Saturday, 30 October 2010

I love the Messiah!

Its that time of year when choral groups all round the world are brushing up on their now familiar versions of Handel's Messiah.



I sing in one of the longest-running community choirs in Australia and I was struck by the instruction of my musical director last week to "engage with the text".

I have sung some of the choruses from this work before, but have never sung the whole work, and so it is taking a lot of concentration to keep my voice on the notes that belong to my part and not the sopranos.

But today, I turned on a DVD I have of the 250th Anniversary performance of this work. It was a great reminder of what it looks like when the choir's bodies as well as voices are engaged with the text. Vocal dynamic is one thing, but the face and body have to reflect it as well.



It is very easy for choristers to know the notes and get the musical dynamics right but when the recognise the significance of the texts they are singing it really does come to life in wonderful ways. It is not just good music - which it is. It is indeed the greatest story ever told.

I love the Messiah!

I love the music and I love my life which is centred on my relationship with the man about whom the music speaks.

How about you?

Sunday, 17 October 2010

The Kingdom of God for the GLTB Community

Recently I took part in a thread of discussion on FB that was started by a Youtube Clip of Joel Burns, a Fort Worth City Councillor telling gay teens "it gets better". His speech of 12 minutes was during normal Council debate and was prompted by the recent suicide of a number of young high school boys and girls as a result of bullying about the sexuality.

Retired Baptist Minister, Rowland Crowcher, posts such things on Facebook from time to time, and the responses from his readers are animated to say the least. While the focus of Rowland's concern was a Christian response to the kind of abuse that occurs to young people that drives them to consider suicide, most contributors, myself included, weighed in to the debate as to what the biblical view of homosexuality was.

I think it is fair to say that I grew up in a Christian environment that understood homosexuality as deviant and so necessarily involving sinful behaviour. Since it was contrary to nature, as people often say, it must be bad and therefore sinful. And anyway, there are such clear condemnations of it in the Bible saying among other things that homosexuals will not inherit the Kingdom of Heaven.

The beginnings of my enlightenment on this issue was the presence of an openly gay man at the seminary in which I studied. In the late 70's it was indeed a brave thing for him not only to come out, but to begin challenging the church to seriously consider him as a ministerial candidate. Sadly, he had to leave that church and join another in order to have that calling taken seriously.

As I worked through the issues surrounding the empowerment of women in the church I think I developed a hermeneutical framework that enabled me to begin to reframe my traditional response to this issue. This involved the need to clearly understand the historical context in which the biblical references to homosexuality stood and consider how these might or might not apply to the situation we are in today.

I then read John Spong's work "Living in Sin" - in fact the mid-week study group of the church in which I was pastor at the time chose to use it as a framework for their weekly gatherings for a number of weeks. This work, I think, created the paradigm-shift necessary for me to start moving towards where I stand today on this issue, but further experience and the writings of others was needed to create the necessary refinement.

I think the next significant factor was when a member of my extended family made it clear to everyone that they were involved in a homosexual relationship. This scandalised everyone initially, and some thought it would not last long and then it would go away. But it did not go away, and it was interesting to see the members of my family gradually, and at their own rate, come to terms with this. This event, so close to home, caused me to form the view that political and eccesiastical protestations about the threat such relationships pose to the family and the marriage of a man to a woman were absolutely spurious.

I think also, that my experience of church over the past 15 years in which I have become aware of more and more deeply commited Christian people who are gay, many already in ministerial positions, and many in long-term stable and committed relationships, has caused me to question the assertion that homosexuality is sinful. Some Christians try to soften their position by allowing that sexual orientation is not sinful, but homosexual sexual activity is. This to me is an absolute nonsense. If one's sexual orientation was in fact how that person was wired, and if all God made was good, then it was unjust and cruel to condemn a homosexual person to a celibate life so as not to sin while allowing a heterosexual person to have the joy of an intimate relationship - without sinning.

Finally, up to this stage, I think that the hermeneutical approach of Marcus Borg has given me a framework that aligns my passion for justice and discomfort with the purity-code approach of many Christians by showing how frequently Jesus stepped outside the social and religious conventions to meet the marginalised and distressed face to face, welcoming them into his space.

The willingness of Jesus to talk to a Samaritan women of dubious marital status in a public space, to allow another woman to behave scandalously as she kissed his feet and anointed them with nard, to reach out to lepers and tax-collectors causes me to challenge all those who would hold up texts and theology to justify their shunning of homosexuals. Too often, Christians act as if they will be contaminated if they associate too closely with the ritually, or doctrinally impure.

I welcome and celebrate the life in Christ that all who come to him experience regardless of their sexual orientation. I would dare to suggest that being homosexual is no greater indicator of one's propensity to sin than being straight is. We are all sinners. It concerns me, though, that homosexuals are accused of very particular kinds of sin associated with their sexual orientation.

We need to break down old ways of understanding our life together. Could I dare to suggest the following?

The Bible clearly affirms the sanctity of marital relationships, but I wonder if we could not change the view we have of the grounds for that sanctity. Traditionally we have held the view that this is because it is in a heterosexual relationship that procreation can happen, and that children can be brought up in a relatively safe and nurturing environment. Over time we have developed a whole field of theology and doctrine to uphold this view.

I have been wondering if these views have their grounding more in social, cultural and biological drivers rather than in divine intent.

In a scan of biblical history it is clear that the greatest abomination to God is infidelity. This applies as much to religious infidelity as to personal infidelity, both of which are referred to by the prophets and Jesus as adultery. The marital relationship was seen as an icon of the relationship between God and ourselves, but whereas we might be unfaitful to God, God can only be faithful to us. If this is the case, then a relationship of fidelity between two people, regardles of their gender, and regardless of their capacity to procreate, is something worthy of God's blessing since it is an icon of God's fidelity towards us.

I regret that the orders of my church do not permit a form of religious ceremony to affirm and bless the vows of fidelty a gay couple may want to make to each other. I regret that the politicians of our country have bought the lie that legal protection for gay relationships poses a threat to MARRIAGE.

The politicians and people in power in the church may continue to uphold barriers that create and encourage injustice towards gay people, but as for me and my household, we will serve the Lord by welcoming into the Kingdom all members of the GLTB community who feel so called and we will march each year in the Gay Pride parade in solidarity with them all.

Tuesday, 5 October 2010

Who's in and who's out???

It is interesting to experience the way new translations enable you to see new aspects to familiar texts.

This morning I read from Psalm 87 as part of my regular cycle of readings for the Daily Office in the Anglican church, but instead of using my familar NRSV or the now hackneyed NIV I read it from the Litrugical Psalter of A New Zealand Prayer Book. It reads as follows:

The Lord loves the city
that is founded on the holy hill:
its gates are dearer to God
than all the dwellings of Jacob.

Glorious things are spoken of you:
Zion, city of our God.

"I the Lord will count Egypt and Babylon:
as among those who are my friends.

"The people of Philistia, Tyre and Ethiopia:
eash one is born in her.

"All shall call Jerusalem 'Mother!':
for each of them was born in her."

The Most high shall keep her secure:
when the roll of the peoples is written up
the Lord shall record,
'Each one was born in her'

Singers and dancers alike shall proclaim:
'In you all find their home.'

I was away last week at a Religious Education conference attended by Christians, Muslim and Jewish educators. One of the questions that naturally arose in this context concerned the exclusive claims that Christians and others have made about their religion, and in a workshop on the Old Testament theology of Creation the comment was made that Judaism was not an exclusive-ist religion. While Israel saw themselves as chosen they were to live in a world in which all peoples belonged.

The Psalm certainly reflects that view. It sets out by calling Jerusalem the Holy Hill that is most dear to God. God then declares the nations to be among his friends even going so far as to say of them that each one was born in "her" - a clear referrence to Jerusalem as God's Holy Hill. "All shall call Jerusalem 'Mother', for each one of them was born in her."

How extraordinarily generous of God.

I am moving gently towards a broader, more inclusive view of Christianity that seeks to reflect God's grace and mercy and sees the religious faith of others as a response to the same kind of, but different, revelation of God that we rely on within my own Christian tradition. Indeed, I delighted a week or so ago to visit a Franciscan Friar who was establishing a multi-faith house of friendship, under the patronage of the Roman Catholic Archbishop. While I was with him a Hindu guru arrived and invited us both to join him for chai at a local vegan resturaunt, driving us both there in his rather large, though old, Mercedes Benz. We were joined there by a local Buddhist adherant and between the four of us we discussed all sorts of things - the good and ill of this life.

Monday, 4 October 2010

Real Presence

I read a book recently written by a Roman Catholic Nun that was considering various aspects of the Communion or Eucharist as celebrated in churches all round the world.

It has always seemed ironic to me that the Eucharist, which was intended to be a symbol of the intrinsic community that exists between God and us and between ourselves, should have been at the heart of most ecclesiastical division over the centuries.



Words were invented and argued over to try and define the territory of the dispute - Transubstantiation and Consubstantiation were just the beginning - but at the heart of the debate was a response to the question "In what way, if any, is Christ present when we celebrate Communion, the Lord's Supper or Eucharist (whatever you may call it)?

Huldrych Zwingli wanted to defuse the whole matter by proposing that since the Church was engaged in an act of commemoration - "Do this in remembrance of me!" - there was no sense of presence necessary for a correct understanding of this question. This proposition took wide hold in protestant circles leaving Roman Catholics, Orthodox, Lutherans and Anglicans to hold out for one understanding or another.



Medical Mission Sister, Mirian Therese Winter, in her recent book eucharist with a small "e" proposes a completely new way of considering the real presence of Christ when the Christian community is gathered to celebrate Communion. She wants to take up the gospel comment of Jesus that where two or three are gathered, there he was in their midst. This does away with the mystical/scientific dichotomy created by the linguistic debate of Transubstantiation and Constubstantiation which is generally a sturggle for most moderns, and it provides a way of considering the eucharistic event as having more significance than a simple commemoration in which nothing happens other than our own sentimental reminiscences.

I have always felt there was a dynamic and power in the idea of Christ being present when two or three are gathered together, and so this proposition resonates well with me. What about you?