Sightings

Black Churches Divided Over Same-Sex Marriage

by Martin E. Marty

Monday | July 15 2013

Two weeks ago Sightings picked up on some lines written by the influential Evangelical-oriented author, Eric Metaxas. “Not so fast,” he wisely enough cautioned those who consider legalized, same-sex marriage to be inevitable. And yet, hours after he posted this alert, the United States Supreme Court issued a judgment, which made legal same-sex marriage look a bit more inevitable.

“Not so fast,” Metaxas would continue to warn: look at many factors in American life and not just at the biased-media that caters to supporters of the cause. He needed evidence for his stand and found it here in Illinois, where the legislature so far has failed to remove legal barriers to same-sex marriage.

You didn’t hear about it?

Metaxas accused the media of creating a blackout about the legislature’s vote and about one of the main reasons for that vote. Citing the National Organization for Marriage and the National Review, he reported that black pastors demanded that state legislators acknowledge the biblical definition of marriage, as they (the black pastors) interpreted it. Quoting the “National” and the “National” sources, Metaxas wrote that these pastors defeated “gay-marriage advocates and their supporters in the legislature in the bluest of blue states.”

Rather than speculate about the future, I’d simply say that Metaxas has alerted the media and everyone else, of whatever race or denomination, to keep their eyes on the black churches. One would not think of trying to cover religion in this blue city in the bluest of blue states without paying most attention to black churches—perhaps after having first noted Catholic archdiocesan news.

Whoever takes a look at the scene finds that, yes, many black pastors and, we presume, congregants, oppose same-sex marriage for reasons rooted in their biblical understanding and cultural expressions.

But a second look reveals profound controversy within black churches.

A year ago (July 31, 2012), the Coalition of African American Pastors (CAAP) drew attention to Chicago and elsewhere when it mobilized to defeat President Obama’s re-election bid. CAAP’s founder and president, the Rev. William Owens, called President Obama’s position on same-sex marriage a “travesty” and accused him of “pandering” to the gay and lesbian community. The 3,472 pastor-strong CAAP swayed some legislators, but the President won last November’s election.

Meanwhile, of course, the CAAP awakened much opposition. When Owens rejected the claim that the right to marriage for same-sex couples matched other rights, critics quickly stepped up to question his involvement in civil rights causes (he boldly asserted that he had been up front about his views).

Also, since President Obama changed his official opinion on same-sex marriage and since the recent Supreme Court ruling, polls have found an increase in support of same-sex marriage among blacks.

It is too early to tell whether black pastors will carry the same weight they are said to have exercised in the Illinois legislature and can help defeat this “rights” issue one more time.

Metaxas is right: the change in the public’s willingness to support same-sex marriage is “not inevitable.” The public, “the media,” and religious observers—including those of us who do much “sighting” of religion in American life—will do well to sharpen our focus on the vital African-American churches, which are often the most dynamic and influential forces in most of our metropolises.

Those of us who pay attention to the local black churches, to the loyalty so many of them command, to the respect they gain through their ministries, and to the power that goes with all that, have to pay attention to the interplay of the “inevitable” and the “evitable” in these days of sudden and radical change.

References:

Metaxas, Eric. “The False Narrative of Gay Marriage: It Is Not Inevitable.” The Christian Post, June 26, 2013. Accessed July 13, 2013. http://www.christianpost.com/news/the-false-narrative-of-gay-marriage-it-is-not-inevitable-98836/.

Maza, Carlos. “Three Things The Media Should Know About Rev. William Owens And His Coalition Of African-American Pastors.” Equality Matters (blog), August 8, 2012. Accessed July 13, 2013. http://equalitymatters.org/blog/201208080002.

“Black Pastors Condemn Supreme Court For Ruling on Gay Marriage.” Atlanta Daily World, June 26, 2013. Accessed July 13, 2013. http://www.atlantadailyworld.com/201306267036/Original/black-pastors-condemn-supreme-court-for-ruling-on-gay-marriage.

“The Black Church.” BlackDemographics.com. Accessed July 13, 2013. http://blackdemographics.com/culture/religion/.

Author, Martin E. Marty, is the Fairfax M. Cone Distinguished Service Professor Emeritus of the History of Modern Christianity at the University of Chicago Divinity School. His biography, publications, and contact information can be found at www.memarty.com.

Editor, Myriam Renaud, is a Ph.D. Candidate in Theology at the University of Chicago Divinity School.

~~

We often hear terms like “gay agenda” or “gay propaganda” thrown about in public discussions about the recognition of same-sex relationships. As someone who revels in being both gay and organised, the notion of a “Gay Agenda” (capitalised here on purpose) seems to me a quite promising one.

My fantasies aside, though, what exactly does the term mean – and why are people so invested in using it?

Loree Rudd, our prime minister’s sister, recently offered oneresponse when she referred to recent Russian laws prohibiting public manifestations of “gay propaganda”:

I think that there should be a law (in Australia) protecting children from the propaganda of homosexuality as normal. They’re trying to build their family life and structure in Russia and people in the west don’t seem to understand our family life and structures are breaking down.

In other words, Rudd sees the Gay Agenda as an impending threat to the “normal family”. Homosexuality, apparently, tears away at our basic moral and social fabrics. In fact, so vigorous is this “gay Gestapo” (her words, which she continually refuses to apologise for) that we must protect children by banishing any mention of homosexuality from public discourse.

Rudd’s comments could easily be turned into the subject of satire – her comments, after all, read like something one might find in The Onion. Sadly, the rhetoric that homosexuality is sinful, perverse, or immoral remains a pervasive reality; it is not something we can ignore or dismiss.

Whether you think people who are gay are “born this way” or “choose” it, our sexual orientation is a fundamental part of our conscience. No one should be forced, coerced or shamed into changing who they are (much like our religious beliefs). With the preponderance of “ex-gay therapies” and the persisting legislative discrimination, we are far from recognising the basic civil rights of gay people.

With this in mind, the Gay Agenda becomes less about indoctrination, and more about social recognition.

And recognition demands visibility. Visibility comes in acknowledging same-sex relationships in schools, or legislating specific anti-discrimination protections. In the words of poet Lord Alfred Douglas, the “love that dare not speak its name” should no longer be confined to a place of secrecy or silence. Which is why the Gay Agenda is so important.

In the national 2010 study Writing Themselves In 3, over 60% of same-sex attracted and gender questioning young people continued to experience some form of verbal abuse – most of it in schools. What makes these figures startling is that not only do they represent an increase from previous years, but they also highlighted a lack of specific school programs to address the issue.

The recently drafted federal health and physical education curriculum, for example, focuses on “reproductive health and wellbeing” – ignoring same-sex sexual practices and associated issues. Discussing non-reproductive sex, then, is supposedly less about indoctrinating children, and more about “ensuring better public health”. And with the persisting stigmas surrounding non-heterosexuality or gender non-conformity, it is little surprise that poor mental health remains a systemic problem.

Change, however, is happening. A number of promising policy initiatives like the Proud Schools Program in NSW and Safe Schools Coalition in Victoria have been established. While still largely in their infancy, these programs not only target the symptoms of homophobic bullying, but address the underlying prejudices that facilitate it.

Despite the evidence-based success for these programs, conservative commentators like Miranda Devine took to the widely read Daily Telegraph’s front page to denounce the “thought police telling kids that heterosexuality is not the norm.” From media to politics, our current minister for mental health and social inclusion, Jacinta Collins, oncereferred to marriage equality as a “distraction” and that we should focus on fostering “stable, biological parenting” as a “social norm.”

If we pursued Devine and Collins’ arguments to their logical conclusions, homosexuality would return to the auspices of the closet: it would be privatised, turned into a personal practice that we would tolerate so long as it did not not disturb the heterosexual social order.

While we often like to lecture places like Uganda or Russia on their punitive “gay propaganda” laws, the rhetoric that circulates in Australia seems rather conducive to the very laws we want to repudiate. Rudd’s rhetoric does not shy away from the evangelising statements used in Uganda’s recent attempt to further criminalise same-sex relationships.

The Gay Agenda is an elusive concept. For some, it represents a threat to humanity. For others, it is a rich source of comedy. For those still seeking recognition and acceptance, the Gay Agenda is really quite simple: promoting respect for human dignity.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jul/15/gay-rights-australia-loree-rudd?CMP=ema_632