HOME
SUNDAY SCHEDULE
NEWSLETTER
CALENDAR
DIRECTIONS
LEADERSHIP
PROGRAMS
OUR BELIEFS
SERMONS
ABOUT US
CONTACT US

The following text was transcribed from a tape recording of the sermon. Susan Maginn does not write her sermons, but rather speaks from an outline.

As many of you know there was a service here on March 27th. [See Gay Marriage Ceremony.] Lesley Proud and Sally Nelson were married here. Their wedding was a beautiful celebration of the 15 years they have spent together, the two sons that they have raised and the business that they started together. For those of you that were here, you know that it was a beautiful and very powerful service. The balcony was full of press people.

After the service we went out into this glorious spring day and I was able to watch Lesley and Sally as they addressed the press. They were surrounded by cameras and microphones and one woman said, "You know that the Missouri House of Representatives is about to pass something that will allow the state to vote in November on whether to put an amendment in the constitution to ban same-sex marriages. What do you think about that?" And Lesley said, "I just wish that people were not so afraid of things that they do not understand." And that just really stuck with me. They handled the press beautifully.

I was also really proud of the press for not making a spectacle of this but really asking questions that were respectful of Lesley and Sally. I am also very proud of Daniel for taking the risk that he did to do this service. We knew that there was the possibility of him being charged, possibly being in jail for up to 15 days and paying a fine. Fortunately, none of that happened, but that was a risk that he had to be willing to face when he did that service.

Since last week, I have been re-reading some of Martin Luther King's writings on non-violent direct action. And he defines non-violent direct action as something that dramatizes an issue so that it cannot be ignored. It does not create tension - the event itself does not create tension, but rather, it brings to the surface tension that already exists. One who dramatizes this issue does so openly and lovingly. And I think we can all be proud that Daniel led a service that really did live up to that last week.

It was an act of disobedience in that we signed an affidavit saying that Daniel believes that this wedding should be considered legal. And then on Monday he took it to the courthouse and went to the Bureau of Marriage Licenses and asked to submit this as a marriage license, knowing full well that they would say 'No', which they did. And he went up to the Recorder of Deeds and filed it successfully.

Now I was notified a couple days ago that St. Charles County was appalled that Daniel was able to file this affidavit. The commissioner said that they would never allow that. Well, basically an affidavit is just the filing of an opinion. So I have been considering what we can do next. I would love to see a consistent flow of affidavits in St. Louis County and perhaps to St. Charles County to see how that goes. And I have begun to think of what could be done in the future, to continue this effort.

I am also interested in something that is happening in New York right now. Gay couples are organizing every Wednesday morning - they go to the Bureau of Marriage Licenses for the City of New York and simply ask for a marriage license - knowing that they will be denied and they openly and lovingly turn away and come back next Wednesday. But that to me is really where this issue lives and where this non-violent direct action is probably most in line with Martin Luther King's definition of it. Where the issue is dramatized so that it cannot be ignored, because really the heart of the issue is gay couples requesting marriage licenses and what better place to do that than the office that grants marriage licenses and have the issue be dramatized in such a way that they are turned away and they continue coming back. So I can see people doing that here in St. Louis as well.

We created an organization called Straight People for Gay Marriage that meets here every Thursday. We are going to be marching in parades with a big banner that says Straight People for Gay Marriage - in the Kirkwood Greentree parade and also in the 4th of July parade in Webster Groves. We are putting ads in the papers - just educating people on civil marriage as a civil right.

So I have obviously been thinking about things that we can do to extend what we have already started, but what is really at the base of this is considering this question: What is our calling? Now as a seminary student and as an aspiring minister, this is a question that I have heard quite a lot in recent years - this question of what is your calling. And I have some discomforts with this question because implicit in this is that ministers are special in that they are called by God to do x, y and z.

My comfort level with this question goes up exponentially when I think of all people as having a calling. What I understand to be a calling is that we have something to give. And we give it. It is really that simple - that we know what it is that we have to give and we give it to the world. I believe all people have the potential to fulfill that kind of calling. And I also believe that organizations have the capacity to fulfill that kind of calling.

We here at Eliot Chapel are considering that as we are re-writing our mission statement - What is our calling, as a congregation? What is it that we have to offer the larger world? And I think about what is the calling of Unitarians - right now - especially at this point in our country's history. What is it that Unitarians have to offer the world? What is it that we have to give? And I believe - long before this gay marriage issue erupted in our country - I believe that there are two things that we have to offer - more than two, but really two things that distinguish us from other religions.

First is our weekly experience with religious pluralism where we have people of different theological perspectives capable of sitting in the same worship service. That to me is profound. It is the seed of world peace. But the second thing is our belief in civil rights for gay people. If you haven't noticed, the words 'religion' and 'civil rights for gay people' rarely go hand in hand. But it does go hand in hand for us as we believe in the inherent worth and dignity of each person. I think that we can all be proud of what happened last week as a way of us saying what it is that we have to offer the St. Louis [area] by simply doing what we have done for so many years - by joining two people in a life-long commitment who happen to be of the same gender.

I think there are three places for a congregation to be in: preservation, frustration and vision.

When a congregation is in a state of preservation their concern is solely the preservation of congregational life - all of its efforts are focused on the sustenance of the congregational life. It is very insulated in its exclusive focus on the sustenance of the congregation.

When a congregation is at the level of frustration, the congregation looks beyond the congregational walls, but it is often to say something like, "Uh, isn't it just terrible that is happening! I hate that. Oh well, what are you gonna do?" We have all been there - frustration, staying at the level of complaining about it, but not really doing anything about it.

The third place to be is in the place of vision. This place of calling - where a congregation has a sense of what they have to offer the larger community and they seek out ways to bring that message, to bring that experience to the larger community.

Now one of the complications, you could say, of being a congregation of vision, is that you are going to be challenged by those who do not agree with you. We have gotten calls and emails letting us know that this is not OK with the Bible that we are doing this - that God does not agree with what we are doing. Other people are really concerned that we don't know what we are doing, that surely we haven't read these certain passages in the bible because if we had we would know if was a terrible mistake.

And I want to offer you a few alternative perspectives on the bible so that you address similar questions should you be so challenged. We have a protester outside today as you may have noticed. If I just have a few minutes to respond to someone who says, "Haven't you read Romans? Haven't you read Corinthians? Haven't you read Leviticus?" my first response is: consider that there is more in the bible condoning slavery than there is condemning homosexuality. There are more passages in the Bible that are in favor of slavery than there are against homosexuality. And Jesus, as quoted in the bible, never said anything about homosexuality, not a word. And that is usually where I leave it. However, I also find it really interesting that Jesus did not have a traditional family life - he spent most of his time with 12 men. I have also learned from all of my biblical teachers how important it is to consider the context when you are looking at any passage in the bible - that you look at the context in which the passage was written. And for the Old Testament and passages like Leviticus which says that homosexuality is bad, you have to consider the fact that the culture in which that was written in, there was a real concern for the very survival of the community - that reproduction was really important. Now, given that we live in a world where we have an overpopulated planet, I think we can revaluate the context in which we are reading these passages. I could go on and on about this, but I wanted to just give you some talking points so that if you are challenged on this issue, that you have some points to talk about from a biblical perspective.

Something that I have heard congregation members talk about and I have also read quite a bit about on a national level - is the question of where this is all going, what are we aspiring to when we say that we are in favor of gay marriage, when we say that we are in favor of civil rights for gay people? I hear people calling for not only civil unions for gay couples but civil unions for all and marriages as a religious rite for those who choose it.

This is an idea that I think will take quite a bit of time for people to understand but I think it is really worth considering. That civil rights are something granted by the state and protected by the state and that civil unions can be an expression of that legal right, that license that is granted by the state. Marriage is left for religion. So you can be Catholic and say that a civil union is up to the state - that is their business - but we are not going to bless same-sex marriages in our church - as the Catholic church says. Just as many Jewish synagogues say that we will not marry anyone except couples that are both Jewish. Just as the Catholic church says that we will not marry couples where one person has been divorced until that marriage has been annulled, if it can be annulled. But that is religious business. And I think right now we have people who have very strong religious convictions projecting those convictions onto the legal system. We need to start considering how those can be separated.

Weddings are a transformational event. They are phenomenal ceremonies. I always cry at weddings and it takes every ounce of strength that I have since I have actually been leading weddings in the past year to not cry as I am leading a wedding. It is such an honor to be a part of a couple's life and to really get to know them in the months and weeks leading up to their ceremony, get to know their relationship so that when the wedding actually happens, I can really see that in that moment when their vows are exchanged - vows like we heard earlier - that their lives are sealed together forever. Regardless of what happens, their lives are forever sealed.

I have married three or four couples in this building. Actually the first wedding I did was for two women. And what has happened to me in recent months is that I have discovered that I am no longer willing to send gay couples out those doors into a world of inequality, into a world where they are not allowed the societal structures that we have created to support American families. They are not able to get family benefits of social security, of joint tax returns, of family health care, of hospital access as we heard earlier, of children's custody - those rights and responsibilities. I am no longer willing to send gay couples out those doors into a world where they are basically not welcome.

Martin Luther King said that "The arc of the universe is long, but it bends toward justice."

• 150 years ago, our country believed that the foundation of our nation was dependent on slavery and so they fought against abolition. But the arc of justice leaned into freedom.
• 100 years ago, our country believed that the foundation of our nation was dependent on the exclusively male vote and so they fought against women's rights. But the arc of justice leaned into equality.
• 50 years ago, our country believed that the foundation of our nation was dependent on same race marriage and so they fought against making interracial marriage legal. But the arc of justice leaned toward a love that transcends race.
• Today our country believes that the foundation of our nation is dependent on heterosexual marriage and so they fight against marriage as a civil right for all Americans. But the arc of justice is still leaning.

I do believe that in my lifetime I will sign marriage licenses for gay and lesbian couples. I believe that the arc toward justice is more powerful than its threats - given time, but that justice has never just happened on it's own with the inevitable passing of time. It is the human capacity for love and compassion that moves that arc toward justice. It is the tireless effort of community organizers, lobbyists and protesters that moves that arc toward justice. It is the brave couples who dare to expose their personal lives so that others may see that their love is worthy. Those couples who love each other day in and day out in a culture that surrounds them with hatred, injustice and even violence.

These are the people who carry the heavy arc toward justice today. For us straight people, today's arc is not ours to carry. It is not our personal burden to bear and it is not our personal victory to claim. But we must clear the way to ensure safety of their struggle and the completion of their task. Our gay brothers and lesbian sisters are at risk when they come out of the closet in a state like Missouri. Some fear for their livelihoods and some fear for their very lives. They need us to speak out on their behalf. How will we respond? Will we watch as our state marches toward a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage? Will we watch as our state marches toward taking away state funding to any organization that condones protection for its gay and lesbian employees? I believe this arc toward justice will happen, but not on its own and it will not happen without all of us.

When the arc of justice has had her say, we will send gay couples through those doors into a world of acceptance. On that day, we will all walk taller in a world of courage, love and vision.

May it be so.
Amen.

 Home   Sunday Schedule   Newsletter   Calendar   Directions   Leadership   Programs   Our Beliefs   Sermons   About Us   Contact Us