INTEGRITY FORUM

A JOURNAL FOR GAY EPISCOPALIANS AND THEIR FRIENDS

c Integrity, Inc. 1977   ISSN: 0095-2184

Vol. 3  No. 8   June-July 1977

 

INTEGRITY:  Gay Episcopal Forum is the official newsletter of Integrity, Inc., a nonprofit religious charitable, educational and literary organization of Gay Episcopalians and our friends.  Integrity, Inc. maintains a national office with The Rev. Ron Wesner, President, 5014 Willows Avenue, Phila., PA 19143, phone 215/748-2118.  Membership and subscription correspondence should be sent to Forum  Publisher, David Williams, INTEGRITY, P.O. Box 891, Oak Park, IL 60303, phone 312/386-1470.  Editorial correspondence should be sent to William Doubleday, c/o Episcopal Divinity School, 99 Brattle Street, Cambridge, MA 02138, phone 617/723-4336. 

 

Signed articles represent the views of the contributors.  The editor reserves the right to revise all sexist language. 

 

Copyright 1977 by Integrity, Inc.  10 issues per year.  Membership subscriptions are $10; subscriptions without membership are $12.  Add $3 for all subscriptions that require plain envelopes; Canadians remit in U.S.funds.  Couple rates are $13 for one journal. 

 

President................................ The Rev. Ron Wesner

Vice President................................. John Lawrence

Secretary...................................... Donn Mitchell

Treasurer............................. The Rev. John Lenhardt

Assistant Treasurer........................... Paul Chervenie

Editor.................................. William A. Doubleday

Publisher..................................... David Williams

Assistant to Publisher..................... Thomas M. Walters

 

Trustees:     Ernest Clay, Louie Crew, Julie Peterson,

              The Rev. Richard Younge

 

TWO KEYNOTERS TO SPEAK AT PHILADELPHIA CONVENTION

 

Noreen Carter, clinical counsellor, and Neale Secor, priest, will be the keynote speakers on the theme "Liberation Ethics," at the third Integrity convention August 25-28 in Philadelphia.  Fa­ther Secor, former attorney and United Church of Christ minis­ter, is Rector or St. Mary's Church, New York City.  Ms. Carter, of Tyngsboro, Massachusetts, member of the Task Force on Human Sexuality of the Massachusetts Council of Churches, has had ten years experience as a clinical counsellor, and is a member of St. Mark's, Westford, Mass.

 

After opening worship on Friday morning, August 26, at St. Mary's Church, Hamilton Village, the convention sessions will be held at the Christian Association on the campus of the University of Pennsylvania.  The keynote speeches will be followed by work­shops on gays and ordination, feminism, bisexuality, transsex­uality, rural gays, health care for gays, ongoing gay relation­ships, gay counselling, straight talk about gays, and even one on "gothic dimensions of the gay mystique."  Workshop leaders will include William Kinter, Nancy Krody, Dr. William Stayton, Rev'd John Lenhardt, Janet Cooper, William Doubleday, Rev'd Ronald Reed, Rev'd Richard Younge, Roberta Dickinson, and John Lawrence.  John and Wayne Fortunato-Schwandt, who achieved national publicity last year in their receiving a blessing by Father William Wendt in Washington, D.C., will lead the panel on "Ongoing Relationships."  Barbara Gittings, who received last year's Integrity Award, will present a film program at the convention; she is editor of the American Library Association's gay bibliography.

 

Other features of the convention include the Awards Banquet on Saturday evening, a cabaret with live entertainment at St. Mary's church on Friday evening, a sherry party, community building exercises, and free time to visit historic sites in Phila­delphia. The convention concludes on Saturday August 28 with the Annual Business Meeting, preceded by High Mass at St. Mary's, and followed by Solemn Evensong there.

 

The Reverend Ronald Wesner, president of Integrity/National, will preside at convention sessions.  Donald Bentley has been named Dean of the Convention, and Roger K. Stephens, 1516 Lombard St, Philadelphia, PA 19146, is serving as the registrar.  Registration fees are $30 for Integrity members, $35 for non­members; fees include 4 meals, sherry hours, and snacks.  Housing has been arranged at International House ($12 a night), Drexel University dormitory ($6 double, $9 single), and in pri­vate homes.  Also, there's a Holiday Inn 2 blocks from the con­vention site.

 

Registrations after August 1 will be charged a $5 late fee, and no meals can be guaranteed to registrants after August 15.

 

BLESSINGS AND CURSES

BY RON WESNER

 

At a recent meeting of a Diocesan Sexuality Commission a local rector and a local gay activist were conversing.  The Gay man asked the rector if he would be accepted in the priests congregation.  The priest said he would not accept him.  The liberals on that commission spoke as with one voice and said, "Oh Father, what you meant to say was that you couldn't accept what he does but you can accept him."  The priest, who has not been confused for being a liberal, said, "On the contrary, I meant what I said.  I not only do not accept him, I reject him."  Again the Liberals spoke as with one voice and said, "What you meant to say is that you love the sinner and hate the sin."  Again, the priest calmly and coolly said, "In this area you cannot separate the person from the orientation and the orientation from the act.  I reject the homosexual, person and orientation."

 

There was silence, and I broke it.  I said, "Thank you, Father, you have given us the clearest and most unconflicted statement of the day."  It felt good.  We knew where we stood with him.  He was honest.  Wrong, but honest.

 

He scared the liberals, because he pointed out to them the conflict in their position.  He challenged their desire to separate us into neat little packages, accepting some of those packages, rejecting others.  He recognized our Integrity, our wholeness.  They did not.

 

With his curses we were blessed.  With their blessings, we have been cursed.

 

So also it is with Anita Bryant.  With her curses we are also bless­ed.  She too, is befriending us, by being a willing symbol of ar­rogant ignorance.  At last, we have a public figure to point to and ask our liberal friends finally to see the results of homopho­bia and selective literalism combined in one person.  Through her, and with her help, finally we are seeing "Community" e­merge from what was an apathetic sub-culture in Dade County.  I urge you not to relax and laugh her off, nor to vent your spleen only on her.  I am sure she needs much more faith and love than she does our spleen.  Work actively to overcome the curses she is offering us.  But also, give thanks that the enemy has chosen to identify itself so that all can see what it looks like.

 

A COLLECT FOR AID AGAINST PERILS

 

Lighten our darkness, we beseech thee, O Lord; and by thy great mercy defend us from all perils and dangers of this life; for the love of thy only Son, our Savior Jesus Christ.  AMEN.

 

Minister O Lord, open thou our lips,

 

CHAPTER NOTES

 

Integrity/New York has moved to St. Luke's-in-the-Fields on Hudson St. at Grove St. in the West Village.  Meeting night has been changed to Tuesday. ··· Jay L. Friend, the first Convenor of Integrity/Southern Ohio, has resigned for health reasons. ··· Integrity/Denver now has about twenty-five members.  The chap­ter has been developing an active ministry in the midst of an extremely hostile and homophobic diocese which is the home of the Kings Ministry, a group devoted to the non-acceptance of the homosexual person. ··· Bill Giles, Convenor of Integrity/ Detroit, has moved to 13511 Kittridge, Van Nuys, CA 91401.  A new Convenor will be elected on June 4. ··· Integrity/Miami was actively involved in the Dade County Civil Rights Ordinance campaign. ··· Forum Editor Bill Doubleday visited Integrity/ Chicago in early May.  He was impressed by the fine leadership in that Chapter. ··· Rev'd Canon Clinton Jones of Integrity/Hartford spoke to Integrity/Boston on May 24.  Integrity/National Vice President John Lawrence of Boston spoke to Integrity/Hart­ford later that same week. ··· The Rev. Richard Younge, Con­venor of Integrity/San Francisco appeared on a TV program Black Perspective to discuss counseling gay people.  Don Clark, author of the superb book, Loving Someone Gay, appeared on the same program. ··· Among the celebrants for Integrity/Twin Cities this spring was the Rev. Dr. Jeannette Piccard.  That chap­ter celebrated its first anniversary in April.  Integrity/Twin Cities, cooperates with Dignity/Twin Cities, Lutherans Concerned and Gay United Methodists in producing the monthly Minnesota Gay Christian.  Such ecumenical gay cooperation is to be commend­ed. ··· Larry Bandfield of Cleveland and Forum Publisher David Williams were invited to address the Diocese of Ohio's Com­mission on Social Education on June 9. ··· Editorial Note:  I would greatly appreciate receiving all routine chapter mailings.  I would also encourage Chapters to send any press releases or local news clippings which they think might be relevant to Chapter Notes or News.  Send all material to: William A. Double­day, c/o Episcopal Divinity School, 99 Brattle St., Cambridge, MA 02138.  Hopefully every chapter can be mentioned in every issue of INTEGRITY FORUM.

 

INTEGRITY PRESIDENT IN ALAMO CITY

 

San Antonio, known as the Cradle of Texas Liberty, was the scene of much excitement, both pro- and anti-gay, during the visit of Integrity President Ron Wesner to the local chapter, 31 May-3 June, as the guest of Convenor David White.  Fr. Wesner's visit came in the midst of heated controversy arising from a proposal to the City Council, made two weeks earlier by Integrity member and gay activist Jim Eggeling, that San Antonio provide legislation to protect civil rights of gays.  The controversy was escalated by a widely publicized dance and rally at the San Antonio Country, a popular gay bar, to raise money for the Dade County Coalition, and an equally publicized rally in front of the Alamo, led by Pastor Joe West of the East Baptist Church, in support of Anita Bryant and the "Save Our Children" campaign.

 

Father Wesner held a press conference on 1 June in Travis Park, opposite St. Mark's Episcopal Church, which had previously denied meeting space to Integrity because it was not a recognized organization." In Father Wesner's press conference, which was covered by all newspapers and TV stations, includ­ing Spanish-language Channel 41, he spoke of his own identity as a gay priest, of the presence of gays in every church, of the energy wasted by hiding in the closet, and of the need for a political and social climate for self-affirmation and honesty.

 

The Integrity President met with Bishop Scott Field Bailey in an honest and productive session, and later addressed the City Council in support of gay rights.  Fr. Wesner was introduced at City Council by the Bishops assistant, the Rev. Canon Carl Jennings, who said that while Fr. Wesner was not a representative of the Diocese of West Texas, the Diocese did urge the Council to work to secure the civil rights of all citizens.

 

During the same week, the South Texas Conference of the United Methodist Church, which earlier had suspended the Rev. Gene Leggett for admitting his homosexuality, was meeting at Travis Park Methodist Church.  Father Wesner and Integrity members joined the Rev. Mr. Leggett and Gay United Methodists in their protest of the suspension, by leaving the church silently just before the ordination of new Methodist ministers.

 

A celebration of the Holy Eucharist was held in David White's apartment, since as yet no church in San Antonio has permit­ted Integrity to meet.  The latest parish to refuse was St. Luke's, the convenor's own church.

 

INTERFAITH GAY PRIDE WEEK SERVICE IN BOSTON

 

Integrity, Dignity, MCC, Evangelicals Concerned, Lutherans Concerned, and Am Tikva (Jewish Gays) were the joint spon­sors of an interfaith Gay Pride Week service in Boston in memory of gay martyrs and gay dead.  The Convenor of Integrity/Boston offered this invocation:

 

O God, you are the Creator of the Heavens and the Earth, yours is the greatness, and the power, and the glory, and the majesty of all Creation.  You, O God, are the Cosmic Lover, the source and perfection of all life and love.  In love you have created us, to love you have called us, when we love it is you who rejoices with us.

 

You have called us to love one another; to love our neighbors as ourselves; to love ‑‑ man and man, woman and woman, woman and man.  In your eyes, O God, we are all your children; in your hands we are strengthened and nurtured; in your un­ceasing love we are accepted and affirmed; we are empowered to grow together in relationship with each other and with you.

 

Be with us this night, O God, as we pause in Gay Pride Week to remember our gay brothers and lesbian sisters who have died.  We trust in your neverfailing love and care, as we recall the martyrs of the Holocaust, the victims of needless disasters, the human beings sacrificed at the hands of gay oppression, and the despondent who in fear and isolation have taken their own lives.

 

We pray, O God, that you might grant us a new and clearer vision of your love for us and for all people.

 

O God of Abraham and Sara, O God of David and Jonathan, O God of the Exodus, the perfect archetype of human liberation, in these fearsome days, in these troubled hours, be for us a light in the darkness of human civilization.

 

Grant peace to the departed; give rest to the weary; soothe the suffering; shield the joyous; and strengthen those who strive to bring your love to us all.  AMEN.

 

EPISCOPAL CHURCH NEWS

 

BISHOP KRUMM ON THE BARRETT ORDINATION

 

The editor recalls the disappointment in his home parish of Grace Church, Amherst, Massachusetts, when John M. Krumm failed to be elected Bishop of Western Massachusetts Some years ago.  Shortly thereafter he was elevated to the episcopate in the Diocese of Southern Ohio.  Now Bishop Krumm is involved in another in­stance of disappointment, this time with respect to his response to the Ellen Barrett ordination.  Bishop Krumm has in the past offered some modest leadership in changing the Church's ecclesiastical and pastoral attitudes towards gay people, but now he seems to have lost his nerve.  His pastoral letter in response to the Barrett ordination is an expression of poor hermeneutics, bad theologizing and outmoded psychology.  With sadness we reproduce that letter:

 

A Statement by the Rt. Rev. John M. Krumm, endorsed also by the Standing Committee of the Diocese of Southern Ohio, Febru­ary 8, 1977.

 

The announcement of the ordination to the priesthood by the Bishop of New York of a woman who confessed to being a practicing lesbian has raised a great deal of protest and resulted in a number of letters addressed to me expressing dismay and strong opposition.  I need to make a statement of my position on this matter.

 

Bishop Moore and his Standing Committee and other authorities in New York have taken this step, of course, without any consultation with any other diocesan bishop that I know of, certainly not with me.  I have expressed privately to him and now wish to make known to the Diocese of Southern Ohio my own disapproval of this ordination and my own intention not to ordain anyone who is a self-confessed homosexual and feels obliged to admit this publicly.

 

My position is that homosexuality is a matter best dealt with in each individual case and by private pastoral counselling.  I cannot unequivocally condemn all individuals who engage in homosexual practices since in many instances the person's orientation is such that no other form of sexual expression is open and possible for him or her.  I am, however, unable to endorse such practice in any general way as an alternative life style which fulfills God's intention in the creation of human beings as male or female.  I have had oc­casion in pastoral counselling to learn about many such homosex­ual patterns of behavior, and I am convinced that they fall far short of the true meaning of sexuality although they are not necessarily devoid of value and dignity.  The act of the Church in ordaining a person known to be a practicing homosexual seems to place a seal of general approval upon a style of life which I do not believe Chris­tian theology, based on Scripture, can unqualifiedly endorse.

 

I have also been persuaded that St. Paul's admonition that we must avoid whenever possible offending against the scruples and conscience of fellow Christians applies in this case (cf. Romans 14, verse 21, for example).  Bishop Moore has said that the present state of society now permits a homosexual to be more "open" about his orientation and lifestyle.  I cannot agree, however, that the community of Christians in the Church shares this tolerance and permissiveness, and whatever else may be claimed or believed loving concern for fellow churchpeople would require at the least an absence of publicity about such an ordination.  Neither Bishop Moore nor Ms. Barrett sought this publicity, I am persuaded, but when it became inevitable I believe the ordination should not have taken place.

 

I also would express the hope that we might avoid any self-righteousness in our judgments concerning men and women struggling with moral dilemmas from which God may have spared us. I be­lieve self-righteousness is a more serious sin than any other, and I feel I need to warn some of my correspondents of this danger.  ‑‑John M Krumm, Bishop of Southern Ohio

 

REACTION TO BARRETT ORDINATION CONTINUES

 

The reaction to the priestly ordination of the Rev. Ellen Barrett by the Rt. Rev. Paul Moore, Bishop of New York continues to be heated and widespread.  Numerous Bishops and Dioceses have protested the ordination and several parishes in the Diocese of New York appear to be steadfast in their decision to withhold diocesan assessments.  The extent of the negative response to the Barrett ordination does not seem to bode well for further ordinations of acknowledged homosexuals and lesbians between now and General Convention 1979.  Indeed the experience of several seminarians already suggests that the ordination has contributed to a growing witch-hunt for closeted and hidden gays among prospective ordinands.  It is not too late to express your support to Bishop Moore for his courageous act in ordaining Ellen Barrett.  It is never too late to work within your parish or diocese for accept­ance of gay vocations and a deeper understanding of human sex­uality.

 

A MESSAGE FROM INTEGRITY'S PRESIDENT

A sermon preached on Palm Sunday at St. Mary's, Hamilton Village.

 

IN THE NAME OF THE FATHER AND OF THE SON AND OF THE HOLY SPIRIT.  AMEN.

 

Many years ago, on a Sunday in Lent, in 1964, I took my youth group in Berkeley California to see a play in San Francisco.  The  Play was called "The Fantastics" ‑‑ a musical -- which happens, today, to be the longest running musical play in the history of the American Stage.  lt's still running.  Some of you, undoubtedly have seen; some of you, undoubtedly have seen it many times.  A two act play, the first act has a very simple plot -- deceptively  simple ‑‑ there is a boy and there is a girl (as I say, it was written a long time ago).  He is twenty, she sixteen. They are madly and insanely in love with each other.  Both of these young people have fathers.  Their fathers, wise to the nature of young people, have built a wall between their two gardens and have  staged a feud.  In reality the fathers are very good friends and they want their children to fall in love and marry.  When the boy and the girl are off stage, the fathers sing a song called "You Merely Say No." In this song they explain that if you want your children to do something, you must forbid them to do it.  For the early sixties, they were very wise fathers.

 

To pull off their grand scheme, they hire a bandit to kidnap the girl.Their intention is for the boy to fight off the bandit, be a hero in the girl's eyes, and then to marry her and live happily ever after.

 

The plan goes well.  The bandit and an Indian catch the young couple alone in the woods.  The boy does indeed fight off this nefarious pair, saves the girl, they fall in love.  The curtain closes and the first act is over.

 

Sol took my youth group to see the play ‑‑ a well mannered, well­scrubbed group of high school students ‑‑ even Berkeley, in the early sixties, was producing such creatures.  As I walked into the lobby, at the end of the first act, one of the young men asked me if the play was over.  It was a good question, there were no loose ends to tie up, it was a completed plan, executed successfully.  I had seen the play before and I knew otherwise.  I told Ted, "You will notice in the program that the first act is called "In the Moonlight," the second act, "In the Sunlight."  No, the play is not over."

 

We returned to our seats for the second act.  The narrator removed the moon from the set and replaced it with the sun.  In this act the boy and the girl find out that their love for each other can't stand the harsh light of the sun.  The boy goes off to see the world, to seek adventure, the girl stays home to fall in love with the romantic bandit.  The boy finds that the world is not the thrilling, exciting place he imagined it to be.  He went to find his shining star but got burned instead.  The same thing happens to the girl in her infatuation with the bandit.

 

But the play is not a tragedy.  The boy and girl find that after each has been burned, tested, tried, wounded ‑‑ now each can love the other.  The narrator ends the play by singing the theme song, "Try to Re­member."  One line, in particular stands out, "without a hurt, the heart is hollow.''

 

By a long shot, the play was not over after the first act.

 

Wouldn't it be nice to leave after the first act?  Wouldn't it be nice to have ended the service today after the Palm Sunday procession?  Wouldn't it be nice to have passed out the palms, sung Hosannah to the Son of David, praised the triumphal King, and then gone home on an emotional jag?  Wouldn't it be nice to find God in power and strength and glory?  Wouldn't it be nice to worship Christ, the successful hero and not have to look at his wounded, crucified body?

 

He was wounded for our transgressions, bruised for our iniquities, with his stripes we are healed.

 

A month ago I was in a midwestern city ‑‑ on one of my too frequent speaking trips for Integrity.  A party was given in my honor (no ‑‑ there were no palm branches ‑‑ it was too early in the season).  One of the guests stayed around when the rest of them left.  He wanted to talk.  So, with the permission of my host and hostess, and another house guest, the five of us sat on the floor while the one man and I had a conversation, just the two of us, while the other three, a Gay man, a non-Gay man and a non-Gay woman listened.  He talked about himself.  He talked about feeling a strong need to come out, that is, to declare himself openly as a homosexual.  He talked about feeling a vocation to authenticity.  He talked about needing to be honest, choosing no longer to hide in a closet pretending to be what he wasn't.  He talked about his fears, fears of being honest, fears of having to pay a price for that honesty.  He talked about the fear of being naked, vulnerable, exposed.  He talked about the fear of being weak, a person with no defenses built up around him to protect him.  He talked of the need, financial and emotional, of being employed and the risk that coming out would bring.  But most of all he was asking the question, "Is it okay to be who I really am?"

 

After he asked this last question, he indicated for the first tune, that he was aware of other people in the room.  He looked around himself, and asked the others present if they thought he was crazy, or what?

 

The woman present, a non-Gay woman, a well put together woman, a loving person, said, with tears in her eyes, "I've never had anyone ask those questions for me before, but you just did.  You asked for me, 'Is it okay to be who I really am?' Thank you."

 

He was wounded for our transgressions, bruised for our iniquities, with his stripes we are healed.

 

Jesus Christ was present that night.  Jesus Christ was that Gay man.  Jesus Christ was that person who was willing to show his wounds, not as a masochistic exhibitionist, not as one who has no sense of privacy, but as a person exploring the pain of authenticity, as a per­son who was daring to be real.

 

He was wounded for our transgressions, bruised for our iniquities, with his stripes we are healed.

 

Jesus Christ, on the cross, was not there to appease an angry God, not a sacrifice to persuade a vengeful creator to divert his anger towards him.

 

He was there, he is there, as an authentic human being ‑‑ so that we can be there.  He was there, not so much in our place, but rather as one who goes before us ‑‑ to show the wounds, yes, to show also, the healing that comes once the wounds are opened.

 

The drama has more than one act.  It goes beyond the moonlight.  It has more than two acts.  It goes beyond the merciless sunlight.  It goes beyond the emotional high of Palm Sunday.  It goes beyond the em­barrassment of Good Friday.  Thank God, the play is not over.      ‑‑  The Rev. Ron Wesner

 

OUR OPINION

 

A Parable Based on Mark 8:34-38

Preached at the Episcopal Divinity School 24 March 1977.

 

In the name of God, Creator, Liberator and Sustainer.

 

Let us for a moment imagine that Jesus himself were available to address the content of this evening's Gospel to a modern day meeting of clergy and seminarians in some hypothetical diocese.  Jesus had already spoken for some time about a variety of matters related to life and ministry within the diocese when he said, "What does anyone gain by winning the whole world at the cost of his or her true self?"  All of a sudden the as­sembled clergy and seminarians interrupted him and began to reply.  A priest said, "I gained my cardinal rectorship, my weekly radio program, mass distribution of my renowned sermons, a salary of thirty thousand dollars a year, a European vacation every other summer, and a five story town house in the finest section of the city."  And one of the Bishops broke in and said, "I gained my episcopate, a distinguished reputation in aca­demia, an image of intense and searching spirituality and per­sonal, pastoral and political power beyond my wildest dreams or expectations."  A young woman priest jumped up and as­serted, I gained the distinction of being one of these first per­sons of my sex to be called to a parochial ministry on a full-time basis.  I am a nationally recognized figure and a television and media celebrity.  Someday I will likely be the first female Bishop in the Episcopal Church.  Then a rather nervous looking young male seminarian somewhat timidly obtained the floor.  He began to speak, "In just three more months I will have gained my first curacy in my career in the church.  Unlike most of my classmates I already have a contract and my credentials and my character have already been certified in preparation for my ordination to the diaconate.  I will have gained a good job, a good income and a very real ministry which the entire community cannot help but respect and admire.  That's not bad for a young man of twenty-six given the clergy over-supply, the job shortage and the general state of the economy." And the seminarian's senior tutor spoke and said, "I have gained my tenured chair in the languages of the Old Testament.  I have a nice house, a fair salary, generous sabbaticals, small classes, have published seven volumes on six of the lesser prophets and have lots of time to pursue my hobby which is collecting coins which were in circulation in the Roman Empire during the life of St. Paul."

 

But at this point Jesus interrupted the speeches, knowing that countless others were prepared to relate what they had gained at the cost of their true selves.  Jesus said, "What can anyone give to buy back that true self?"  He looked around, searching for an answer.  Assembled around him were several hundred clergy and seminarians who knew what they had gained even as they lost their own true selves.

 

Some of these clergy and seminarians recognized what integ­rity they had sacrificed in the course of securing ordination and of advancing in the hierarchy of the Episcopal Church.  Many were aware of the personal compromised into which they had entered.  Others were aware of the half-truths, the illicit relation­ships, the game playing and deception which had been es­sential to their rise to and maintenance of prominence and power within the Church.

 

Most of those assembled undoubtedly believed that the positive fruits of their ministries justified the radical personal loss of in­tegrity and the intense alienation from self which had been involved in participating in the existing system of ordained minis­try in the church.  Most of them probably believed that things could be no other way.  But then from the back of the room came the voice of a parish priest who would shortly turn seventy years of age, who was already scheduled to retire from his rectorship.  Beloved in his parish and throughout the diocese, he was a Christian who had preached against Joe McCarthy, worked for improved race relations in the '50's, opposed the war in the '60's, and vigorously aided the cause of women's ordination in the '70's.  This old priest said, "I can keep quiet no longer.  For nearly forty-five years my ministry has been based on the operating assumption that my true self did not matter, indeed that only my ministry itself could somehow make up for or compensate for those parts of me which I could not face and which the Church and our society were prepared neither to accept nor affirm."  The old priest paused.  There was murmuring throughout the room.  Many wondered to what hidden secret he might be alluding.  One young priest over on the right hand side of the room whispered to a friend, "You don't suppose the old queer is about to come out do you?"  And then the old man spoke, "For nearly forty-five years I have pretended that I was not a homosexual.  For all those years I have denied myself love, friend­ship, and meaningful relationships.  For decades I have lived with enormous guilt in constant fear that my ministry would be discredited, that my parishioners and colleagues would reject me, that my membership in the Christian community would be terminated or denied if my secret were ever found out."

 

A not so subtle hiss came forth from several corners of the room. The Bishop had turned visibly red.  The Suffragan Bishop was turning visibly green.  The dean of the cathedral felt ill and had left the meeting seeking a rest room.  One young woman seminarian shouted out, "I'm no Lesbian, what does your situation have to do with me?"

 

The old priest turned to her and looked around at what he fear­ed might be his last clericus meeting.  And then he spoke, "My brothers and sisters, I am not suggesting that most of you are homosexuals, although I suspect we all might be surprised if we knew who and how many in this room were.  But in diverse ways, whether we are gay, straight or bisexual, celibate, single, married, divorced, or widowed, male or female, Black or White, we are all forced to spend significant parts of our lives in the closet.  All too often, individuals are forced to cut off significant parts of themselves in order to gain a place in the life and min­istry of the Church, to say nothing of in order to receive simple toleration far short of full acceptance within our society at large."  Realizing that he might never be allowed another opportunity to address such a group he went on, "I ask you, do we really gain anything which matters when we win the whole world or even the whole church at the cost of our true selves?  How great a risk do we take in giving up our integrity! How great a loss must be the sacrifice of the possibility of truth and honesty.  How unjust it is that we are forced to depart from principles of openness and wholeness in order to survive in the Church.  I say that the time has come when no matter what we gain, no matter what may be the fruits of our parochial or other ministries, if we have lost touch with our own true selves in their fullness and wholeness, if we have sacrificed our sacred integrity, then truly I say to you we have lost touch with our souls and our church shall shortly be bankrupt.  It should not be a requirement for ordination that one disregard the depths of one's soul."  The old priest had finished speaking.  There was a hush hanging over the room.  And then Jesus spoke up prepared to complete his pericope for the evening, "If anyone is ashamed of me and mine in this wicked and godless age, the Son of Man will be ashamed of that one, when he comes in the glory of his Father and of the holy angels."   AMEN.  ‑‑ W. A. Doubleday

 

RETIRED BISHOP COMMENTS ON GAY ORDINATION

 

The Rt. Rev. George W. Barrett, the retired Bishop of Rochester, recently issued the following statement in response to the widespread objections to Bishop Paul Moore's ordination of Ellen Barrett to the priesthood:

 

REVEALING REACTIONS

 

The high degree of irrationality existing in human institutions gener­ally and in the Episcopal Church in particular has been vividly shown in the furor aroused by the ordination of Ellen Barrett to the priest­hood.  Great pressure has been put upon diocesan bishops to disavow and condemn the act.  The straightforward statement of the Bishop of New York, giving reasons for his action, has been largely ignored.  Shock, hurt, fear, anger, in one instance the ridiculous flying of the Church flag upside down on a parish flag pole, all have given the impression that the very foundations of Christian faith and morality have been threatened by the ordination of one woman, honest enough to admit her lesbian tendencies.

 

Several attitudes and assumptions seem especially unfortunate.

 

1.  Many people have assumed a knowledge about homosexuality unwarranted by the facts available.  No one really knows a great deal about the subject, about its causes, the possibility or even the desir­ability of its cure or the reasons for the taboo against it in many, but by no means all human cultures.  We do know that in any society there are a considerable number of homosexuals and many more people quite capable of homosexual as well as heterosexual relationships.  Only very recently has anyone tried to compile statistics or make estimates of the numbers and percentages involved.  We know even less about past societies.  It is well indeed for the Church to study human sexuality in depth, although one questions whether or not we have the means or the capacity to do so fairly and objectively.  In the meantime, it is foolish to quote Biblical texts that reflect far different cultural conditions in a manner that suggests a literalist or pre-critical attitude toward the interpretation of scripture or a naive natural theology that takes little account of actual biological and psychological complexities.

 

2.  Many people seem to assume that until more is known about homosexuality, homosexuals should not be ordained.  However, it will be a long time before Christians agree on this sensitive subject, judging by the emotional level of the current comments. In the meantime, shall we deny that homosexual persons can be called to the priesthood or demand from them a standard of celibacy not expected of others?  One bishop writes, "I am convinced that they (homosexual patterns of behavior) fall far short of the true meaning of sexuality although they are not necessarily devoid of value and dignity."

 

Most patterns of behavior fall far short of the true meaning, not only of sexuality, but of God's purpose for our entire lives.  Can anything more be expected of Christians, ordained or unordained, that they strive to live lives of value and dignity, always knowing how short we fall and how great is our need of forgiveness?  Can anyone say with assurance that God's purpose for the homosexual is something other than living out his nature with dignity?

 

3.  It is very distressing to note that some people are willing for homo­sexuals to be ordained, as indeed a great many of them always have been, provided they do not admit their inclinations publicly.  Thus we shall perpetuate a conspiracy of silence with its guilt, fear and hypo­crisy.  Critics seem to have overlooked the fact that many homosexu­als feel called to minister to the "gay" community, to people seek­ing to find and maintain a human and Christian identity.  Can this be done from the closet or with the tacit assumption that such folk must "repent" by denying themselves to a degree not required of others?

 

I am not much impressed by arguments about not offending against the scruples and consciences of fellow Christians.  Paul's admonitions in this regard dealt only with refraining from eating meat offered to idols, no great sacrifice for anyone.  But Christians must learn to live with fellow Christians who are homosexual, just as Jewish Christians had to learn to live with Gentile converts.  Bitter trauma seems to have been or to be involved in both instances.

 

Obviously, certain kinds of publicity are in bad taste, although in the case of the recent ordination the publicity seems largely to have been the result of the protests against it.  Publicity was probably inevitable in this instance; to cite it as a reason for canceling the ordination is indeed unfair and unjust.

 

4.  Once again the doctrine of "collegiality" in the House of Bishops is advanced as an argument for inaction or delay.  Obviously bishops should consult and counsel with each other on matters of substantial consequence to the faith and to the Church.  But for them to bind themselves and each other to certain courses of action is to circumvent the constitutional and canonical procedures provided for the orderly governing of the Church as well as to abdicate the responsibility for leadership laid upon bishops by the very virtue of their office.  There may be extreme instances when certain bishops ‑‑ alone or with others  ‑‑ feel that they must go beyond normal canonical rules, but to inter­pose a binding of collegiality is to exceed constitutional standards.

 

5.  The protests show little or no evidence of dialogue with homosex­ual persons or communities, of listening to their needs, aspirations and anxieties, to how they understand and value their sexuality and relate it to the whole of their Christian profession.  This brings to mind similar insensitivities such as white people discussing among themselves (often very charitably) how far to go in granting freedom or civil rights to black people, or men deciding among themselves whether women should have the right to vote or be ordained as priests.

 

 

6.  Finally, this episode demonstrates the need for much more study of taboos.  In the Book of Leviticus the taboo against homosexuality is listed among many others having to do with diet  and conduct.  Some, if not all, such taboos may have been necessary for the preservation of the distinctive character of the people of God, even for their sur­vival in a time of small populations and many hazards to their health and identity.  The taboo against homosexuality may even have some­thing permanent to say about the organization of society and the role of male and female.

 

Much more urgent, however, is the need for developing other taboos necessary for human survival in our day.  We need taboos against waste and pollution of human resources that could rob our children of life and health, taboos perhaps against several cars for at least most families, against overpopulation and the alleged right of every couple on earth to have as many children as they wish; taboos against indiscriminate development of nuclear energy, a far greater threat to the human race than almost any number of homosexuals.  And need we not develop taboos against violence and the attitude that one man shooting another or beating him into unconsciousness is somehow natural while two people embracing in love, whatever their sex, is not?

 

Are there not more consequential areas in which to expend our ener­gies and to seek to learn the will of God for our time?

 

EDITOR'S NOTE:  Bishop Barrett is a 1933 graduate of the Episcopal Theological School in Cambridge and is the holder of numerous honorary degrees.  He served as the Rector of several parishes, in­cluding Christ Church, Bronxville.  He was a Professor of Pastoral Theology at General Theological Seminary from 1952 to 1955 and served as Bishop of Rochester from 1963 to 1969.  Bishop Barrett is now retired and resides in Santa Barbara, California.  The Church would benefit from the leadership of more Bishops such as George Barrett.

 

ON BEING GAY AT V.T.S.

by The Faculty of Virginia Theological Seminary

 

Virginia Theological Seminary

A Statement of Policy

 

This seminary does not knowingly accept an applicant or retain a student who is a practicing homosexual.

 

The following statement sets forth the position of the faculty concern­ing homosexuality from a theological and pastoral perspective.

 

I. Introduction and Statement of Norms

 

1. Homosexuals are persons whose predominant sexual response, latent or actual, is to persons of their own sex.  The overwhelming opinion of psychotherapeutic authorities is that "this human condition" is not "congenital" nor "physiological" but "psychogenic."  We know bisexual persons but none who do not have a predominant predisposition although societal norms may make this "predominance" ambiguous.

 

2. We view this condition of homosexuality with the deepest compassion.  We are convinced that the Bible deals in a condemnatory way only with culturally approved or culturally consenting ho­mosexual relations and not with psychogenic homosexuality.  Therefore we view psychogenic homosexuality in a pastoral and not a moralistic context.  This means that we have guidelines for Christian psychogenic homosexuals which can be simply stated:

 

a) All Christian homosexuals are obligated to use all the resources of grace including psychotherapy ‑‑ individual and group ‑‑ to effect a transfer to heterosexuality.

 

b) We are aware of the limited resources in many geographical areas for this kind of help.  Nevertheless, we believe that every effort should be made with all available resources.

 

c) Where every resource has been used, however limited, and the Christian homosexual has failed honestly to make the transfer to heterosexuality, we commend to him or her the follow­ing guidelines:

 

1. That he (or she) seriously consider adhering to the norm of celibacy.

 

2. That he (or she) induct no others into the homosexual life.

 

We are not unaware of the stringency of these norms and are prepared to deal compassionately and in Christian forgiveness with human failures in this regard.  We deal pastorally and not moralistically with all Christian homosexuals.

 

II. Theological Grounds

 

Our norms for the above position derive from the Christian understanding of sexuality in the context of the Christian understanding of Creation.

 

1. Sexual differentiation on the human level was given by God in Creation.  Full humanity is intended to include males and fe­males in relationship to each other.  The fundamental expression of this relationship is lifelong monogamous marriage excluding all premarital and extramarital coitus.

 

2. The psyche (soul) and the soma (body) should be congruent.  A psyche with predominant sexual predispositions which are in contradiction to the sexual nature of the body is in deep trouble.  We view this contradiction ‑‑ evidently widespread ‑‑ with deep compassion and as one aspect of the distortion of God's creation witnessed to by the myth of "The Fall."

 

III. Candidates for the Ordained Ministry

 

This faculty regards homosexuality as a pathological condition which, if uncorrected, constitutes a grave disability for the ordained ministry.  Therefore, homosexuals, before seeking admission to this seminary, are morally responsible, as are all Christian homo­sexuals, to use every resource, divine and human, pastoral and therapeutic, to effect the transfer to heterosexuality.  This faculty is prepared to help to the best of its ability and available resources any student who has already been admitted and who becomes aware of this problem.

 

Our Chaplain is specially exempt from the use of any information he may acquire in a pastoral relationship for disciplinary purposes and in no way participates in the Seminary Faculty's obligation under Canon 34, Section (5) to give "a judgment as to his (the applicant for ordination) personal qualifications for the ministry of this Church."

 

Every theological student who expects to be ordained is responsible for making known to his bishop any homosexual predisposi­tions confirmed as such by skilled pastoral and accredited psycho­therapeutic authorities and to permit progress reports by such per­sons to be made to the bishop.  No bishop should be put in the position of ordaining a psychogenic homosexual without full know­ledge of the available facts and of the judgments of persons most competent to interpret the facts. This is clearly a part of the intent of Canon 34, Section (3) and Canon 26, Section I(b), paragraph 2.

 

In short, we believe that psychogenic Christian homosexuals should be dealt with pastorally and that postulants and candidates, who are psychogenic homosexuals, should be dealt with by their bishops with full knowledge of their situation.

 

EPISCOPAL CHURCH REACTS

 

Louisville, KY ‑‑ The Executive Council of the Episcopal Church has adopted a resolution in which it says it "deplores and condemns all actions which offend the moral law of the Church."

 

The Council went on record that "it witnesses to the necessity for the Church to give moral leadership to the affairs and activities of the Church and the world."  The Council said it "believes it should deal with moral issues."

 

Meeting here April 26-29, the 41 member Council said that it "has heard concerns about the ordination of avowed homosexual persons, abuse of the marriage canons and refusal of priests to honor the godly admonitions of their Bishops."

 

The Council resolution expressed "the hope that no bishop will ordain or license any professing and practicing homosexual until the issue be resolved by the General Convention."  The next scheduled meeting of the Convention is in the fall of 1979 in Denver, Colorado.

 

The Rev. Robert F. Royster, Lakewood, Colo., who initiated the subject through the Council's Committee on Church in Society, told the members, "This Council should speak to the moral issues....  This Council is competent to deal with the issues."

 

The Rt. Rev. Hal R. Gross. Suffragan Bishop of Oregon, said he did not "think it's the function of this Council in effect to censure any bishop of the Church for openly flaunting the moral law of this Church ... "

 

Fr. Royster said, "I do not believe the bishops are the sole repositories of the moral leadership of the Church."

 

The Rt. Rev. William H. Folwell, Bishop of Central Florida, said he also believes "it is the responsibility of the Council to deal with moral issues," and he cited civil rights and social responsibility in investments as two areas in which the Council has exercised moral leadership.

 

FORUM:

Observations from some of our readers, and others.

 

Risking a Gay Christian Vocation

by Betsy

 

Since I have become aware of my own nature as a lesbian, I have had to try to work out a reconciliation between my being gay and my being Christian.  In listening to other Christians, various viewpoints have been offered to me.  At the most conservative end, I have been informed that homosexuality is wicked and sinful, because it says so right there in the Bible.  This attitude shades into another almost imperceptible, where homosexuality is regarded as a regrettable disease, case of arrested development.  People holding this attitude offer to accept me with Christian compassion, just as they would lepers or other unfortunates.  If they get lucky, I may even repent and change my ways.  A still more liberal priest has told me that as long as I didn't choose to have a homosexual orientation, it can't be held against me as sinful, since sin is a concept concerning acts of the will.  And another Christian said that ideally there is nothing sinful about being homosexual but that maintaining a monogamous, lifelong love relationship of the type encouraged for Christian marriage is so difficult for homosexuals, given the lack of societal support, that for an practical purposes an active homosexual can't help but live in sin.

 

In all of these viewpoints, homosexual love itself is treated as, at best, a neutral entity and at worst, a down right evil one.  The proposition of living as a homosexual is treated like the proposition of taking a prescription drug with a high risk of bad side effects and no known positive value.  I would like to suggest another possibility.  Perhaps homosexual love is an intended part of God's creation, and some persons are called to a homosexual  orientation as part of their Christian vocation, just as they can be called to have other differing gifts.  In this case homosexual love is a positive, God-given force, not a handicap or sin for which you have to compensate.

 

The notion of a gay vocation sounds far fetched.  But is it?  If we look at the nature of God's creation, variety seems to be a primary rule.  We don't just get birds, but thousands of kinds of birds.  There isn't just rain, but also hail, snow sleet and fog. God seems to enjoy creating with an hilarious abundance of variety, and multiple variations on any theme.  More to the point, this principle of variety seems to hold true for types of love as well.  In the Bible, God encourages an sorts of love ‑‑ love between husbands and wives, but also between David and Jonathan, Ruth and Naomi, parents and children, man and God, Christians and other Christians.  This abundance of love is so important that Jesus summarizes all of the law into loving God, your neighbor and yourself.  Why, out of all these varieties of love should gay love be singled out as an exception?

 

There is no denying that the Bible does do just that on several occasions, along with adultery, fornication, etc.  However, there are lots of other injunctions in the Bible that are ignored today.  Nobody goes through the hand washing rituals anymore, and I haven't seen too many women with hats on in church lately. Given a New Testament relationship to God through the Spirit rather than under the law, it seems reasonable to find acceptable any behavior that doesn't violate love of God, neighbor or self. But we certainly can't know for sure.  There is always going to be that element of doubt.

 

So what is a gay Christian supposed to do?  The situation really is perilous.  I can't be absolutely sure that homosexuality isn't sinful and even if it isn't, it's going to be a lot harder to carry on a Christian gay love relationship than it would be if I were straight.  On the other hand, God may be calling me to fulfill myself as completely as possible as a gay person, to live out a gay vocation as part of His plan for creation.

 

I think I have three choices:  1) Try to become as heterosexual as possible, via psychotherapy; 2) Be celibate; 3) Try to establish a Christian homosexual lifestyle, even though that may be very difficult and might even fail.  I have decided on the third option, but let me deal with the other two first.

 

Apparently very few people are totally homosexual or heterosexual, but vary along a continuum.  Trying to force oneself to become heterosexual would be militating against a person's God-given identity to the degree that the person were purely homosexual.  For someone that was close to a 50/50 split, this might not be a bad option.  For someone who is almost exclusively homosexual in ori­entation, I see this as self-alienating and sinful, a rejection of God's intentions for that individual.

 

Deciding to be celibate has obvious appeals.  There is no risk of entering into a sinful love relationship.  However, there are sins of omission which are as bad as sins of commission.  Like the servant who buried his talent so that it would be safe, but did nothing to make it grow, a person can be cautious to the point of failing to love altogether, and failing to serve God actively and fully, due to the risk of making mistakes.  Some few people do seem called to be celibate and to have a unique love relationship exclusively to God, but this is a very special vocation and not something to take on simply as a defense against the complexities of living a Christian life.

 

Now let's look at the third option.  It will be very hard for the Christian homosexual to find a life long partner with whom he/she can share a holy love relationship.  However, Christ never said being Christian was going to be easy.  He never said to avoid hard tasks or compli­cations for fear of failing.  Rather the whole New Testament is filled with the challenge to dare to live more abundantly, under the Spirit rather than under law, in a dynamic, changing relationship with God rather than in a certain, static compliance to a fixed set of rules.  Clearly, being human, all of us will fail in this higher, New Testament calling again and again.  It's like trying to walk on a pitch­ing trampoline instead of on solid ground.  The New Testament is full of that. Everyone is always failing in there.

 

At this point the gay lover can only join with all Christians in ac­cepting God's free gift of grace and being thankful.  I would rather sin while trying my hardest to do God's will, than to sin from fear of trying at all.  Therefore, I do seek to have a Christian love relation­ship with another woman, and can only try to work out my salva­tion humbly, "with fear and trembling," but also with the ultimate assurance of God's unconditional love towards me.

 

Having gifts that differ according to the grace given to us, let us use them: if prophecy, in proportion to our faith; if service, in our serving; he who exhorts, in his exhortation; he who contributes, in liberality; he who gives aid, with zeal; he who does acts of mercy, with cheerfulness.  Let love be genuine ... Romans 12:9

 

HAVE YOU READ McNEILL YET?

 

John J. McNeill is a Jesuit priest and moral theologian.  His long­ awaited book, The Church and the Homosexual, had been delayed for several years while he patiently sought permission to publish from his ecclesiastical superiors.  The book was finally granted the recog­nition of "imprimi potest" which indicates only that the work meets the standards of scholarship expected in a book which treats of a "controversial moral topic."  McNeill was one of the founders of the New York Chapter of Dignity, the Roman Catholic Gay Fellowship and Caucus.  He writes as an ethicist and moral theologian who is critically concerned with the pastoral implications of the Church's theological and political stand on homosexuality and he draws upon extensive personal experience as a pastor and counselor to gay people.

 

Clearly, The Church and the Homosexual must be appraised in reference to the readership for which it was written.  It is aimed not at out-of-the-closet gay activists who have long ago resolved or rejected traditional Biblical and ethical assumptions about gayness; rather it is written in the hope of influencing those elements within the Church which may at least be ready to reevaluate their unquestioned assumptions about homosexuality. The work is an attempt to devise a Biblical hermeneutic which will clarify the scriptural writers' seemingly ir­reconcilable homophobia.  It is unwise an attempt to integrate the diverse contributions of the social and psychological sciences in the ongoing ethical debate over the nature of the homosexual condition.  But McNeill's greatest concern seems to evolve a theological frame­work which would entertain the possibility of positive contributions by and creative dimensions to the phenomenon of homosexuality as it affects the lives of individuals and the institutional life of the Church and our society.  Such a possibility would surely activate a new age in the Church's pastoral concern for gay people.

 

Lesbians receive very limited attention in The Church and the Homosexual.  Biblical strictures against lesbianism are less pronounced than those against male homosexuality, but the oppression which exists today is certainly felt by men and women alike.  Perhaps McNeill's shortcomings in comprehending lesbians throughout his book indicate that most of his pastoral experience has been with gay men, or per­haps he simply reflects the male-dominant orientation of the Catholic Church and the Christian tradition in modern times.

 

Biblical fundamentalists are not likely to be swayed by McNeill's handling of the scriptural references to homosexuality.  He does point out that a "homosexual condition" as opposed to homosexual activi­ty by "perverse" heterosexuals was not understood in Biblical times.  In an effective and concise manner he addresses such issues as:  the original intention of the author of the Sodom and Gomorrah narrative; translation problems in various versions of the Bible; the sociological, religious, and sexual environment of Old Testament Israel; the Gos­pel's view of human sexuality as a potentially positive dimension of the individual.

 

McNeill's discussion of the handling of homosexuality by the Early Church, the strongly negative influence of Stoicism, the lingering dominance of Thomas Aquinas, and the implications of the Church's gradual acceptance of the morality of non-procreative  heterosexual activity together constitute an important original contribution to the theological demythologization of homosexuality.

 

Responding to several Roman Catholic moral theologians who have reinforced their critique of homosexuality by drawing upon psychia­trists such as Dr. Irving Bieber and Dr. Edmund Bergler, McNeill presents a useful synthesis of the views of such writers as Evelyn Hooker, Wainwright Churchill, Thomas Szasz, and Dr. George Wein­berg, whose Society and Healthy Homosexual he quotes on sev­eral occasions.

 

McNeill's attempt at a teleological chapter setting forth the positive contributions of homosexuality to the social order includes important and interesting material, but one is left disappointed by the lack of depths in his analysis.  Either radical social change is not necessary because homosexuality is already making a very significant contri­bution, or his arguments a little too shallow to prove much of anything.

 

The most disappointing part of McNeill's book comes in the chapter on "Pastoral Ministry to the Homosexual Community."  His goals are clearly positive, but his thrust is often conservative and occasion­ally ill-advised.  There is considerable evidence to suggest that Mc­Neill should be more skeptical about the possibility of heterosexual adjustment by homosexuals.  While arguing for the possibility of positive relationships for homosexuals who do not become hetero­sexual he seems reluctant to be sufficiently critical of those theolog­ians who argue that sexual abstinence is the best and desired lifestyle for homosexuals.  He suggests that an individual should not affirm a gay sexual orientation before the age of twenty-five, a point that seems unrealistic and naive.  On the more positive side it should be noted that McNeill does present a strong case for Law reform and a solid defense for the continued existence of Dignity, at least within the fringe areas of Roman Catholicism.  In his behalf it may be suggested that any more radical presentation of the issues involved in pastoral care and counseling would have been counter-productive given the anticipated readership of the book.  The Church and the Homosexual merits the attention of all Church-affiliated gay people and their pastors.

 

Reprinted with permission from The Boston Gay Review, Box 277, Astor Station, Bos­ton, MA 02123

 

 

NEW BOOK COMING FROM UNIVERSAL FELLOWSHIP PRESS

 

Norman Pittenger's Gay Lifestyles:  A Christian Interpretation of Homosexuality and Homosexuals is a dispeller of darkness, a harbinger of light.  It speaks sense where the Church too often has spoken nonsense, or worse still, has not spoken at all.  It is a candid book, even with the bedroom geometry of Gay bodies housing Christ's spirit.  It is an affirming book, not so much of a theological or philosophical "position" of persons, viz., of Gay Children of God.  It is a sensitive book, informed by the experience of Gay pain yes, but by the experi­ence of Gay love and forgiveness too.

 

Gay Lifestyles was written after this eminent Anglican theologian had spent the summer of 1975 talking to the Convention of The Uni­versal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches and to the Convention of INTEGRITY in his own Episcopal Church.  Dr. Pittenger had written earlier works that addressed homosexuality honestly and affirmatively, most notably A Time for Consent and Making Sexuality Human.  Yet Gay Lifestyles goes far beyond these important earlier efforts; it is informed much more clearly by extensive experi­ence with Gay Christians.  Furthermore, Gay Lifestyles has a decid­edly American focus that the earlier books did not have in their British context.

 

Dr. Pittenger is known internationally as one who sees God as a Pro­cess.  Here God is clearly in the process of loving Gay human beings and in the process of teaching Gay human beings to love and affirm one another. ‑‑ Louie Crew.

 

ON ANITA BRYANT, DADE COUNTY AND THE GAY RIGHTS ISSUE

 

Most of us have by now experienced a data overload regarding Dade County, Anita Bryant and her religious crusade against the human and civil rights of gay people.  Since the media and the press have probably supplied most Integrity Forum readers with extensive information and commentary on the issues and personalities in Dade County, we will restrict our comments to three points:

 

1. The events in Dade County and the phenomenon of Anita Bryant's crusade against gay people underscore the need for a committed and loving presence of religious gay people with­in the Church.  It will be far more difficult for the Churches to ignore us, deny us or reject us when we stand as a visible wit­ness among them.  We have arrived at a critical stage in the process of reeducating the Church and society about sexuality and homosexuality.  Our continued loving participation in the institutional Church is an essential factor in the process of shat­tering stereotypes, challenging myths and bringing an end to hatred and prejudice which oppress us all.

 

2. Now is a time to work even harder for the publication of open and affirming statements about the phenomenon of homosex­uality and lesbianism.  Supportive pronouncements from par­ishes, denominations, individual church leaders and community groups are an articulate challenge to Ms. Bryant and to the as­sertion that the Church and the Bible stand in monolithic oppo­sition to the acceptance of gay people.  The Gospel is about love.  Being gay is about loving.  We finally must stand up and say, "Jesus loves me: this I know for the Bible tells me so!"  Our acceptance as loved and loving children of God in the whole­ness of our beings is ultimately Christ's message for us all.

 

3. This is the time to become more, not less, involved in the movement for acceptance of gay people in Church and society.  Work harder for Integrity.  Join the National Gay Task Force. Support your local gay and lesbian organizations.  Nurture your non-openly gay friends.  Encourage your openly gay friends.  Be a witness and a spokesperson for acceptance of gay people and never be a voice for your own or our own oppression.

 

CHRISTIANITY AND CRISIS DEVOTES ENTIRE

ISSUE TO GAYNESS AND CHRISTIANITY

 

Gay and Concerned Christians should rejoice upon the publi­cation in early June of an entire issue of Christianity and Crisis which is devoted to very affirmative perspectives on what it means to be Gay and Christian.  Time and space do not allow a lengthy synopsis of the six articles, but the magazine should be required reading for all active members of Integrity, all members of diocesan sexuality commissions, and the clergy and laity who counsel gay people and their families.

 

Included in the issue are the following:  a survey of the gay ordination question by Tracy Early, who writes frequently for the Christian Science Monitor; a superb piece on gay counseling by a wonderful non-gay woman, Peggy Way, who will soon join the faculty of Vanderbilt School of Divinity in Nashville; a fine essay on being a "Woman, Lesbian, Feminist, Christian" by Nancy E. Krody, the Coordinator of the United Church of Christ Gay Caucus; an article entitled, "The Dynamics of Sexual An­xiety," by James Harrison, a clinical psychologist in New York City, who is supportive of human liberation; and a semi-auto­biographical essay by Integrity's founder, Dr. Louie Crew, de­scribing what it is like to be gay and Christian in Fort Valley, GA.

 

Integrity President Ron Wesner has acquired multiple copies of this special issue of Christianity and Crisis.  He can supply you with a copy for $1.50 (including postage and handling).  Write to Father Wesner at 5014 Willows Avenue, Philadelphia, PA 19143.

 

EPISTLE FROM SKULL PLACE

 

My trip to North Carolina was filled with good experiences. Bishop Fraser gave me an hour and fifteen minutes, and seemed to be enjoying the occasion more than just being tolerant.  He dearly wanted to be supportive, and remembered some humble occasions from his earlier ministry when brother priests were deposed for being Gay.  He set the tone by beginning, "Well, now, Dr. Crew, you know we in the House of Bishops made a study of our own clergy many years ago and found about 30% of them to be Gay. Not too surprisingly, some others in the diocese were to alter the perspective on their bishop.  One Gay priest came to the SE Gay Conference and told me that he has not celebrated Mass since last Christmas and is about to give up on the Church as a bigoted insti­tution; he certainly questioned any understanding that might be attributed to Fraser ... I discovered that we even have a chapter in Chapel Hill ... with Anglican and Roman priests also alternating the combined DIGNITY/INTEGRITY chapter.  I went to the Palm Sunday Mass at the Newman Center and nearly dropped to the floor in surprise as person after person prayed for Gay people and for the conference that we were having in their midst ‑‑ this at the main 11 o'clock mass the morning after a campus dormitory had been used for a Gay dance for over 670 people ... behind the Cotton Curtain!  The Conference itself was a huge success, and one of the warmest gatherings I have ever attended. We had our meetings in the Student Union right in the middle of the campus with a much bigger crowd than had been expected.  Our panel on Gays and Religion (including two priests, an MCC person and a nonGay UCC pastor who is father of one of the Conference leaders) was one of the largest I discovered that many more are identifying themselves as DIGNITY or INTEGRITY people and making strong witnesses for us long before they make any kind of official affiliation with a chapter or with the national organization ... I have been granted another NEH Fellowship for this summer ... at University of Texas to study the political uses and abuses of Standard English by the power elite, under the major grammarian James Sledd ... I couldn't resist, but have written Dorothy Faber at the Christian Challenge asking her if she knows of a local parish where Ernest and I would be welcome for the summer!  I have also written Bp. Richardson, Dean Charlton at the Seminary of the Southwest and several other persons letting them know of my interest in meeting with diocesan groups interested in the Gay Christian movement in our Church.  I think I'll make me a bright yellow suit and get a white straw hat; and at our Convention in August I'll be Rose of Texas!  Love from Skull Place. ‑‑ Louie Crew, Fort Valley, GA.

 

SUPERLATIVE THEOLOGIZING IN CHRISTIANITY AND CRISIS

 

Christianity and Crisis, for April 4,1977, reprints a 7-page article by James B. Nelson, "Homosexuality and the Church:  Toward a Sexual Ethics of Love."  The article originally appeared in the Win­ter 1975 issue of Theological Markings, journal of the United The­ological Seminary of the Twin Cities, where Nelson is professor of Christian ethics.  (Christianity and Crisis plans a special number on Homosexuality and Ordination later this Spring.)  Excerpts from Professor Nelson's article:

 

A typology of four possible theological stances toward homosexuality can begin with the most negative assessment.  A rejecting ­punitive position unconditionally rejects homosexuality as Christ­ianly legitimate and bears a punitive attitude toward homosexual persons.  While no major contemporary theologians defend this position and while official church bodies have moved away from it, this stance unfortunately is amply represented in Christian history.

 

The rejecting-punitive stance today may be milder in its usual manifestations, though it continues to bear highly punitive attitudes along with its theological arguments.  If the latter are based upon a selective biblical literalism, the former are rooted in familiar stereotypes.  All lesbians are hard, and all male gays effeminate; homo­sexuals are compulsive and sex-hungry; male gays are inherently prone to child molestation; homosexuals are by nature promiscuous.  Each of the preceding stereotypes has been thoroughly discounted by reliable research; yet they persist in the minds of many, buttres­sed by untenable biblical interpretations.  But the key criticism of this stance is simply the incongruity of a punitive orientation with the gospel of Jesus Christ.

 

The rejecting-nonpunitive stance must be taken more seriously, for no less eminent a theologian than Karl Barth represents this view.  Since humanity is "fellow-humanity," says Barth, men and women come into full humanity only in relation to persons of the opposite sex.  To seek one's humanity in a person of the same sex is to seek "a substitute for the despised partner," and as such it constitutes "physical, psychological and social sickness, the phe­nomenon of perversion, decadence and decay."  This is idolatry, for one who seeks the same-sex union is simply seeking oneself: self-satisfaction and self-sufficiency.  While Barth says homosexu­ality thus is unnatural and violates the command of the Creator, he hastens to add that the central theme of the gospel is God's overwhelming grace in Jesus Christ.  Hence, homosexuality must be condemned, but the homosexual person must not.

 

The underlying assumption appears to be this:  that theological positions and ecclesiastical practices which reject homosexuality can, in fact, be nonpunitive toward those persons so oriented.  This, too, must be radically questioned, and we shall do so in the context of the next major position.

 

The third major theological option is that of the qualified acceptance of homosexuality.  Helmut Thielicke provides its best articulation....

 

More than Barth ... Thielicke is empirically informed and pastorally sensitive on this issue.  But his position is still grounded in an unacceptably narrow and rigid version of natural law.  As such, in spite of its greater humanness his argument becomes self-contra­dictory.  In effect the gay person is told, "We heterosexual Christians sympathize with your plight, and we believe that any sexual ex­pression in which you engage must be done in an ethically respon­sible way ‑‑ but do not forget that you are a sexual pervert!" ...

 

The fourth major theological possibility is full acceptance. While it usually makes the assumption that homosexual orientation is much more a given than a free choice, even more fundamentally this position rests upon the conviction that same-sex relationships are fully capable of expressing God's humanizing intentions.

 

One possibility is that "the homosexual problem" may be more truly a heterosexual problem.  We are learning that "the Black prob­lem" is basically the problem of white racism, and that "the woman problem" is basically the problem of male sexism.  So, also, we might well wonder whether or not "the homosexual problem" could be rooted in a homophobia frequently experienced by heterosexuals.

 

My own experience suggests this....

 

The church's firm support of civil rights for gay persons ought not depend upon agreement concerning the theological and ethical appropriateness of the homosexual orientation or of specific same-sex acts.  Civil rights support ought to be considered an expression of Christian concern for basic social justice....

 

To be sure, congregational affirmation of gay persons would involve significant attitudinal changes on the part of many heterosexual Christians.  With full acceptance, for example, all of those gestures and behaviors appropriate to heterosexuals in church gatherings must be affirmed for homosexuals as well.  This should mean, then, no double standards concerning the hand-holding couple, the kiss of greeting or the appropriate partner at the church dance....

 

The ecclesiastical implications of full acceptance are undoubtedly complex.  Very understandably, however, many gay Christians are tired of waiting for such complexities to be resolved.  They have waited ‑‑ and hurt ‑‑ long enough.  Their impatience, I believe, is a call for repentance and for urgent work by the rest of us.  At its root the basic issue is not about "them," but about us all:  What is the nature of that humanity toward which God is pressing us, and what does it mean to be a woman or a man in Jesus Christ?

 

Reprinted with the permission of Christianity and Crisis, 537 West 121st St., New York, NY 10027.  Reprints of the entire article are available from that address at $.75 per copy, bulk rates available.

 

Editorial note:  It is not too late to express support for this article through a letter to the Editor of Christianity and Crisis or by sub­scribing to that fine publication.

 

INTEGRITY FORUM SUBSCRIPTION FORM

 

Enclosed is my check or money order for $_______.  Please [_] enter or [_] renew my subscription as indicated below.

 

Name______________________________________________

Address___________________________________________

City State & Zip__________________________________

 

[_] $50 Sustaining Membership

[_] $25 Supporting Membership

[_] $10 Regular Membership

[_] $13 Couple Membership

All memberships include one year of Integrity Forum.

[_] $12 One year Integrity Forum, non-member

[_] $ 3 Plain Envelope

 

If you want Integrity Forum mailed in a plain envelope, you must   enclose the $3 additional.

 

$_______ Enclosed as my contribution for the general purposes of the national office.

 

Canadian and Foreign subscription remit in U.S. funds.  Air Mail extra.  Return to: INTEGRITY, P.0. Box 891, Oak Park IL 60303.

 

LOCAL CHAPTERS

 

INTEGRITY/ATLANTA Convenor Thomas J. Jackson, Station C.P.O. Box 7934, Atlanta GA 30309

INTEGRITY/AUSTRALIA Convenor Rev'd Ron Dowling, St. Linus's Vicarage, 19 Glyndon, Merlynston, Victoria, 3058, Australia.

INTEGRITY/BOSTON Convenor William Doubleday, Box 2582, Boston, MA 02208 617/723-4336

INTEGRITY-DIGNITY/CHAPEL HILL Convenor Hogan Gaskins, P.O. Box 385, Chapel Hill, NC 27514

INTEGRITY/CHICAGO Convenor David Williams, P.O. Box 2516, Chicago, IL 60690 312/388-1470

INTEGRITY/DENVER Convenor Rev'd Thomas Dobbs, 1734 Washington Street, Denver, CO 80203

INTEGRITY/DETROIT Secretary-Treasurer Nick Benard, 22105 Gaukler, St. Clair Shores, MI 48080 313/771-0654

INTEGRITY/SOUTHERN OHIO Convenor Jim Burns, 244 Castlewood Av., Dayton, OH 45405 513/274-9714

INTEGRITY/EUGENE Convenor Larry Monical, 310 East 14th Av., Eugene, OR 97401.

INTEGRITY/FORT VALLEY Convenors Ernest Clay and Louie Crew, 701 Orange Street, #6, Fort Valley, GA 31030 912/825-7287.

INTEGRITY/HARTFORD Convenor Rev'd Dr. C.R. Jones, 45 Church Street, Hartford, CT 06103

EPISCOPAL INTEGRITY/HOUSTON P.O. Box 25342, Houston, TX 77005 (Not to be confused with the fine local secular organization called Integrity)

INTEGRITY/KNOXVILLE Convenor Jim Fleenor, P.O. Box 8174, U.T. Station, Knoxville, TN 37916

INTEGRITY/LOS ANGELES Convenor Jim Pressler, 5629 Monte Vista, #7, Los Angeles, CA 90032 213/462-5936

INTEGRITY/MADISON Rev'd Bill Landram, 21 W. Gilman St., Madison, WI 53703

INTEGRITY/MIAMI Convenor Bill Worley, P.O. Box 680457, Miami, FL 33168

INTEGRITY/NEW ORLEANS Convenor L. Sam Myers, P.O. Box 15586, New Orleans, LA 70175 504/861-1663

INTEGRITY/NEW YORK CITY G.P.O. 1549, New York, NY 10001

INTEGRITY/PHILADELPHIA Co-Convenors Rev'd John Lenhardt 4711 Baltimore Av., Philadelphia, PA 19143 215/726-1089 and Rev'd Ron Wesner 5014 Willows Avenue, Philadelphia, PA 19143 215/748-2118

INTEGRITY/PHOENIX Convenor Bob Eff, P.0. Box 27212, Phoenix, AZ 85017

INTEGRITY/PORTLAND Convenor Randy West, P.0. Box 1323, Federal Station, Portland, OR 97207

INTEGRITY/RICHMOND Convenor Edward Meeks Gregory, 1907 N. 23rd St., Richmond, VA 23223

INTEGRITY/ROCHESTER P.O. Box 8295, Rochester, NY 14617 716/232-6521

INTEGRITY/ST. LOUIS Convenor Jim Ellsworth, P.O. Box 7213, St. Louis, MO 63177 314/776-8210

INTEGRITY/SAN ANTONIO.  Convenor David Allen White, 417 E. Locust #3, San Antonio, TX 78212 515/735-4393

INTEGRITY/SAN FRANCISCO AND BAY AREA.  Co-Convenors Rev'd Richard Younge, P.O. Box 6444, San Jose, CA 95150 and Andrew Berry, 695 Noe St. #4, San Francisco, CA 94114

INTEGRITY/TORONTO Box 463, Station J, Toronto, Ontario, CANADA M4J4F2

INTEGRITY/TWIN CITIES Convenor Rollie Winter, P.O. Box 3565, Minneapolis, MN 55403

INTEGRITY/WASHINGTON, DC Convenor Rev'd Bill Baker, 1101 Third SW #616, Washington, D.C. 20004

 

Persons have inquired about the possibility of new chapters in Dallas, Jacksonville (FL), Lexington (KY), Montana, Norfolk, Oklahoma City, San Diego, Savannah, Seattle, Springfield (MO), Toledo and Topeka.  All queries should be sent to our President, Rev'd Ron Wesner, 5014 Willows Av., Philadelphia, PA 19143 215/748-2118.  This ministry is very important.  We need you.  Please write today.  Isn't it time for you to convene a chapter?