The Conversion of Phillip by a Gender Transgressive Foreigner & MARRIAGE from PRES OBAMA & President Obama: Same-Sex Couples Should Be Able To Wed & Gay Marriage Ban Passes In North Carolina 9MAI12

ON the day after N Carolina voters passed law banning same sex marriage and civil unions (actually all civil unions, surprise N Carolina voters who didn't read the fine print!) and on the day Pres Obama came out in support of same sex marriage and civil unions, I found this sermon (and I wasn't looking for it) buy Rev Nadia Bolz-Weber, the Sarcastic Lutheran, on the issue of the Church and inclusion and it seems appropriate to post all three articles together to give all of us something to think about...
 By Nadia Bolz Weber 
3 years ago I preached a sermon on Phillip and the Ethiopian Eunuch that became seminal to the identity of House for All Sinners and Saints.  This text came up in the lectionary again this week and I was asked to preach it again.  What follows is my adaptation.  The audio is not available due to a technical glitch.
Acts 8:26-40
The 1980s pop star Tiffany has a hermaphrodite[1] stalker who helped me write this sermon 3 years ago. Kelli, the stalker in question, doesn’t know that she helped me.  All she did was walk into St Mark’s coffee shop where I was struggling to write a sermon about Phillip and the Ethiopian Eunuch.  This shocked me because there is a documentary called I think We’re Alone Now – about her and another Tiffany obsessed fan, and I had literally watched it just 2 days before. And then she walked in weird, right?  But I was ashamed that, before I could stop myself, I felt disgust or something close to is, at how both male and female she seemed, not androgynous like David Bowie or Annie Lenox; Kelli had long hair like a woman and a face that seemed both female and male, and breasts and a man’s midsection and thick legs. I’ve been around gay men and queer gals and drag queens and transgender folks most my life and yet I felt disgust the day I saw an intersex woman in a Denver coffee shop.
And that didn’t feel good since I had just written the first draft of a pretty self-congratulatory sermon on inclusion in which I take a couple pot-shots at Christians who aren’t as “open and affirming” of the GLBTQ community as we are at House for All Sinners and Saints.
My denomination had been fighting about the issue of human sexuality for years at this point.  The argument was over the ordination of GLBTQ folks and if Lutheran pastors would be allowed to preside at same-gender unions.
And the argument my denomination was having about inclusion “The Gays” mirrored the argument 40 years earlier around the ordination of women which mirrored the argument in the early church around inclusion of Gentiles. Which means that disagreements over “inclusion” happened approximately 20 minutes after Christianity started.
See, much like the early church who were convinced that Gentiles could only become Christians if they changed into being Jews first (which, for the record, involved a rather unpleasant process for the fellas), well, like that, a segment of the church today thinks that if we extend the roof of the tent to include “the gays” then the whole thing will come crashing down around us. For them, the tent of the church must be protected from being stretched too thin and collapsing in on itself. Some Protectors Of The Tent suggest that we must “evangelize” the gays – ie. change them into us before they will fit. Several organizations exist to help queer folks “pray away the gay” (which, for the record, involves a rather unpleasant process for everyone and oh, by the way… doesn’t work) Meanwhile the other side of the church, the liberal side, is all about “inclusion”;  we are the Extenders of the Tent and must stretch the tent to include the marginalized, the less fortunate, the minorities. Our job is to extend the tent until everyone fits because we believe in inclusion. And this was the point of the mediocre and self-congratulatory sermon I wrote about the Ethiopian Eunuch.
But there I was, the pastor of a GLBTQ “inclusive” congregation and I feel revulsion at seeing an intersex person.  It was humbling.  And it made me face in a very real way, the limitations of “inclusion”.  If my salvation is in my ability to be more inclusive than the next pastor, then there are several problems with this.  One, I will always, always encounter someone: intersex people, Republicans, criminals, Ann Coulter etc who I don’t want in the tent with me.  Two, inclusion cannot save me.  Because sometimes while I am writing a sermon about how wonderfully inclusive we are of sexual minorities a intersex celebrity stalker walks into the coffee shop and I react with something far from a gracious desire to include them and well,  then I have to re-write a perfectly bad sermon.
So instead I wrote about how a few weeks earlier, our dear Stuart had shown up to liturgy wearing slacks and button down shirt rather than his normal ironic Grease Monkey jacket and jeans.  Earlier that day he had stood as Godfather and baptismal sponsor for the child of a straight couple, Charlie and Duffy (who now are part of this church) who had known Stuart for a number of years.  Apparently after the baptism there was a little reception back at Charlie and Duffy’s house.  To Stuart’s surprise they got all of their guests attention so they could say a few words about why they had chosen Stuart as their child’s godparent.  We chose you Stuart they said because for most of your life you have pursued Christ and Christ’s church even though as a Gay Man all you’ve heard from the church is that ‘there is no love for you here’.  I heard that story as his friends saying to him you, Stuart convert us again and again to this faith.
Growing up I always heard the Phillip and the Eunuch story called the Conversion Of The Ethiopian Eunuch. I was always told that the message of this text was that we should tell everyone we meet about Jesus because in doing so we might save them.  We might convert them.  We might change them into being us. But after thinking about what Charlie and Duffy said about Stuart I began wanting to call this story from Acts not the Conversion of the Ethiopian Eunuch, but the conversion of Phillip.
Because in the story the Eunuch was riding along the desert road in his chariot reading Isaiah, returning from Jerusalem having gone there to worship. But If he was reading Isaiah surely he was also familiar with Deuteronomy, specifically 23:1 which says No one whose testicles are cut off or whose penis is cut off shall be admitted to the assembly of the Lord.  (hands up if you had that one as a memory verse growing up)
The point is that this law strictly forbids a Eunuch from entering the temple.  Their transgression of gender binaries and the inability to fit in proper categories made them profane by nature.  They do not fit in the tent.  But the Eunuch went to Jerusalem to worship despite the fact that in all likelihood he would be turned away by the religious establishment.  The Eunuch sought God anyway despite the fact that he had heard there is no love for you here.
So, when the Spirit guided Phillip to that road in the desert I wonder if she guided him to his own conversion. When Phillip joined this person who sought to worship God despite his exclusion from the tent, maybe it was Phillip himself who was converted to the faith.  It was perhaps even a mutual conversion.  Maybe because Phillip and the Eunuch only asked each other questions.  If you go back and read it you’ll see that the only commands came from God and the command was go and join.  Go and join the other.  What we don’t know is if the Spirit also gave the Eunuch a command to invite.  Invite this nice Jewish boy – representative of all that clings to the law and rejects you from God’s house.  Invite him to sit by you.  Go…join…invite…ask questions. Perhaps Phillip in his encounter with this gender transgressive foreigner learned what seeking the Lord looks like.
I started to think that maybe I can’t actually know what this Jesus following thing is about unless I too have the stranger show me.  Or maybe even an intersex person.  I regret not meeting Kelli, not having her join me at my table, not asking her questions. And this is far more than “inclusion”. Inclusion isn’t the right word at all because it sounds like in our niceness and virtue we are allowing “them” to join us – like we are judging another group of people to be worthy to be included in the tent.  “inclusion” seems like a small thing.  A charity.  A mercy. But the truth is that I need the equivalent of my Ethiopian Eunuch to show me the faith.  We continually need the stranger, the foreigner, the “other” to show us water in the desert.  We need to hear here is water in the desert, so what is to keep me the eunuch from being baptized? or me the queer or me the intersex, or me the illiterate or me the founder of Focus on the Family.  Until we face the difficulty of that question and come up as Phillip did with no answer…until then we just look at the seemingly limited space under the tent and either think it’s our job to change people so they fit or its our job to extend the roof so that they fit.  Either way, it’s misguided because …it’s not our tent.  It’s God’s tent. The wideness of the tent of the Lord should concern me only insofar as it points to the gracious nature of a loving God who became flesh and entered into our humanity.  The wideness of the tent should only concern me insofar as it  points to the great mercy and love of a God who welcomes us all as friends.
So maybe here in this story of the conversion of Phillip and the Eunuch is some hope for the church and maybe society itself.  That under God’s really big tent we might ask questions, invite those who represent the establishment to come and sit by us, to stay in the scriptures, to be converted anew by the strange and the stranger, to see where there is water in the desert, to enter fully into the waters of God’s mercy with foreigners, with the “not us”. And to go on our way rejoicing having converted each other to this beautiful, dangerous expansive life of faith.

---

[1] The term “hermaphrodite” is generally considered offensive but it more known and understood  (however imperfectly) than the more appropriate term “interest” the term which is then used throughout the sermon.  I chose to start with the familiar term and switch to the appropriate one rather than starting with a language lesson. In no way am I intending offense, rather I am confessing my unfortunate reaction.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/nadiabolzweber/2012/05/the-conversion-of-phillip-by-a-gender-transgressive-foreigner/

MARRIAGE-FROM PRESIDENT OBAMA
Today, I was asked a direct question and gave a direct answer:

I believe that same-sex couples should be allowed to marry.

I hope you'll take a moment to watch the conversation, consider it, and weigh in yourself on behalf of marriage equality:

http://my.barackobama.com/Marriage

I've always believed that gay and lesbian Americans should be treated fairly and equally. I was reluctant to use the term marriage because of the very powerful traditions it evokes. And I thought civil union laws that conferred legal rights upon gay and lesbian couples were a solution.

But over the course of several years I've talked to friends and family about this. I've thought about members of my staff in long-term, committed, same-sex relationships who are raising kids together. Through our efforts to end the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy, I've gotten to know some of the gay and lesbian troops who are serving our country with honor and distinction.

What I've come to realize is that for loving, same-sex couples, the denial of marriage equality means that, in their eyes and the eyes of their children, they are still considered less than full citizens.

Even at my own dinner table, when I look at Sasha and Malia, who have friends whose parents are same-sex couples, I know it wouldn't dawn on them that their friends' parents should be treated differently.

So I decided it was time to affirm my personal belief that same-sex couples should be allowed to marry.

I respect the beliefs of others, and the right of religious institutions to act in accordance with their own doctrines. But I believe that in the eyes of the law, all Americans should be treated equally. And where states enact same-sex marriage, no federal act should invalidate them.

Thank you,

Barack 

President Obama: Same-Sex Couples Should Be Able To Wed

by Eyder Peralta

President Obama On ABC News

Enlarge Carolyn Kaster/AP President Barack Obama is seen on a monitor in the White House briefing room in Washington, Wednesday. President Barack Obama told an ABC interviewer that he supports gay marriage.

In an interview with ABC News, President Obama declared his support for gay marriage. This marks a departure from the president's previous stance, which has repeatedly been described as "evolving."
Here's the money quote from ABC's OTUS blog:

"I have to tell you that over the course of several years as I have talked to friends and family and neighbors when I think about members of my own staff who are in incredibly committed monogamous relationships, same-sex relationships, who are raising kids together, when I think about those soldiers or airmen or marines or sailors who are out there fighting on my behalf and yet feel constrained, even now that Don't Ask Don't Tell is gone, because they are not able to commit themselves in a marriage, at a certain point I've just concluded that for me personally it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same sex couples should be able to get married."

In the interview with ABC's Robin Roberts, the president also said where Americans stand on gay marriage depends on their generation.
"You know, Malia and Sasha, they have friends whose parents are same-sex couples," the president said. "There have been times where Michelle and I have been sitting around the dinner table and we're talking about their friends and their parents and Malia and Sasha, it wouldn't dawn on them that somehow their friends' parents would be treated differently. It doesn't make sense to them and frankly, that's the kind of thing that prompts a change in perspective."
The interview comes about a week after Vice President Joe Biden said he supported gay marriage on Meet The Press. That put the president's own position in the spotlight.
Update at 5:11 p.m. ET. Announcement Comes 'Too Late':
The Log Cabin Republicans, a group of GOP members who support gay rights, say the president's announcement is a "a day late and a dollar short."
"Log Cabin Republicans appreciate that President Obama has finally come in line with leaders like Vice President Dick Cheney on this issue, but LGBT Americans are right to be angry that this calculated announcement comes too late to be of any use to the people of North Carolina, or any of the other states that have addressed this issue on his watch," R. Clarke Cooper, Log Cabin Republicans Executive Director, said in a statement.
Update at 4:39 p.m. ET. Obama On The Religious Aspect:
Good Morning America has added a little bit more of Obama's interview. He gave this answer when he was asked about first lady Michelle Obama's role in his decision:

"This is something that, you know, we've talked about over the years and she, you know, she feels the same way, she feels the same way that I do. And that is that, in the end the values that I care most deeply about and she cares most deeply about is how we treat other people and, you know, I, you know, we are both practicing Christians and obviously this position may be considered to put us at odds with the views of others but, you know, when we think about our faith, the thing at root that we think about is, not only Christ sacrificing himself on our behalf, but it's also the Golden Rule, you know, treat others the way you would want to be treated. And I think that's what we try to impart to our kids and that's what motivates me as president and I figure the most consistent I can be in being true to those precepts, the better I'll be as a as a dad and a husband and, hopefully, the better I'll be as president."

Update at 4:34 p.m. ET. Romney Reaffirms His Position:
During a stop in Oklahoma City, Mitt Romney, the presumptive Republican nominee for president, reaffirmed his position that marriage should be between a man and a woman.
He acknowledged that the issue was a "tender" and "sensitive" one but said that he has the same view "I've had since running for office."
Update at 4:01 p.m. ET. A Bit More On The Politics:
As we noted earlier, one of the big questions is how this pivot by the president will play in November. It's a political gamble for sure. Over at the Washington Post, Chris Cillizza writes that on plus side, this move may re-ignite Obama's base and bring young people, who had such a huge effect in 2008, to the polls. On the negative side, this could shrink Obama's support from the black community and could hurt his chances in Virginia and North Carolina, two hugely important states.
Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign, which advocates for gay rights, says that this decision won't make much difference politically.
"I think at the end of the day, this election will continue to be about the economy and about economic struggles we all face," Solomese told our colleague Liz Halloran. "As all contests like this, it will also be a question of character. What the president demonstrated today is that he is a person of deep conviction."
Mark Knoller, White House correspondent for CBS Radio, says on Twitter that Obama administration officials say this won't be a "cornerstone" of the president's campaign and "don't think it will have a bearing on the outcome."
That's certainly not what Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council, which advocates for a Christian organization that advocates for a traditional family unit, told NPR's Liz Halloran.
"What everyone said was not going to be an issue in this election is now an issue," Perkins said. "The president has made it an issue. this provides a very clear contrast between him and Mitt Romney. I think [Romney] may have been handed the key to support from social conservatives. Obama just turned up the heat and intensity."
Perkins also noted that 10 of the 16 battleground states have passed amendments barring gay marriage.
Update at 3:50 p.m. ET. Republican Reaction:
Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus sent this statement to reporters:

"While President Obama has played politics on this issue, the Republican Party and our presumptive nominee Mitt Romney have been clear. We support maintaining marriage between one man and one woman and would oppose any attempts to change that."

Update at 3:43 p.m. ET. Where Does The Country Stand?:
According to the latest Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, Americans are almost evenly divided on the issue.
"46% favor allowing gays and lesbians to marry legally, while 44% are opposed," Pew reports.
National opinion, however, has been shifting in favor of gay marriage. Perhaps indicative of that fact: When ABC News cut in to its programming to deliver the news, they interrupted a segment featuring Tim Gunn, a gay TV fashion guru. When NBC interrupted its programming to deliver the news, it cut into the Ellen Degeneres Show. Degeneres is also gay.
Update at 3:32 p.m. ET. Audio Of The Interview:
Note we've added audio of the two-minute clip released by ABC News at the top of this post. The rest of the interview is set to air on ABC World News tonight and tomorrow morning on Good Morning America.
Update at 3:28 p.m. ET. 'A Historic Moment':
Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign, told NPR's Liz Halloran this was a "historic moment."
"I think that the president spoke from his heart, from a place of common humanity," Solomese said. "His words give a great deal to give hope to LGBT Americans that, as he has always said, he sees them as a part of the American fabric. The leadership of the president, the words of the president, his coming out in support of an issue as important as marriage equality, and around which many are still struggling, still on a journey, will help those people."
Update at 3:17 p.m. ET. North Carolina And The General Election:
This policy shift from the president was also made more dramatic because of yesterday's vote in North Carolina, which changed the constitution making all gay unions illegal.
It was a rare occasion where African Americans and Republicans voted on the same side of an issue. It's something that will almost certainly come into play during the November election.
The big question is, of course, whether this position by the president will erode his overwhelming support from African Americans.
A New York Times/CBS News Poll from February found that only 29 percent of black respondents said gays should be allowed to marry. 23 percent said they should be allowed to form civil unions.
Update at 3:13 p.m. ET. 'Stood On The Side Of Broader Equality':
ABC has posted a two-minute video on its website. In it Obama says that he has always "stood on the side of broader equality" for gay community. For a long time, he said, he thought that civil unions would be enough. But, now, that view has evolved, Obama said, and he now believes same sex couples should be allowed to get married.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2012/05/09/152356770/president-obama-gay-marriage-should-be-legal?sc=nl&cc=brk-20120509-1509

Gay Marriage Ban Passes In North Carolina

by Eyder Peralta

North Carolina voters decided to rewrite the state constitution, passing an amendment that makes the only recognized, domestic legal union a marriage between a man and a woman.
The AP made that projection based on an actual tally of votes. With 35 percent of the vote counted, 58 percent of those casting ballots voted in favor of the amendment, making North Carolina the 30th state to adopt such a measure.
The Charlotte Observer reports that the amendment gained national attention, bringing in more than $3.5 million in donations. The paper adds:

"Supporters of the amendment said it would ensure the preservation of traditional families. In addition, they say, it means marriage has an actual definition in the state constitution — and is not subject to definition by 'activist judges' or legislators.
"Opponents said the amendment would be devastating to unmarried women and their children. They said it would strip them of domestic violence protections, and their children would lose health benefits."

  During the run up to the vote, former President Bill Clinton recorded phone messages asking voters to reject the measure, while the Rev. Billy Graham endorsed the amendment in full page ads that ran in 14 of the state's newspapers.
As Liz reported earlier, the North Carolina-based Public Policy Polling found that many of the voters did not understand the intricacies of the amendment. The state already had a ban on gay marriage, but this amendment goes further by barring same-sex civil unions.
Our Original Post Continues:
A referendum that would outlaw same-sex marriage and civil unions is driving a high turnout in North Carolina.
As Liz reported earlier, nationally the vote is symbolic, even if former President Bill Clinton and the Rev. Billy Graham jumped in on opposite sides of the debate. Still it's a contentious issue in the state and a mirror of the kind of debate happening nationwide.
Coincidentally, the presidential campaign was drawn into the conversation this week. On Meet the Press, Vice President Joe Biden expressed his support for gay marriage. President Obama has not gone that far, and his position was further highlighted when his education secretary, Arne Duncan, also expressed his support.
The Charlotte Observer reports that the referendum is likely to pass and that the controversial measure might push turnout to record levels. The paper reports:

"Gary Bartlett, the state elections supervisor, told NewsChannel 36, the Observer's news partner, late Tuesday morning that the state-wide turnout could exceed 37 percent. That would make 2012's turnout the biggest for a primary in a quarter-century, Bartlett said.
"Several people questioned by The Observer at precinct places said they were voting for a variety of reasons, but each mentioned Amendment One."

Polls in the state have now closed. We'll update this post as the votes are tallied.
Update at 9:11 p.m. ET. Marriage Amendment Leads:
With 30 percent of the precincts reporting, 57 percent of voters approve of the constitutional amendment.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2012/05/08/152297983/gay-marriage-referendum-drives-high-turnout-in-north-carolina?sc=nl&cc=brk-20120508-2130