Take my Governor...

PLEASE!!

So here we Texans sit, in the Democratic Primary catbird seat (OK - along with Ohio) and it looks like those rascally Republicans are at least failing to hog the national spotlight for a couple of weeks. At last, at last, thank the Lord Almighty, we Blue Dot Democratic Texans swimming in the Red Sea are free at last!

Or so I thought.

Imagine my chagrin to hear that our current Governor - Republican Rick "Hairspray" Perry - is back in the national news. In the New York Times, no less. He has written a book (cue shocked gasps from crowd) and in this book, he champions the values of the Boy Scouts. He has taken that a step further, and is purportedly donating the royalties from this book to BSA's legal defense fund.

(Full disclosure: We used to be a Scouting Family. My husband is an Eagle Scout, my son was one of the first Tiger Scouts when that early level was introduced, and I was a Den Mother and a Pack Leader. I still have my yellow and blue shirt in a closet upstairs. My husband and I used to proudly contribute to the Capital Area Council's Annual Campaign every year. Every year until in 1991 when the BSA officially prohibited openly gay adults from volunteering and joining their ranks.

One more disclosure: I have not read Governor Perry's Book, nor do I intend to. I am reacting to what I have heard about the book, and to Governor Perry's own press release and statements about the book.)

Since this is a lot about "words", rather than characterize what Gov. Perry has to say on this I will excerpt the pertinent passages and let you read for yourself.

Taken from the interview "Troop Leader" by Deborah Soloman in the NY Times Magazine, publication date 2/24/08:
Solomon: Let’s talk about your new book, “On My Honor,” which draws on your experience as an Eagle Scout and champions the values of the Boy Scouts of America, to whom you are donating your royalties.

Perry: Yes, to their legal-defense fund.

Solomon:Which has been fighting the A.C.L.U., to keep gays out of the scouts. Why do you see that as a worthy cause?

Perry:I am pretty clear about this one. Scouting ought to be about building character, not about sex. Period. Precious few parents enroll their boys in the Scouts to get a crash course in sexual orientation.

Solomon:Why do you think a homosexual would be more likely to bring the subject of sex into a conversation than a heterosexual?

Perry:Well, the ban in scouting applies to scout leaders. When you have a clearly open homosexual scout leader, the scouts are going to talk about it. And they’re not there to learn about that. They’re there to learn about what it means to be loyal and trustworthy and thrifty.

Solomon:But don’t you think that homosexuals might also be interested in being loyal and thrifty?

Perry:The argument that gets made is that homosexuality is about sex. Do you agree?

Solomon: No.

Perry: Well, then why don’t they call it something else?

*Sigh*.....

"Why don't "THEY" call it "something else"?

Governor Perry - when was the last time you sat down in conversation with an openly gay person who referred to themselves or their partners or others in the community as "homosexual"?

If it is the word you are so worried about, Governor Perry, why don't YOU call it something else?

All those words aside, reducing any person to their sexual orientation is certainly not in holding with the Boy Scout's philosophy as far as I understand the words they profess. Let's review:

Scout Oath (or Promise)
On my honor I will do my best
To do my duty to God and my country
and to obey the Scout Law;
To help other people at all times;
To keep myself physically strong,
mentally awake, and morally straight.


Scout Law
A Scout is trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly,
courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty,
brave, clean, and reverent.

I don't see ANYthing in there at all about discriminating or reducing another human being to one (nonessential to Scouting) aspect of their genetically determined sexual orientation.

Governor Perry says he doubts "many" parents enroll their sons into Scouting to get a crash course in sexual orientation.

I would agree - with a reservation. Boy Scouting is about character development. Understanding what is and what is not factual about sexual orientation might help a lot of otherwise confused boys understand a little bit more about how character has to do with accepting who I am, and then accepting others for who they are. Without fear or discrimination.

On Your Honor to obey the Scout Law, Governor Perry?

If you are the poster boy for Scouting, I am unclear how "honor" is meant to be interpreted.

Trustworthy? This is the man who as Lt. Gov. was captured on videotape trying to convince a DPS Trooper not to write his driver a speeding ticket because of the stature of his office. "Why don't you just let us get on down the road" said Scout Perry.

Courteous? This is the same Governor who, thinking he was off-mic, said "adios, Mo-Fo" to a reporter who pressed him for details of his upcoming legislative agenda.

Helpful? This is the same Governor Perry who has used his veto power a record number of times considering his party's dominance of the Legislature. He has been at the helm while the State of Texas has not only the next to lowest percentage of children immunized, but also the highest percentage of children uninsured, when compared with nationally reported statistics.*

Honor? Under Governor Perry, Texas currently ranks as the third highest state with persons living below the Federal Poverty Level and the third highest for percentage of the population with food insecurity.

If I were in charge of the Boy Scouts of America, I'd ask Former Scout Perry to take a long hard look at the Scout Oath he seems so anxious to protect and defend against "homosexuals".

If the state of our State is an example of Governor Perry's "best"? We'd all be better off saving our book dollars. Maybe we could contribute them to a hungry uninsured child in Texas. We can worry about who that child might be attracted to later, after we first make sure they are well fed and immunized.

(*Taken from "Texas on the Brink").

Unintended?

We in the ELCA are yet at the front end of our Lenten journeys for 2008. One of the themes developed for us to use on Wednesdays and Sundays looks at the theme, "Who is our neighbor?". When I noted this resource, I was reminded of my own question, spurred by a sermon given at the January '08 extraordinary ordination of Jen Nagel in Minneapolis, in conjunction with a statement released by our presiding Bishop on immigration policies of the US. My question is/was, "so who belongs here in the ELCA anyway?".

In answer, I heard an amazing sermon this past Sunday, one that succinctly made the case for the ELCA to change course with regards to its discriminatory policies preventing openly glbt clergy from accepting a call unless they agree to celibacy.

The idea that the ELCA ought to change it's policy is not the amazing part. I've understood for years that desperate hanging-on-by-their-fingernails-to-traditional-concepts-and-practices stance clung to by too many of our elected, appointed and called, "guardians of the church" to be outdated, even doomed.

No - the amazing part was that this particular sermon was delivered by a pastor who did not apparently see at the time (and may not yet for all I know) how the point he made absolutely condemned current church policies. And my amazement deepened when I read the comments for the lectionary provided on the back of our preprinted bulletin covers - the Augsburg party line if there ever was one, "Sundays and Seasons". The ELCA itself is making a case for policy change, simply by asking us to read and heed our Lenten lessons this Sunday.

I don't have a transcript of my pastor's entire sermon- these comments are my paraphrased notes which I began to jot down when I realized what I was hearing. I knew my spotty memory wouldn't serve me well without notes. But if you will read Sunday's lessons (if you haven't already) I think you will see. Any distance between what my pastor said and what I heard is no stretch.

It all begins with the lectionary for the First Sunday in Lent. We had a reading from Genesis 2:15-17, 3:1-7, the story of the temptation in the garden of Adam and Eve. We proceeded through Psalm 32 where we are advised to trust in God alone who is our only judge and deliverer. On to Paul's comments in Romans 5:12-19 pointing us towards Christ's obedient death which brings every sinner into liberation and life. We ended up in the Gospel of Matthew, where the author reports how Jesus himself is tempted, and unlike Adam and Eve or the Israelites in the wilderness, this time gets it right.

All according to the agreed upon lectionary for the ELCA and all well within approved, standardized, traditional, same as it ever was "church".

My senior pastor is a lifelong Lutheran. Being a pastor could be considered the family business. He is not a boat rocker but he is kind and a fairly thoughtful man. He delivers a 12 minute sermon on Sundays. He has spoken of how his father, who was in life the senior pastor of a Lutheran juggernaut in Minneapolis/St. Paul (now led by another son and grandson among others), taught him to preach "so that the truck driver in the pew can understand everything you are saying".

Rather than insulting either rank and file Lutherans or truck drivers, I believe that statement could be heard as a warning to stick to the basics. I would agree with that assessment. A need to not get too abstract accurately addresses the actual level of most theological thinking in the pews on any given Sunday. My congregation has an extremely high level of education overall, yet most of us who are there Sunday in and Sunday out are not much past a rudimentary stage of theological thought or scholarship. We mostly show up on Sunday and pay attention as we can. Period.

So, this sermon, as most of his sermons, did not stray from the text for the day and did not intentionally break new ground.

Not intentionally, no. But take a look at these statements flowing naturally out of our readings for Sunday and see for yourself if this is not a native son of the ELCA, speaking on the provided texts, making a most traditionally rooted yet radical departure from arguments usually offered up to defend it's Vision and Expectations policies with regards to lgbt clergy...

The gospel reading points out how temptation begins immediately after Jesus's baptism which established his identity. Satan calls God's promise a lie and challenges God's words of identification. There is the repetitive formula to heed in Matthew, it rolls off many a threatened power's tongue, "IF you are...".

The unstated challenge - "do you believe in your identity? Test it and see, then I will believe it too. Prove it to ME."

The challenges continue - "Admit these words are more powerful than God's." The idea - "What kingdom would be yours if you admit that God's words of identity are not most powerful?".

We heard Martin Luther's admonition "Fear, love, and trust God above all things".

We heard again about baptism, how it conveys a promise - a certainty of identity that neither sin nor death nor power of denial can destroy. God's power comes through speaking. God speaks to us at our baptism. What God says is to become our reality. Our identity.

Can you see the parallels here? When lgbt clergy are identified as ready for a call, they are yet challenged by a policy that calls God's promise and identity established at their baptisms as a lie. They are faced with a policy that demands of them IF they believe in their identity, to test it with celibacy and then the ELCA will "believe it too."

The ELCA with this discriminatory Visions and Expectations policy wants to say their words are more powerful than God's. They say - you glbt clergy can enter into our little kingdom, accept a call, IF you admit our words are more powerful than God's identity established at your baptism.

The denomination that carries Martin Luther's name so proudly seems content to continue to ignore his challenge to "fear, love and trust God above all things.". The ELCA seems to want to second guess the power of God's speaking at our baptisms by saying "We welcome you into the Lord's family. We receive you a fellow member of the body of Christ, child of the same heavenly Father, and worker with us in the kingdom of God....IF you are celibate...".

I find it amazing, remarkable, that we have handed to us this past Sunday such a powerful example of church policy being convicted on it's own scriptural underpinnings. The Bible, so often misused as the rationale, as establishing the cause for the need to discriminate, simply takes our truck driver level theological ears and says to us this Sunday, "beloved child, believe in God's identity for you above all else".

Believe in God's unquestioning unconditional love. Not in authority, or rules, not in outdated purity codes, or fearful statements made by people who cannot see room enough at God's table for everyone. Just believe in God's love and words of identity as spoken to you at your baptism.

This turns the ELCA policy on it's head, don't you think?

Who is being faithful and obedient now? The ELM with their extraordinary ordinations allowing unfettered belief in God's identity and God's call? Or the ELCA, who says to this one group "If you are who you say you are, then remain celibate and prove to us that you are worthy"?.I think my pastor's father's idea of "preaching to the truck driver", sticking to the basics, is just right. I wish our leaders would stick to the basics more often themselves.

Maybe then we could stop wasting time, energy, and emotion drawing circles around one group or building walls between "us" and "them". Maybe then we could get back to the central business of showing the world what God's love looks like and lives like.

OK, So I Will (too)

Everybody is having their say about the political candidacies of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

There are women asking each other how they can live with being "traitors to the cause" for saying they'd vote for a man rather than a woman. Some old guard feminists have responded with a question of their own - ?What was the feminist revolution about if not for the opportunity to vote for ANY body - male or female - rather than having to vote for a woman - any woman - solely because they were female? There have been Pepsi/Coke, PC/Mac, Safeway/Whole Foods breakouts over which voters will go what direction. I especially liked one observation that threw cold water on trying to figure out what it all means ahead of any actual voting. The reasoning goes that typical patterns may not hold. Folks who "only" shop in Safeway or Whole Foods will both visit the other stores on occasion, they just won't be as comfortable there.

I laughed out loud to read the humorist who wrote if Romney is DVD, then John McCain is VHS, and my fellow Texan Ron Paul is "a View-Master dug out of a box in the basement with a “Great Wonders of Engineering Vol. 12: The Hoover Dam” permanently jammed in it."

I have often had trouble choosing which candidate to support, especially in those races where it seems nobody is really saying anything about who they are or what they want to try to do, just how bad those other candidates are and how awful it will be for everybody if the vote doesn't go their way. That is not the dilemma so much this year, where we have two amazing candidacies to choose between in the Democratic primaries at least. My dilemma is finally over. I am "undecided" no longer. I am a person of faith, a firm believer in science, an optimist and a woman who grew up and took my own place as a wife and mother during the thick of the feminist furor. In light of that, and in honor of my firm conviction that this country must change to not only survive but to thrive, I have not only decided to vote for - but have donated to - the campaign of Barack Obama.

The bottom line for me is this. I want to be proud to be an American again. I have listened carefully to all Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have said in speeches and in debates, and equally importantly to me, I have watched carefully as to how the two of them have financed and administered their campaigns. I figure that is as close a glimpse as we will ever get as to how they will behave with Presidential power in their hands. I have watched who rises up in support of each candidate, and thought some about what national vision that type of support might translate into after the election dust has settled.

It is clear to me that Ms. Clinton is extremely intelligent. Her drive and confidence are admirable and she has some good ideas for the future of this country. There are two moves she has made in recent weeks however, that reveal to me how painfully trapped she is in "we've always done it this way" politics.

Her willingness to include or discard results in the states who ignored the rules of primary date selection based upon whether or not they helped her bottom line was an "ethics aside" choice I cannot ignore. In addition, her willingness to bend the lines in private around financing her campaign is another signal there is an "any/everything it takes to win" mentality that we've already suffered under too long. We need a president who will stand by their principles even when it might work to their personal disadvantage. We've suffered enough at the hands of the "anything goes as long and me and my own benefit" style of decision making.

I have supported various organizations working for campaign finance reform since the 1980s. Our system is broken. If we can't get big money out of the system, my thinking goes, we'll never even get a chance to vote for anybody who won't stoop to playing the game as if it is a game, by all the old party line rules. Apparently, at least one candidate agrees.

Barack Obama has run a different kind of campaign, gathering hundreds of thousands of small donations from ordinary people around the country. Including a small donation from me that I mailed today. Obama speaks of hope, shares a positive world view, he thinks about America and Americans as proud international citizens. That is a vision I can joyfully share.

With Barack Obama as my president, I can be proud to be an American once again.

So, just in case you are one of the four people left in the world who haven't yet seen this - I share with you a ray of hope in the stormy skies of this presidential race. " I am TexasDeb, the blogger who inhabits this space, and I approved of this message..."

Lenten Echoes

Anybody who tries to do any sort of reformation work knows - burnout is nearly inescapable. Working to heal the world, to return it to the vision God is described holding in Genesis, is often simply overwhelming. As we read in Genesis chapter 1 (the Message)
God created human beings;
he created them godlike,
Reflecting God's nature.
He created them male and female.
God blessed them:
"Prosper! Reproduce! Fill Earth! Take charge!
Be responsible for fish in the sea and birds in the air,
for every living thing that moves on the face of Earth."

Be responsible, indeed! Whether you are working to feed the hungry, visit those who are ill or in jail, working to reach out to the marginalized and disenfranchised of our world, there is always danger that you will over-reach, hit seemingly insurmountable obstacles, see nothing ahead but hurdles to clear, and be filled with despair.

And that is precisely where I found myself this past week.

On Transfiguration Sunday, I hit what felt like for me a "last straw" moment, when a member who'd started out enthusiastically attaching their name to a recent effort called only hours later to heatedly accuse me of being dishonest. They angrily retracted their support. I tried to clarify what had happened, I tried to apologize, all to no avail. The call ended abruptly and I was stunned.

Afterwards I felt physically ill. Over the next day or so I alternated between fury at being thought capable of manipulative lying and despair over how our efforts might be undermined. How could our welcoming work possibly be seen as bearing good fruit in light of this drastic reaction? How would our support survive in the face of such anger from a prominent member? I was ready to slink away. Pick up my wounded pride, pack up what was left of my dignity, and quietly go.

I know I am not alone in hitting such moments of doubt. Over months and years of this shared work of re-forming the ELCA to fully welcome all it's sons and daughters into the fullest participation of the life of the church, I have seen and heard all too many similar expressions of dismay. There is so much to do. Such a feeling of urgency to get it done. So much pain in the face of what can seem to be so little love and compassion.

How to keep from being overwhelmed?

A former associate pastor advised us to pay attention when it seemed we were getting repeated messages from various quarters. She told us those messages are often "holy echoes". Messages we are showered with to answer a need. Needs we may be ignoring, refusing to acknowledge, or even a need not yet clearly recognized.

In the Artist's Way, author Julia Cameron frames it a bit differently. Writing about synchronicity (pp 64-65), she points out "Ask and you shall receive - Knock and it shall be opened to you" are "some of the more unpleasant [words] ascribed to Jesus Christ. They suggest the possibility of scientific method: ask (experiment) and see what happens: (record the results)." She mentions Jung, warning his paper on synchronicity was often shunted aside as he described something "some of us prefer to ignore: the possibility of an intelligent and responsive universe, acting and reacting in our interests.".

Where to turn? In the midst of all the confusion, one of the two Bible studies I am participating in, "The Way of Forgiveness" from the Companions in Christ series, provided what looked like a good start. Moving through the weeks of study provided several exercises and practices that seemed custom tailored to my situation.

I was directed to sit with my anger to consider it's source, it's deeper history. I was asked to consider the way Jesus suggested to a similarly furious Martha that her seemingly idle sister Mary had found "the one thing needed". Rather than being distracted by "many things", I was invited to get clear about that "one thing" in my own life. I was asked to see how that might influence or shift my "relationship to the situation". I was invited to write a letter to God directly expressing my anger. Boy was I able to lean into that one! Finally, I was invited into an "experiment in faith: Pray for those who anger you rather than curse them."

An "experiment in faith"? Tiny bells went off in my head. I pulled out my "Artist's Way" to find the Cameron quote about "ask, seek, knock" and the scientific method. I thought about another passage I'd read the morning of Ash Wednesday that had caught at my heart. I found the words again... "Embracing forgiveness turns out, strangely enough, to be an act of repentance, because it means giving up our own way of seeing the world and accepting in its place God's rather more generous way."

I was flabbergasted. Holy echoes all over the place. My life, my studies, the seasons of the church, all aligned in startling clarity and unity of purpose.I had already done what I knew to do to make amends. I had offered an immediate apology to the person when they'd called in the first flush of their anger on Sunday. I'd prepared another apology in writing which I mailed first thing Monday. Following the suggestions of the exercises, I had been praying, day in and day out, for that member. I prayed for them to find peace, to escape their anger, to find forgiveness to offer me in the midst of our misunderstanding.

After reading about embracing forgiveness I was determined not to go to the altar for communion on Ash Wednesday until and unless I could be reconciled with this person.

In the moments before the service began, I spotted the member seated several rows in front of me. I slipped in the empty chair next to them, put my arm around their shoulders and whispered "I am here to apologize and ask your forgiveness in person..". They turned to me with a contrite smile, apologized for their own quickness to lay blame, and accepted full responsibility for not listening carefully when first approached for support. I refused to lay off all blame or accept it either one, and stated we should agree on a 50/50 split. I smiled, took their hands in mine, asking "Are we good now?" . "All good." was the welcome reply.

I went to communion with a light and newly grateful heart. I'd been served up a powerful reminder that when I am feeling burdened, weary, overwhelmed, even angry, I am called to leave all of that at the foot of the cross. I must place my burdens on God's broad shoulders and focus on that "one needed thing" - a forgiveness which encompasses repentance. Those holy echoes tell and retell; in the work of healing this sad weary world, God's "rather more generous way" must prevail.

Prayer. Forgiveness. Repentance.

Holy Echoes, Synchronicity, the workings of the Holy Spirit. No matter how I describe what has happened to and for me, I more clearly recognize my needs now. I see them more clearly just as I see more clearly who is there to answer them.....

Again from The Message, "God looked over everything he had made; it was so good, so very good!"

Amen!

Do as we say -not as we do

Because, unfortunately, so far we do not...

Years ago I volunteered to help staff a Lutheran Concerned/North America's "Reconciling in Christ" Leadership training session held in the Minneapolis/St. Paul area at Salem English Lutheran Church.

The training was memorable for me in many ways, not the least of which was experiencing firsthand the remarkable ministry setting of the amazing people collectively calling themselves "Salem".

Salem, from the Hebrew "shalom". Peace. Real peace for these folks, though. Not conflict avoidance or head in the sand insistence on "as it ever was", but a vision of change, of service, of peace through the living out of the gospel in their context.

Housed in a large building complex in a neighborhood in flux, as we trained RIC leaders, the 118 year old Salem was in the process of deciding to join forces and move worship services in with a local church of another denomination. Having difficulty meeting energy costs in their setting, Salem questioned if they might reconfigure the property currently housing their sanctuary to provide a mixed residential, retail, social service center and sustainable ministry center.

Pretty big stuff for Lutherans - a denomination not typically noted for embracing change. You'd expect to encounter chaos in such a setting. And yet what we found was abundant life, joy, and love. There was an electric charge of energy in Salem's halls, but in the hearts of Salem's people? True peace.

In between our Thursday through Sunday sessions, we had the delight of making the acquaintance of Salem's pastors and staff, including Jen Nagel, who was then serving the congregation as a "Pastoral Minister". A graduate of Concordia-Moorhead, LSTC and the University of Chicago Divinity schools, Jen was precluded from serving her amazing flock at Salem as an ordained pastor by the policies of the ELCA restricting glbt clergy from ordination without a promise of celibacy.

You see, Jen is not "only" an extremely well qualified pastoral candidate by dint of both training and personal qualities too numerous to mention, she is also a young lesbian, who has the audacity to love God, love her neighbor, AND love her partner. As such, she is automatically disqualified by current ELCA policy from what she has been educated, trained by the ELCA's finest schools, and even more crucially, CALLED by God, to do.

Coming from a more typically staid ELCA congregation, I was especially struck by the winds of spirit and change blowing through the halls of Salem. They had enviable property and placement they were willing to abandon to follow God's call. They had a jazz band as part of Sunday worship services and an uncloseted gay woman serving in Pastoral Ministry. They were consistently loving and serving their neighbors, not just their members.

So it was not a huge surprise to read Salem's choice to participate in "principled non-compliance" with the ELCA's discriminatory policies by Extraordinarily Ordaining the delightful Jen Nagel as a Pastor on January 19, 2008, ending a years long wait that began with her qualified ("pending a change in church policy") qualification for an ELCA call in 2000.

Looking at the photos,
Jen's ordination looks pretty ordinary if you can apply that term at all to such a momentous occasion in a life. I suppose baptism can similarly seem pretty ordinary to those outside immediate family and friends. It is all a matter of vantage point.

Reading the text of the sermon delivered the Sunday after the ordination I was struck by other similarities. Pr. Erik Christenson (rostered by and co-chair of ELM) pointed out the waters of baptism are the "waters of God's impartiality". Even in my cautious congregation thousands of miles removed both physically and psychically from Minneapolis, we have been hearing words surrounding and defining baptism, our baptism, my baptism. Words of inclusion, love, and welcome.

The elected leaders of our denomination and our full ministry partners, the Episcopal church, just issued a joint statement on immigration that might as well be written about ordination. Rev. Mark S. Hanson and Most Rev. Katherine Jefferts Schori state: "The current immigration (ordination) climate in this country is often focused on exclusion and restriction. As people formed by a generous and embracing gospel, we must challenge our leaders to avoid cultivating an unwarranted atmosphere of fear. We must not encourage building walls or denying basic human rights to those who clamor for security and justice. Our perspective should be one of abundance, for we are blessed with abundance and guided by the mandate to love all as part of God's good creation." (substitute word in parenthesis mine)

Pr. Christenson went on to state in his sermon:" We are not citizens of a nation that has thrown its doors wide open to all the peoples of the world. No, we’re actually considering building walls along our borders. We’re not members of a church that welcomes all people, and I’m not talking just about LGBT people, I’m talking about the ways that our religiosity still spends so much of its time trying to draw lines that separate instead of setting tables that invite. Our heart is restless until it rests in God, and, ironically, to rest in God means not to stay put – but to go where God is going because God is on the move and is reaching out to draw us in, to call us home to one another. Jesus issues the invitation “come and see” and it is an invitation to re-imagine the very meaning of the word home. We will not find our rest in a place, but in a person, in relationship with God, which is to say in relationship with each other." (read the full text of the sermon here)

I read these statements together and I consider the example of the bold ministry of Salem Lutheran Church in Minneapolis, a tiny church with an enormous heart and an understanding of Christ's radical gospel that puts many of our more traditional, compliant, obedient congregations to shame. I read these words from designated leaders and designated outlaws, and I wonder, where, exactly, is our disagreement? What is our real problem here?

If following the challenge of the gospel is our liturgy, the work of our people, and if we are indeed the priesthood of ALL believers, then why draw a circle of exclusion? Why build a wall of discriminatory practice? We baptize freely, promising as a family of faith "We welcome you into the Lord's family. We receive you a fellow member of the body of Christ, child of the same heavenly Father, and worker with us in the kingdom of God.".

Again from Pr. Christenson's sermon: "There is something powerful happening in the waters of baptism – an ancient practice that the Christian church inherited from its Jewish roots and re-imagined as sign not of purity, but of belonging, which is why Peter and John are questioned by the authorities in their respective leadership – people want to know who they think belongs inside their community. We want to know who belongs here."Well, now I want to know. Who belongs here in the ELCA , and by here I mean everywhere. Pew AND pulpit. If we as a church cannot joyfully answer "everybody everywhere!", then maybe we should ask our Bishop to refrain from advising our politicians until and unless we get our own house in order.

And, while we are working to re-order our houses, we could do a lot worse than to look to the powerfully peaceful, deliberately non-compliant folks at Salem to be our guides. When it comes to the folks of Salem, we can do as they say AND as they do.

Congratulations Jen! Congratulations Salem! You are truly worthy of both name and calling.

Postscript: Be a part of this "new thing" God is doing! To contribute to the ongoing work of Extraordinary Lutheran Ministries, visit here.