My apologies for the belated post--I waited to see if more letters would arrive to The Daily News on Referendum 74, either responses to our letter, or letters from other clergy.
Lo and behold, there were both!
You can find a response to our letter here (the fifth letter on the webpage).
And, you can find a letter from a neighboring United Church of Christ pastor weighing in here (the fourth letter on the webpage).
What do you think of what was said?
What do you wish had been said that wasn't?
Yours in Christ,
Eric
I think there are two issues here. One is a matter of civil law and the other is a matter of religious doctrine. I think it is useful to separate them. As for civil law, I believe there is a growing consensus to live and let live. Whether I agree with your lifestyle or not, I'll grant you the right to make your own choices. When it comes to gay marriage the only question is whether there is any harm to anyone else. If two men or two women who love each other want to solemnify their relationship, that has no direct effect on the relationship between my wife and me. Indirectly, I believe gay marriage supports monogamy which I believe is a positive value. I hear the counter arguments that we must maintain the sanctity of marriage, but when I look at the gay couples that I know, I see mostly good coming from the relationships. I know more than one child who would still be in a substandard foreign orphanage receiving no care for their disabilities were it not for the loving couples who adopted them.
ReplyDeleteWhat about the religious aspects? As an Episcopalian, I lived through the controversy of the ordination of a gay bishop. That caused a rift that resulted in some parishioners, some parishes and some diocese separating from the national Episcopal church. The process was painful. I miss some friends who used to attend our church. I wish we could have avoided the split, but I don't know how we could have done that and remained true to our democratic tradition. Bishop Robinson was selected by the same process that determined the canon of the Bible at the council of Nicea. Delegates to a convention voted. I don't know whether this process will work for all denominations, but I believe each denomination of the church should determine for themselves what is acceptable practice. As a matter of religious freedom, I don't think the government should decide this issue for us.
I agree that it is necessary and useful to make distinct matters of civil law and religious doctrine, but it is likewise necessary to remember that there is always some overlap--it isn't just statutory code that says you should not murder, it's also Scripture that says so.
ReplyDeleteThat doesn't mean we should put any sort of religious litmus test to our political institutions or anything of that sort. But I do think a complete separation of civil and religious law is very difficult, if not impossible.
Given that reality, I can understand why folks on the other side of this question would want to base their public policy views upon their religious beliefs. I just worry that in this particular case, Scripture is being used as something for discrimination to hide behind, which I think is partly why we then in turn see the schisms...not just in the Episcopal Church, but also in the ELCA (Lutherans) as well.
Thanks for commenting again! I always enjoy hearing your perspective!