Dr Martin Luther King Jr. championed civil disobedience as a pushback or resistance to existing law with the goal of ultimately changing the law; of course, that is precisely what happened. Rosa Park’s refusal to sit in the back of the bus and lunch counter sit ins are prototypical examples of civil disobedience. Of course, King had learned from Mohatma Gandhi who used civil disobedience, first in South Africa and later in India, to exact reforms and ultimately Indian independence from colonialist England.
In the Episcopal Church, the election of V. Eugene Robinson as New Hampshire bishop in 2003 was also a form of civil disobedience. Despite denominational rules to the contrary, Robinson was elected as bishop as an openly gay man in a committed relationship. Six years later, the Episcopalians revised their rules to include “all the baptized in all the sacraments”. The fait accompli of Rev Robinson forced the Episcopalians to confront the issue of gay clergy and to ultimately change church policy de jure to accord with the de facto status of Bishop Robinson.
The extraordinary ordinations of gay clergy in the ELCA in the early ‘90’s, accelerating in the new millennium, similarly helped to push the issue of gay clergy to the forefront of the ELCA consciousness, culminating in the momentous actions of the ELCA churchwide assembly of 2009 (CWA09) in which ministry policies were formally changed to allow persons in same gender, livelong, monogamous relationships to become rostered clergy. Those who pushed back, who exerted pressure through civil disobedience, are now being welcomed back into the ELCA (see prior posts here and here).
The most recent example is Pastor Anita Hill of St Paul Reformation church. After I sent Pastor Hill a congratulatory email, she replied, “I’ll be glad when the process is complete for all of us in ELM [Extraordinary Lutheran Ministries]”, and her email contained a quotation from Alice Walker: “The most common way people give up their power is by thinking they don’t have any.”
The Presbyterian Church (USA) is now witnessing the same process of civil disobedience. The John Knox Presbytery covers SW Wisconsin, NE Iowa, and SE Minnesota. As an ELCA person, I think of a Presbytery as being similar to an ELCA regional synod (or diocese in the Roman Catholic and Episcopal traditions). A lengthy article published Feb 22 by the Presbyterian News Service provided background and context to the news that the John Knox Presbytery had voted to reinstate Scott Anderson, a gay man in a twenty year committed relationship, to the rolls of Presbyterian ordained clergy despite ministry policies to the contrary.
The ordination standards of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) [require] that those being ordained practice “fidelity within the covenant of marriage between a man and a woman or chastity in singleness.”
The Anderson case is based on an apparent loophole in the polity of the PCUSA based on a “scruple” which is an “objection of conscience”. That is, Anderson claimed an objection of conscience to the fidelity-and-chastity rule, and his Presbytery, by a vote of 81-25 agreed. But, that is certainly not the end of the story as opponents will likely appeal this decision to the judiciary of the PCUSA, which must decide whether the policy of “scruple” may be used to circumvent the fidelity-and-chastity ordination rule. If the PCUSA judicial system upholds the ordination of Anderson, it will have established a precedent, a fait accompli, that the PCUSA General Assembly must confront.
The PCUSA is scheduled to convene its 219th annual General Assembly on July 3 in Minneapolis (perhaps ironically, in the same venue as the ELCA assembly which voted to allow gay clergy last year). Certainly, ministry policies will be front and center of the assembly business. If the PCUSA judiciary affirms the Anderson ordination based on the policy of “scruple”, it would appear that the burden of persuasion will have shifted from gay clergy advocates to their opponents; that is, it will be the burden of the opponents of gay clergy to persuade the assembly to change the policy and not vice versa.
In a similar context, there is a “Womanpriest” civil disobedience effort underway within the Catholic Church in the US (see prior posting). The official Roman Catholic policy prohibiting female ordination is set in stone, and there are no exceptions based on “scruple”. Yet, a group of women, and their male supporters, are proceeding to ordain females nevertheless, at the risk of excommunication.
Womanpriest Bishop Andrea Johnson spoke the following as quoted by a Nashville blogger in advance of Johnson’s appearance at Vanderbilt:
“We feel that canon law, which does not represent the people at all — only a few guys in Rome — is unjust,” Johnson [said]. “We’re breaking canon 1024. Like Rosa Parks, we’re saying, ‘No, we are not going to sit on the back of the bus.’ “
I’m sure a tornado will hit Minneapolis if the PCUSA follows a path similar to the ELCA.
@Joe BW Smith
I was there and exited to the street within minutes after the tornado passed. I blogged about the overall experience in a post entitled, “Then came a great wind“.
@Joe BW Smith
How kind of you to wish death and disaster on people. So what did the people of Chile do to deserve their earthquake this morning?
Well if God was so mad at NO that he/she sent Katrina, and at the ELCA God toppled a steeple, all things considered, God just can’t be that mad at the ELCA. Maybe instead of a wind that toppled the steeple, it was God letting out a giant sigh of “about time”!
I’m curious about the theological or biblical justification for civil disobedience. I’m not saying it can’t be found, but I’d like to see evidence you’ve thought it through. For Christians, after all, the means matters just as much as the ends. Starting off with Ghandi does not do much to make one think you’ve thought through how Christian reasoning can lead us to civil disobedience. Or, why civil disobedience and not uncivil disobedience?
Secondly, putting the ‘womanpriests’ up beside the gay clergy issue gives them far too much credence. The gays and lesbians in otherwise liberal American denominations are really not breaking un-tilled ground – the base will support these moves, and gladly change the rules to accommodate them. There is no such thing as a female priest in the Catholic tradition. Simply saying you are ordained does not make it so. And the women involved show their own ignorance of their own tradition when they reduce their enemies to “a few men in Rome” and call themselves Rosa Parks. Please. They are not taking any real risk with this; don’t pretend to be a martyr in the making.
Obie,
Excellent post!
Was Jesus’ little emotional outburst in the Temple civil disobedience? I am sure in the eyes of some in his day it may have even been considered criminal, unless the destruction of private property wasn’t a crime in Jesus’ day. There are examples of both civil obedience, and disobedience in Scripture. As always I am sure that this will be open to ones Biblical interpretation as to just what is civil disobedience.
I agree with Susan, great post Obie
@Pastor Mack
“I’m curious about the theological or biblical justification for civil disobedience. I’m not saying it can’t be found, but I’d like to see evidence you’ve thought it through.”
An interesting question, Pastor Mack. I note Ray’s suggestion of Jesus upsetting the booths of moneychangers. I think also of other examples of Jesus’ pushing against the law: gleaning on the Sabbath, healing on the Sabbath, breaking bread with tax collectors and women, etc.
I think there are many examples in the prophetic tradition of the Hebrew Scriptures as well.
Forget “the Catholic tradition”. That old sledge hammer is always used by the clergy and the hierarchy to justify reaction, the status quo, and the governance of the hierarchy. It always come in handy as tool for blunting progress for any group, gays, women, slaves, the status quo, you name it. Rome will eventually see the errors of it’s ways.
I wish the Romish priestesses continued success and my prayers go with them.