A while back, a question was raised over at Ormonde Plater’s Place, and I found it interesting that I was the only canine to try to debate it… so I raise it again, with the hope that someone else will join and post some thoughts.
June brides
Am I the only person in The Episcopal Church, other than “reasserters” or “conservatives,” who thinks the marriage of Gene and Mark just before Lambeth is a terrible idea?
Given the threats against +Gene and others who promote justice and human rights, I suspect their insurance companies would prefer they waited until after Lambeth. Perhaps, like some, the insurers would prefer the time never comes as the event itself has the potential for all sorts of havoc. A governor would never have considered killing a little girl as she entered a school. Religious bigots have no respect for individuals who don’t share their prejudices and we have seen their verbal violence. IMNSHO it is long past time to honor all of God’s creation. Yes, even dogs tho my feral cats might not agree.
I thought that the pancake drawing might get you going!
Let me (as always) be the one to belabor the obvious. While they may well have thought about what kind of impact the event might have on the church (diocese - TEC - AC) in general and Lambeth in particular, I suspect that they, like most couples planning a wedding, had a whole lot of other (dare I say more important?) things to consider, including who they wanted to be present, what kind of constraints the schedules of others imposed on them (guests, musicians, clergy, etc.), where and how the wedding would take place, what needed to be done in terms of security, any lease of facilities, etc. Once they figured all that out, I suspect that they came to the conclusion that there was no “good time” as far as the church was concerned so they might as well do what otherwise made sense to them. So why on earth shouldn’t they do as they please?
I think I read somewhere (but couldn’t swear to it) that it was actually the heightened danger likely to attend Lambeth and its surroundings that made them want to do it beforehand simply for the practical reason that they wanted the legal protections just in case something were to happen. While one doesn’t like to think in those terms, unfortunately that is a reality they face everyday. In any event, once it became legally possible for them to marry, it was only a matter of time and, since they knew there would be all sorts of publicity attendant to Lambeth and publication of the book, it makes sense to me that they would do it now when there is already a lot of attention rather wait until later when it might otherwise be receding. But I have no idea what made them pick the date and really do not care. I also don’t think the wedding itself will have any impact on Lambeth. How could Gene’s opponents be any more outraged on account of it? And if there are, indeed, any neutrals, would it really alter their thinking if he a) never married his partner or b) married him at a later date? I just don’t see it.
p.s. I tried posting at your new Dark place. I wanted to congratulate Elizabeth for taking all the blame, but it seems that the Comments must be turned off there while you’re rolling outside in the grass and sunshine. No wonder your BP is under control.
p.s. back at you, klady… nope, I don’t have comments off. I wonder what happened. Maybe wordpress got mad at me not liking their new little “look over here” widget thing?
woof!
I finally figured it out. I was clicking on “Reply” and got no box opening up. Then I discovered all I had to do was type in that dark cyberspace and squint and find the submit button. I’m a bit computer challenged, you see, never mind that I spend 3/4 of my life attached to my PC. But sooner or later I usually stumble upon what I need.
So, blame me, not WordPress.
Well, what did you expect? When you poke your nose into a dark rotten mess of a place, did you expect all pastel colors and smiley faces? Glad to see clumber++’s eye test is working so well!
Back OT. It looks like Bishop Robinson has recently responded to criticism of the timing and manner or celebrating his union here in the Guardian. Seems to me he said all that needs to be said (and more).
All respect to Ormonde, but I think +Gene and Mark are right to go ahead. First of all, it’s their life and they are entitled to their timing. It will no doubt make a few people feel that +Gene is waving it in their faces, but these are the folks for whom it would never be the right time. For many others it may actually prove educational. It draws attention to the fact that gay couples want exactly what straight couples want. It underlines the very real legal disabilities and emotional costs a gay couple face when they cannot be married. How many millions of couples down the centuries have scheduled their weddings just prior to the departure of one of them, usually the husband, for a potentially dangerous overseas military or civilian posting? The marriage gives them both legal protections and emotional support. Gene will be going into the lions’ den at Lambeth. He deserves all the fortification he can get.
I have a sense that the name of the game in England is “Let’s Pretend”. Let’s play like none of our clergy and bishops are gay. Well, okay, we know some of them are gay. Actually, quite a few. Okay, whole platoons of them. But let’s just act as though that weren’t so, because the rest of us will be more comfortable, the appearance of propriety will be maintained, everything will go smoothly, and the fundies and the Akinolites won’t be able to accuse us of apostasy and betrayal of Gospel values.
And since it can’t be denied that there are a few who are gay, and some of those are even partnered, let’s make a rule that (partnered or not) they must be celibate. Then let’s play like they are in fact all celibate, even though we know a lot of them aren’t. That way the appearance of propriety will be maintained, everybody will be comfortable, everything will continue to go smoothly, and we can pretend that it is only those willful Americans who have a gay problem to deal with.
This is the racket which I feel +Gene should not be asked to give in to. It isn’t doing the Church of England any good to carry on with this hypocrisy. It’s not furthering the health of their congregations or their witness to the society. They need +Gene’s witness, full-on. Having been at the meeting in Putney the other night where he came to speak and sign books, I feel that through his very being, his word and example he is giving heart to the folks who need it in the C of E, and the wedding will only add to that. For him to hold back would not make for a greater likelihood of peace in the Anglican Communion. +Gene could resign his orders, leave his partner, remarry his wife, declare himself straight, and do penance for the rest of his natural life and it would not appease the right wing and bring about unity and peace in Anglican Communion.
BTW my detailed report on the Putney event is now up at OCICBW… along with a nice pic of +Gene and one of Fr Giles Fraser.
What’s your dark place, Clumber? What have I missed?
Susan, it’s the new blog A Dark Rotten Mess for a Heart and Guts… butI have to warn you. It’s Dark. And Rotten. And a Mess. But dogs just love that sort of stuff. Heck, clumberkim calls us clumbers “snow pigs”!
I agree with klady — I’m sure any number of considerations outweighed sticking it to the worldwide Anglican communion, in Robinson++’s decision to have a civil union, including the need for certain legal protections if some hatemonger kills him.
That being said … Robinson++’s been treated hideously by the worldwide Anglican communion. And by the ABC, including this week’s decision not to allow him to function as a priest while in England during Lambeth. I don’t believe they’d undertake so solemn, joyful and binding undertaking as civil union as a protest against anything at all. But what a protest! Robinson++’s been polite, gracious, and his behaviour and demeanour soar over many of his peers. He hasn’t said anything untoward — just planned a public legal contract and family celebration. Gandhi would be beaming.
It’s really simple. +Gene and Mark should have their wedding at the time of their choosing, and folks should let them be.
Well, there we are, it should be whenever they want it. It’s unanimous. Sorry, Ormonde, can’t find anyone who agrees with you.
I agree with Mimi, they should do as they please because they will never please the people who are displeased!
Since I started all this, let me simply add that I support Gene and Mark in their marriage and hope they will celebrate it as soon as possible. It was pompous of me to suggest that they delay it.
Ormonde, no not pompous… it was your first reaction to hearing about this, and I’m sure you were concerned over what impact it might have. Yet sometimes (and Clumber++ knows this perhaps as well as any of you humans out there!) we need to ponder thoughts. I have a deep respect for your books and your ideas and thoughts, but just felt (after I’d put my cold wet nose into your discussion) that it needed some more brains to think about whether it was the right or wrong time… a tail wag out to you for beginning the discussion, however!
Love that Ormonde.
Yup, indeed, he’s a mensch.
Ormonde is a mensch.
I find this to be perfect timing. So many of the discussions about gay clergy revolve around the “married or celibate” issue. This just goes to show +Gene is doing his best to follow the rules, now that New Hampshire offers him even half an option to. Not his fault they still won’t acknowledge the marriage part. Then again, my memories of sacramental theology (rather than canon) are that a marriage is made by the two people as a covenant before God and the clerical presence is just providing a blessing anyway. I’ve always wondered why more people don’t bring this up. (See, all that RC education in my youth was good for something