Putting the Warren invocation in perspective

Gay rights groups, liberal organizations like People for the American Way, and the progressive blogosphere are upset that President-elect Barack Obama has picked mega-church pastor and best-selling author Rick Warren to offer the invocation at next month's inaugural.

I can't say I was thrilled when I first heard the news. What was Obama thinking, I asked like many others. One gay rights leader described it as a "slap in the face." It is certainly being portrayed that way in the email blasts and list serves I'm seing.

One Kansas blogger, Moti Rieber who blogs at Fed Reb, has writen several intelleigent and angry posts on the subject. In one he wrote

Someone asked me whom I would have chosen instead. There are many progressive religious figures who have been largely excluded from the public discourse for years now, and who would broadcast a truly inclusive message at the start of the new administration, but just off the top of my head I came up with four

Moti names four fine progressive religious individuals, who I think would make fine invocators in in January. (But many doctrinaire religious progressive think Jim Wallis of Sojourners doesn't pass the grade on abortion or gay rights.)

But he left out the one that Obama has actually picked to be part of the Inaugural ceremonies. Yes, that right. There's a progressive religious figure already invited.

Obama has asked Joseph Lowery to give the benediction Lowery is an icon of the civil rights movement, long-time of the SCLC, tireless advocate of peace and social justice, and a supporter of gay rights.

The first step in putting the Warren invocation in perspective is to realize that it is not Warren but Warren + Lowery.

Understanding that is key to understanding what Obama may be thinking. And key to how the gay rights movements and friends of that movement should respond.

That's a subject for another day.