Terry Magnum thinks sexual perversion is the worst sin.  He thinks homosexuality is perverse, so he felt he was doing God’s work when he murdered Kenneth Cummings Jr. after he looked for a gay man to kill in Houston Texas June fourth.  He told reporters recently “I believed with all my heart that I was doing the right thing.” 

No one deserves to be mistreated, threatened, or treated less-than-human because of some character trait or individual difference that another finds offensive or perverse.  Perversity, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.  Each of us is wonderfully and uniquely created by God to be who we are.  We all reflect God’s image regardless of what language we speak, our financial status, what religion we practice, the color of our skin, how much we weigh, our sexual orientation, or for any other reason.  God is reflected in a broad range of diversity.

It will be easy for many of us to simply dismiss Terry Magnum as insane and forget that the incident happened.  The problem is that he didn’t develop that kind of thinking in a vacuum.  The idea came to him for some reason.  Prejudice and discrimination always leads to acts of violence.  When any group begins to think of a subset of people as inferior, someone will get the idea that the inferiority needs to be removed. 

Our society has made great strides toward equality, but there is still an underlying prejudice about those who are sexually queer.  Where does prejudice come from?  It comes from fear.  Where does fear start?  Fear begins when we can’t understand or accept the differences of another.  Many are raised fearful of others due to the color of their skin.  Others are fearful of those who don’t reach a certain social status.  Still others are fearful of people who are attracted to the same gender.  It is easy to think more highly of ourselves, if we are able to think of others as lower.

The church has contributed to this fear, prejudice and hatred.  Even in this enlightened age we have television ministers raising money by causing panic among the viewers.  Millions are told continually that they should be afraid of “the gay agenda.”  They are told that God punishes people for having sex with someone of their own sex.  It is not a far jump for weak minded people to think that they would indeed be doing the work of God by punishing homosexuals. 

I trust Mr. Magnum will be convicted of murder.  I believe it will be considered a hate crime which will mean that he will have a harder time being paroled.  He is not the only one who should be charged however.  The politicians that he has heard demonize queers should be convicted as well.  They commit the hate crime just as much as Mr. Magnum.  The preachers he has heard warn of the threat of homosexuality should be convicted as well.  Their hands are covered with the blood of an innocent. 

This murder did not happen in a vacuum.  It happened as a part of a conspiracy; a conspiracy to keep control over others by proclaiming homosexuality as evil; a conspiracy to raise money by making people think that those who love someone of the same sex are a threat to society.  This is a fraud of the worst kind.  Murder resulted from this conspiracy to defraud the faithful.  Guilt is spread to all of those who participated in the fraud, from the pew to the pulpit and the cathedral.  It will be a long time before the blood of the innocent will be able to be cleaned from the hands of those who conspired. 

I am worried about the “values” of the United States Military.  Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay prisons come to mind as examples of a lack of concern for human rights within our military structure.  Not to mention the fact that we attacked a country that never attacked us.  We attacked a country that was never a threat to the United States until after we attacked and created an environment for terrorists to take a stand.  The War in Iraq brings shame to those of us who believe that a just war does not include being the aggressor nation. 

James chapter 4 refers to those who fight and attack others because of a desire to have something that they have.  I’m not sure what the multiple and complex reasons are for the war in Iraq, but I’m fairly confident that they include Middle East oil.  Of course politicians can’t tell us that we may be trading the blood of our youth for oil.

The spokesman from Fort Bragg Army Base in NC used the word “values” in an interesting context this week.  According to the Fayetteville Observer, Col Billy J. Buckner said, “We take this issue seriously, and the soldier’s conduct does not reflect the values we adhere to in the Army."  An Unnamed soldier was discharged from the 1st Battalion of the 321st Field Artillery Regiment. 

In light of the violence, detention, and human rights abuses of the U.S. Military, what could this man have done that was so horrible it disagreed with this Army’s values?  He appeared on a gay military-themed pornography site.  His discharge was because he admits to being gay and was therefore let go based on the flawed policy of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” 

The Army doesn’t think that being gay fits with its values.  I’m not sure the United States military has a clue how to make value judgments.  Obviously someone’s sense of right and wrong is far askew if they promote violence and human rights violations, but are worried about who someone has sex with.  I want good soldiers to protect my country.  I don’t care who they have sex with.  Why should it matter?

Some may argue that the issue is pornography.  Whether we like it or not we have this great thing in the United States called the “Bill of Rights”   Among the very first guaranteed rights given to Americans is freedom of speech.  I don’t want children watching pornography.  But adults should have the right to watch sexual pornography if they like, and certainly a soldier should have the right to make porn, so long as it doesn’t impact his ability to perform his job as a soldier.   When did the giving and receiving of pleasure, without causing harm, become a bad thing?

Individual freedom is an American value, regardless of whether it is a value of the U.S. Army. Americans should fight to uphold the rights of everyone to love the one they love rather than to be forced into a norm that is contrary to the individual’s nature.  Soldiers should not be dismissed because they are attracted to the same sex.  The freedom to love must win out over those who feel that everyone must express their love the same way as the majority of the people.  I hate to sound like a hippie from decades past, but we really should be making love, not war.   

Over the past two weeks a couple of contradictory messages have been given by the Roman Catholic Church.  The first is a repeat of the church’s doctrine of “primacy.”  Pope Benedict XVI has reasserted the position that the Roman Catholic Church is the “one true church” and that all others are “defective.”  Other churches are merely “ecclesial communities” and therefore do not have a “means of salvation.”  

This is not a new idea; it has been the position of the church for hundreds of years.  However, the Second Vatican Council (1962-65) seemed to take a more moderate and ecumenical approach. 

Benedict appears to want to correct what he considers to be “erroneous and ambiguous” interpretations of the principles of Vatican II.  The argument is based on the idea that the Roman Church is the only one with Apostolic Succession.  This is the idea that one's ordination can be traced back through the ages to the original Apostles.  It is incredible to think that anyone has genuine accurate records of such ordinations all the way back to the first century. There were three hundred years of persecution where they were done in secret.  However, the Roman Church is not the only one that has Apostolic Succession.  Orthodox churches, the Anglican Communion, Independent Catholics, and many other Protestant denominations can make just as accurate a claim as Rome.  In fact, I can trace my own Apostolic Succession back to both Rome and Constantinople.  It isn't who placed their hands on you that makes one a representative of Christ.  It takes a great deal more than that to show a true Christian.

Another interesting phenomenon within the Roman Catholic Church has been the announcement by Cardinal Roger Mahoney of the Archdiocese of Los Angeles, of huge payouts to victims of sexual abuse by Roman Catholic priests.  He included, what seemed to me like a rather half-hearted apology to the victims.  Actions speak louder than words, and I don’t believe the Roman Church has taken enough action to protect children from her priests.  Simple payment of money does not show true repentance, unless the changes needed to prevent abuses follow.

In total the Roman Catholic Church has paid out over 2 billion dollars to victims of sexual abuse by priests since 1950.  This is explained in the book Sex, Priests, and Secret Codes: The Catholic Church's 2,000-Year Paper Trail of Sexual Abuse by Thomas Doyle. 

The Vatican seems to be delusional.  This Pope believes that the church he leads is the only “means of salvation” for the world, yet he is head of a morally corrupt cabal that refuses to deal with reality.  Some suggestions for change might include allowing priests to marry.  The attempt at chastity, that is rarely possible, causes men to deny their natural desires instilled by God and therefore they seek perverted ways of meeting those needs.

The church is a haven for many struggling with their sexual orientation.  Unable to confront their families and society and admit their God-given nature, they find it easy to become a priest; since no one will then ask why they aren’t married.  Therefore, another suggestion to change the institutional corruptness of Roman Catholicism would be to stop demonizing sexual minorities and allow people to be true to themselves.  If the church would take a humane position toward those who are sexually queer, there would be far fewer problems with misdirected sexual energy toward perversion within the ranks of priests.

The Bible teaches that salvation comes through Christ’s finished work, not through a church.  Thank God this is true.  If we had to rely on the immoral cabal of Roman Catholics to gain our means of salvation, the world would be in deep shit indeed.  

The argument that same sex marriage will destroy heterosexual marriage continues to be a part of our national debate.  The argument is so strong that the presidential candidates, regardless of how progressive or gay friendly they appear, refuse to support gay marriage equality.  Instead, they fear political suicide and take some less-than-equal position if they bother saying anything at all.  The only Republican candidate who had a fairly favorable position on equality at one time reversed his position lately and said that he does not support gay marriage.

The argument that allowing same-sex couples to marry will hurt marriage is flawed at its core.  The only possible way same-sex marriage could hurt opposite-sex marriages is if we assume that same-sex marriage would be preferred by the majority of the population.  It would follow then that, if given the choice, most people would prefer to be in a same-sex relationship. 

History does not support this view.  Those societies that have been open about homosexuality never were threatened with more people turning homosexual. The modern societies that have allowed same-sex marriage have not in any way caused a decline in opposite-sex marriages.   In reality, the number of people attracted to the same sex has always been, and likely always will be, a relatively small percentage of the population.  Allowing equality for minorities is a basic principle of the checks and balances of our form of government.  The United States is supposed to be a place of refuge where minority rights are protected.

The August 14, 2007 issue of The Advocate magazine published interesting survey results about the kinds of relationships queer folks are involved in.  A full 59% of those responding to the survey were in committed relationships.  Ten percent of these have been together for longer than 15 years.  It certainly doesn’t appear that same-sex couples are any less serious about their relationships than opposite sex couples.   The CDC’s National Vital Statistic Report for 2006 continues to show that the marriage rate of opposite-sex couples is only about 50% more than the divorce rate of opposite sex couples.   

Opposite-sex couples have many social and economic pressures to stay married that same-sex couples simply do not have.  These benefits of marriage have not been extended to same-sex couples, yet same-sex couples still enter into relationships and stay with them at a very positive rate.  The Advocate survey also reported that only 7% of the same-sex couples cheated on the other.  The vast majority (68%) is monogamous, about 25% were not exclusive sexually, but with mutual agreement.   

I doubt opposite-sex couples could claim any better numbers than these.  It appears to me that allowing same-sex couples to marry would strengthen the institution of marriage rather than cause any harm.  Same-sex couples stay together and dedicated to one another as much or more often than opposite-sex couples do.   

There is no threat from equality.  Equality, liberty and justice should be for everyone, not just for those who are attracted to the opposite sex.

I continue to be amazed at the amount of fear expressed toward sexual minorities.  What is it that is so fearful?  How is any relationship based on love and commitment a threat to any other relationship?  The obvious answer is that other people’s relationships are not something to be feared.  I tend to think we should each worry about our own.  Maybe Senator Sam Brownback should keep this advice in mind.

President Bush reached a compromise and appointed a judge to the Federal bench that was more liberal than two others who fall far more close to Bush’s own views.  It was a deal where the President was supposed to get two who agreed with him on the bench in return for one who disagreed.  It is a no-brainer; the conservatives still have the most influence.  He nominated Janet T. Neff of Michigan to U.S. District Court. 

Senator Sam Brownback, a Republican of Kansas, has used a procedural maneuver to block the Senate’s consent to the appointment.  His concern is that she spoke at a union of two women in Massachusetts in 2002.  Neff responded in writing to the Senator that the ceremony was for a close family friend, and she had no legal standing at the ceremony whatsoever.  This was prior to gay marriage, and a UCC minister officiated at the event.  She was a judge in Michigan not Massachusetts.  Judge Neff only spoke in support of her friend.

The fact that the judge participated causes alarm for the ambitious Senator from Kansas.  He doesn’t accept her response because she wouldn’t answer questions about her views of gay marriage.  She claimed it would show bias to express an opinion on something that could come before the court in the future.

Perhaps the Senator should do some research about how judges are supposed to act.  The American Barr Association Code of Judicial Conduct Rule 2.11 clearly states that “A judge shall not, with respect to cases, controversies, or issues that are likely to come before the court, make pledges, promises, or commitments that are inconsistent with the impartial performance of the adjudicative duties of the judiciary.”  Perhaps a primer for the Senator to start with is, Lawyers' Ethics and the Pursuit of Social Justice: A Critical Reader, by Susan D Carle

The Senator is clearly not interested in following the law, or having an impartial court.  He wants to grandstand for name recognition so he can attempt a run at the presidency.  Once again, politicians are creating fears that do not exist in order to divide the electorate.  Senator Brownback is a perfect example of those unscrupulous characters that will use a wedge issue for personal gain.

Rather than an impartial court, or a fair hearing before the Senate, Brownback has already decided to run the country following the principle of “guilt by association.”  And, Oh My God! The judge has a lesbian friend.  How frightful!

Using this model, Brownback would deny many people fair hearing, including Jesus who had plenty of politically incorrect buddies.

Some folks refuse to believe that same-sex attraction is natural.

For centuries the church said nothing about homosexuality.  Queer people were accepted to some extent in pre-Christian societies, and that acceptance was not unheard of in church circles for many years.  There are stories of great Saints who were gay, such as Sergius and Bachus.  Some evidence suggests that the early church even blessed same-sex unions.

It wasn’t until after the unsuccessful crusades against Islam that the church began to focus its attention on same-sex partners. It is a common fund-raising technique to find a common enemy.  Since the majority population was attracted to the opposite sex, homosexuals were, and are, an easy target.  It is easy to turn something that is viewed as different into something to fear with the right rhetoric. 

Focus on the Family and the 700 Club raise millions of dollars today by claiming to protect society from the “gay agenda.”  (I’ve been gay a long time and still don’t know what that agenda is. It must be a tightly held secret.)  The truth is that people who love one another are not a threat to society.  Those who use fear to raise money to promote hate are very dangerous. 

Getting back to my original thought, those who want to proclaim homosexual human beings as dangerous would probably have a hard time accepting homosexual animals as threats.  If animals that can cause no harm can be gay, then people who are gay do not automatically cause harm either.

This has some folks in an uproar when it comes to a pair of same-sex penguins.  These penguins dared to show public displays of affection in Central Park.  An even greater cause for alarm was that they found a fertilized egg and raised to it be a perfectly healthy chick.  How dastardly!

Human parents are in an uproar, even though other penguins don’t seem to mind the adoption at all.  A picture book that tells the story of the adorable penguins adopting and raising the chick called “Tango,” And Tango Makes Three (Ala Notable Children's Books. Younger Readers (Awards)) has parents in southern Illinois and other places upset about the message the book promotes.  I suppose these parents don’t want their kids to know that penguins of the same sex can care about each other and care enough to raise a chick.  Never mind the fact that Tango may not be around were it not for the gay penguins.

Perhaps these parents would rather show their children a picture book of a penguin egg sitting alone with no one to care for it until it dies and decays.  Maybe that is a better message.

Thomas Aquinas declared that same sex attraction was unnatural and therefore sinful. The church adopted this position and the Roman Catholics hold to it to this day. This conclusion was reached based on the assumption that animals are not homosexual.  No matter how much evidence to the contrary, some people will simply not admit that same-sex attraction is just as natural as opposite sex attraction.  One is not a threat to the other.  What really matters is that we encourage people to love one another.

Growing up in Chicago we used to play “king of the hill”.  Actually it was more like king of the snow bank at this time of year.  Various empty lots in the neighborhood became depository of large amounts of snow cleared from the streets and parking lots.  Several would often try to climb to the top, while at the same time trying to pull others back down.  Whoever got to the top could stand and shout that they were king.  The reign was usually short lived as it didn’t take long for someone to grab the king’s ankles and pull.  This resulted in a slide back down the pile of snow.  It was great fun.

 Some people, however, never seem to learn to stop playing “king of the hill”.  No doubt we can all think of people who have climbed on the backs of others to make it to the top.  For adults it usually takes a great deal of exaggeration and self-promoting to make one’s self a ruler; even if the dominion is relatively small.  The thing that would-be kings should remember is that arrogance is often followed by a great fall.

 The current leadership of the Republican Party set the political party up for a great fall with the arrogant way they have manipulated the politics of all three branches of government within the United States, and caused the U.S. to be viewed as a bully and aggressor nation elsewhere in the world.  All the while, claiming they were the pinnacles of virtue, values, and morality.   It just isn’t so.

 The Mark Foley incident should remind politicos everywhere that no group has the morality market to itself.  Foley, a Republican, flirt with young pages while in Congress.  He wrote sexually explicit things to them and had conversations about sex.  He was a dirty old-man, at the least.  No one has accused him of more than that yet, but there is an assumption that he is guilty of more; all this, while he was the darling of the Republicans and champion of legislation to protect children from predators.  Also, the question remains to be answered about whether Republican leaders helped cover up Foley’s sexual improprieties.  He proves the proverb that arrogance is followed by a great fall.

 In the religious arena, Evangelicals have set themselves up as the bastions of morality.  They have often colluded with the Republican Party to try to legislate a very narrow moral agenda.  Thankfully, not everyone shares their morality (or lack thereof).  They have taken pride in their influence in government and the rise of attention to evangelicals.  The National Association of Evangelicals has millions of members nationwide and they often control many of the religious media outlets. 

 The president of the National Association of Evangelicals had to resign last month.  Ted Haggard admit to being a liar, purchasing methamphetamines, and “full body massages” from a male prostitute.  He said he had inappropriate sex.  His private life of drugs and gay sex was overshadowed by his public life of spewing forth hatred towards queer people and controlling politics to insure that gay people cannot get equal rights in Colorado.  The proverb still holds true that arrogance leads to a great fall.

 Mark Foley and Ted Haggard point to an underlying problem with our society.  People often feel they cannot succeed unless they cover up their true nature.  Foley is no role model for gay young people, but he isn’t the devil either.  He is human.  He’s not even the first Congressman to be inappropriate with pages.  He should confront the consequences of his actions, but he should also be restored to wholeness.

 Ted Haggard is likely not an evil person.  He made some bad choices about what to preach and taught hatred instead of love.  He taught exclusion rather than acceptance.  He did so to the point that he could not accept himself and his true nature.  In this way he’s not a great deal different from many others.  How sad that people who proclaim love couldn’t accept a minister who was gay and he was compelled to lie and deceive because of his religion.  With the right kind of help he can be nurtured back to health and accept himself as either the gay or bi man that he is. 

 For the rest of us, we should be wary of all who claim to have an absolute hold on morality or truth.  Whether preacher or politician vote against them!   We should recognize that those who arrogantly place themselves higher on the hill than the rest of us are inwardly just as human as we are.  Let’s make sure we aren’t nearby while they are falling lest we get hurt in the avalanche, but always be ready to rush to pick them up and help them on the right track once the bruises are healed.

My partner and I will obviously have to be more careful as we travel around North Carolina to visit his family.  We aren’t a threat to anyone. But for some reason we have had folks challenge us on the road since we have a rainbow sticker on our vehicle.  I suppose some would say that we should not have the sticker, but somehow we think there is supposed to be freedom of speech in the United States, so we should be OK.

 Honestly, we look like a couple of grandpas and other than the fact that we are two middle-age men traveling alone, we shouldn’t draw much attention at all.  But, the last time I was run off the road by young guys in a pick-up truck, I was simply driving back from lunch to my office minding my own business.  I was able to avoid any harm other than the verbal assault of being called “cocksucker” among other things.

 Why do I say we have to be even more careful?  The North Carolina Baptist State Convention has raised its rhetoric about gays being evil and voted to expel churches that support gays and lesbians.  Interestingly, this happened the same week the National Council of Catholic Bishops voted to redefine ministry to homosexuals in a way that clearly indicates that gays and lesbians are not to be given equal status in any way in the Roman Catholic Church.  Gays who have sex can’t take communion in the church. If you don’t have sex, and you don’t tell anyone you are gay, you can still participate, but not in any leadership position.

 When any group is labeled as inferior, there are people who will assume that they have the right to persecute that group.  Religious rhetoric about homosexuality goes a long way toward promoting hatred and violence.  Even those who don’t intend to support violence are still responsible since any de-valuing of human life tends to give license to some people in society to persecute and commit acts of violence.  There are plenty of people who will look for any opportunity to spread hatred.  Some may even go to the extreme of thinking they are doing God’s Will by hurting people that their preacher or priest says are hated by God.  Sticks and stones will break bones, and people who call others names often lead to sticks and stones. 

 It is no wonder then that Sir Elton John has said he supports the ban of organized religion.  There is no doubt that religion has a bloody history and acts of violence have been done more in the name of religion than for any other cause.  I doubt organized religion can be banned, but it is the evil preachers and priests of the world who are truly the greatest threat to peace and tranquility, not those who have sex with people of the same gender. 

 Expressing love through physical intimacy threatens no one.  Are the religious leaders of the world truly so fascinated with people having sex differently than they do that they fail to see that there are painful hurting people in the world who need ministry.  Are they jealous?  Are they worried they are queer themselves?  Are they worried about losing male dominance? 

 Somehow I think the true prophets would be hanging out with the queers, and challenging the leaders of world religions to wake up.  How can thinking people continue to support such hateful and evil organizations as the North Carolina Baptists or the Roman Catholic Church?  We can’t ban religion, but we can stop sending money to those groups that proclaim bigotry and hatred.

There are initiatives on the ballot next week in various states to create state constitutional amendments to prohibit same sex couples from marriage.  It is a very interesting debate that raises all kinds of questions.  The government has chosen to give certain people who are in long-term relationships specific rights in order to protect and support the couple.  They call these marriage rights. 

The controversy around marriage is a bit difficult to grasp from a state interests perspective.  It isn’t about children, or else those who cannot have children would not have these rights.  It isn’t about sexual activity alone; people have sex out of marriage all the time.  If it were about restricting promiscuity, then the state has a vested interest in allowing any two people who have sex to marry so that the responsibilities and rights of marriage would apply.  Instead, this is about picking out one group and saying, “You can’t have what I have because I don’t like the way you have sex.”  

Everyone should be able to marry the one they love and have all the rights as everyone else.  Personally, I’m not as concerned about what it is called, so long as the same rights are given to all couples.  The problem is that many of these initiatives (Like Virginia) take away the possibility of ever getting equal rights, even with a different name.

From a religious perspective, I understand that there are many different views on the issue.  Most mainline churches continue to wrestle with the idea.  Some argue that same sex relationships are just as sacramental as opposite sex relationships since the purpose of sacrament is to be a vehicle of grace causing people to be transformed ever more like Jesus.  Interestingly, I think everyone would agree that not all unions whether homosexual or heterosexual meet this standard.  More fundamentalist groups have clearly decided that same sex relationships are sinful.  Some would support radical punishment of homosexuals and continue to use rhetoric that causes much pain and sometimes violence toward sexual minorities.  The guilt of violence rests with leaders who have demonized queers to the point that people do harm to sexual minorities. 

Some claim that allowing gay marriage will cause more people to be gay.  That’s a very challenging idea.  In order to believe this, those who argue against gay marriage must believe that most people would be homosexual if it were a choice.  What does that say about their internalized homophobia?  I wonder how many of the loudest critics of gay marriage do so out of fear that they are gay themselves?

Some perspective is added to this issue by Julian Bond, national chair of the NAACP.  Bond spoke to a forum at the University of Virginia and said, “We believe it is always wrong to use a constitution to single out one group for discrimination.”  Regarding the issue of religious vs. state interests in marriage, Bond stated, “If you don’t want gay people to marry in your church, good for you.  But you can’t say they can’t marry in your city.”  Amen to that!

The Associated Press reported today that Katherine Jefferts-Schori, newly elected Presiding Bishop the Episcopal Church supports the moratorium on new gay bishops and official liturgies to bless same-sex couples.  She will be installed Saturday at the National Cathedral. She says it makes her “very sad” to do so, but she says “for the health of the larger body we have to do that for a season.”  Personally, I think she and her cohorts are full of shit. That’s probably an understatement.

 There are no legal ties between the various Anglican Primates.  It is not a monolithic organization like the Roman Catholic or many other churches.  Instead, each province is independent, but they are held together only by common tradition and fellowship.  That fellowship is already broken, wake up.

 It is repugnant to anyone who truly understands the Gospel to maintain ties and fellowship with people (like some African Primates who are currently angry with the Episcopal Church) who endorse the murder of people because of their sexual attraction to someone of the same gender.

 The Episcopal Church and Jefferts-Schori are more interested in maintaining fellowship with murderers than with gays and lesbians.  Something is wrong with that picture.  Bishop Jefferts-Schori claims to be a friend of sexual minorities, but she obviously is talking out of both sides of her mouth.  How much more inconsistent can you be?  Fundamentalists have taken over the U.S. government for the past six years; do we have to allow them to stop any progress in the Episcopal Church as well? 

 Does everyone who gets in a position of power have to forget their values in order to maintain the power?  That is certainly how it appears with Bishops.  Not just Bishops really, I feel the same way about local ministers who compromise values continually for fear of offending someone in the parish, and maybe it would be someone who gives a lot of money.  What a disaster that would be!  Maybe some would actually have to live like Jesus.  Since we claim to be followers of Jesus living up to genuine Christian values should come above everything else.

 Who will stand up for sexual minorities in lands where the crime of being true to one’s self is punished by torture or death?  I gave up on Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams since the last Episcopal Convention because he has distanced himself moiré and more from the U.S. and Canadian Church.  I have little confidence that Presiding Bishop Jeffri-Schori offers any hope at all.

The same week that Christianity celebrated the ascension of Jesus into the clouds after the resurrection, our culture may have ascended one step closer to equality two years ago. It was a small step in only one state, but the Commonwealth of Massachusetts began issuing and conducting legal marriages of same-sex couples. It was a noted victory for sexual minorities, however, the battle for total equality has a long way to go before the social war for equality can be proclaimed victorious.

I wasn’t surprised to find that most of organized Christianity stood opposed to this ascension. Even the Episcopal Church, which presents itself as the most progressive on queer issues, would not allow the weddings of same-sex couples to be given full and equal status. In spite of the fact that the Diocese of Massachusetts had been a relatively strong supporter of the legalization of marriage equality, the Bishops voted to not allow their ministers to conduct the marriages. It appears queers are welcome to come and participate in the Episcopal Church, give our money, sometimes have our unions blessed, and even reach some level of leadership, but we cannot be considered equal to heterosexuals when it comes to marriage.

Marriage is a strange mix of church and state. For the first few hundred years of Christianity, marriage was totally in the domain of the state. The church had no official ritual and took no position regarding the marriages recognized by the state. Usually marriage was simply a matter of common law. If two people lived together as spouses and said they were married, the community accepted their relationship. With the demise of the Roman Empire, the only organization that spread beyond the small states of Europe was the church. Therefore, the church took on the role of performing and sanctioning marriage. Even Augustine, when he was trying to defend his lovers from the charge of adultery proclaimed the "sacramental" nature of marriage without any ritual attached to the union at all.

Eventually the church and state both took responsibility for marriage. The state passed laws about who may or may not be married in the eyes of the state, and the church passed canon laws about who would be considered married in the eyes of the church. The vast majority of marriages are recognized by both. The state licensed the marriages and the church solemnized the unions. The state does not compel any church to perform marriages and couples have the option of civil ceremonies if they choose. The church came to see marriage as a sacrament that required the participation of a priest and specific prayers and oaths in order for the couple to be united in Holy Matrimony. The roots of the Episcopal Church come from a split with Rome over whether the King of England could get remarried. The pope had allowed many kings to get remarried in the past, but the Roman church was punishing the king.

In all honesty, I agree with Augustine. I do not need a ritual of the church in order for my union to be sacramental. Even the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, has admitted in his book The Ray of Darkness that some same-sex couples may have relationships that are more sacramental than some heterosexual couples. Something is sacramental when it gives grace through mercy, righteousness, and hope as we model our lives after the example of Jesus. Same-sex couples do not need the church to proclaim their marriages sacramental. The love and devotions the couples express to one another will serve to prove the nature of their relationship just fine.

With this in mind, however, I believe the church needs to recognize the sacramental nature of same-sex marriage by encouraging its ministers to perform the unions. The corporate groups of people who call themselves Christian are expected to reflect God’s principles to the world. Included in those principles are love and acceptance of all. Even the conservative Apostle Paul said that there is neither male nor female in Christ Jesus. There is no room for sexism or heterosexism within the true church. It belittles and brings shame on the love of Jesus for the church to deny the equality of all people and the image of God in everyone. When any church replaces the love of God with canon laws made by human beings, their hypocrisy and injustice becomes evident. " If anyone says ‘I love God’ yet hates his brother, he is a liar. For anyone who does not love his brother whom he has seen, cannot love God whom he has not seen." (I John 4:20)

The Episcopal News Service (www.episcopalchurch.org/ens) has released the results from the Special Commission created to respond to the Windsor Report.   The Windsor Report was a document created by the Anglican primates (Archbishops or leaders of the various regional jurisdictions of the Anglican Church) asking essentially for the Episcopal Church, which is a part of the Anglican Communion, to repent of the consecration of an openly gay man, Gene Robinson, as Bishop of New Hampshire three years ago.

Although the report is certainly not an easy read, it says a lot about the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion.  Frank Griswold, the current presiding Bishop whose term ends this year, asked the Commission to develop resolutions for the convention to consider that address the fact that the Episcopal Church’s somewhat progressive approach toward homosexuals is different than many others in the Anglican Communion.  The 75^th Convention of the Episcopal Church USA will address these resolutions in Columbus, Ohio in June.

The media has often misrepresented the amount of division around the issue within the communion as a whole.  Many other jurisdictions support the moves toward equality for sexual minorities that the Episcopal Church has taken.  The Canadian Church has gone so far as to officially bless same-sex unions.  The Episcopal Church USA has yet to take this stand, but has encouraged that diocese and churches recognize individual conscience on whether to bless same-sex unions or not.

The eleven resolutions range from expressions of deep regret for the pain caused the other jurisdictions by the Episcopal Church’s actions.  There are some that sound like fairly strong apologies.  There is one that could be interpreted as banning future gay Bishops, but really calls for serious consideration to be given prior to consecration of a Bishop who may not be acceptable to the rest of the communion.  A resolution supports the role of Bishop and specifically does not allow for a congregation or priest to be under another Bishop’s jurisdiction that they agree with on the issue.  There are also resolutions that repeat the church’s apology to homosexuals for the way she has treated gays and lesbians and calls for the full inclusion of sexual minorities in every rite and order of the church.

Herein lies the rub.  The Anglican Church as a whole has always chosen the middle way; they are somewhat catholic, but also protestant.  There is room for people to believe a variety of particular things within the church.  The Book of Common Prayer includes a communion prayer that supports the idea of transubstantiation, and one that sounds more reformed.  It is a church filled with diversity.  This is both a blessing and a curse in this situation.

The Special Commission’s attempt to find reconciliation and middle ground will likely not please either side of the debate.  Honestly, I will be greatly offended if they apologize for consecrating Gene Robinson when Bishops in Africa don’t have to apologize for endorsing the execution of gay people.  On the other hand, I’m sure there will be those on the opposite side who will be offended that a resolution calls for the inclusion of sexual minorities in all the orders (deacons, priests, and bishops) of the church.  Trying to stay on the middle ground and straddling the fence on this issue will probably cause more division than simply taking a stand and allowing the consequences to be as they are. 

It is a time for much prayer and guidance of the Holy Spirit to allow the delegates to be able to discern whether to stand on unity and forsake principle, or stand on principle and forsake some of the unity.  My prayer is for the principle of equality to thrive and the church continue her move forward rather than take steps in the wrong direction just to stay together.  Sometimes the healthiest and most sacred thing to do is to agree to separate and each serve God in the best way possible.  I don’t want to be abandoned when so much progress has been made.

Michael Peterson is getting another day in court. The novelist was convicted two years ago of killing his wife in their Durham, NC mansion.  A panel of appellate judges began hearing his appeal today.  His Attorney Tom Maher, has filed a 96 page brief outlining why Peterson did not get a fair trial.  The position of the defense boils down to a prejudiced jury.

Two years ago I wrote that I believed evidence around Peterson’s reported bi-sexuality should not be introduced for that very reason. (http://differentspirit.

inclusivechristians.org/essay21.htm) Computer evidence, pornography and a male prostitute, who never actually had sex with Peterson but only chat with him on the internet, were presented as evidence.  No doubt jurors were selected based in part on their view of a man having sex with another man. Prosecutor Jim Hardin defended the effort to bias the jury at the time.  His then assistant, Freda Black still defends the attempt to break down the image of Peterson’s family life.  Ms Black is currently running for her boss’s old office.  She was fired shortly after the Peterson trial. 

We don’t know whether Kathleen Peterson knew about her husband’s bisexuality, or whether she cared.  His gay pornography was in the open in his library.  She may have had access to his computer.  It isn’t unusual for married people to be aware of a partner’s bisexuality, and have no problem with it whatsoever. 

The court now has a chance to do the right thing.  I don’t know whether Peterson killed his wife, but I know he didn’t get a fair trial.  Prosecutors deliberately sabotaged our justice system by using homosexual bias and innuendo to make a defendant look guilty, regardless of the truth of the matter. 

The voters of Durham County, NC now have a chance to do the right thing and not vote for prosecutors who will play on hatred, prejudice, and fear to make their case.  Durham deserves a justice system that sticks to the facts and the evidence rather than using bias to gain a conviction.

Easter is the celebration of new life.  It comes at the time of year when all of nature is coming back from its winter sleep.  We are reminded of the cycles of life and the continuation of the Creator’s plan.  We recall and celebrate the resurrection of Jesus and Christ’s victory over death which gives us the promise of eternal life.  Christ is only the first fruit of a bountiful harvest of resurrection.

Our Easter celebration was saddened this year when my partner and I were told prior to going to church about his grandmother having passed into the next life during the night.  She had been in poor health for several months after a stroke last autumn.  When last we visited her, we were pleased that she recognized us and was able to have a conversation.  Since that time just a few weeks ago her body has slowly let go of life. She was within a week of her 90^th birthday.

I’ll admit that I was a bit nervous about meeting Gladys many years ago.  I had been warned that she was a “Church of God woman” and didn’t understand all this gay stuff.  We were asked not to mention that my partner is gay or our relationship.  Ironically, Gladys knew a great deal more than her family thought she did.

She had a hymnal on her coffee table, and we went through it together singing some old hymns for a few minutes.  Then she said, “So, you are Mark’s new boy.”  We were quite shocked with the statement and didn’t know what to say.  I hadn’t been called a boy in a long time, but since she was old enough to be my grandmother, that was OK.  Not to mention the fact that Mark is younger.  I responded with, “I guess I am.”  And her response was simply. “That’s good.” 

Over the years we’ve had conversations about a number of things including the church and the Bible.  She has come church when I have preached, and has been very much the supportive grandmother to both Mark and me.  I don’t know whether she understood our relationship, and doubt that she cared one way or another, but she definitely loved and accepted us as individuals and a couple. 

It’s sad that she has passed on, but also fitting that it be on a day filled with the joy of new life.  Another saint has entered heaven, and one that understood the truth that love is all that matters.  In many ways she was timid and fearful.  She was afraid of the big city and didn’t like it if her family took airplanes because she worried.  Now she is in a place where there is no more fear, her pain is all gone, and Christ wipes away every tear.

It is the darkest day of the liturgical calendar – Holy Saturday.  This is the day we recall Christ’s burial and time in the tomb.  For us, with the belief that he arose from the grave, this day still has great hope, but for those believers living at the time it was a day of despair and defeat.   Their hopes of Messiah were dashed by the power of the religious fundamentalists of their day who had gained political influence.

After Christ was crucified a wealthy man named Joseph of Arimethea provided a tomb for burial.  There he lay until early on Sunday morning or at least that is what appeared to happen.  Christian tradition tells us that Jesus did more during that time. 

He visited hell while he was in the grave and set those who were imprisoned there free.  He took authority over death, hell, and the grave away from the powers of evil. Revelation records these words attributed to the risen Christ, “I am the Living One; I was dead, and behold I am alive for ever and ever! And I hold the keys of death and Hades.  (1:18) That is why Christian liturgy after dark Saturday night includes the words, “This is the night, when Christ broke the bonds of death and hell, and rose victorious from the grave.”  (BCP287)

In my soul I feel that these are days of great darkness in the life of the United States, and our influence upon the world.  Legalistic religious fundamentalists much like those zealots who crucified Christ, have gained power in one of the political parties and have won all three branches of our government.  The Republican Party has brought an administration into office that challenges the very soul of America.  Using nice sounding rhetoric like, “preemptive strike” we have attacked another nation that did not attack us and brought devastation. 

When gay and lesbian people started gaining some of the same freedoms that everyone else enjoys, like choosing who to be your mate, who should have medical say if one becomes ill, and inheritance rights through domestic partnership or marriage, these same religious fundamentalists in the Republican Party declared social war on sexual minorities.  In many places of our land political war is being fought for homosexuals to have the same rights as heterosexuals. 

It feels like a nightmare.  I was taught that the United States is a land of honor, bravery, and freedom. It is hard to find these attributes in our political leadership today.  Those in charge deceive the citizens by telling half-truths and lies in order to promote their own fundamentalist ideas.  Internally, this social war has meant freedoms taken away.  In Iraq, thousands have dies and freedoms taken away from an entire nation because of an administration that is ignorant and misguided at best, and evil at worst.

During the Civil War in the United States, General William Sherman said, “War is Hell.”  I’m not unconvinced of the theological truth of that statement as well as the experiential truth of it.  War is indeed hell.  The United States is at war internally and externally as a brutal aggressor nation out to take away other’s liberties for the benefit of a few.

This Holy Saturday, I pray for a visitation of Christ in this hell and ask for the spiritual freedom that comes through Christ to be made real in American society and the world.

Sovereign Christ, visit us and break the bonds of Hell that have been inflicted upon us by the administration and leadership of George W Bush.  We pray he repent and turn from the great evil that he has brought upon the world, and set your people free O God.

Sacrifice is such a strange idea to our twenty-first century mode of thinking.  We see the offering of sacrifice as cruel and unusual; something that simply should not be done to an innocent animal.  Thankfully, when Jesus died on the cross the veil of the Temple in Jerusalem was torn and sacrifices were no longer a part of spiritual devotion, at least from a Christian perspective. We remember the crucifixion on this Good Friday.

Early agrarian societies depended on nature for survival.  If there was a drought, they often lacked for food. If there was a flood, their entire life’s possessions could be wiped away.  When natural disasters occurred, ancient peoples often came to believe that these disasters were because they had somehow angered a god.  In order to make sure that they didn’t suffer disaster, they began to offer sacrifices to appease what they felt must be an angry god and therefore protect themselves.  It was a primitive type of religious life insurance.    

The meaning of sacrifice changed drastically over time and from place to place.  What was an act of appeasement became an act of thankfulness.  Offering sacrifices of animals and crops and the smoke from the burning of the sacrifice ascending up to god was something to be pleasant to god, and therefore a way of expressing gratitude.  In our American holiday called Thanksgiving we celebrate and eat a big feast. In ancient times the feast was given to god.

The concept of sacrifice that we find in the story of Jesus is very different.  In this sacrifice God himself is the one doing the sacrifice, not the people.  There are those who believe that the sacrifice of Christ on the cross was a way of holding back God’s anger and finding forgiveness for sins.  This is certainly supported in Scripture.  However, couldn’t God have simply chosen to forgive (which God does) without having to go through the act of becoming human and suffering a horrendous death on the cross? 

Since God is God, obviously God could have.  But there is another aspect to the sacrifice of Jesus that is sometimes overlooked.  Early Christians believed that Jesus’ death on the cross was to purchase the human race from the power of evil.  Not only are sins forgiven, but humanity is no longer a slave to sin. Hebrews 10 clearly explains the superiority of this kind of sacrifice.  Christ’s sacrifice is powerful enough that no other sacrifices are required.

Why then does evil still exist in our world?  Evil still exists because human desires have not conformed to those of God, who is love.  Our selfishness and desire to place ourselves above others is at the heart of the evil that takes place in the world.  We cannot say, “The devil made me do it.”  In fact, the evil that happens does so because we live in a world that is broken among people who are broken, and God is still in the process of restoring all things to the dominion of love and grace. (Romans 8:22)

Yet regardless of what we do, we have been bought by God through Christ’s sacrifice and nothing can ever take that away.  “For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.” (Romans 8:38, 39)

I’ve always had a special place in my heart for Holy Communion.  For some reason I am compelled to partake of the sacrament and have always held it in high regard as a primary part of my life.  Having taken several mission trips, I have enjoyed Holy Communion with saints on over four continents.  I have broken this sacred bread with various cultures and peoples.  Those who would be considered low on the economic spectrum as well as those who are higher up the ladder of wealth and power in our world.

I have partaken at Westminster Abbey while sitting in the seats of royalty who didn’t show up that day. I have shared communion in a mud structure in Nigeria with a grass roof and Geckos scrambling around.  I have partaken of Communion with the powerful folk in Washington at the National Cathedral, and in a simple chapel across the creek from a coal mine in West Virginia.  I have partaken of communion in other languages, where I wasn’t quite sure what was being said, but I knew the holy mystery of the Sacrament was just as real. 

I have taken the Lord’s Supper at Baptist Churches where they used crackers and grape juice as the elements as well as non-denominational store front churches in the inner city.  The mystery continued as I have shared communion in the Methodist Churches. Pentecostal Churches, Presbyterian Churches, Lutheran Churches, Episcopal Churches and probably dozens of others with various and sundry names on the door.  Some practice Holy Communion every week, some once a month and others only once a year, but the sacramental rite continues as a spiritual reality for millions around the world.

It has been my joy to partake of this scared event with people who have different color skin than I do, people who come from different places, people who speak different languages, and some who speak the same language but they sound different.  I have shared communion with gay people, straight people, transgender people, bisexual people, and people from about every imaginable family structure possible.

In all of these events I have been blessed to share in genuine and real “Communion of the Saints.”  Not necessarily saints who have been canonized as role models for the rest of the church, but saints none the less.  It is when we realize that there are huge masses of people sharing this same sacred meal that we see what it means to be in communion with one another.  We are not all the same in our eyes, but we are indeed the same in God’s eyes.

Today is Maundy Thursday.  It is the day we remember the Last Supper of Christ when he instituted Holy Communion as one of the two primary Sacraments of Christianity.  Baptism is the other.  Jesus introduced the elements of Eucharist as “my body, broken for you” and the “cup of the new covenant in my blood.”   In all the years since, Christians have practiced this sacred meal as we gather together to partake of the body and blood of Christ.   

The grace that is shared through the sacrament is not for a chosen few.  It is not for those who only believe a certain way. God’s grace is for all who will come.  Everyone is invited to the table of Christ’s love and grace. 

In times when people are arguing about nearly everything, from economics and politics to religious minutia and worrying about who someone else is in love with or having sex with, we need to remember that we all come to Christ’s Supper the same.  We do not have to agree on anything except God’s wonderful Grace. 

We can come and share and enjoy true Communion of the Saints be we black brown yellow or white, homosexual, heterosexual or asexual, powerful and strong or lowly and weak; One and all are welcome in Christ’s great Communion of the Saints. 

Jesus knew what it was like to be betrayed with a kiss.  Judas pointed Christ out to the soldiers in exchange for some cash by kissing him.  This is Wednesday of Holy Week, when we remember Jesus warning the disciples he was about to be betrayed and telling Judas to go ahead and do so.

The Gospel of Judas has received notoriety recently by being published for the public.  In many respects it probably agrees with the other Gospels; Jesus willingly gave himself as a sacrifice for us, his friends; Judas was very much playing a role designed for him to play.  Yet the idea that Jesus was in collusion with the plan is  stretched quite a bit in the newly released text.  It is one thing to be passive in allowing one’s self to be betrayed, but it is quite another to plan the betrayal as a part of some grand deception.

The new Gospel of Judas probably does tell us a great deal about the early Gnostics.  They were a cult who believed that the tangible world, and thus our bodies, is evil; while intangible things are good.  This heresy has been disputed and found not to be accepted by the bulk of Christianity.  Gnosticism would believe that Judas truly was a hero because he helped Jesus escape from his human form. 

While it is easy to see how incredibly non-Christian this philosophy is, and that it clearly fails to fit in with the remainder of Scripture, there are ideas of Gnosticism that remain in the church.  The idea that pleasure is sin, for example, is still popular in some circles.  This thought comes from the idea that the body is evil and therefore anything that pleases the body is evil.  In spite of the fact that God created us as creatures capable of great pleasure some believe pleasure is evil.  However, God created our bodies, and pronounced them to be “good”. 

Pleasure is not sin.  What is sin is to place one’s personal pleasure above the well-being of others, or to partake of pleasure knowing that although the immediate pleasure is wonderful the long-term consequence is harmful.  God is pleased for us to live pleasurable lives, but that life must also be one that finds room to emulate Christ and offer ourselves and our desires as a sacrifice for others.

Following Jesus doesn’t mean one has to stop having fun, it just means we have to stop doing so to the detriment of ourselves or others.

Tuesday of Holy Week is the day we remember Christ cleansing the Temple in Jerusalem of the money changers and those who would make a profit from the work of God. 

Interestingly, today we find religion to be big business once again.  Not only are the institutional denominations, with their grand and glorious buildings and huge budgets with large salaries, guilty.  Para-church organizations are blossoming that use the gospel to make hoards of money.  Patty Roberts, the first wife of young evangelist Richard Roberts, once spoke of how the institutional ministry took over her life and destroyed her marriage.  She felt the Oral Roberts Evangelistic Association was a monolithic entity that was no longer about the gospel, but was instead about keeping the institution alive.

God only knows the extent to which this is true of the religious structures, both denominational and non-denominational alike, that thrive in our world today.  The Grandeur of the European church was built on the backs of the poor by selling indulgences to get souls released from purgatory early.  This was in spite of the fact that the Christ suffered once and for all. 

Hatred and bigotry of nearly every type have been used to keep religious leaders wealthy.  Whether it was fear of giving equal rights to blacks, women, or today’s sexual minorities (gays and lesbians) bigotry has gone a long way toward making money for religion.  Having the perception of a threat causes people to give their money.  James Dobson, Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell have all bowed down to the idol of wealth at the expense of preaching bigotry.  And all is shamefully done in the name of religion.

Who knows when it is time for the Holy Spirit to cleanse the temple again and bring a revival of true faith?  A faith that does not hate or ridicule; a faith that is not built on hatred (the realm of evil) and a faith that will be built on the true dominion of God must arise from the ashes of materialistic institutional religious empires. Jesus was sharp in the rebuke that the House of God had been turned into a Den of Thieves.  Is any less true today?

The Apostle Paul shared very clearly what type of religion counts.  He said, “The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love. (Galatians 5:6b)”  Let’s join together to repent of the shame of using hatred to divide and raise money based on fear.  Then, together believers will be able to truly love on another the way Christ loves the world.