A Fast For Equality

As you may know, the California Supreme Court declared that the state ban on same-sex marriages was unconstitutional, thereby giving all couples in the state the right to be married. In response, Bishop Marc Andrus of the Episcopal Diocese of California suggested pastoral guidelines for the clergy and laity of the diocese regarding weddings. Directive No. 1 states:

I urge you to encourage all couples, regardless of orientation, to follow the pattern of first being married in a secular service and then being blessed in The Episcopal Church. I will publicly urge all couples to follow this pattern.

In this manner, all couples, whether male/female, female/female, or male/male will be afforded the same treatment by the church. Only blessings will be performed by the church after the couples have been married in a civil ceremony, until such time as the canons of the Episcopal Church change so that all may have equal access to church weddings. Read the rest of the letter, including the other guidelines.

Richard Helmer, rector of The Church of Our Savior, in Mill Valley, California, has chosen to follow Bishop Andrus' directives. His eloquent and inspiring statement of his reasons for so doing is at his blog, Caught By The Light. Richard says:

Bishop Marc, it seems to me, has chosen along with his Diocese a very careful, tenuous path of grace in a conflicted Church. Following his recommendation, I informed my vestry yesterday evening that I would no longer preside over a marriage of any kind until The Episcopal Church has settled on a way forward that honors the covenants of all couples with equality. Rather, I will treat all couples who approach me for marriage equally by offering counseling and blessing, and referring them to the civil authorities to publicly declare their vows as legally binding. By equality, I don't mean political equality (although that naturally follows), but equality in terms of the recognition of God's grace.

A parishioner asked me yesterday if I was therefore withholding the sacrament of marriage. After reflection, I decided I wasn't because I can't. It is the couple who engage in the sacrament of marriage. At best, as a priest, I can only name it and declare it publicly. The sacrament of marriage between couples of all sorts will continue with or without my help in that particular way. In a curious sense, that's liberating Good News, as I fast from this part of ordained priesthood.

Indeed, in my many years of Roman Catholic schooling, I was always taught that the minister of the sacrament of marriage is not the priest, but the couple themselves. The priest pronounces that the commitment has been made and blesses the couple and the covenant they have agreed to with one another.

Richard names refraining from officiating at weddings as a fast until all couples in his parish may receive equal treatment with respect to church weddings. To me that's close to an ideal description of the practice. I've said before that I'd like to see the church out of the marriage business altogether, with the couple receiving the church's blessing after a period of discernment by their church community.

Richard allows that the practice of blessing all couples is at the edge of the boundaries of what the canons of the Episcopal Church permit:

While our violation of canons by what we are doing in this case is quite arguable (I believe we have pushed their limits, but not transgressed them), amid the half-veiled or fully naked calls that we are anarchists and rejecters of the rule of law, I am reminded of the legacy of civil disobedience. Is there such a thing in an ecclesiastical setting? It was St. Augustine who argued that an unjust law is no law at all. Perhaps we are starting to point towards this ancient truth in our actions at this time.

I left the following comment at Richard's blog:

Richard, an eloquent and inspiring post. Thank you for taking the time to share your words. Just last night, durng my walk, I thought of the civil rights struggles here in the US. I thought of civil disobedience and wondered what the term would be for such actions within the church. Ecclesial disobedience? Ecclesiastical disobedience? I don't know, but you make the important point that if one engages in such actions, one must be willing to face the consequences of those actions, as those in the civil rights movement had to, with the consequence that some died as a result of their part of the struggle for equality. Others went to jail. They were willing to pay the price.

FWIW, I believe that Bishop Andrus has made the proper decision and that yours to follow his recommendations is proper and right.

Please read Richard's well-reasoned and eloquently written post in its entirety.