Scum-sucking Bottom-feeders

Now that I have sort of settled in on Blogspot and Google (and for those who have the password, on .Mac), I am consolidating my blog efforts here.

I posted this piece after we had our service in the Outer Banks in July. I had posted part of it on our service photos, just in case someone identified one of my friends and threatened this friend with the church's witch-hunt against allies of GLBTQ persons.

Here it goes:

A joke is meta-logic, using a common situation and common language and giving it a little twist that magically connects to an experience of disorientation or discomfort that can also be commonly experienced. Most of the time, a joke makes one laugh. Sometimes, a joke evokes tears; and sometimes, the response is both (have to laugh or cry, but have to do something!).

Meta-analysis requires sophistication of logic applied to a bit of speech or other performance. It also kills jokes.

Meta-logic also can be quickly seen in an artistic expression. Recently, my partner and I had a ceremony of holy union, a covenant service, and we had a wonderful time. We were surrounded by life-long friends and family, across the generations, from age 5 to -- what? -- maybe 75?I posted on another blog all of the pictures and pieces of our ceremony, and I protected it all with a password, so only those who were invited could enjoy my presentation of our story.

Because the ceremony was attended by some whose ministry credentials would be threatened and by children whom I wanted to protect from predators, I felt I should act defensively. But, the caution also raised questions because not all was revealed transparently.

As some sort of joke, I posted a little warning sign with this message: Note to the scum-sucking bottom-feeding witch-hunting ordination-stealing idiots of the church: [The other clergy person present] did not preside over this ceremony of holy union. This site is password protected, so go away and mind your own business.

Someone who was somewhat removed from the situation, yet was given access to the site (always a risk) saw my message and sent this email to my partner:

I recently viewed the links you sent from your union.It has been over a year and half that we have thought about getting together for dialog. (I first mentioned this back in the fall of 2005) I think we will not get the chance to dialog about the [unidentified denomination's] stance on ordaining homosexuals, or admitting them for membership. Maybe I am just assuming you were ordained in the [unidentified denomination], and wonder how that came about as you are openly homosexual. I remain curious as to how you reconcile this stance as you live your life in a Church that does not value your whole being.The main reason I don't think we can dialog is the following note displayed on one of the links you sent regarding your recent union. [then she quoted my note above.] I don't know if this is your true feeling about your church, or your partner's feeling about the Church where you pastor and serve. I know, for me, while I may not agree with a particular religion's stance on homosexuals, I value dialog or accepting them as they are. I thought you did as well. The above note doesn't fit with dialog. I am sure we will cross paths …End of message.

So, my partner, of course, sent this message to me because it was in response to my blog. I have taken out all identifying information. After I read that email to my partner, I wrote the following on my own blog:

Good morning! There is a joke among private-practice physicians: What's the difference between a trial lawyer and a catfish? One's a scum-sucking bottom-feeder, and one's a fish. My late partner, N, told me that joke so many years ago, and it is so well-understood in my circle of friends, that I did not think much about it. So, now, I have to conduct a meta-analysis, which always kills a joke.

Someone was offended by my warning message on one of my photo pages. Since that person is reading this, she obviously has been given the password, meaning she was trusted with our thoughts and celebrations. But, perceptions can vary. The expressions on this blog are mine, not my partner's. This person has declared that she cannot be in dialogue with my partner now, because of my words. I'm not sure what that is about, but guess what? You're in dialogue now! I'm responding.

So far, no one has made a mission out of disturbing my partner's ability to be in ministry as an ordained minister. Her ministry has flourished within the choices she has made. She can speak for herself on this point. I celebrate and would defend her ability to be in ministry in the way she expresses that at [a wonderful gay-friendly church in our city].

But, the other clergy person present, has been threatened -- and she is straight! Married to [cool guy] Mom of 2 kids.This friend is guilty by association -- with me. She still has her credentials because people who are not scum-sucking bottom-feeders have exercised the kind of grace and reason that protect the innocent in times of witch-hunting. The same is true for my partner.

I did lose my credentials for ministry ten years ago because someone/s made a mission of having me blocked from ordination. Not only did I lose my credentials (I chose to resign rather than go through the public ordeals that have made news in recent years. That's a choice for another blog posting later), but, the credentials of lots of people I love were brought into question simply because they were my friends, including students in my campus ministry group, seminarians, or newly ordained clergy. I chose to go to battle for them with the Board of Ordained Ministry, not for myself. It's a long story, and I will write all about it soon. If you are not willing to support us, please be kind and gracious, and do not pass our passwords to anyone else. Please be in dialogue. I'm all ears.

And then what happened???!!!

Now, this is the perfect screen for all sorts of projections. Privately, I have had several responses to my private blog. These responses could have been comments posted on the blog, but I do provide email for private correspondence and that was the choice. Interesting that the one who wrote the email to my partner did not choose the blog comment link or the private email to me, provided on the blog, but wrote separately to my partner!

Then, when my partner responded to her, the writer scuttled sideways, taking back all of the animus of the origninal message, writing, I couldn't tell whose blog it was.

Come on -- it's on the first page, Annie Mac's Living Human Document! My partner and I are individuals, connected in very significant ways (viva la connection!), didn't this person also read about the construction of our rings? Of course, I can have an opinion about the denomination that differs from my partner's. I love my partner and support her ministry, while also not supporting the church. So, no wonder the writer is not in dialogue -- such practices do not move anyone toward light.

Of course, with such powerful emotions in play, I have had some encouragement to look deeper into my own motives for posting the joke about scum-sucking bottom-feeders. To wit, ....

... One response that I respect very much is that I am still trying to work out past pain, that of losing my credentials. I want to write more about this, and I will. I think there is truth in the observation, but there is also much that is very present, very current about the pain. It is true that my United Methodist ordained minister friend could get in lots of trouble for her presence at my service, and for making a presentation to us, a gift that I requested from her -- that was in no sense presiding over the exchange of vows or declaration of marriage! (I feel I should say it again!) I know she could get into trouble because she was threatened, along with many other clergy, for similar witch-hunting in another location.

Another response was the inspiration for removing the negative energy from my iWeb blog to this blog. The warning note that appeared on one of my photo pages appeared quite jarring to one friend whose observations carry the sweet old character of Southern gentility. I used some harsh names and set up the unpleasant sensory overload of scum-sucking and bottom-feeding alongside some beautiful sensory presentations on the iWeb blog.

I admit, I did have the dissonance ringing and the grotesquery of visual experience as I placed the warning in the fist place, with the rather harsh, "go away and mind your own business."It is tragic, isn't it, that a joyful occasion can be visited by such ugliness as the fear that something bad could happen to my friend? And, isn't this also like life, that we all make choices for happiness, and we prepare for the consequences the best we can, and still the life-giving strives amid the death-dealing.

I think the life-giving wins. Releasing dialogue and possibility into life, like this reflection, might be one of the positive steps.