Brother!"

"Walk Like an Egyptian!"

2011-08-07T11:15:00.001-04:00

"Walk Like an Egyptian!"

The Season after Pentecost

Lectionary Reading: Genesis 37:1-4, 12-28 (Excerpts adapted from the Inclusive Bible)

When Joseph's brothers saw Joseph approaching in the distance, and before he reached them, they plotted to murder Joseph. They said to one another, "Here comes the dreamer! Now's our chance! Let’s kill Joseph and throw his body in one of these pits. We'll say that a wild animal devoured him. Then we'll see what becomes of Joseph's dreams!"

Joseph's brother, Ruben, intervened and saved Joseph from their murdering him, saying, "No bloodshed! It’s one thing for us to throw him into a pit in the wilderness, but let’s not murder him!" Ruben's intention was to later rescue Joseph form the pit and return him to their father.

So when Joseph arrived at his brother's location, they stripped him naked tearing off the highly ornamented robe he wore, and picked him up and threw him into the bottom of deep pit. The pit was empty, and there was no water in it.

As they sat down to eat their meal, they saw an Ishmaelite caravan approaching. Joseph's brother, Judah, said to the others, "What is our monetary gain in murdering him and concealing his death? There's no profit in it for us. Why not sell him to the Ishmaelites? He is, after all, our flesh and blood, and this way his blood will not stain our hands." The others were all in agreement.

So, they sold Joseph to the Ishmaelites for eight ounces of silver and the Ishmaelites took Joseph with them as a slave to be resold in Egypt.

During the time of Egypt's 5th Dynasty, the 25th and 24th centuries BCE; two men worked, lived, and built a life together within their societal paradigm as a committed same gender family. They were both employed as body servants to the Pharaoh and as such, held positions of esteem within Egyptian society. We know this because the two men, Khnumhotep and Niankhkhnum, held to the traditional Egyptian after-life beliefs and provided for their life together beyond mortal existence. They built a tomb in which their joint burial as a couple would occur. They outfitted it in the traditional Egyptian funerary ways by stocking it with all the things they would need to continue their lives as a couple beyond the mortal life, including decorating the walls of the tomb with images of themselves as a family. The image at the top of this reflection of two men in romantic embrace is from the wall of their tomb and is depicting the couple, Khnumhotep and Niankhkhnum, as they appeared in life. In other of their tomb paintings, they are represented occupying the same stances and positions as are those of traditional Egyptian iconography which depicted a married couple. To date, the image is the oldest known image of a same gender couple. The couple’s names are referred to as “chosen names” because at some point during their life, they chose to change the names they received at birth in order to better describe themselves. Niankhkhnum means "joined to life" and Khnumhotep means "joined to the blessed state of the dead,” and when read together their names are translated as "joined in life and joined in death."

The discovery of Khnumhotep’s and Niankhkhnum’s tomb in 1964 astounded Egyptologists and archeologists because prior to its discovery, no tomb had been discovered as being so exactingly representative of that of an opposite gender couple yet the tomb was that of two men. Detractors immediately began to dismiss the evidence of the men being a same gender family and insisted that the men were brothers because, they reasoned, the relationship of the two men, as evidenced in both life and death, was not representative of a “traditional” Egyptian family, and therefore, they could not be a couple. Yet if the way in which they were depicted in the tomb’s hieroglyphs was that of two brothers, then they were guilty of committing incest. Short of hanging a rainbow flag over the entrance to their tomb, the indication of their relationship in representing themselves to the world as a same gender family could not be any clearer. Even the choices of household gods worshiped by the couple were unique in their representation of male sexuality and their pairing of male fertility gods with other male gods.

Approximately 500 years after the passing of Khnumhotep and Niankhkhnum, Joseph, the child of a very non “traditional” family, the 11th son of Jacob, and the 1st son of Rachael, arrived in Egypt after being kidnapped, stripped naked, beaten, thrown into the bottom of a well, threatened with murder, and finally sold into slavery by his 10 older brothers. Needless to say, Joseph's family is NOT the Waltons! If you are looking for an example of "traditional family values," this family, not so much! This isn't the first time I've engaged Joseph's very less than ordinary family arrangement in one of my reflections. Recently in my reflection titled "I'm Getting Married in the Morning!"

(http://therevsisterbishop.blogspot.com/2011/07/im-getting-married-in-morning.html) I reflected upon the fact that within neither the Hebrew nor Christian Scriptures is there a single verse which specifically states that marriage shall be between one man and one woman. Needless to say, when examined, Joseph's family is a model of this being the case. Joseph has four mothers. His biological mother, Rachael, is also the sister of Leah, a second of Joseph's four mothers. In addition to being sisters, both Rachael and Leah are the cousins of Joseph's father, Jacob. This convoluted familial arrangement therefore makes Joseph cousins to both of his mothers and his father. As was the case with the fallacy that marriage is dictated by the authority of Scripture to be between one man and one woman, so too is the fallacy that there exists a standard, "traditional" family arrangement instituted by God.

For the sake of clarity, allow me to repeat:

There does not appear anywhere within the Hebrew or Christian Scriptures a diagram, a standard or an implication that there exists, nor has been Divinely instituted, a "traditional" family upon which a model for family is to be established.

This is verified by Jesus within the narrative of the Christian Scriptures. In the Gospel attributed to Matthew (Chapter 22: 23-33) there is recorded a discussion with Jesus by individuals, who in an attempt to trick Jesus in regard to the validity of the Laws of Moses, question Jesus in regard to one of these very unusual, completely non-traditional (by implied Western, Christian paradigm) familial arrangements. Within the narrative, the antagonists of Jesus, relate how the Laws of Moses allow for a woman, whose husband has died but without producing any children, to be passed on to the woman's brother-in-law in order to become impregnated. In this particular passage, the woman is passed not to one brother-in-law, but to numerous in-laws. One Bride for Seven Brothers! The woman has no say so in the matter. As each brother dies, she is handed off to the next brother-in-law as a piece of inheritance property. A conveniently overlooked, and only one of many, examples of there not being within the pages of the Hebrew or Christian Scriptures any paradigm, model, standard or dictate as to what is referred to in the West as the "traditional" family. Just as with the invented-out-of-whole-cloth idea that "marriage is between one man and one woman," the idea that there has ever existed in all of human history a Divinely based standard for what constitutes a family is wholly fantasy, an invention of the heteronormative power majority.

As I began my preparation for this reflection, I kept encountering a very tired homophobic falsehood (one of many) regarding the “Gay Agenda.” Supposedly, one of the items on this fantasy of homophobic minds agenda is “the destruction of the family.” As I hold my head in pain in regard to the complete and utter absurdity, I wonder how this idea could ever be perceived to be possible in that if non-heteronormative, non-gender specific, same gender loving individuals are seeking the legal recognition of their partners as being both a marriage and a family, how then does the construct of a family destroy family?

It is not the legal recognition of the union of same gender loving individuals as being married, nor is it the legal recognition of their unions in constituting families which is destructive. Instead, the single most destructive and intrusive institution in all of human history, which has caused more harm and pain to any definition of family, is the Christian church.

Through its tools of shame and fear, the Christian church has forced countless individuals into loveless marriages. Throughout much of the history of the Christian church, men and women who, having been denied the freedom of developing their innate same-gender loving sexuality entered into, for the sake of safety and appearance, marriages of misery.

The Christian church stood by endorsing the institution of human bondage: slavery. Children were torn from their mother’s and father’s arms, women and men were separated by force, all because the Christian church said that the sale of human beings was blessed by God and the Scriptures.

In the history of the North American west, the Christian church was the accomplice in the destruction of indigenous families. The Christian church promoted and endorsed, for the sake of empire, the twisted theology of Manifest Destiny. As the American empire expanded toward the Pacific Ocean, the Christian church established boarding schools whereby the children of the indigenous peoples of North America were forcefully removed from their families and sent away to be “civilized” by the Christian church. The children were denied their language, traditions, culture and families all in the name of Christian missionary zeal.

The traditional message of the Christian church has been repentance: Because human beings are intrinsically evil from birth, they must repent (turn away) from their sinful natures and turn toward God thereby insuring the eternal salvation of their soul. Yet, the message of repentance has been lost on the Christian church as an institution. The institutional church has lost its soul. The Christian church as an institution has not repented of its sin of destroying people’s lives, of standing by endorsing the sale of human beings as property, of the persecution and death of anyone who questions the power and authority of the institution. The institution of the church has not repented of its sin of denying and, at best, perverting the teachings of Jesus Christ.

If the Christian church wants to remain relevant in modernity, it must cease its insatiable hunger for the power and control of people’s lives. It must “turn from its wicked ways.” The Christian church has become an afterthought in much of the West. Cathedrals have become museums. The average age of Christian clergy in the West is advancing upward as the people of younger generations no longer see the relevance of the institution of the church in either society or their lives. Churches built just a few decades ago to hold hundreds on Sunday mornings are nearly vacant now as the fading refrains of pipe organs and hymns echo off of cold walls and empty pews. The grasping for the control of individuals and the power of being the arbiter of society’s morality will be the institution’s own demise.

Whether the endorsement of slavery, the destruction of indigenous peoples and cultures or the persecution of non-gender conforming and same gender loving individuals; the theme has always been the same: Dehumanization. The people of the African continent were deemed less than human so their enslavement was advanced. Indigenous peoples were not “civilized” so the destruction of their culture and lives was justified. Same gender loving people are reduced to animalistic sexual acts – abominations - and therefore their persecution is legitimized. Sexually driven animals don’t have families, therefore, the denouncing of their unions as being non-families is pronounced.

There is repentance needed: Repentance from the sin of dehumanizing the children of God.

Unique family arrangements are, literally, as old as the pyramids. Individuals who did not meet the Western paradigm of "the traditional family" have existed for all of human history. Families can be biological or they can be chosen. Yet, the single defining characteristic has remained constant throughout all of history: People who love one another.

May you this day, and every day of your life, strive to see every child of God through the eyes of Jesus Christ. For it is in seeing every human being through the eyes of Christ which allows us to be able love all of humanity as did Christ.

Blessed Be.

“Walk Like an Egyptian!”

Eucharist To Go - Supersized!

2011-07-31T13:04:00.005-04:00

Eucharist To Go - Supersized!

The Season After Pentecost

Gospel Reading: Matthew 14:13-21

When Jesus heard about the beheading of John the Baptizer, he left Nazareth by boat and went to a deserted place to be alone. The people heard of this and followed him from their own towns on foot. When Jesus disembarked and saw the vast throng, his heart was moved with pity, and he healed their sick.
As the evening drew on, the disciples approached Jesus and said, "This is a deserted place and it is already late. Dismiss the crowds so that they can go to the villages and buy some food for themselves."
Jesus said to them, "There is no need for them to disperse. Give them something to eat yourselves."
"We have nothing here," they replied, "but five loaves of bread and a couple of small fish."
"Bring them here," Jesus said. Then he ordered the crowd to sit on the grass. Taking the the five loaves of bread and the two small fish, Jesus looked up to heaven, blessed the food, broke it, and gave it to the disciples, who in turn gave it to the people.
All those present ate their fill. The fragments remaining, when gathered up, filled twelve hand baskets. About five thousand families were fed that day.
(The Inclusive Bible)

2.15 billion dollars.

In terms of the behemoth Federal budget which has risen into the double digit trillions of dollars, by comparison, a measly $2.15 billion to religiously based charities isn't much. For those of us, however, whose lives are maintained by way of a very rigid income of counting every penny, diligently clipping coupons, and hunting sales to make ends meet - some of us didn't need to take vows of poverty, instead for us, it's just reality - it's virtually unfathomable!

When faith based charities climbed into bed with the Federal government during the last administration a really ugly monster was created. The concept of the separation of church and state became a joke. Then again, separation of church and state doesn't matter to Nationalist-Christians whose work to create a theocracy advances on a daily basis. The current administration is not any different: When faced with the possibility of discontinuing this odious practice, for the sake of political expediency, they chose to keep the beast alive and to continue to feed it Federal dollars.

"Charities" (and I use the term loosely) which spend more on infrastructure then they lay out in aid, are, sadly, fronts for industries. They employ lobbyists - using money absconded in the guise of donations - to advance their political views among the government elite. Much of their lobbying efforts are in the form of pushing legislation which would allow them to discriminate against those to whom they would be willing to give aid. If they don't like you, for whatever reason they dream up as someone being in violation of their religious views, they want the freedom to continue to accept tax payer dollars via the Federal Government, but, to also have the freedom to deny giving it to anyone of whom they disapprove.

The National Gay and Lesbian Task Force published a comprehensive and detailed academic report titled Lesbian, Gay, Bi Sexual and Transgender Youth: An Epidemic of Homelessness in which they documented how the previous Presidential administration actively worked with religious based charities on how to circumnavigate the law, accept and use Federal tax dollars, and still discriminate against those whom they determine to be un-worthy of assistance. One group in particular, The Salvation Army, maintained a publicly stated policy against giving assistance to openly same-gender loving persons, persons of alternate gender expression, as well as, Transgender, Bi Sexual, Lesbian and Gay persons; most especially any persons who openly lived as same gender loving couples. Although the organization was forced to moderate it's policy in order to receive Federal money; reports still abound of individuals who live their lives openly as persons of alternate gender expression, same-gender loving individuals, Lesbian, Gay, Transgender and Bi Sexual individuals who are denied assistance. During the aftermath of hurricane Katrina in New Orleans, numerous reports were filed with the Federal government regarding Gay, Bi Sexual, Transgender, and Lesbian persons being turned away from religiously based charities which are recipients of Federal dollars. One of the continuing type of complaints heard by the Federal government regarding religiously based/federally funded charities is from persons who are denied assistance (food, clothing, shelter) unless they attend religious services conducted by the individual charities where they are forced to listen to teachings and sermons which are contrary to the individual's belief system. So, if you're hungry, homeless and need a bed for the night, be prepared to lay aside your personal beliefs and faith practices and listen to a hell fire and brimstone sermon before you get any food or shelter. I find this horrible practice to be the antithesis of the teachings and life of Christ - that pesky individual from whom Christians borrow his name yet ignore his teachings and instructions. The evidence of which is seen within the narrative of the Gospel Reading for today.

Jesus has just heard about the death of his relative, John the Baptizer. You may recall that in the Gospel narrative regarding the births of John and Jesus, the mother of John, Elizabeth, and the mother of Jesus, Mary, are relatives thereby making John and Jesus relatives. Jesus has literally gone away to be by himself to mourn the loss of his relative. His cousin, John, was executed as a political prisoner by the state in the person of King Harrod who had John arrested and beheaded. The horrible nature of John's execution has to not only grieve Jesus deeply, but also for Jesus, it foreshadows his future. The pain and loss which Jesus is suffering cannot be imagined. Yet, when Jesus sees the throng of people coming to him for help, he, in an act of self denial, lays aside his own grief and mourning - "his heart was moved with pity" - and helps those who have nowhere else to turn for assistance other then to him. I have no doubt that although many of the people who sought Jesus for help in regard to physical healing, (especially given the notoriety of John the Baptizer and the great esteem in which he was held by the people as well as the fact that Harrod, even prior to the execution of John, was a hated individual by the populace) that also many of the people were seeking out Jesus in order to share with Jesus their own sense of grief and loss at John's death. Jesus doesn't require of anyone to sit and listen to a sermon before he offers them medical help or food. No one is turned away. Everyone who came to Jesus received assistance. Everyone was fed. Jesus didn't tell anyone "Ask me into your heart" before I will help you. Jesus didn't require of anyone to listen to him tell them that they were sinners bound for hell before their illnesses were healed or before they were fed.

There doesn't seem to be very much evidence among the Nationalist-Christian politicians in the United States Congress of having the same attribute of Jesus: pity. Their hearts are moved by political ambition and grandstanding, yet, pity seems to be lacking. The dehumanizing language they employee as they pontificate on why they refuse to help those in need is evidence of their lack of pity. "Welfare mothers" and "lazy," are very politically popular dehumanizing adjectives. Yet, senior citizens (whose existence is from one Social Security check to the next) are not persons who are the recipients of "entitlement."

There are only two specific miracles which are listed in all four of the Christian Gospel narratives. Some miracles are recorded in certain of the Gospel narratives, yet not always in others. The miracle of the Resurrection of Jesus is one, the miracle of the "Feeding of the Five Thousand" is the other. Only these two miracles of all of those attributed to Jesus, are recorded in all four of the Gospels narratives. It would seem that to the early church, as well as those who penned the narratives, that there was a unique significance to the fact that these two miracles, of all the miracle stories, were needed to be recorded for all of posterity. We can understand the inclusion of the Resurrection narrative because it is upon this miracle which the whole of Christianity is based. Yet, what was the unique significance of the "Feeding of the Five Thousand?"

The iconography of the first millennium church is replete with countless representations, not as one would assume with representations of dead Jesus' hanging limply from wooden cross beams, but instead with the representation of five loaves of bread and two fish. For the first millennium church, this unique day, this unique occurrence of the healing and feeding of this great gathering of people, was the picture and representation of the Eucharist meal.

For the first millennium church the significance of the Eucharist meal was not distilled to being the one meal which we refer to as "The Last Supper." The institution of the observance of the Eucharist meal by Christ on the night in which he was arrested, tried, tortured and executed by the state; was the remembrance of ALL of the meals at which Christ has been a participant during his physical ministry on earth. It was a time for reflection upon all of those things which Christ had taught his followers. It was a time for community. Christ didn't refuse anyone from partaking of food offered at any meal in which he was a participant. Even in knowing that Judas was going to be the individual of his demise, he offered the elements of the meal to the man who would be the link to his torture and execution. It wasn't Christ who restricted participation in the Eucharist meal, it was humanity which developed the rules and regulations of exclusion. Jesus had pity on humanity in all of it's suffering and pain. Human beings do not. Jesus said to his followers in referring to the people gathered to receive ministry "There is no need for them to disperse. Give them something to eat yourselves." It is human beings who turn helpless, disenfranchised, people who are lacking in medical care and food, away to fend for themselves. It is Jesus who instructs his followers to give them out of what you have. It is human beings who say that to give a starving person Food Stamps only encourages their "laziness" and is "stealing from my pocket."

The Christian Gospel narratives abound with references to Jesus reclining at table partaking of meals with individuals of whom society disapproved. Jesus used his presence at these meals, not only as the physical representation of the Community of God on earth, but also as opportunities for teaching and ministry. It was at these meals with Jesus that people received spiritual healings and physical healings. Both their bodies and their souls received care. It was at these meals that those who had been outcast by society were received into the Community of God.

My prayer for you this day is for you to be able to see people as Jesus saw them.
May you develop the ability of Jesus to see people in all of their pain and to be moved with pity.
May you, in your own grief, longings, agendas and despair learn to be able to find your healing and peace in the act of bringing healing to others.

Blessed Be

Eucharist To Go - Supersized!

"I'm Getting Married in the Morning!"

2011-07-24T04:58:00.004-04:00

"I'm Getting Married in the Morning!"

The Season After Pentecost

Lectionary Reading: Genesis 29:15-28

22 So Laban brought together all the local people for a wedding feast, and there was a great deal of drinking." (The Inclusive Bible)

If there were ever a perfectly clear Biblical narrative which in it's fullest extent completely and totally gives us an absolute unambiguous directive for the Scriptural mandate of what marriage is supposed to be, it is Genesis 29:15 - 28!

From this passage we see that the Biblical mandate for marriage is:

1) Two women who are sisters, Leah and Rachael.

2) The two maids of Leah and Rachael, Zilpha and Bilhah.

3) One man, Jacob, who literally buys, after fourteen years labor his two wives, Leah and Rachael. Leah and Rachael are also Jacob's cousins. Jacob marries and has sexual intercourse with both sister/cousins, Leah and Rachael. He also has sexual intercourse with their two maids, Zilpha and Bilhah.

4) From this union of one man, 2 women, and their maids are produced multiple children twelve of whom were males.

If there was ever any doubt in your mind as to the Biblical mandate as dictated by God regarding God's intention for marriage, this narrative should completely and totally finalize in your mind that Biblical marriage is "between one man and one woman."

Wait!

What!?

How do we derive that we know that God's mandate for marriage is "between one man and one woman" based on this narrative?

We don't.

See the problem is there isn't anywhere in either the Hebrew or Christian Scriptures a verse which specifically states "marriage is between one man and one woman." It cannot be found because it does not exist.

As close as you can come in the Hebrew Scriptures as to this implication being that "marriage is between one man and one woman" might possibly be the Genesis narrative of the Adam and Eve saga. Yet even in this saga, there is no definition or description of MARRIAGE. We imply that Eve is Adam's wife based on our reading it into the text based on OUR Western paradigm of what constitutes marriage. No mention is either made or implied that a marriage has, or is about to occur. We are fully aware of the author's knowledge of whatever interpretation of marriage existed at the time of the penning of the saga, yet the author does not refer to Adam and Eve's joining as a marriage. The transliteration of the saga only distinctly refers to Eve as being either Adam's "helper" or "partner." Helper in what activity? Partner in work? Partner in life? There is no elaboration by the author as to the meaning of the choice of words "helper" or "partner." The words "husband" or "wife" do not occur in the narrative. Later in the narrative, Adam refers to Eve as "the woman" but not as his "wife." In the dialogue of the narrative attributed to the Divine, neither does God refer to either Adam as "husband" or to Eve as "wife" but only as "a helper," or "partner." Any possible meaning as to the definition of "helper" or "partner" is supplied at the discretion of the reader. We know from later in the narrative that sexual intercourse does occur between Adam and Eve because they do have children. Are we to assume, however, that having children is the definition of a marriage? Is this a "common law" marriage "without the benefit of clergy?" If then having children is the definition of marriage, then in modernity there are a multitude of unrecorded marriages! Conversely if, for whatever reason, children are not the product, does this then mean that regardless of what the appearance, law or license, the absence of children makes the union invalid?

If you are one who is a believer in the literalness of the Genesis narrative, that the earth is around 5000 or 6000 years old, then your inference drawn from the Adam and Eve narrative is that Adam's "helper/partner" appears after God has caused Adam to fall into a deep sleep, God takes a rib from Adam, God creates Eve, Adam wakes up from his nap and there is his "helper/partner," Eve.

There's no indication of an exchange of vows. There's no white dress. In fact both the "bridge and groom," according to the narrative "are naked and not ashamed."

So, if we are to base the definition of marriage on the Adam and Eve Genesis narrative, then marriage consists of one man who must have one rib Divinely removed, one woman who must be created out of the man's rib, they both must be "naked and not ashamed," they must live naked in a garden and they must avoid eating any fruit offered to them by talking snakes.

Once again, for the sake of repetition, there does not exist anywhere in either the Hebrew or Christian Scriptures a verse which specifically states "marriage is between one man and one woman."

In fact very nearly every "marriage" indicated in the Hebrew Scriptures is something so convoluted as to not be recognizable as being "marriage" by any Western definition. There are forced marriages by kidnapping and rape. There is a brother raping his sister. There is a father-in-law raping his daughter-in-law. There are women sold to men with whom the men have sexual intercourse. There are countless marriages to cousins. There are multiple partners as in the case of either of the Hebrew Kings David and Solomon whose joinings number in the hundreds of wives, concubines, mistresses and other men's wives. There is the murder of a man and the rape of his wife. There are slaves who have no voice in deciding their fate and who are given to men who have sexual intercourse with them. Yet, nowhere in all of this morass of giving, buying, selling, raping, and stealing is there a single reference, a single verse, a single definitive verse of Scripture which states "marriage is between one man and one woman."

I can hear the wheels turning! I can smell the smoke rising as you prepare the pyre to burn the heretic! You're thinking to yourselves, "YOU'RE WRONG! AND WE CAN PROVE IT! We've all been to weddings. We've all heard the minister/priest/pastor quote Scripture, why even Jesus quotes it in the Christian Scriptures and Paul quotes it in his letter to the Ephesians"

"For this cause a man shall leave his father and mother and shall be joined to his wife and the two shall become one flesh."

"See! We told you that you're wrong, heretic! Somebody strike a match!"

Yeah. Not so much.

See we have several problems with the use of this Scriptural reference being the definitive Biblical directive that "marriage is one man and one woman."

First, the verse doesn't say "one man and one woman." It states "A man." "A man" may have as many wives as "A man" desires to have. Additionally with each wife to whom "A man" is joined, he becomes "one flesh" with each particular wife. You see the idea of one man/one woman being the ideal for marriage doesn't appear in western culture until the time of the Roman Empire and even then it is only several hundred years after the time of Christ that it becomes codified into the Roman legal system. Until that time, a man may have had as many wives, slaves, mistresses and sexual partners as he could afford, some of whom may have been males.

Secondly, if we are going to use this verse as the definitive Biblical directive that marriage is between one man and one woman, then we have a huge sin problem here because in that this verse first appears in the text in Genesis narrative, is it neither adhered to, nor followed by, any of the men to whom we refer to as "Patriarchs." The Lectionary reading for today is indicative of this being the case because Jacob does not obey, nor even make a pretense at obeying, this directive. Additionally the twelve males produced by Jacob's joining with his two sister/cousin wives and their maids, and who are attributed as being those from whom the Twelve Tribes of Israel are descended; neither is there any record or reference to any of them following this directive but all are attributed as having multiple wives, concubines, slaves and other sexual partners.

Thirdly, the quotation by Paul is not indicative of this being the definition of marriage. Paul is not defining what a marriage is, he is defining how a marriage FUNCTIONS. Paul quotes the verse in a litany of verses with which we as a Western culture have major problems! Paul, in addition to quoting this particular verse, also states that "husbands shall be the head of their wives," and that "wives shall be submissive to their husbands in all things." If then we are using Paul's quotation as the "proof" that this is the definitive Biblical dictate as to what constitutes marriage, then I am not personally aware of any Biblical marriages. I do not know any Western woman who is "submissive to her husband in all things," and neither do I know any Western husband who is "the head of his wife." Setting aside the whole misogyny issue, there is the scholarly problem that in some manuscripts, this passages in regard to husbands, wives and marriage does not appear at all. In some manuscripts it is inserted into the margins at a later date by either a scribe or clergy person who, while copying the text, makes the decision on their own to insert the passage and it appears in different handwriting from the remainder of the text.

Lastly, if we are going to use the fact that Jesus quotes this verse as a proof that the definition of marriage is "one man and one woman," we again have a problem: Jesus quotes the verse within the context of defining DIVORCE. This becomes a particularly sticky situation in that it is this passage which Jesus clearly and expressly forbids divorce in responding to the people who are asking him "is it lawful to divorce." The emphasis of Jesus in quoting the verse is that of the end of the verse "let no one separate" as in "as a matter of justice, you don't get to use the laws of Moses to play fast and easy with divorcing your wife because you're tired of her and want to trade her in on a new model." In that over 50% of all marriages, of any kind or expression, in the United States end in divorce, that most churches members are either directly effected by divorce or come from households of divorced and re-married parents, that most churches have ministries to divorced people, are you certain that you want to snatch this verse out of context and use this reference of Jesus quoting this verse as the definitive Biblical mandate as marriage being "between one man and one woman?"

In actuality its nearly impossible to apply this as being a Scriptural mandate even to the Adam and Eve saga at all because Adam doesn't have "a father and mother" from whom he may leave. The verse is inserted into the narrative by the author as a kind of "footnote," an after thought, an explaining WHY joinings occur NOT their appearance. So, a literal application as to the verse being a definitive definition of marriage being "one man and one woman" again fails the test.

So why would the author insert this "footnote" into the text? If, as most reputable scholarly works suggest, the Genesis saga is penned during the time of the Hebrew exile post the David/Solomon Kingdom period, then the insertion of this "footnote" into the text makes far more sense. The national paradigm of the Hebrew people was one of their Divine establishment as a nation-state based upon their unique standing with God. If this is the case, how then does their nation-state cease to exist and how do all of these people who are "chosen by God" end up being virtual, if not actual, slaves of foreign invading and conquering powers? Again, as most scholarly works indicate, the penning of the five Hebrew Scripture books we refer to as the Torah, becomes a defining of who the Hebrew people are in relation to their turbulent and changing world and how they are to exist as a unique people who are captives of a stronger and vastly dominant culture, which does not in any way resemble their own.

It's all about cultural change. It was about cultural change then and the matter of defining marriage today is the same as it was then: cultural change.

People were frightened. There was a fear of the Hebrew people loosing their identity and becoming assimilated into the culture of their captor's. There was the need to retain their uniqueness in the world. People are as frightened by cultural change today as they were then. The world around us is changing at a very fast pace. Frightened people become dangerous people. The need for absolutes in a changing culture becomes a security blanket. The definition of marriage has changed multiple times over millenia. The idea of marriage has never been static. It has changed and evolved over time. As Yale Professor John Boswell illustrated in his work Same Sex Unions in Pre-Modern Europe, there was a time in our past when the church blessed same gender unions in distinct liturgical services. In our own history we have re-defined marriage several times. It was redefined at the early stages of existence while still a colony of Great Britain. So many slave owners were having sexual intercourse with their female slaves that the question arose what was to be done with the children? Were they to be free like their fathers or slaves like their mothers? The choice was made: no marriage and children of slaves are slaves regardless of who their fathers may have been. During the time of Empire expansion into the western areas of the continent the Federal Government in the North West Ordinances re-defined marriage. The absence of clergy and judges caused the Federal Government to recognize common law marriages. In my life time the Supreme Court overturned the states' laws which made marriages between persons of different races illegal.

Why does any of this matter? I don't take any joy from playing a game of one-upmanship. I'm not searching for the thrill of the "ah, ha! gotcha!" moment. It matters to me as all things of which I write matter: Justice. It matters because words matter. They have power. They inspire people for good. They inspire frightened people towards violence. It is not just and right for people who name the name of Christ to "bear false witness against your neighbor." It is not just and right to hide behind the name of Jesus and attack same gender loving people. It is not just and right to imagine that by hiding behind the name of Christ and groundlessly vilifying others, you have succeeded in hiding your hatred of same gender loving, non-heteronormative, non-gender conforming individuals.

Many of my colleagues battle for "the right to marry." Other of my colleagues are adamant that for same gender loving people to adopt the guise of marriage, only further advances us along the path of assimilation. I understand both points of view. Yet, my missive here is not either. Regardless of the outcome of our culture war regarding the definition of marriage, the time when homophobic religious people are free and protected by the power heteronormative majority in making unchallenged, unproven, and untrue blanket statements wrapped in a thin veneer of religiosity in regard to same gender loving, non-heteronormative and non-gender conforming individuals has passed. We do not search for conflict, we are at heart a peaceful, loving people, however, we will not sit idly by while extreme physical violence and death is perpetrated on non-heteronormative, non-gender conforming individuals. Such word inspired violence is at an all time high and increasing exponentially. We will not go quietly into the night.

Your homophobic fears are unfounded. They, like your words, are based, not as you claim, in being the guardians of society's morals, but are based in your unreasonable hatred of people not like yourself. You know this is wrong. You know that the teachings of Christ are such that this is wrong. Yet, you are trying to find a way to be able to hate children of God, who are created in the image of God, and to still be able to name the name of Christ. You are not "struggling with the 'gay issue.'" You have already made up your mind. No one is out to "recruit" you, your children, your grandchildren. No one is out to "turn" you or anyone else gay. There is no "gay agenda." There are simply individuals, who, like every other person, want to live their lives in peace and to be free to love who they love without interference from anyone else. We want what every other human being wants: our universal human rights respected and honored.

My prayer for you this day is that you may find the peace of God in your life. The peace of God which takes away your fear of change.
I pray that you no long worry yourself regarding other's place in eternity, but to instead worry if you are living the life which the one who you claim to be your Messiah instructed you to live.
My prayer is that you may learn to live the words of Jesus and to build the Community of God on earth.
"In so far as it is possible with you, live at peace with all people."

Blessed Be.