The Rev. Susan Russell:

These are the questions I’m getting – and the answers I’m giving – as we continue as a people of God to sort through the challenges of this present day. They are offered simply as my responses and in the hopes that they might stimulate dialogue and conversation, and perhaps enable others to come to their own conclusions.

THE WESTERN IMPERIALISM ARGUMENT
THE COPPING OUT TO THE CULTURE ARGUMENT
THE IMPAIRED COMMUNION ARGUMENT
THE “WHAT ABOUT THE BIBLE?” ARGUMENT:
THE “WHAT DOES THIS SAY ABOUT FAMILY VALUES?” ARGUMENT THE “BUT THE PRIMATES SAID …” ARGUMENT

THE WESTERN IMPERIALISM ARGUMENT: Isn’t this just another manifestation of an arrogant America arrogantly inflicting western cultural values on the rest of the Anglican Communion?

· We are each called to proclaim the Gospel in our own cultural contexts. Just as the ministries of ordained women have enriched and enlivened the Episcopal Church over the last-nearly-30-years, the full inclusion of GLBT people into the Body of Christ – incarnated by the consecration of Bishop Gene Robinson – will better enable ECUSA to proclaim the Good News of God in Christ Jesus in an American culture where discrimination on the basis of race, gender or sexual orientation are increasingly problematic. Clearly the challenges faced by, for example, the Nigerian Church struggling to live out the Gospel in a climate hostile to it are very different than the challenges faced by the American Church. We do not presume to tell Nigerian Anglicans how to live out their call to be evangelists in their culture: we ask the same respect be given to ECUSA.

THE COPPING OUT TO THE CULTURE ARGUMENT: Aren’t Christians called to transform the culture rather than be transformed BY it? Isn’t this just about being “trendy?”

· Far from “copping out to the culture” the message the Episcopal Church is incarnating by the actions of General Convention 2003 – consenting to the election of the new Bishop of New Hampshire and recognizing that liturgies blessing same-gender relationships fall within the bounds of our common faith – is one of radical welcome and inclusion: a challenge to the culture which continues to scapegoat and marginalize GLBT people and their relationships. We offer a vision for a community of faith where one’s theological orientation – rather than one’s sexual orientation – is the focus of our energies. We invite all people seeking spiritual community to come and be fed by the holy food and drink of new and unending life – to be filled by the Holy Spirit who calls us to be agents of change and transformation in the world – to experience relationship with the Jesus who invites us all into health and wholeness. It’s not about being “trendy” – it’s about loving the Lord your God with all your heart, soul and mind and loving your neighbor as yourself. It’s about making disciples to partner with God in redeeming the creation.

THE IMPAIRED COMMUNION ARGUMENT: Isn’t the fabric of the Anglican Communion irreparably torn if bishops from some provinces are not recognized by the primates of others?

· If this were the case, the communion has been “irreparably torn” since July 1974 when the first eleven women were ordained priests in the Church of God. Or in 1976 when the General Convention regularized those ordinations. Or in 1989 when Barbara Clementine Harris was elected Bishop Suffragan in Massachusetts. The reality is there are many places where the ministries of women priests and bishops are not recognized as valid in the wider communion and that isn’t likely to change anytime soon. We have managed to find a way to live with the tension of those differences: we can manage to find a way to live with the tension of these if we’re willing to. If agreement on all things was necessary to be in communion with one another there would never have been a Church of England – much less an Anglican Communion. Forged in the crucible of the English Reformation we began as a church determined to hold in tension its identity as both catholic and protestant. Surely our differences on issues of human sexuality are of less ultimate challenge than that.


THE “WHAT ABOUT THE BIBLE?” ARGUMENT: How can you ignore the clear teaching of Scripture that homosexuality is a sin? Is the Bible wrong? And if so, what do we base our faith on?

· Jesus says Word Zero about homosexuality. The few passages in Holy Scripture that address homosexuality at all do so in the context of condemning specific sexual acts in the context of either violent aggression, in violation of ancient purity codes or as part of cultic temple prostitution. Nowhere does Holy Scripture – in either the Old or New Testaments – address the issue at hand: faithful, committed, monogamous life-long relationships lived out in Christian community by persons of the same gender. Meanwhile, other passages of Scripture have historically been used to justify all kinds of things we now understand to be contrary to the will of God, including slavery, the subjugation of women and anti-Semitism. We have learned that the world is not flat, that epilepsy is not caused by possession and that left-handedness is genetic – not demonic. Anglicans have historically based their faith on [a] our Lord Jesus Christ, crucified, died and risen and [b] the three-legged-stool of scripture, tradition and reason. Through this lens, the Bible becomes for us the Living Word of God as our tradition teaches us that our understandings of God’s will for us have sometimes changed through the centuries as our reason has discovered new and different things about God’s creation through scientific inquiry. The foundation remains the same but our living out of the Gospel has changed – and will continue to change – as we live more fully into partnership with God.

THE “WHAT DOES THIS SAY ABOUT FAMILY VALUES?” ARGUMENT: What kind of values are we teaching our children?

· We are teaching our children that no matter what their sexual orientation we expect a high standard of relationship that includes fidelity, monogamy, mutual respect and life long commitment. We are telling our families that no matter what your family looks like, we have values for you. We are challenging all couples – gay and straight – to live their lives in relationship within the context of Christian community: both supported by and accountable to their brothers and sisters in Christ. And we are modeling to GLBT young people – those so tragically at risk for self-loathing and suicide in our communities – that there is a place where they can be loved by God, embraced by a community of faith and where Jesus loves them just as they are as they grow up to be all that they can be.

THE “BUT THE PRIMATES SAID …” ARGUMENT: How can you ignore the will of the primates who issued a rebuke to the American Church and warned of impaired communion in their statement issued in October from Lambeth Palace?

· The primates of the Anglican Communion are the heads of 38 autonomous national churches, representing very different polities, theologies and secular cultures. Their statement did indeed speak of regret at the impaired communion the New Hampshire consecration would create while stating clearly that “what we hold in common is much greater than that which divides us in proclaiming Good News to the world.” Some have focused on the re-affirmation of the 1998 Lambeth Resolution declaring homosexuality incompatible with Biblical teachings. Others have emphasized the statement’s call “to listen to the experience of homosexual persons … and to assure them that they are loved by God … and full members of the Body of Christ” and its acknowledgement of the need for ongoing study on questions of human sexuality. If the primates had been consulted in 1976 a similar statement would likely have been issued regarding the ordination of women. We are still not “in consensus” on that issue, nor are we on many others. In the end, the Gospel is better served by taking the Statement in its totality, rejoicing in its commitment to continued conversation and deepened commitment to work together than it is by “proof texting” bits and pieces to make one or the other political or theological point or the other.