Showing posts with label same sex marriage. Show all posts
Showing posts with label same sex marriage. Show all posts

Monday, December 15, 2008


I was quoted in an article on marriage equality in the edition of Newsweek dated today.
Gay Marriage: Our Mutual Joy Newsweek Culture Opponents of gay marriage often cite Scripture. But what the Bible teaches about love argues for the other side.
I am quoted toward the end of the article

Monday, November 24, 2008

I was asked to do a reflection on my involvement with GLBT issues for the Presbyterian Promise Newsletter.

Here is what I wrote

Back last August Dick Hasbany asked me to consider writing some sort of reflection piece on my involvement with LGBT issues in the 11 years that I have been a member of this Presbytery. Since my tenure with First Presbyterian Church is soon coming to an end (February 1, 2009 is my last day) and I will be leaving Connecticut within another few months, I guess I cannot delay meeting this request much longer. (I do not plan to terminate my membership in the Presbytery until I have voted YES for the “change B” overture at the May 09 Presbytery meeting.)

When I went to Florida in 1990 I was already firmly committed to full equality for GLBT people in the Church and in society. I knew this was not a widely shared commitment in a Presbyterian church in a small town in north Florida and decided that support for this issue would not be a part of my ministry. I felt I had been called to grow this Church located in area with booming population growth and that is what I did. Before the end of my tenure at this Church my views had been revealed in a number of ways including the fact that I spoke and voted against the adoption of the original B overture. The last year of my ministry in that place was a very unpleasant experience. As I was seeking a new call I discovered this Church in Hartford that said on its Church Information Form that they had welcomed people who differ by age, race, ethnic background, sexual orientation, family status, economic situation and theological viewpoint. This sounded more like the kind of place I belonged and I determined that I would not ever again try to disguise my views on this issue, or any other issue of importance.

Being in this Church and having made this commitment to transparency has made it possible for the Church and I to be partners in the cause of justice for LGBT people, as well as other justice issues. During my tenure here we have brought the Shower of Stoles to our sanctuary twice. We have brought or supported several overtures to the Presbytery to change our ordination standards and to recognize marriage equality. I attended the 2006 General Assembly as an overture advocate to support deleting B. This was an opportunity to meet with leaders in the equality movement from across the country. We were among the first Churches to join Presbyterian Promise and the second Church in the Presbytery (by one month) to become affiliated with More Light Presbyterians, to which I had belonged for years. Jane Spahr, Michael Adee and Heather Reichgott have all preached in our pulpit at the invitation of session.

I have been part of the steering committee of Connecticut Clergy for Marriage Equality, and have presided at one Civil Union service. Among my closest friends in ministry are the local Metropolitan Community Church pastors.

In many ways my support for these causes has been an extension of the same commitment to equality that led me to Washington in 1963 as a college senior to demonstrate with Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and onto the streets of Louisville with his Brother A. D. Williams King to march for open housing in 1966. All of us regardless of race, ethnicity, income, religion, gender orientation or age are children of one loving creator. When one of our brothers and sisters is diminished because of discrimination we are all diminished and I feel we are all called to work for the equality of all people.

Thursday, October 16, 2008

I had an op-ed article published last Sunday, October 12, 2008 in the Hartford Courant. On October 12, 1998 Matthew Shepard died, brutally attacked and tied to a fence because he was Gay. The article marks this occasion and calls for action against Hate Crimes. Read the article.



Last week Connecticut became the third state in which same sex marriage is allowed. The State Supreme Court ruled under the equal protection of the law provision in the CT constitution that same sex couples have the right to marry. Same Sex Unions are not enough. This is what Love Makes a Family has been saying all along, and what Clergy for Marriage Equality has been working for. I am proud to serve on the steering committee of this organization. Our Church hosted a worship service celebrating the long awaited decision on Monday Evening, October 13. Unfortunately I was not able to be there since I was at a wedding reception.



Last week Presbyterian Promise and First Presbyterian CHurch, Hartford co-sponsored a display of 50 liturgical stoles the Shower of Stoles Project. See Pictures.

Monday, March 03, 2008


More Light Sunday



Guest preacher Heather Reighgott and myself, click for more pictures

What a great day we had on Sunday. We were celebrating our session’s decision to affiliate with More Light Presbyterians, a national network of people seeking the full participation of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people of faith in the life, ministry and witness of the Presbyterian Church (USA).

Elder Lois Maxwell coordinated our celebration and invited Heather Reichgott, a member of the national More Light Board be our guest preacher. Heather is a graduate of San Francisco Theological Seminary and a candidate for ministry in the Presbyterian Church (USA). She now lives in North Hadley with her wonderful wife Gillian Woldorf to whom she was married in 2005 in Amherst, Massachusetts. They are joyfully expecting their first child (due in April.)

We found Heather to be a wonderful preacher and very open to tell her personal story and relate her story to THE story told in scripture. She has a great sense of herself and confidence as a preacher and was eager on almost no notice to bring the Children’s message as well as the sermon.

Deacon Keith Rhoden and I traveled to New Haven that after noon for our Presbyterian Promise meeting and an opportunity to meet with another candidate for ministry (for 22 years) Lisa Larges. At last Lisa has been certified ready to receive a call; she presently serves as national director of That All May Freely Serve, another national organization that advocates for “an inclusive church that honors diversity and welcomes lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender persons as full members. Full membership includes eligibility for ordination to the offices of elder, deacon, and pastor.”

Monday, February 11, 2008

Presbytery rejects welcoming overtures
The session (governing body) of First Presbyterian Church, Hartford endorsed a proposal from the First Presbyterian Chuch in New Haven to alter language presently in the denominational constitution which requires ministers, elders and deacons to live in fidelity in marriage between a man and woman or chastity in singleness. The change would allow Churches to ordain GLBT (gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender) people as elders and deacons, and Presbyteries to ordian GLBT people as ministers.
......
On a twice counted vote the proposal failed to pass our regional governing body, the Presbytery of Southern New England on a tie vote. If just one more person supporting the proposal had made the trip to Fall River, MA the overture could have prevailed. Many people left the meeting at lunch before the vote was taken and one of our elders believes if we had voted before lunch the results would have been favorable.
.......
One more problem with the voting was that we dismissed one of our Churches to another denomination before lunch, but since the action was taken pending their reception into the other denomination their representatives were allowed to vote (and they all voted NO). Likewise new ministers who were received pending their dismissal from other Presbyteries were not allowed to vote. at least one of whom would have voted with us.
.....
Our session sent a second proposal (we call them overtures) to change a few words in four paragraphs in the directory for worship that would treat same sex couples in the same way as opposite sex couples when it comes to marriage and blessing civil unions. That proposal failed by a margin of ten votes, my memory is the vote was 42 to 52.
.....
I find this very discouraging. On at least two previous occasions the presbytery passed similar overtures to change the constitution by margins of 60%. Each time the change was rejected by the General Assembly. This was the first time the body had considered the marriage overture.
.....
It is extremely troubling to my conscience to belong to a denomination that is so intollerant and unwilling to welcome GLBT people as full equals and leaders in the Church. The Lord I serve through Jesus Christ certainly loves all of us and welcomes all people into the family of God. I have resisted changing to another denomination feeling that the only way to change this Church, which has so many good qualities, is to work from the inside. It took years and years to change the policy on women ministers, but we just celebrated the fiftieth anniversary of that change. At this point it seems doubtful that I will ever see the change while I am still in active ministry (I intend to retire in January 09), and I wonder if it will happen in my life time.
.....
The woman who presented the marriage overture on our behalf is herself in a civil union with her partner of fifteen years was very personally hurt and says she will never attend Presbytery again. She did not come to Church either on Sunday morning. She is one of our most outstanding leaders, giving herself to many of our ministries, heading the revitalization committee for the Church. She and her partner are generous supporters of our Church and its outreach to the poor and needy.

Wednesday, June 27, 2007

The 2007 session of the Connecticut legislature has come close to being an utter and complete disappointment. Considering the fact that the democratic party (supposedly the left or liberal party, in a reportedly liberal state) had a veto proof majority in both the house and the senate virtually no part of the liberal agenda moved very far forward. Click on the headings below for my take on the major issues. [All of these issues except the same gender marriage issue were identified by ICEJ as high priority issues.]

Tax Reform
Immigration Issues
Healthcare Reform
Education Issues
Same Gender Marriage
A Cynical View

The gold coast legislators sided with the republicans on the issues of tax reform; we have to do everything we can to help the rich get richer and pay less taxes while the middle and lower class rate payers get stuck with the bill. The complaint is made that progressive income taxes and the inheritance tax confiscate the wealth of the most affluent members of society. Well yes they do. Isn’t that what we should be doing; narrowing the gaps between the haves and the have nots? It is certainly the Biblical ethic beginning with the Jewish law of the Jubilee. Under the law of Moses in the year of Jubilee (See Leviticus 25 and 26), each 49th or 50th year, all land was to return to the families that originally owned it, all debts were cancelled. It is the divine plan for redistributing wealth; the divine plan for land reform. (This law was of course proclaimed in a time when wealth consisted primarily of property, not stocks and bonds and precious metals). Conservative religious people who are so eager to uphold the ten commandments and the holiness code might ask themselves why they are not supporting laws to confiscate excessive wealth and redistribute it to the poor.

Score the legislature as a total failure on significant tax reform; the progressive income tax was defeated. It looked as though progressive legislators might preserve the state Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) if they were willing to roll back or abolish the estate tax on estates over $2 Million Dollars. That was a draconian compromise, but in the end it was lost also.

Score one for the legislature for passing a bill that granted a few hundred undocumented immigrant children the right to pay the same tuition that other state residents pay at state universities. These are children whose parents are undocumented, but who have been living long term in the state, in many cases not even knowing that their status was not copasetic. (Anti immigrant agitators like to talk about these people as illegal immigrants. In the first place it is not a crime but a civil offense to be here with out documentation. Second the illegal term implies that all these people snuck in to this country by violating the law; many of them came here legally as tourists or other visitors, students, etc. but stayed after their visas expired. Others were here legally as spouses of US citizens or permanent legal residents and may not have even been aware that their status changed when they were divorced.) Unfortunately although the legislature passed this progressive measure the margin was slim and our wonderful and popular governor vetoed the bill. Put a black mark next to her name.

Healthcare reform seemed off to a hopeful start with State Senate President Pro Tempore Donald E. Williams, Jr. being a primary champion for universal healthcare in Connecticut. In the end all that was accomplished was to increase the compensation rate for healthcare providers under the Husky Plan. (Of course that is significant since the rates were so low that many impoverished children had limited access to doctors for non-emergency care, and no access to dental healthcare.) But the hopes of Don Williams, Healthcare for All, the ICEJ and so many other groups for significant progress were sadly disappointed.

What was accomplished? There is significant new money for education in the budget, but whether this will mean more money for the public schools in most districts remains to be seen. The governor’s education package was touted as giving a tax break to the cities; the state will give cities more money for education so the cities do not need to impose such high property taxes to pay for education. Every one wants property tax relief, but is the almost flat rate state income tax that much more desirable as a revenue source? What is positive about the shift in who pays for education is that the same tax base will be supporting the schools in every town. Without the new state money impoverished (i.e. low total property value) districts like Hartford simply lack the revenue to provide support for the high cost of educating underperforming students. Score the legislature a partial success in the educational field. (On the other hand are we doing all we can, and need to do to move toward universal access to preschool.)

The bill creating same gender marriages in Connecticut seemed to be off to a good start when the joint Judiciary Committee passed it by a much larger majority than even the most optimistic supporters expected. Unfortunately the Governor, bless her small minded heart, promised to veto it. The Leadership of the Judiciary Committee counted the votes and were uncertain about having a majority in both houses, and were certain that the votes were not there to override the veto so withdrew the bill before it ever came to the floor in either house. While this is considered a better strategy than bringing up the bill and seeing it either defeated or vetoed I am not sure it is a moral strategy.

One of the most dismaying facts about the Connecticut Legislature is that it is still dominated by an entrenched leadership and a incompetent and unprogressive governor. During the session everything is so democratic and open with public hearings and debate on every issue of importance, with everything exposed to the light, everything open the public scrutiny. Then the session ends with no budget, no tax plan and no spending plan, and the key leaders get together totally in secret and decide what is going to happen with state spending, then the legislature convenes and rubber stamps what the leadership has decided, without even knowing what is in the budget in most cases. Why have the 6 month long session? Just let the governor and a few other folks make the decisions and then call a session to rubber stamp everything. No matter how successfully I lobby my representative and senator, it doesn’t make a dimes worth of difference.

Monday, May 14, 2007




Same Sex Marriage - Picture of the week.




We have been publishing a picture of the week on the Church Web Site, all objects within walking distance of the Church. Do you know where this Biblically based Sculpture is located?




It was disappointing to read this morning that the proposal to recognize same sex marriage in Connecticut has been withdrawn for this session.
Story from CT News Junkie.
Comment from Love Makes a Family.
Those who count votes predicted that the bill would lose by a few votes in the House. We can be certain that the proposal will be back in the 2009 legislature, and likely that it will pass then.

Friday, April 20, 2007


The picture says it, Marriage Equality. Yesterday First Presbyterian hosted a prayer breakfast for Connecticut Clergy for Marriage Equality. After breakfast and a keynote speaker, Bishop John Selders we walked over to the press conference at the Capitol. Here is my set of pictures from the event. Another set by Chion Wolf

Saturday, April 14, 2007


Vestments as Costumes
This is me on Good Friday in the street procession. It was one cold and windy day. I usually wear a black cassock and the stole shown above for this event, but I felt I needed my winter coat and the Chasuble was the only vestment that would fit over my winter coat. Actually it did make a rather striking image accompanied by beret and earmuffs.
Seeing myself made me think of a Unitarian clergy friend who would never vest for services in the Church but who wears a Roman Collar and stole in peace protests. I asked her why she did this, since even more than Presbyterians Unitarians believe in the parity of clergy and laity. She said that street demonstrations were a form of theater, and costumes seemed legitimate in that context.
I do admit that sitting in the meeting of the Judiciary Committee on Thursday with my Equality sticker on I did think it would have been good to have on a Roman collar to be identifiable as clergy. [for out of state readers, the committee voted overwhelmingly to send a bill to the CT Legislature establishing same sex marriage. If passed we will be the first state to have marriage equality by action of the legislature. Mass had same sex marriage also, but it was mandated by the court system.) I have pretty much rejected wearing a clerical collar as making a distinction I do not want to preserve between clergy and lay people; but there are times when one legitimately wants to be recognized as clergy since society gives certain deference to clergy as opinion leaders.
Follow this link for more pictures from the Procession on Good Friday and services on Easter Sunday.

Tuesday, March 27, 2007

SAME SEX MARRIAGE
I listened yesterday to a part of the 12 hours of testimony for and against the bill before the Joint Judiciary Committee to authorize same sex marriage in Connecticut. I had testified two years ago, but did not this year, but as I listened I really wanted to say something. Again and again legislators seemed to be saying in one way or another that they didn't want to discriminate against gays and lesbians (no one mentioned bisexual or transgendered), but that the legislature had already given them all the rights of marriage through civil unions. Several of them kept on at Anne Stanback wanting to know why it was so important to call same sex relationships "marriages."

What this sounds like to me is the same old separate but equal argument that we rejected when it came to rights for African Americans. There were people in the 1950s who wanted to know why Rosa Parks was not satisfied to sit in the back of the bus. After all the back of the bus is going the same place as the front.

Why do LGBT people want marriages, civil unions get them the same rights.?