Sunday: Your turn to discuss traditional marriage and same-sex marriage at our adult forum

Icon of St. Sergius and St. Bacchus,
with Christ blessing them,
St. Catherine's Monestary, Sinai, 303 C.E.
Was it marriage?

First, my apologies for not posting the last few days. I've taken a few days off, and life in our household has been focused on Lori's recovery from knee surgery. She is now walking without a crutch or cane and is keeping up with her physical therapy regimen.

I will get back to posting regularly here next week, and do please avail yourself of the Lenten reflections by members of St. Paul's (just click the purple cross on the left). For our adult forum on Sunday we will be continuing our series on the issues of traditional marriage and same-sex marriage. It's your turn to talk.

We will have an open discussion, beginning with this question: Has anything in the previous forums caught your attention or been eye-opening in ways you have seen these issues before? If you missed our presentations, start by clicking HERE for Part I. You can find the other presentations by clicking HERE and scrolling to find the one you missed.

Also, we will look at the resolution approved by General Convention in 2009 that has essentially authorized bishops to move ahead with same-sex blessings. To give you a head start, here is the resolution, C056:

Resolved, the House of Deputies concurring, That the 76th General Convention acknowledge the changing circumstances in the United States and in other nations, as legislation authorizing or forbidding marriage, civil unions or domestic partnerships for gay and lesbian persons is passed in various civil jurisdictions that call forth a renewed pastoral response from this Church, and for an open process for the consideration of theological and liturgical resources for the blessing of same gender relationships; and be it further 

Resolved, That the Standing Commission on Liturgy and Music, in consultation with the House of Bishops, collect and develop theological and liturgical resources, and report to the 77th General Convention; and be it further 

Resolved, That the Standing Commission on Liturgy and Music, in consultation with the House of Bishops, devise an open process for the conduct of its work inviting participation from provinces, dioceses, congregations, and individuals who are engaged in such theological work, and inviting theological reflection from throughout the Anglican Communion; and be it further 

Resolved, That bishops, particularly those in dioceses within civil jurisdictions where same-gender marriage, civil unions, or domestic partnerships are legal, may provide generous pastoral response to meet the needs of members of this Church; and be it further
Resolved, That this Convention honor the theological diversity of this Church in regard to matters of human sexuality; and be it further 

Resolved, That the members of this Church be encouraged to engage in this effort.

Same-gender blessings task force meets today in the Diocese of Virginia

Today I am participating in the "R-14 Task Force," the 11-member panel appointed by Bishop Shannon Johnston of the Diocese of Virginia to determine how/when/whether we can proceed with same-gender blessings. This will be the first meeting, and I will give a report in this space as best as I am able when we are done.

So that you are on the same page with me, I am reprinting below the "R-14" resolution approved by the Diocesan Council of Virginia that set up this task force, followed by "C056" approved by General Convention last summer that called for a "generous pastoral response" on same gender blessings. Please read these carefully.

I am mindful that the stakes are large for many people, and there are only 11 of us on this task force. So I invite your advice, your wisdom, your opinions and especially your prayers. Please feel free to post here on this blog under "comments." And please have the courage of your convictions by giving your name and church affiliation. I will not respond to anonymous comments -- they interest me not -- but I will consider all comments with all due respect. Hateful or bigoted comments will be deleted with no apologies.

Here are the resolutions, beginning with C056, the General Convention resolution, followed by R-14, the diocesan resolution:

C056 - approved by the General Convention of the Episcopal Church

Resolved, the House of Deputies concurring, That the 76th General Convention acknowledge the changing circumstances in the United States and in other nations, as legislation authorizing or forbidding marriage, civil unions or domestic partnerships for gay and lesbian persons is passed in various civil jurisdictions that call forth a renewed pastoral response from this Church, and for an open process for the consideration of theological and liturgical resources for the blessing of same gender relationships; and be it further

Resolved, That the Standing Commission on Liturgy and Music, in consultation with the House of Bishops, collect and develop theological and liturgical resources, and report to the 77th General Convention; and be it further

Resolved, That the Standing Commission on Liturgy and Music, in consultation with the House of Bishops, devise an open process for the conduct of its work inviting participation from provinces, dioceses, congregations, and individuals who are engaged in such theological work, and inviting theological reflection from throughout the Anglican Communion; and be it further

Resolved, That bishops, particularly those in dioceses within civil jurisdictions where same-gender marriage, civil unions, or domestic partnerships are legal, may provide generous pastoral response to meet the needs of members of this Church; and be it further

Resolved, That this Convention honor the theological diversity of this Church in regard to matters of human sexuality; and be it further

Resolved, That the members of this Church be encouraged to engage in this effort.

R-14 - approved by the Council (convention) of the Diocese of Virginia

Substitute for R-3 (Inclusiveness in Ordained Ministry), R-4 (Authorizing Rites of Blessing) and R-11 (Defining Sacramental and Civil Definitions of Marriage)
Adopted as substituted.

Whereas, the Rt. Rev. Shannon S. Johnston stated in his pastoral address to the 215th Annual Council of the Diocese of Virginia:

“I do regret that, in this address, some important matters in our common life will seem to be slighted while others are omitted, such as the several topics arising from the debate on sexuality. But I look for us to address these issues thoroughly in regional forums in 2010. It is unfortunate that some of the weightiest deliberations that come before us cannot be adequately and justly dealt with in the very short time allowed by Annual Council,” [verbatim transcript of the bishop’s pastoral address], and

Whereas, the necessary process will involve both the bishop’s regional forums, which will allow for broad individual contributions on these issues, and the drafting of proposed canons for the effective and consistent exercise of pastoral ministry should same-gender blessings be authorized; be it therefore

Resolved, the 215th Annual Council of the Diocese of Virginia recognizes that:

1. Our clergy and people remain divided over the wisdom and theology of blessing same gender relationships, as well as how much weight to give to the views of others in the Anglican Communion about these issues, particularly to views from those with whom we are in mission partnership;

2. The growing differences between Christian and Civil understanding of marriage and relationships create immediate pastoral issues for our clergy and congregations;

3. There are numerous same-gender couples in our diocese engaged in long-term monogamous relationships who have engaged in productive and vital ministries for the proclamation of the Gospel. Many of these couples strongly desire the church’s blessing of their relationships;

4. These issues deserve to be collectively addressed in an orderly, careful, and deliberate way assisted by appropriate legal and canonical experts; and
Recommends that:

1. Our Bishop is asked to empanel a group of clergy and lay people, including attorneys admitted to practice in Virginia and recognized experts on canon law, as well as knowledgeable clergy and lay representatives of a variety of theological perspectives on the issue of blessing same-gender relationships.

2. Such panel shall recommend consistent standards to be written into diocesan canons so that, if services of blessing same-gender unions are authorized, our clergy and people have a clearly understood and enforceable set of rules to guide the application of clergy discretion in providing pastoral care to same-gender couples seeking such blessings.

3. In formulating these recommendations, the following issues may be addressed (based in part on General Convention Canon I.1.18 and I.1.19):

(a) Whether individual members of the clergy have the right, as a matter of theological principle, to decline to conduct any such service, without adverse disciplinary consequences or personnel action;

(b) Whether individual members of the clergy have the right to decline to conduct such a service for a particular same gender couple, without adverse disciplinary consequences or personnel action, similar to the current rule for clergy asked to conduct weddings;

(c) The age, capacity and degree of kinship, if any, of the parties;

(d) The effect of prior marriages or unions blessed by a licensed clergy person or registered with civil authorities, the responsibility to any former spouse or partner in such union, and responsibility to minor children of any prior marriage or union;

(e) The appropriateness of advance medical screening, if any;

(f) The effect of any legal union or marriage entered into between the parties in another jurisdiction;

(g) The appropriate role of the Bishop for advanced review of any proposed blessing of a specific same-gender couple;

(h) Review of financial arrangements to protect the parties in the absence of state law presumptions governing married couples, presumptions intended to protect the weaker party from potential exploitation, oppression, or improvident action by the other party in the relationship;

(i) Other factors listed in the General Convention canons for marriage, Canons I.1.18 and I.1.19, including the baptismal status of the parties, the commitment to life-long union, the voluntariness of consent, the absence of coercion, fraud, mistake of identity of the other party;

(j) The minimum time line between notification of the clergy of a desire to obtain such a blessing and the performance of the ceremony;

(k) The number of witnesses and the record-keeping requirements for the clergy and any congregation involved;

(l) Any requirement for written affirmation by the couple that the commitment is to a life-long union;

(m) Any statement of the theological basis for the union to which the partners are to subscribe;

(n) Provision to address possible dissolution of a blessed same-gender relationship, including the considerations of factors enumerated in Canon I.1.19 to address marriages which are in distress or which have been terminated by a civil court, as well as the circumstances, if any, under which another same-gender relationship may be blessed where both partners to an earlier such relationship remain living;

(o) The restriction in the General Convention canon on marriage in the church to heterosexual couples;

(p) Whether any blessing service for same-gender union may be used in lieu of marriage for heterosexual couples under any circumstances, and if so, what those circumstances are;

(q) How these might apply to all members of the Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Trans-gendered community;

(r) Any other factor deemed important by the panel.

3. If the Bishop appoints such a panel, the panel shall strive to deliver its report (including proposed canonical language) to the Executive Board by All Saints Day, 2010, in time for careful and orderly consideration of its recommendations by the 216th Annual Council of the Diocese. The panel is not to opine on whether the blessings of same-gender unions should be authorized, but it is to set forth its canonical recommendations to govern blessing such relationships if such services of blessing are authorized.

4. The consideration of any authorization for Virginia clergy to enter same gender unions should be deferred until after consideration of the preceding process.

Same-sex blessings: Where are we?

The issues of inclusion of gay and lesbian people are at the forefront this week in several spheres, including in The Episcopal Church. Under lively discussion this week in my parish, and generally in the Diocese of Virginia, is a resolution approved recently by Diocesan Council (or convention) a few weeks ago calling up Bishop Shannon Johnston to impanel a study group on same-sex blessings.

The diocese resolution is in response to last summer's national General Convention which called for a "generous pastoral response" by the bishops to allow for such blessings in those places where it is needed. Many in the LGBT community are interpreting the recent Virginia resolution as, essentially, a call upon our bishop to go slow before allowing any such blessings in his diocese.

The issue is timely for us at St. Paul's because Bishop Shannon Johnston will be with us on Sunday. I think it is important that before he arrives we understand the issue, and the nuances of church governance that underly the issue. I want to share with you some background that I have given our Vestry and leaders in our Gay Straight Concerns Group and the Charlottesville chapter of Integrity.

First, to read the national resolution (C056) approved by General Convention, click HERE.

To read the Virginia resolution, click HERE.

Here is what I have shared with the Vestry:

This is complicated because the national resolution (C056) provides that bishops may provide a "generous pastoral response" for same-sex blessings at their individual discretion. That means all of the authority on this is in the hands of the bishop, and not in the hands of a Diocese Council or an individual parish or its priests.

Indeed, this is consistent with the practice of marriage rites. The parish and its Vestry has no authority to require its clergy to preside at a marriage rite, or to order its clergy to refrain from presiding at a marriage rite. The bishop has limited authority over his priests on this. The bishop could direct me to not perform a wedding, but he could not order me to preside at a wedding. Presumably, the same principle would hold true for a same-sex blessing. When I preside at a wedding, canon law provides that I seek the bishop's written permission in certain cases (divorced people primarily).

My ordination vows include that I will follow the "pastoral direction" of my bishop, and same-sex blessings certainly fall in that category. So even if the Vestry wanted me to preside at a same-sex blessing, I am not really free to do so without the permission of the bishop (I suppose I could ignore or defy the bishop, but let's call that for what it is).

I would also argue that the Virginia Council has no authority on this topic, and that its recent diocesan resolution is only a recommendation to the bishop; a close reading of that resolution shows that it is, indeed, phrased as a non-binding resolution. Only the bishop can act on the recommendation contained in the resolution, and he also could ignore it or modify it. It is my hope that he will impanel a study group, and in the meantime, that he will allow those of us who are willing to preside at same-sex blessings to do so with his permission and support.

Let me also mention that I have had at least three conversations with our bishop on this topic, including at General Convention in July on the day he voted for C056, and he has been consistent in saying that his intention is to allow priests who are willing to preside at same-sex blessings. He has also said that he wants to work out a consistent liturgy with those clergy who are willing. I should also mention that several dioceses have impaneled tasks forces on this topic, and are moving forward. There is already a body of resources to work with on this.

Finally, I think it is important that we engage in a conversation with Bishop Shannon about this when he is here Sunday, and I trust that it will be respectful and fruitful.