Saturday, July 11, 2009

"Refuse to Sign" movement

A nationwide movement, called Refuse-to-Sign, headed by some United Church of Christ clergy but not limited to that denomination, is calling on clergy to refuse to sign the legal documents for anyone's marriage, at least until the right to marry is granted to all.

I think it was as far back as the 2004 election, when the anti-gay-marriage amendment was on the GA ballot, that a Unitarian-Universalist minister in Atlanta made a similar announcement: he would perform no more weddings for anyone until he could do so for same-sex couples as well.

Their aim is not just to secure the right for same-sex couples to marry but to clarify the distinction between the state's obligation to grant equal rights to all and marriage as a religious sacrament.

This seems very much in line with what is advocated by Bishop Gene Robinson, the gay Episcopal priest whose consecration as bishop has led to backlash schisms in the worldwide Anglican communion. When he spoke in Atlanta earlier this year at a conference at Emory Law School, he described what he advises churches.

Separate the civil union ceremony from the religious blessing of the union. When he and his partner got married, they went first to the back of the church where they were joined in civil union by a justice of the peace; and then they went to the front of the church, the altar, and had a religious ceremony.

Bishop Robinson is advising churches to set up this two-step process for those who want it. Let the church provide a civil officer -- not the minister -- who will perform the legal procedure and then have the clergy perform a religious rite.

His point is that clergy should not be doing the state's work, especially when they do not agree with its laws on the matter.

I think our society is gradually moving that way; and it's what I have long concluded as the preferable way: civil unions for both heterosexual and homosexual couples performed by the state, with equality for all; then marriage can solely be a religious rite, with various churches free to define their own criteria for whom they will marry.

Because you can always go find another church that will marry you; but you don't have the freedom to choose another government to ensure your equal rights -- unless you move to another country.

Ralph

1 comment:

  1. Of course, it's going to take a lot of education and a lot of demographic shift, as the younger generation more and more replaces the older generation.

    If you tried to do this now, it would be nearly impossible to counter the loud screams that you were "destroying the institution of marriage."

    Unless, of course, you could talk to the American people as if they were adults. It might just work.

    ReplyDelete