“Defending Marriage” is one of these. Defending Jesus in the Eucharist is another. Chillul HaShem is the technical term in Judaism. The Infamous Danish Cartoons, the Satanic Verses…

Christians, at least, are *supposed* to follow a God who doesn’t defend himself even against spitting, nails and lashes. I usually enjoy the ironic twist of Catholic Crusaders leaping with legal swords to defend an image of God nailed to a tree.

And after reading a lot of theology on God’s lack of human passions, I find the idea that the Almighty of Sinai could be “offended” to be ancient, tribal and humorous superstition.

Attacking your ideas about God (which are up for debate at all times) is not the same thing as attacking God. And if someone wants to attack God – directly, full on, hatred – then I think that’s between God and the Attacker. But, secretly, I think God can handle it.

Here is the website of the movement, Community. They also have a Facebook group.

All these resources are in Finnish (note to self, time to learn Suomi?) but the Brotherhood of St Kosmas has unwittingly done a pro-gay favour in translating many documents into English. Perhaps they wish to enlist (like the Anglicans in Africa) the help of conservative Americans and the IRD.

As I noted earlier – the Brotherhood, like Orthodox COnservatives in England – seems actually to be some kind of Pro-Kremlin (and/or Proto-Tsarist) political movement, siding with Russia against “the west”. The theo-fascists in the IRD should both love and hate that…

The Brotherhood provided two very good English documents for us:

The Community Declaration and a side statement from Orthodox members of same organisation. Both are included below…

The Declaration from Yhteys-liike

COMMUNITY is an open forum for all the members of Christian churches and communities, who believe that the gospel of Jesus Christ also embraces sexual and gender minorities, such as gays, lesbians and bisexuals, as well as trans-gender individuals as full-standing people and Christians. They have the right to participate as themselves in the life and management of Christian parishes.

WE ARE a group of Christians, individuals with a variety of backgrounds, who work to materialize the above-mentioned right in practice. We invite new members to look for ever-deepening concept on community and courage to work for our goal.

AS PEOPLE committed to Community, we are active members of our Christian churches and communities, both office-holders and lay people. In our work related to pastoral care, education and administration, as well as in the everyday life of Christian parishes, we have faced the often painful reality of the lives of people who belong to sexual and gender minorities.

WE CALL TO Community people in Christian churches and communities ready to serve as friends, pastoral caregivers and supporters of those who belong to sexual and gender minorities in various parts of our country.

WE ALSO LOOK for people, who want to promote the debate on the rights of those in sexual and gender minorities both in Christian churches and communities and society on the whole. We try to make sure that no-one will be left alone in his/her internal struggle or under pressure of public attacks and prejudices. Silence and lies are a destructive burden for all those involved. We want to create in our Christian communities an atmosphere, in which it is possible to be hones and to live according to one’s conscience, with no need to fear that one is rejected or insulted for it.

AS CHRISTIANS, WE are bound by responsibility, respect, confidence and reciprocal commitment in inter-personal relations, including sexuality. The Bible doesn’t contain any part, which would condemn a faithful marital relationship based on respect and commitment between people of the same sex. The parts in the Bible interpreted in this way are chiefly related to rejection of sexual abuse and irresponsibility. We know that the Bible is interpreted in light of various traditions and with a variety of emphases. At the same time, we have confidence that open debate and new research can help us to get out of old and biased interpretations based on a fear of deviation. Many questions are difficult and answers are still open. However, we have confidence that, in accordance to the promise given by Jesus, the Holy Spirit will guide us towards the truth.

COMMUNITY REQUIRES that the principles and practices, which constantly cause anxiety among the people who belong to sexual and gender minorities and function in Christian churches and communities, should be re-evaluated. Those complicate the lives of these people as Christians and may also restrict their participation in the sacraments of the church. Moreover, valuable work of many employees is lost.

IN CHRISTIAN FAITH, the most crucial thing is God’s mercy, granted in Jesus Christ. This gospel of forgiveness and conciliation calls from isolation into community and from alienation into mutual confidence between Christians with different sexual orientations. The gospel provides the back-ground for reciprocal respect and cooperation both in office and the life of Christian communities in general.

At the moment, we are especially concerned about the fact that employees, elected officials and other people bearing a responsibility in the parishes, who belong to sexual and gender minorities often cannot but keep silent about their sexual orientation or resign from their work and even their entire Christian community.

Homosexual employees who live in stabilized and committed same-sex unions also give Christian churches and parishes an opportunity to provide positive examples for their members, who belong to sexual minorities. This would strengthen the right of everyone to have sacraments, pastoral care and Christian unity.

Subsequent Statement from Orthodox members of the movement, “Community”

We, the undersigned members of the Orthodox Church are involved in the movement Community, because we believe that it promotes the ethical teaching of gospel. Christ accepted all kinds of people in his company. He set as examples people, who were despised, rejected and held in contempt. The Kingdom of God calls for integrity and penance. Integrity is a fruit of love, which teaches us to respect all people. Christ forbids us to condemn each other.

Sexuality doesn’t determine the whole of a person. Homosexuality is an innate tendency, not a choice. We hope that the Orthodox who belong to sexual minorities will find their spiritual home in their own parish and that they will be able to participate in the divine services, prayers and sacraments of the church in full.

The teaching of the church about sexuality, family and the equality of man and woman meets various challenges, in which homosexuality is only one. In our opinion, homosexuality is, above all, a pastoral question, not a dogmatic one. We work for the values of the movement Community within the framework of the sacred tradition and canonical tradition of our church. We are not bringing new practices into the life of the church, nor are we draw parallels between matrimony and same-sex unions.

On the basis of the Orthodox view on people, we consider that all kinds of discrimination are a sin. We hope that an open and objective discussion on issues related to sexuality will promote tolerance and love for one’s neighbour in our church.

Copyright Information:

This text is free to be distributed in any form, unless commercially sold. Publisher’s name Pyhän Kosmas Aitolialaisen Veljestö, or any of its translations (for example “The Brotherhood of Saint Kosmas of Aitolia”), or the publisher’s official main internet site address http://www.kosmas.fi should be mentioned, when using parts which are not directly and obviously taken from other, primary sources. Also, the Publisher’s name of the compilation should be mentioned if using citations of this compilation that are translated from Finnish to English. All other rights are reserved by the Publisher, unless permitted in writing by authorized representatives of Pyhän Kosmas Aitolialaisen Veljestö ry, Joensuu, Finland.

2) This right and wrong has little to do with “doctrine” per se (debatable, iota-sized technicalities about begetting and essence and accident and que) and much to do with practice (do justice, love mercy, pray for enemies, forgive, etc).

3) Christianity is judgmental in the first-person only. I am the only sinner I’ll ever know, all others are to be Christ to me. I’m not going to get it right.

4) Christianity is communal. None of the above is possible without a community: iron sharpens iron, rocks tumble in the river, sharpened edges grind down and we are saved together or not at all. We call this community Church. Church happens – even in places where the name isn’t used or is anathema. I’m not going to get it right on my own.

5) “Saved” has to do with all of the above. “Heaven” or “Afterlife” or “Pie in the Sky” is unimportant in this equation: if you think there is a “Heaven” why not make that lifestyle present here, now, always. If it’s around in the sky, that’s just a cool bonus.

6) Right worship is found in a community that is “doing it right” (see #2) and – at the same time – Traditional, “high church”, etc. Montesorri Grade School silliness is not church, not worship: it is me-oriented, not God-oriented. It prevents “Doing it right” because being me-oriented in worship results in being me-oriented in the world. Being God-oriented in worship results in being God-oriented (ie, my neighbour) in the world.

Traditional does not mean static: saying/doing the same things, over and over, whilst the meanings change is not “keeping the traditions”. It’s possible to be Traditional whilst singing kirtans or dancing the hora or wearing dashikis.

7) Numbers 1 through 6 need the traditional icons of Christianity to work. Trinity, Church and Eucharist are the only ways this unity-in-diversity works at all. Salvation only happens that way – making unity in diversity. Making Humanity an here-and-now reflection of the Holy Trinity is salvation. It only happens in the Church. But see #4.

8) Persons who can be called *doctrinally* devout Christians (define doctrine as you will) have come to differing conclusions on the issue of human sexuality. My experience has been that persons who agree on Trinity, Church and Eucharist – not the doctrines, but the icons – can actually worship together in peace.

Icons not doctrines: Trinity as the image humanity strives to be; Church as the image of that being. Eucharist as the proof, context and creation of that being. Icons not doctrines: sometimes the names are different.

9) We can debate doctrines all we want. We can even argue and painfully disagree. But when we stand before God (before Whom all our differences are merely like familial genetics) we prostrate in peace, feed each other in love and dance together in joy. That – unity-in-diversity, worshipping together in peace – is the Kingdom of God on earth, taking over the world, destroying the systems of evil that man puts up and replacing it with Love.

10) The only proof of getting it right is when all of us are together. And most of the time “us” is defined in too-small a way to be right.

UPDATE (1): Fr Peter responds in grace and love and keeping to the traditional teachings of his church. Amen!

Update (2) Rick Warren does the right thing

UPDATE (3) Rod’s on board.

Update (4) The Vatican Chimes in today as well.

They all hedge their bets but that’s ok: I didn’t expect *anyone* to say “Gay is Good”. I just don’t want gays dead… and I don’t want to feel that giving my money to the local Greek church or Agnlican congregation (or Rick Warren book purchase) will, ultimately, support the holocaust against gays in Africa.

With brothers and sisters like this, I feel safe in God’s house – even if we disagree.

1) I do, really, believe there is a right way to do CHristianity and a wrong way to do it.

2) I do, really, believe that this right and wrong has little to do with “doctrine” per se (iota sized technicalities about begetting and essence and accident and que) and much to do with practice (do justice, love mercy, pray for enemies, forgive, etc).

3) I do, really, believe that Christianity is judgmental in the first-person only. I am the only sinner I’ll ever know, all others are to be Christ to me.

4) I do, really, believe that Christianity is communal. None of the above is possible without a community: iron sharpens iron, rocks tumble in the river, sharpened edges grind down and we are saved together or not at all.

5) I do, really, believe that “saved” has to do with all of the above. “Heaven” or “Afterlife” or “Pie in the Sky” is unimportant in this equation: if you think there is a “Heaven” why not make that lifestyle present here, now, always. If it’s around in the sky, that’s just a cool bonus.

6) I do, really, believe that right worship is found in a community that is “doing it right” and – at the same time – Traditional, “high church”, etc. Montesorri Grade School silliness is not church, not worship: it is me-oriented, not God-oriented. It prevents “Doing it right” because being me-oriented in worship results in being me-oriented in the world. Being God-oriented in worship results in being God-oriented (ie, my neighbour) in the world.

Finally, because of Number 6, my experience is that numbers one through five need the traditional God-doctrines of Christianity to work. Trinity, Church and Eucharist are the only ways this unity-in-diversity works at all. THerefore,

7) I do, really, believe that persons who (without the above in mind) can be called doctrinally devout Christians have come to differing conclusions on the issue of human sexuality. My experience has been that persons who agree Trinity, Church and Eucharist can (with the above in mind) actually worship together in peace.

I do, really, believe that’s the Kingdom of God on earth, taking over the world, destroying the systems of evil that man puts up and replacing it with Love.

Having said all that… news that the State-Ratified Gay Genocide Bill to Be Enforced in Orthodox Churches, Warns Archbishop Jonah of Kampala and All Uganda (Catholic and Anglican Leaders Threaten Likewise) coupled with the near total silence of global religious leaders (Canterbury, the Pope, Constantinople, Russia, and almost all American preachers and Denominational leaders across the spectrum) makes me wonder why the hell Jesus ever bothered to care about us at all and makes me wonder why the hell I should bother because it is clear that the man failed.

If this doesn’t make you know the Church is not infallible, nothing will. (And those of you who want to quibble about doctrine can go stuff it. Siding with the state – or anyone – in hate and genocide is not time for playing that “when she’s wrong, she’s not the Church” shell game.)

ECUSA elected a Gay Bishop last weekend, btw, and all those who are silent about hate launched into some SERIOUS hate very quickly about that…

UPDATE: Fr Peter responds in grace and love and keeping to the traditional teachings of his church. Amen!

Update (2) Rick Warren does the right thing

UPDATE (3) Rod’s on board.

Update (4) The Vatican Chimes in today as well. They hedge their bets but that’s ok: I didn’t expect *anyone* to say “Gay is Good”. I just don’t want gays dead… and I don’t want to feel that giving my money to the local Greek church or Agnlican congregation (or Rick Warren book purchase) will, ultimately, support the holocaust against gays in Africa.

I found this passage, from the Introduction, to the section, to be inviting:

Today Christianity finds itself confronted not only by the wisdom of the East—Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism—but by other wisdoms as well. Jungian and transpersonal psychology, modern art and poetry, tribal shamanism, hermeneutics, ecology and feminism, literary theory and the history of thought—on every side, the sharp edges of western consciousness are rounded and silvered by an invisible river of psyche and spirit.

At this critical threshold, the container of Western and of Christian consciousness is opening to a fresh encounter with reality on every side. At this moment, wisdom signifies an epistemological quantum leap from our culturally contracted mind, an awakening to this larger, multidimensional reality. Christian wisdom, at this moment, is the rediscovery of the Christ-Event in the context of this larger, dynamic and interrelated world of reality.

Our ‘Wisdom Christianity’ page will move around this point: the re-emergence of the Christ-Event at the center of the larger world in which we find ourselves today, whether on the level of spirit, of mind and psyche or of the body.

I draw from there a difference in the Eastern and Western churches: the eastern church having never really lost touch with these sorts of “other” wisdoms – indeed with her own Sophia, at least until the modern age when she seems overcome by legalism and dogmatism. THe West came into contact with other sources of wisdom – Celtic and Germanic, tribal sources. Her church encloses in spirals and knotworks the same Wisdom that the East chose to portray in silence and vast golden spaces. It seems rather like the difference between free verse and iambic pentameter. Both are poetry, intensely beautiful, rich. But they are different.

When the Western Church – shrugging off her late fixation on legalistic minutae – contacted “mystery”, it seemed a revelation, “a fresh encounter with reality on every side”. It will be the same for the Eastern Christians, too, when they finally escape their modern world view and discover the gold spaces in their icons.

Wisdom as we are using the word is intended to signify not only depth, but fullness and vitality. We are dealing, finally, not with a specialization but with a breaking out from the confinement of our over-specialized consciousness—whether secular or religious. It is a question of recovering the fullness of the Beginning—in the energy of the Spirit which impels us toward the end. Today the word ‘wisdom’ connotes the critical breakthrough into a greater consciousness, which has been long beginning in the modern West.

Be sure to read the 27 Assertions of The Christ Mystery.

It can be a downer if one is a text-only fundamentalist. One wants to see “one truth” that one can follow, instead one is made to see that her “one truth” is in fact, one selected by her out of because of history, politics (secular or ecclesial) or culture or personal preference. ONe is apt to ignore the reality and insist that “God” made me do it, or else to reject the entire package in a gambit I call “Spong made me do it.”

But when one sees the textual and ecclesial multivalence not as a challenge to Literalism but rather as evidence of the human striving to know God, one frees himself to seek God the Logos beyond the wordy text. The Logos may be found in a “non-canonical” text or absent in a “canonical” one: the Logos lives in the Reader’s heart, not in the text. A literal reading of Genesis (rejected by the Church Fathers) is as devoid of the Logos of God as the mythological reading of The Protoevangelion of St James is filled with Logos. The former yields only a denial of God’s gift of the human mind and logic, whilst the latter yields the poetic beauty of the feast of the Presentation of the Virgin.

Building an ideological fence around the Bible isolates us. But the text calls us to relationship, a way of life and love reconciled to God and each other. Church. The History of the Bible reveals the Logos of God at work in all the ways of humanity bringing us the full text of God’s Glory: but not that glory contained in the text. That glory, that presence, that living word is within our hearts, helping us – living in relationship – to read the text, if we will but listen.

For most of the last few years (I was Chrismated in June of 2003) I’ve not cared about the Calendar. I picked Fr Victor’s parish out of the many in San Francisco listed on the internet precisely because it was noted as the only New Calendar/English Language parish in the Bay area. (That may no longer be true, but even 6 years ago, the other New Calendar parishes were far far too Greek- or Arab-language dominated to be called “English” parishes.)

But now I’m second guessing my reasoning.

I’ve read texts out there that speak of the division between Old and New calendar (the Julian and Gregorian, specifically) as if it is clear “the other side” is either nuts or blatantly evil. The logic used in support of the Julian Calendar is most often along the lines of either, “this is the Calendar Jesus used…” or else “the Gregorian Calendar was created by heretics and schismatics…” To the one I say, “No, Jesus would have used the Jewish Calendar and felt the Julian conception of Time to be an oppressive outsider’s heathenism.” To the other I say, “Scientifically, the Gregorian Calendar is more valid. There is no problem with a heretic or heathen speaking truth – it is only our pride that forbids us from hearing them.”

I don’t want to speak of partisan theology here, though. I want to speak of Salvation.

We’re in the season now of Consumptionmass. Shop until you drop. Stop working (in countries outside of the usa) for many many parties. I’ve heard it said that some places in Europe basically stop any real work in the month of December. And I confess I longingly eye the Julian Calendar as a way to distance my feast of the Nativity of Jesus from the orgy of shopping, partying and blinking electric sex.

One of the reasons the Jewish and Islamic calendars are largely unmolested by secular culture is because they are out of sync with the secular, Gregorian calendar. Now that all of the Western world and much of the rest of the world, as well, uses the Gregorian calendar, secular culture is able to co-opt just about all religious festivals save those that slide around out of control of Wal*Mart and Madison Avenue.

Imagine what would happen to Matel if all Christian churches pulled their Party over to 7 January!

First off, the TV studios and movie houses would *not* move over. December 25th is too woven into their scripts and minds. Secular American Culture would take several generations to move as well. Persons not going to Church would never notice. They’d still consume all manner of things all over the place.

But Christians could give a few presents on the 19th for St Nicholas, feast with friends on 25th December for St Herman, then wait until the orgy of spending was safely over, celebrating the Nativity of Christ on 7th January. We’d give up the school holidays, the midwinter silliness, the lights, the tinsel and the garish consumption justified by modern editions of red-and-green Victoriana.

And we’d have Christmas back as our own.

For a little while, anyway.

As a bit of Cultural Warfare, I’d suggest switching to the calendar Jesus used, allowing for certain cultural modernisms, and celebrating the Nativity on 25th Kislev, Hanukkah, a feast mentioned in the NT (along with the Greenery and Gold decorations noted in the books of the Maccabees). The constant shifting of the date (after the style of Easter) would throw the economy into a full-on panic. Christmas, this year, would be on 12 December, next year on 2 December, followed by 21 December 2011, 9 December 2012. In 2013 25 Kislev falls on November 28th which is ALSO, Thanksgiving! I’d love for 2013 to be known as “The Year with No Black Friday…”

Oh, God, if the world can nearly be destroyed by Greed, imagine what maddening chaos would arise if Christians stopped playing along! My Christarchist heart is over-filled with giggles!

One key parallel in my mind is not being discussed in the essay: the Hebrew word for the doings of the Law – Mitzvah – is usually translated “good deed”. WHilst it is a mitzvah to walk an elder across a busy intersection, it is also a mitzvah to hang a Mezuzah on the door posts, to wear a prayer shawl, to read the Torah, to keep kosher, etc. It could be said, in a Christian context, that our sacraments and our sacramentals are all “Mitzvot”. What makes the parallel even tighter is that “mitzvah” also means “connection”. In other words, I think it is helpful (in a Christian context) to see the ritual practices of Judaism as a community’s set of sacraments and sacramentals. In that light, the discussion of “patterns of practice” makes a lot of sense.

“Torah” means “teaching.” In Jewish tradition, talmud Torah, the study of Torah, is a life-long obligation and opportunity. Reconstructionists are committed to a serious engagement with the texts and teachings, as well as the art, literature and music of tradition. But we are not passive recipients; we are instead challenged to enter the conversation of the generations and to hear voices other than our own, but to add our own voices as well. Reconstructionist Judaism is respectful of traditional Jewish observances but also open to new interpretations and forms of religious expression. As Rabbi Mordecai M. Kaplan (1881-1983), the founder of Reconstructionism, taught, tradition has “a vote, but not a veto.” Reconstructionists share a commitment to making Judaism their own by finding in it joy, meaning, and ideas they can believe. Unlike Orthodox and Conservative Judaism, Reconstructionism does not view inherited Jewish law (halakhah) as binding. We continue to turn to Jewish law for guidance, if not always for governance. We recognize that in the contemporary world, individuals and communities make their own choices with regard to religious practice and ritual observance.

But where Reform Judaism emphasizes individual autonomy, Reconstructionism emphasizes the importance of religious community in shaping individual patterns of observance. Belonging to a community leads us to take the patterns of observance within that community seriously; our choices do not exist independently, but are made in response to our community as part of our participating in it. Reconstructionism thus retains a warmly traditional (and fully egalitarian) approach to Jewish religious practice.

All healthy Orthodox and Eastern Catholic communities already hold a spectrum of practice: in practices from fasting to home prayers parishes contain near-monastic sorts and those who are far more concerned with other aspects of their faith than diet or private devotion. One of my own key experiences in Orthodoxy was the sense of denial about the differences in observance: making fun of parishes who were seen as “less holy” for being “less pious” or hearing people describe themselves as “bad” because they could not eat a lot of carbs.

Again, the key is in that last paragraph: it’s not the stuff we are doing that holds the centre point, but rather it’s the doing together that is important. It is this communitarian focus that I imagine might hold together our imaginary “Byzmergent” community: if it makes room for and hold support for persons all along a spectrum of practice, then it will bring them together around the Lord’s table.

While deeply connected to the historical experience of the Jewish people, we find a profound sense of belonging in our contemporary communities as well. This connection often leads to increased ritual observance and experimentation with the ritual rhythms of Jewish life. We find meaning in rediscovering the richness of traditional ritual and creating new observances which respond to our contemporary communal and personal cycles.

Reconstructionist communities are characterized by their respect for such core values as democratic process, pluralism, and accessibility. In this way, they create participatory, inclusive, egalitarian communities committed to exploring Jewish life with dedication, warmth and enthusiasm.

“Ritual observance” is perhaps too scientific a term. What we mean is the making-sacred of day-to-day life. This will be discussed with more depth in the next post in this series.

The important thing here is community. Whilst some of these claims (“inclusive, egalitarian” “pluralism” etc.) will seem out of synch with more-conservative communities, likewise the idea of “increased ritual observance” will seem alien to more-liberal folks. One of the things I most especially miss about my experience in Orthodoxy as well as Anglo-Catholicism, was a veritable plethora of liturgical functions: Morning and Evening prayers, liturgies, noon-day mass, rosaries, akathists, etc. On a regular week most people were in church about 3.5 – 4 hours and feast days would be on top of that. This in addition to times of private devotion. No one is doing this alone: it is the community that supports such action.

Why do we tend to equate “liberal” with “less liturgy”, or less ritual observance? That assumption comes from all sides. What might it mean if that assumption were turned on its head?