STARTING IN THE WRONG PLACE

I am looking out my window at the amazing Rocky Mountains…from the West Side…which is kind of cool for me to think about given I first just assumed I was on the other side. I am not used to being on the western side of mountains. Living on the east coast my whole life, my orientation, has been to look westward.

It is easy to become disoriented. It is easy to think you are in one location, start out on your journey, only to end up at a destination that you never intended to arrive at.

This past week I have been at the General Convention of the Episcopal Church and I want to suggest that many have been thinking we are “starting” at one place, thrown ourselves into a journey, and quite frankly are on a way to a destination that many people did not expect (let me emphasize many not all). I got a glimpse of that destination this week.

We thought we started at a place called Marriage…or Marriage Equality. We were offered the idea that two…count them two…people in a lifelong monogamous relationship, should be treated equally regardless of gender and sexual orientation with regards to marriage. I will not rehash all the debates about this change in theology. This week the General Convention of The Episcopal Church changed its Canon for Marriage, it changed its theology of marriage, redefining it as between a couple, irrespective of gender. You might have thought we had arrived at the destination; we had not.

This battle that many have fought (and I know my pacifist friends deplore that language, but it is honest) this battle, was thought to be over the right to marry. Said differently, some thought that the journey had set out in the direction of marriage equality. Apparently that was not so.

We learned it was not about marriage equality. I am not inferring or extrapolating anything in that sentence. We were told directly—it is not about marriage equality, but rather equality.

This week, person after person gave testimony in committee hearings and from the floor of the House of Deputies that it is about equally for all. Now equally for all sounds nice. But their context was equality for sexual behavior. One person unabashedly stated they were living with their mate, had no plan of marrying, no plan for children, and no plan for lifelong commitment…but then stated they hope that soon the Episcopal Church will be able to bless them. At another hearing I heard a similar comment after the person testifying provided a long list of possible…well let’s just say arrangements.

Now, just for a moment let me stop here from further describing the situation. Let me avoid the fear mongering of where this might lead…let me…well let me just point out that none of these possible arrangements is about marriage. In all these discussions, what is really going on is IDENTITY. People wonder, “Who am I?” and “If I am this kind of person, am I OK?” and finally “If the Church would bless me and my behavior, then perhaps (big emphasis here on the word perhaps) then perhaps I will feel OK.”

As people living in the early part of the 21^st century, we are inheritors of the sexual revolution of the late 20^th century, and that revolution…so potent with its allure…has completely hijacked our understanding of identity. This is not an “anti-sex” article…it is an article about how we have started these very serious and important discussions in the wrong place…we thought we were starting with whether two people of the same gender, with the intention of a lifelong committed relationship, should be understood as married…and if so, then should the church asks God’s blessing upon them in this institution which most Christians say God instituted…we thought (at least many) we thought this was the starting point.

It is obvious now that it was not. It is instead a fairly vocal amalgamation of people, who have formed themselves together, each crying out for recognition of their identity. I note that most people involved in this gallant effort speak passionately about their identity. And let's face it, our identity is hugely important. In fact the letters LGBTQ…are about identity, but identity that seemingly reduces the matter of personhood to the singular lens of sexuality.

Furthermore, returning to evaluating this under the idea of marriage/relationship starts again in the wrong place. Identity starts first with the individual before moving to relationship.

I doubt the outcome on Same-Gender Marriage would have been different. I do think however it has sent us on a course, a path of thinking, which start’s in the wrong place. What if it started with a different question, a different name to the Episcopal Church’s Task Force? Instead of the Episcopal Church’s Task Force on Marriage, what if, it were the Episcopal Church’s Task Force on Human Identity & Purpose?  If we started there I imagine our thinking, our approach would look quite different. No doubt we would run the risk of producing a summa theologica.

We could start in a few places. In some future blog posts I want to explore just that question. For now however I would return simply to where I began…and that is…I wonder if we did indeed start in the wrong place.