Posted on 11/28/2007 1:34:26 PM PST by Froufrou
On Sundays, the Saint Paul-Reformation Church often holds informal soup and bread gatherings to discuss congregation business. It was at one of these meetings about two years ago that Jim McGowan, a member for more than two decades, proposed that the church stop marrying straight couples.
The church had long welcomed members of all sexual orientations—they had even bucked local Lutheran leadership and ordained a lesbian pastor. But McGowan, a straight man, nonetheless saw a subtle form of discrimination. If the church couldn't legally marry gay couples, he argued, it shouldn't marry straight ones either.
None of the 50 or so people present in the basement that Sunday stood up to contradict McGowan's proposition. So today, Saint Paul-Reformation is in the process of enacting a church ban on what he calls "the state's business" of civil unions.
If the congregation does vote to abstain from civil marriage duties, the church will still perform ceremonies for both straight and same-sex couples. The only difference will be that heterosexual couples will have to take the extra step of seeking out a judge to make their nuptials legal.
"We are looking at the function of our church in marriage ceremonies," says Anita Hill, a pastor at Saint Paul-Reformation. "Is it just to get it done in a pretty place? We're not in the wedding business; we're in the blessing business."
Still, the proposal to eliminate state-sanctioned marriage doesn't sit well with all the members. "There is a mother in our congregation who gets teary thinking that her daughter might not be able to get legally married in that chapel she sits in every Sunday," says Reverend Hill.
Minneapolis has the country's third-largest concentration of same-sex couples, according to census data, and local churches have not been shy about wading into the controversy over gay marriage. At least three Twin Cities churches have voted to bar clergy from performing civil marriages. The United Church of Christ says that dozens of its churches across the country have passed similar resolutions and that individual clergy have refused to sign marriage certificates for years.
If this is a burgeoning movement, it's an unusually quiet one, according to John Green of the Pew Forum for Religion & Public Life. "Most churches that would have these feelings would be the type to mobilize for the legalization of same-sex marriages rather than just not participate in marriage at all."
When the Massachusetts Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage in 2003, it set off a national debate that culminated in 2004 with voters in 11 states going to the polls to decide on amendments that defined marriage strictly as a union between one man and one woman. In Minnesota, a similar amendment was defeated in the state Senate in 2005, but that did nothing to change the fact that gay couples can't legally marry.
In early 2006, with state lawmakers still wrangling over the issue, the Lyndale United Church of Christ unanimously voted to pass a resolution instructing its clergy to stop signing marriage certificates on church grounds. Lyndale's pastor, Reverend Don Portwood, took it a step further, vowing not to sign marriage certificates anywhere. "When a law is not morally right, we are not going to follow it," he says, invoking the language of the Civil Rights Movement.
Just weeks later, Mayflower Church passed a similar measure. The congregation of 650 voted overwhelmingly in favor of the proposal. "The churches of the Twin Cities are definitely at the forefront of a movement," says Rev. Sarah Campbell. "Our partnership with the state becomes impossible when we can't agree on a basic definition of marriage."
First Congregational Church, also of Minneapolis, became the third church to join the protest when it approved a ban on legal marriage in early 2007. David Anger, who had his union with longtime partner Jim Broberg blessed there in 1991, says the time has come to force the issue. "There can't be a gay door and a straight door," he argues.
A recent report by a Minnesota campaign called Project 515 has identified hundreds of state statutes that benefit legally married couples but exclude same-sex partners. One dictates that the spouse of a patient is the first person consulted if a patient can't consent to treatment. Another allows married couples to be included in joint health or accident insurance policies. And if a person in a straight marriage is murdered, the spouse is entitled to restitution—not so for gay couples. "This is a human rights issue," argues Project 515 spokeswoman Marie Davis.
Addressing the issue, however, is more difficult than documenting it. At Mayflower, there were concerns over alienating straight couples, and the congregation considered having a judge come in to sign the legal documents. At First Congregational, it was suggested that maybe there could be a spot in the chapel designated for the signing.
Ultimately, the three churches that passed the ban decided against making any concessions. "Seventy-five dollars for a judge and 30 minutes plus parking is such a small inconvenience compared to what same-sex couples experience," says Lyndale's Portwood.
WTF ping...
Anita Hill changed professions I see.
gag - cacckk-cacck!
Marriage isn’t supposed to be a business.
“Ultimately, the three churches that passed the ban decided against making any concessions. “Seventy-five dollars for a judge and 30 minutes plus parking is such a small inconvenience compared to what same-sex couples experience,” says Lyndale’s Portwood.”
Nothing compared to what unrepentant same-sex couples will experience later on...
Marriage between one man and one woman is the cornerstone of American society.
Marriage is ordained by God, confirmed by law, and is the glue of the American family.
It is sad that the very institution, the church, that should be at the forefront of this cultural battle in defending marriage, is the very one that is advocating for the destruction of it.
I have faith in the American people that they understand and appreciate dearly the blessings of marriage and how strong marriages create strong families and strong families create a strong America.
Oy vey.
ALL churches and other religious groups should stop following orders from the government about marriage. They wouldn’t take orders from the government regarding any other religious ritual or recognition, so why this one? If a church doesn’t believe in divorce, it doesn’t recognize them just because the government declares a church member divorced. If you want to get married in the Catholic Church, the Church requires you to get permission from the government first in the form of a license. But if you later get a government-issued divorce, the Church doesn’t recognize it. How much sense does this make?
This article really needs a BARF alert after the title. SICKOs on parade.
All of you: so eloquently spoken!
This is an interesting article. The word Christian is NEVER used in the article. The word Christ appears twice because it happens to be in the name of church. Obviously, secular humanism has taken over a lot of territory in this post modern era.
BUZZZZZ Sorry wrong answer.
You are not in either business. God is.
Awwwwww. That’s so cute.
Just because the sign out front says "church" doesn't mean it it one.
This is what we have gotten out of years of "sensitivity" training and "diversity" education.
Hey McGowan, men can’t have babies. Deal with that.
Translation: No one wanted to be labeled a "bigot" by the rest of the congregation.
I did stand up against it at a church, btw, and that's what happened to me.
On the other hand, maybe every single member of this congregation is as loopy as the guy who made the proposition.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.