Blogging the Resolutions - Condemning Threats Against Sexual Minorities

I'm writing about each of the resolutions to the 175th Convention of Diocese of Indianapolis. My scoring criteria are here. Opinions are my own and may not reflect the Episcopal Church of All Saints, its parishioners, clergy, or delegation.

Here's the proposed resolution titled "Condemning Threats Against Sexual Minorities". Sigh. Let me go ahead and score this, and then discuss.

1. Is the resolution likely to pass unanimously? Yes. It doesn't really call on anyone to do anything all that difficult, and the idea that sexual minorities should not be subjected to violence is uncontroversial in this diocese. -1
2. Does the resolution call for someone in the church to do something concrete? No. -3
3. Might the resolution call for the person who proposed it to do something concrete? No. -1
4. Does the resolution contain an escape hatch? No. It is generally quite clear, though I never quite know what, "stand in solidarity with" means in contexts like this. +1
5. If the resolution calls for an allocation from the diocesan budget, is it clear how the funding would happen? The resolution requests no funding, nor does it need it. +1

That gives the resolution a score of -3, out of a possible +6. The negative score is mainly due to the fact that the resolution calls the church to no specific action. I've implied before that delegates should consider voting no on resolutions with a score below 0. But I think what this one is crying out for is not a no vote so much as some thoughtful (and realistic) amendments.

The reason this resolution has come up is pretty important to engage. The public face of Christianity is badly tarnished by the fact that the loudest voices in our faith seem to spend an awful lot of time condemning an awful lot of people, including but not limited to sexual minorities. Paraphrasing Brian McLaren from his interview with NPR's Guy Raz yesterday, the popular image of Christianity is not of loving your neighbors, but living in constant conflict with them.

Matthew Paul Turner's awesome blog used to be called "Jesus Needs New PR" (the blog isn't defunct, just eponymously rebranded). It looks at the sheer awfulness of much of Christianity's public image. A flaw in his blog is that while it entertainingly documents the public face of the church on a spectrum ranging from cluelessness to outright bigotry, it offers few suggestions for improvement. Turner is aware of this.

The message of this resolution is worth proclaiming loudly, but it will barely register outside the legislative session in which it's passed. If we're serious about this, we ought to decide that Jesus literally needs new PR. Jesus tells us, "See, I am sending you out like sheep into the midst of wolves; so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves" (Matthew 10:16). We can vote on this resolution and then file it away. Or maybe we as a church can decide we're going to get all Kelly Cutrone on this message and get it out there.