The Responsibility of Influence

(Community Matters) Two very different responses to my posting on Bishop Andy Doyle

ah, yes. the two-step is a lovely dance. I’m glad you can appreciate its nuances…

and

Eugene – your take doesn’t surprise me – afterall you had no problem with Rick Warren at Obama’s inaguration. This kind of accomodation keeps us at the table and out of power. He is the BISHOP of the diocese – if he wanted to avoid this pain for those of us who are gay and lesbian he could take a leadership role, he could LEAD the diocese to do the right thing(inclusion) but he won’t and you’ll be okay with that – no surprise on either count.

The first acknowledges my belief that Bishop Andy is much more liberal than he wants to be framed and “no change” is likely language for autonomy by parish. The second comment is likely from a reader not familiar with our church and understandably impatient.

I’ve played both roles. I’ve created impatience and chaos and have sacrificed career for making statements, for demanding equality. And, there is a responsibility that comes with influence, one that often places you in the crossfire of both sides. My first draft of the previous posting wasn’t so understanding nor optimistic. Then, I reflected on meeting and talking with Bishop Andy, on the perspectives of mutual friends, and on the nuance of language.

That a damning comment comes anonymously says something in addition to the message. What’s especially interesting is I probably know the reader, and it’s likely someone with whom I play opposite roles in another forum.

I am offended by the statement “accommodation keeps us at the table and out of power.” I’d place my record for change and progress on LGBT equality, HIV/AIDS & breast cancer issues up against all but a hand full of Austin gay men still alive.

Nevertheless, impatience is good and prompts progress.