Noteworthy

Another Gay Bishop for the Episcopal Church?

The 2003 election and subsequent approval of Gene Robinson -- an openly gay and partnered Episcopal priest -- as the Bishop of New Hampshire was one among several milestone moments that led some to call 2003 the "year of the queer." In that same year the U.S. Supreme Court overturned state sodomy laws, Massachusetts saw the first rumblings of marriage equality, and equal marriage rites became a reality in parts of Canada. The fallout from Gene Robinson's election and ordination continues as the worldwide Anglican Communion moves closer to significant splits and realignments over sexuality. The triennial General Convention of the Episcopal Church will meet again this year, in June, where several resolutions and decisions will be considered that may well have an impact on the shape and structure of the Episcopal Church for many years to come.

Meanwhile, the Episcopal Diocese of California (which, despite the name, does not cover the whole state but only the San Francisco Bay Area) recently released its short list of candidates to replace retiring Bishop William E. Swing. The election will be held in May and whomever is elected will, once again, need to be approved by the General Convention in June, which will meet in Cleveland. Included on the short list of candidates in California are one gay man and one lesbian. Needless to say, if either of them is elected, the General Convention will again be faced with difficult choices, parts of the Anglican Communion will likely make a serious break with the rest of the Communion, and the media will swarm all over the story.

As Gene Robinson has noted on many occasions, the amount of time and energy spent on the "gay issue" has seriously distracted the church from dealing with much more pressing concerns, whether its poverty, violence, war or any number of other urgent matters. The Very Rev. Alan Jones, Dean of Grace Cathedral, agrees. In fact, he thinks the sexual orientation of the candidates is completely irrelevant. The following are some of his thoughts and observations about the upcoming election.

A Gay Bishop for California?
Obsessed with Irrelevance

The Episcopal Diocese of California has just revealed the list of candidates for the election in May of a new bishop. What the public has learned so far is that two of them are openly gay. In the past, it would have been noted that two of them are women and one of them is black. The fact that this is of no interest is, perhaps, a sign of progress. The media has shown no interest whatsoever in the qualities of the five candidates - their vision for the church or the qualifications to lead the Diocese of California. And although there are fewer than forty thousand Episcopalians in the Bay Area, how we vote in May is of concern and interest to all Christians. Secular "church watchers" of all types are also interested - particularly those who want to make religion the fount and origin of all evil.

With all the problems and challenges facing the world - environmental degradation, poverty, hunger, war and injustice - the church, with the media's encouragement, will be focused on one issue and one only - two of the candidates, so far, are gay. On this issue depends, some say, the future of the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion. This, of course, is an absurdity but it is, nevertheless, real. The gay issue has become the lightening rod for all the obsessions and fixations of the church. For the intellectually indolent and the theological ignorant on both sides of the issue, gayness has become the litmus test of orthodoxy.

When we are angry or frightened, we often invoke and "authority." Some call for justice, others appear to tradition, still others cite the authority of the Bible. These are ways of deflecting the real issue, which is our pain, confusion and fear. On one side, we hear the pleas of those who feel they have suffered injustice. On the other side, they say, "I hate change. It scares me. Please don't destroy my church." Both sides need to be honest about their terrors and respect the visceral concerns of the other.

How, then, do we proceed in the face of these distortions? How are we to give them the attention they deserve but no more than they deserve? When it comes to my gay friends and colleagues, being gay is part of their truth, but that is the least interesting thing about them. In fact "gayness" or "straightness" rarely comes up in the conversation. We enjoy each other's unique individuality.

So there are some questions I will be asking myself in the weeks ahead as I prepare to cast my vote in May. Anglicanism is known for its pursuing a middle way between extremes. It is know for its moderation and restraint. Is this such a time for these virtues? Should we hold back for the sake of unity? Or is restraint (i.e. not voting for a gay candidate no matter how well qualified because the time isn't ripe) merely cowardice - a capitulation to injustice?

The challenge for us in the Diocese of California is to vote for whom we discern to be the best candidate for us and for our times. If some in the wider church wish to react schismatically, that's their prerogative. I was raised in a church that lived with an amazing level of diversity and, on occasions, animosity. But we stayed together - liberals and conservatives, Catholics and Protestants. I will be voting for the candidate who best understands and embodies this sane and inclusive vision. I hope Episcopalians in the Bay Area will turn a deaf ear to those who appeal to the gay issue either positively or negatively as a reason for voting one way or the other. It is irrelevant, as was the issue of gender and race in the past. Thank God we've moved on.

back to top