The Purpose Driven Inauguration

I've been surprised by all the outrage and righteous indignation coming from my LGBT sisters and brothers and straight allies about Obaman's invitation to have Rick Warren deliver the invocation at his inauguration as president of the United States.

I'm disappointed, of course. And, my annoyance can sometimes roll into anger.

But surprised? Not in the least.

I was helped somewhat by the very fine statement from Susan Russell, the President of Integrity. You can read it here.

Update: Read Susan's Open Letter to President-Elect Obama here. It's very measured and clear. This is Ms. Russell at her best.

It's not that I don't get it. Duh! I've been a religious activist for longer than I care to admit.

I have long ago ceased being surprised by anything a politician says or does.

Perhaps that's why I don't get that everyone is surprised by this - or has enough energy to mount an angry protest.

Not that I don't think it's important to protest. It's just that I'm surprised that everyone is surprised by Obama's choice.

I remember pinning Big Expectations on Bill Clinton's presidency. I remember thinking, "This guy gets it. He gets the 'Big Tent' idea that is central to the Spirit of Anglicanism. In fact, we should make him an honorary Anglican."

The 1992 presidential election was a case in point. Then nominee Bill Clinton promised to lift the ban on gays in the military. When Clinton renewed his promise after winning the election, he was met by a storm of protest from both Congress and the military, especially the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Clinton reportedly turned to (I believe it was) Mel White, head of Soulforce and said, "I had no idea how much they hate you people."

Right. Translation: "Holy Crap! If I pursue this, this is going to cost me not only my re-election, but my entire political career."

In the end the president settled for a compromise that pleased virtually no one.

On July 19, 1993, President Clinton announced what he called an "honorable compromise," a "don't ask, don't tell" policy, under which potential recruits would not be asked their sexual orientation, would have to keep that orientation private and not engage in any homosexual conduct and would require the military to curtail its investigation of suspected homosexuals and lesbians.

Gay men or lesbians who let their identity be known or who act on their sexuality would still be discharged from the Armed Forces. Similarly, President Clinton's support for Congress' enactment of the Defense of Marriage Act ("DOMA"), which enables states to refuse to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states, also drew fire from civil rights advocates.

On the other hand, the Clinton Administration made several important regulatory changes, including issuing an executive order banning discrimination based on sexual orientation in all civilian federal workplaces, as well as an executive order prohibiting sexual orientation and other forms of discrimination by federally conducted education programs; and granting asylum for gay men and lesbians facing persecution in other countries.

I have come to understand that this is the way the politics of social progress works: Two steps forward, three steps back - and if it's going to scare the horses and cost votes, the promises made to LGBT people are the first to go out the window.

When have we seen this before? Hmmm . . .

Consider our own Presiding Bishop who, when she was Bishop of Nevada was supportive of Blessing Same Sex Covenants and, has been widely reported by the "orthodites"(I refuse to call them 'orthodox'. Their theology is NOT 'right'.),even had Jack Spong in her diocese (The acid-test for being beyond redemption).

She hadn't been elected first woman PB for more than three days when she asked General Convention to support B033 - that heinous resolution which asked sitting diocesan bishops and standing committees not to approve the election of any person whose 'manner of life' might cause a problem in the world wide Anglican communion.

Not long after that, she asked LGBT people to enter into "season of fasting." As if that weren't enough, she asked us to "stand in a crucified place" and be patient.

Somehow, that feels a heck of a lot worse than asking Rick Warren to deliver the invocation at the inauguration. At least Obama hasn't asked LGBT people to be "patient." Indeed, it has apparently provoked him to say that he has been "vigorously supportive of gay rights."

Well, no, actually, he hasn't. He has been lukewarm. Which is just fine. I'll take that any day after the last eight years. Somebody just make sure we've got that statement on tape and let's play it for him every time the issue of civil rights for LGBT people is the topic du jour.

And, that leads me to my point. Having Rick Warren deliver the inaugural invocation is not the worst thing in the world. It's not the best. That would have been having Katharine Jefferts Schori or, perhaps, Gene Robinson, with whom Obama has reportedly had several telephone conversations.

Indeed, the 'trade off' to having Rick Warren is that his debt to Obama for this political capitol is far greater than Obama's debt to him. In fact, Obama owes Warren nothing. Indeed, Obama gets a great deal from this little trade.

Stop clutching your pearls and think for one red hot second about what Obama can do with that debt. Obama gets a lot more political capitol from Warren and tons of evangelicals without - And pay close attention to this - costing LGBT people any of our rights.

This is part of the horse-trading of politics. I know. I hate it too. And, I'm not saying you shouldn't feel hurt or angry or outraged. You have an absolute right to feel all of those things.

Write letters. Rage. Protest. Organize.

Yes, do all these things. These are all an important part of the politics of change, which is why we elected Obama in the first place. And, change doesn't - can't - happen in a vacuum.

It happens by creating a climate where adversaries can find some middle ground.

You know. Just like Anglicanism.

We would do well to remember the opening sentence of Rick Warren's book, "The Purpose Driven Life" which, I think sums up this purpose driven inauguration:

"It's not about you."

It's not even really so much about Rick Warren or Barack Obama.

It's about change.

Remember? It's what we voted for.

And, as one ancient Civil Rights worker in Newark once said to me, "Child, if a mountain were easy to climb, it would be smooth."

We've got a few more steep, rough mountains to climb, children, before we get to the promised land of Civil Rights. Let's not waste our energy. Let's get on with it.

Let's be the change we seek.