Why Washington's National Cathedral will start hosting same sex weddings

[rug]

January 13th, 2013
10:11 AM ET
Dan Merica

CNN's Randi Kaye talks to the Very Rev. Gary Hall, dean of the Washington National Cathedral, about the national church's decision to host same-sex weddings.

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2013/01/13/why-the-national-cathedral-will-start-to-host-same-sex-weddings/comment-page-2/

5:52 video at link.

The rite is called “The Witnessing and Blessing of a Lifelong Covenant” but it is not called a marriage. It was approved last July .Does anyone have more information on this? Here's an excerpt.

https://www.churchpublishing.org/media/869869/IWillBlessYouandYouWillBeaBlessingEXTRACT.pdf

[cleanhippie]

1. Is “The Witnessing and Blessing of a Lifelong Covenant” the regular ceremony or is it new

just for same-sex marriages?

I like that pastor. We need more to be like him.

[rug]

2. It was approved by the Episcopal Church last July.

What I find curious is that it does not call it sacramental "Holy Matrimony" as it does in the Book of Common Prayer referring to straight weddings.

http://www.bcponline.org/

[Adsos Letter]

3. Absolutely and completely off-topic, but your reference to the Book of Common Prayer

reminded me of one of the more memorable images conjured up during my studies on the English civil war/revolution:

The first use of the prayer book was in St Giles' on Sunday 23 July 1637, when James Hannay, Dean of Edinburgh, began to read the Collects, part of the prescribed service, and Jenny Geddes, a market-woman or street-seller, threw her stool straight at the Minister's head. Some sources describe it as a "fald stool" or a "creepie-stool" meaning a folding stool as shown flying towards the Dean in the illustration, while others claim that it was a larger, three-legged cuttie-stool. As she hurled the stool she is reported to have yelled:

"De'il gie you colic, the wame o’ ye, fause thief; daur ye say Mass in my lug?" meaning "Devil cause you colic in your stomach, false thief: dare you say the Mass in my ear?".

This was the start of a general tumult with much of the congregation shouting abuse and throwing Bibles, stools, sticks and stones. Prebble reports the phrase "Daur ye say Mass in my lug?" as being addressed to a gentleman in the congregation who murmured a dutiful response to the liturgy, getting thumped with a Bible for his pains, and describes Jenny as one of a number of "waiting-women" who were paid to arrive early and sit on their folding stools to hold a place for their patrons. The rioters were ejected by officers summoned by the Provost, but for the rest of the service hammered at the doors and threw stones at the windows.

[IMG][/IMG]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jenny_Geddes

Leads me to imagining my 17th century self sitting in my easy chair as my wife walks through the front door, and me innocently asking "So, hon, how was church?"


.

[rug]

4. Lol!

And it led to the English Civil War!

Thanks. I never heard that story. I can just picture it.

[cleanhippie]

5. So they have taken the "separate but equal" approach?

If that I the case, I am not impressed.

[rug]

6. I'm not yet entirely clear but it looks like a different rite.

The reason I'm interested is it would redefine a sacrament. It has implications for the Catholic and Orthodox churches, among others.

[cleanhippie]

7. I hadn't thought of that, changing a sacrament.

Or is it simply creating a new one?

[rug]

8. It can't create a new one so it's either redefining one or creating a parallel rite.

[cleanhippie]

9. I would be ok with a redifinition that applies to all...

but a separate or parallel rite just for gays is cowardly, IMO.

[okasha]

10. I think this is a matter of same sacrament, different rite.

If you look at the preamble, it states clearly that the rite is intended to provide "a sacramental framework" for the couple's commitment and relationship. I think that the reason for not calling it "Holy Matrimony" can be found in one of the instructions, where it states that the officiant should consult with the Bishop on the Pronouncement (the point at which s/he'd make the classical "I now pronounce you man and wife" statement) in order to comply with the laws of the state where the marriage occurs. This rite is intended, it seems, to be used both in states which have authorized same-sex marriage and in those that have not. In the latter case, the couple would be seeking the blessing of the relationship that could not be legally described as a marriage but which can be recognized in the Church as such through this sacramental rite.

I would not be surprised to see this same rite, a bit down the road, used by heterosexual couples as well, particularly those who have been living together for some time and/or want to avoid the social extravaganza that frequently characterizes traditional heterosexual weddings. Just personally, I like the idea of Presenters, whether relatives or other members of the congregation, accompanying the couple to the altar and the vows of the community to support them.

The Episcopal Church has, since the 1979 prayer book, had alternate rites for Morning Prayer, Evening Prayer, Holy Matrimony and Eucharist, with the Rite I of each being the older, more Protestant-leaning services with thee's and thou's retained, and Rite II, characterized by a more Catholic-leaning structure and contemporary language. They're different in form, but equally valid within the church. There's also provision for couples who wish to add personal modifications to their ceremony. An alternate rite such as this one for same-sex couples is therefore pretty much within the church's current parameters.

[rug]

12. That makes sense.

So I take it the Episcopal Church now considers same sex marriages to be sacramental marriages. I don't think that's uniform across the Anglican Communion. I'd be interested in seeing the theology behind the changes.

[pinto]

11. The interview (CNN video) with Rev. Hall is really worth a watch.