Yesterday's SF Chronicle was plastered with a large picture of Archbishop George Niederauer who has come under attack for knowingly (or un-knowingly) served communion to two members of the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, a drag-queen dressing justice-seeking group in San Francisco. The furor erupted when folks started asking if the Archbishop knowingly, or even possibly subversively, served the elements of communion to cross-dressing persons in a mass taking place in the middle of the Castro Street Faire. The archbishop has spun things a bit offering an oligatory (my words) apology for his actions. The SS troops of Fox News stormed into the affair, again lambasting the "SF Values" that characterize not just the city across the Bay Bridge, but most of the Bay Area Community. The whole affair really set me off - and got me writing (even if I'm supposed to be offline for vacation). Here's why.
1. Communion is more than a ritual, it's a sacrament (a visible expression of an invisible grace). So whether it's given to Sister Delta Goodhand, a homeless man who got dealt a bad hand, or to Bill O'Reilly, we believe and the ecumenical church community affirms, that communion is about both receiving the Love of God in Jesus the Christ and participating in it. So it's totally appropriate to share it.
2. Many complained that communion had been cheapened by serving it to the Sisters. Interesting. Are those that complained Catholic, Christians or followers of Jesus? Is Bill O'Reilly Catholic or Christian? If not what does he care? We believe - at least in my reformed family of followers of Jesus - that the simple bread and wine/juice become something mysteriously and powerfully real not by our efforts but by God's presence in our worshipping and seeking gathered community of faith. So how can we cheapen what only God's Spirit can make worthy or full of meaning both experiential and spiritual?
3. The article goes on to say that the Archbishop was simply following the "general sacramental principal" that you don't deny the sacrement to someone who request it. Interesting, for I myself a Anglo-American 30-something heterosexual male have been refused communion in mass at least half a dozen times in my life, not becuase of my sexual acitivty or preference, my clothing, or my politics, but because I follow Jesus in a protestant, or non-Catholic, way. So I'm not sure what the general sacramental principal is, because I've not experienced that. It seems to be more about church laws and church dogmatics than about inclusivity. Besides the Catholic church, under the leadership of the current Pope, affirmed and re-affirmed that the Catholic Church alone is the true church of Christ on Earth in a document entitled Dominus Iesus.
4. I was struck in the article - you have to read to the end of it - to read the included note from Sister Deltagoodhand, one of the two who received communion, who wrote to the church the following words: "Just a quick note to recognize the wonderful mass yesterday at your Church. Your entire congregation was so welcoming and it was great to be able to participate. You are a wonderfully inclusive Church." From my read of those words, they didn't come it to destroy or subvert things, nor did they seek to do so through the media (of course I admit I'm naive). They entered a worship gathering, were invited to be both present and participants, and left feeling like the Church, that church in particular, could not only have a place for them, but be the place for them. Isn't that what we're supposed to be about? Isn't that what Jesus taught: "Love your neighbor as God has loved you."?
You can read the article online HERE.
You can also read a great "Two Cents" photo-montage piece with diverse responses to the article and event HERE.
I find this whole event and media re-presentation challenging because of the question it asks underneath it all. SF Gate isn't really interested in declining church attendance, or imploding church systems, or even inclusivity and what it means in a Christ-centered and faith community-forming way. Why is it that we seem to always want to define who we are but who we aren't or who we won't let in? I think it's a theological or philisophical issue. In the end the whole hoopla is about who is and isn't part of the church, who is and isn't welcome, and who should be and shouldn't be welcomed. What a tragedy if we let Bill O'Reilly or our political parties shape and form our faith communities! I think our issues, and our struggles with how we form, articulate and define our "identity" as both individuals and communities reflects our brokeness - that "sin" that is so deeply embedded in who we are as human beings. Jesus himself challenged this, inviting all of us to find our definition of who we are in our relationship with God. We not Jew or Gentile, Free or Slave, Male or Female (as Paul writes in 1 Cornithians)....we're not gay or straight, righteous or of the devil...in God we are God's children. In Christ we're invited to claim that promise through the powerful mystery of the death and resurrection of Christ. By God's Spirit we're empowered to live lives with a new sense of identity, the one we're meant to live from and into....that we are the beloved children of God.
That's what following Jesus is all about. It's what the meaning of communion is and the meaning that it makes - a true sacramental marker of community - that in Christ the walls are broken down...walls that divide us from each other, from God, and from who we are created to really be. It's the power of the mysterious sign and symbol of communion - as we share the cup and bread we experience solidarity, we participate in saving community and we are connected through the only force in the Universe that can connect us together: the Living God.
Any thoughts?
2 comments:
The Sisters asked for communion and they received it. I don't understand why Bill O'Rotten thought this was newsworthy. It's not. I have been denied communion and I didn't understand that either. It was spiritually hurtful. It is man's law, not God's. My email has been hit hard on this subject. The last one said now that I am supposed to write Miller Brewing company because they sponsor Fulsom Street Fair. In my twisted mind, I imagine some mock communion with Miller beer now. God is going to have a sit down with me some time soon.
Have a good vacation. The sleeping bag is still on the portico but I don't see the person who it belongs too. There was a spent chip bag and a water bottle but no candles. As long as no one is playing with matches, I feel much better.
Corn Dog,
We're on the same track. I think the Archbishop acted faithfully to what he believes. There does seem to be a difference, or divide, between Man's Law and God's. I think it's about vision and insecurity, that we're afraid to let too many in - or others that don't fit into the box of our expectations, experience, or the dictates of tradition, - so we don't just not let them in, we end of vilifying and making them into ennemies so that we feel okay about our actions, justify our fears, and legitimize our mistrust of each other and God's all-powerful love in our world. Bill O'Reilly definitely doesn't seem to get that.
Glad tho hear that there are no candles. Thanks for helping keep our community safe!
Peace
Post a Comment