620 Park Ave PMB 311
Rochester NY 14607-2943
800-462-9498 toll-free 
585-486-6529 fax | e-mail
Home
Search
Calendar
Basic Information
Board & Staff
Members
Partners
Welcoming Congregations
Provincial Coordianators
Diocesan Organizers
Chapters
Stores
Other Resources

Integrity gives thanks for the generous support of the...

Arcus Foundation

Evelyn and Walter Haas, Jr. Fund

E. Rhodes and Leona B. Carpenter Foundation

Summer 1993 [HTML]

Voice of Integrity, Summer 1993

This is an electronic reproduction of The Voice of Integrity, the 
quarterly publication of Integrity, Inc., the lesbian and gay justice 
ministry of the Episcopal Church.  All materials except those 
reproduced from other sources are copyrighted by Integrity, Inc.  You 
may reproduce all original material herein if you state "Reproduced 
from the Summer, 1993 issue of The Voice of Integrity, the quarterly 
publication of Integrity, Inc., the lesbian and gay justice ministry of the 
Episcopal Church."

Material may not appear exactly as published since some changes 
were made after the document was transferred to desk top publishing 
format.

We encourage you to join Integrity.  We encourage non-Episcopalians 
and non-lesgay persons to join.  If you are a lesbian or gay 
Episcopalian and don't belong to Integrity, you're benefitting from all 
our work and we hope you'll strongly consider helping us by joining.  
Individual annual membership $25, Couple's annual membership $40, 
Low income/student/sr. citizen $10.  Please mail check or money 
order to Integrity, Inc., PO Box 5255 NYC, NY 10185
 

**********

Summer 1993

*The Voice of Integrity*
Volume 3, Number 3
Published by Integrity, Inc.
P.O. Box 19561
Washington, D.C. 20036-0561
Telephone 718-720-3054

Bruce Garner, President
Edgar Kim Byham, Publisher
R. Scott Helsel, Editor

Contributing Editors:
Claudia Windal, Louie Crew, Paul Wooodrum

Blair McFadden, Layout
Dorothy Gunn, Production

Editorial Office:  201-868-2485
PO Box 5202; NYC, NY 10185

Member Episcopal Communicators 
Associate Member Gay & Lesbian Press Association

Copyright 1993

********************

*TABLE OF CONTENTS*
*March on Washington*
  Pilgrim Lutibelle's Report
  An Abiding Place
  Religious Leaders Support March
  Journey Folk
  All Things New
  The Wedding
  Celebrating Life
EURRR's Cannons Flaming Again
Former Integrity Chaplain Elected First Female Diocesan
Judge Dismisses $4 Million Lawsuit in Virginia
I Was in Prison and You Came to Me
*Book Reviews*
  Nothing New:  "New Millennium, New Church"
  New Prayers For Old Occasions: 
  "Daring to Speak Love's Name"
Chapter Updates
Disciples' Candidate Supportive
Claudia's Column
Joshua's Baptism Pushes the Boundaries of the Family of God
*Lesgays in the Military*
  The Beat Goes On
  A Retired Chaplain on Gays in the Military
  The Presiding Bishop Supports an End to the Military Ban
  UCC Leader Testifies for End of Military Ban
  PB Writes to Armed Forces Chaplains
An Exchange of Pleasantries
East Tennessee Symposium to Explore Search for 
  Structural Reform of the Episcopal Church 
Much Fuss Down Under: 
     First "Openly" Gay Ordinand in Australian Church Quits
Topeka Parish Gay Bashed
Commission on AIDS/HIV Surveying Church's Ministries
EURRR Opposes Minnesota Bishop-Elect
New Dallas Bishop Says He's Open, We'll See
Suffragan Bishop-Elect in Virginia Accused of Sexual Misconduct
A Not Very Pastoral Letter
British Bishop Admits Charges, Resigns
Homophobia Doesn't Just Hurt Gay People - Part II:  
  Straight Integrity Member Fired for Supporting Equality
Bishop Plummer Charged With Sexual Misconduct: 
  The Church and the Media React
God's Vulnerability in Our Sexual Choices
Songs for One of Our Unsung Heroes, 
  Helping Ohio Sing a New Song
Should Integrity Change How it Addresses the Clergy?
Integrity Plays A Major role in Colorado 
  Losing 1997 General Convention
Lesbian Prof Dismissed by General Seminary 
President's Column
Should We Support the ESA?

********************

*EPISCOPAL COMMUNICATORS*

This Publication Honored by Episcopal Communicators

At its annual convention, held in New Orleans June 9-12, 1993, "The 
Voice of Integrity" received Polly Bond Awards and honorable 
mention recognition for several articles in 1992.  Integrity's entries 
compete in the Magazine division, Agency Level, a group which 
includes "The Witness" and "The Living Church."

     Reader Response: Award of Excellence
     "Comments on the Bishops' 'Issues in Human Sexuality'"
.LM 16
               Authors: Louie Crew, Guy R. Foster, John M. 
               Gessell, Larkette Lein, David Lochman, Virginia 
               Ramey Mollenkott, Peter C. Moore, Tim Vivian, 
               David White
.LM 11
               Summer 1992 issue

               Headline: Award of Merit
               "Art Imitates Episcopal Life"
               Author: Kim Byham
               Fall 1992 issue

               Editorial: Honorable Mention
               "PB Hopelessly Heterosexist"
               Author: L. Paul Woodrum
               Fall 1992 issue

               News Story: Honorable Mention
               "`France's Troy Perry' Murdered, Police 
          Implicated"
               Author: Kim Byham
               Spring 1992 issue

               Theological Reflection: Honorable Mention
               "Some Instructive Parallels"
               Author: Warner Traynham
               Winter 1992 issue

               Devotional/Inspirational: Honorable Mention
               "Kicking, Screaming, Limping: Being the Church 
          in the World"
               Author: Louie Crew
               Spring 1992 issue

          ********************

          MEMBERSHIP FORM

          *INTEGRITY, INC.*
          PO Box 5255
          NYC, NY 10185

          I want to share in Integrity's work for justice for lesbians 
          and gay men.  Please enter my membership as checked 
          below and begin my subscription to "The Voice of 
          Integrity."

          [ ] Individual annual membership           $25
          [ ] Couple annual membership               $40
          [ ] Low income/student/sr. citizen         $10

          Mr./Ms/Miss
          Mrs./Rev./Dr.  
          __________________________________________

          Address 
          _________________________________________________

          City _________________________  State 
          ___________________

          Phone ________________________  Zip 
          _____________________

          Please mail with your check or money order to:  
          INTEGRITY, INC., PO Box 5255 NYC, NY 10185
          All contributions tax-deductible to the 
          extent permitted by law.

          ********************

          *MARCH ON WASHINGTON*

          Pilgrim Lutibelle's Report
          by Louie Crew

               We were early enough Friday evening to park in 
          St. Thomas's small lot, since David Allen White, our 
          host, needed to arrive to multiply the loaves and fishes.  
          Ernest and I walked to Dupont Circle, where I had 
          come so many weekends, 1962-65, for long meditations 
          and droolings that led me to flee to England and 
          embrace my identity.  I always remember Dupont Circle 
          as at least four times larger than it actually is, rather the 
          way I remember neighborhood gullies that I learned to 
          jump when 8 or 9.  "I feel like I'm back in Hong Kong," 
          Ernest said, responding to the thickness of the crowd.  It 
          swelled even more as we walked up Mass. Ave., towards 
          Lambda Rising and the March Office.  Police limited 
          the crowds allowed in Lambda Rising, and 5 or 6 
          separate lines of people, each a block long, waited to 
          enter the book store.  What revolution has ever been 
          this much about the right to read!?

               A small crowd had already gathered outside St. 
          Thomas's when we returned.  A much larger crowd had 
          grown inside.  I gave up waiting in line to sign the guest 
          book, lest I not get a seat in the service.  Ushers brought 
          in more and more chairs.  The small Washington 
          chapter wore itself to a frazzle feasting and libating all 
          the pilgrims afterwards.  

               At 10:30 on Saturday morning we rushed by cab 
          to Mt. St. Alban.  Ernest explored the Cathedral of St. 
          Peter and St. Paul for his first time.  I slipped into the 
          small chapel in the Bishops House, where four of us 
          kept simultaneous vigil with similar small groups in 
          cathedrals all over the United States protesting with 
          prayers the consecration of Bishop Iker occurring at the 
          same time in Fort Worth.  Every chapel window 
          depicted female Christians from all times.  As part of 
          my own meditation, I reMEMBERed every woman who 
          had shaped me in my childhood, writing down long lists 
          of names to make them members of me again, including 
          my blood family, my surrogate black family, my 
          teachers, the women in the neighborhood, Dorothy 
          Potter whom I played dolls with, Emily Cater whom I 
          played "naked" with, until her mother, Irene, came like 
          God into the garden, and we covered ourselves with 
          draperies as we stood in the bay windows, and I was 
          spanked severely and forbidden to go to the puppet 
          show....

               "Justice, Justice, Shalt Thou Pursue" was the 
          theme of the Interfaith Service at the Church of the 
          Epiphany on Saturday afternoon at 3 o'clock. Several 
          hundred pilgrims packed in to hear Rabbi Sharon 
          Kleinbaum and Episcopal priest Ted Karpf preach 
          poignantly to this theme.  [See Father Karpf's sermon 
          on page 7.]  Ted subtly reversed the Sodom story to 
          address the question of our numbers.

               No one at this service -- designed months ago by 
          all the lesbigay religious groups in our capital for all 
          MOW pilgrims -- was able to attend a competing 
          service, beginning at 4, long before this service was 
          over, at the National Cathedral.  Contrary to all its 
          public announcements, the service at the National 
          Cathedral was explicitly gay.  The dean of the cathedral 
          did greet the crowd with specific reference to lesbigay 
          pilgrims.

               By all accounts of those there, the service was 
          absolutely splendid and in the best traditions we all 
          expect of our national cathedral. But why did the 
          National Cathedral organize and publicize an event in 
          direct competition with an ecumenical service of all 
          lesbigay religious groups?  Why did it make not one bit 
          of effort to contact any of those religious groups to 
          invite them to attend?  Why did it get specific about its 
          gay connection only when the audience arrived?

               On Sunday, I had been standing with Integrity in 
          the thick crowd on the mall near the Washington 
          monument for about four hours waiting for a space to 
          clear for our group to enter the narrow stream of 
          marchers going down Pennsylvania Avenue.  The 
          crowds were so large that at our position we could see 
          no movement until long after the first marchers had 
          reached the end of Pennsylvania Avenue and re-entered 
          the mall at the other end.

               I was weary.  My legs were swelling.  I decided to 
          risk lying down.  While there was space enough, I was 
          not sure that anyone moving about would see me, nor 
          that I could get back up, given where Mr. K. Knee Stone 
          had kicked me in the back.  I lay there for half an hour 
          or so, vaguely listening to the loud speakers of the 
          performers and speakers on the platform two of three 
          blocks away. The march, I realized, was not about 
          getting somewhere, but about presence, about being 
          there, about being present together.

               We marched but followed no one.  In fact, we 
          might just as well not have "marched," given the 
          difficulty of movement, but might more expeditiously 
          have just sat on the mall all day long.  We had arrived 
          en mass in our Capital. Any other movement was mere 
          choreography.

               Celebrities dropped in and out occasionally, but 
          never controlled us.  No one completely rapt the 
          throngs.  (T-shirts might dispute that claim!)

               Jesse Jackson preached at one point, and some 
          of us responded to his litany, "Keep hope alive" and "I'm 
          somebody."  I was glad that he was there, glad that he 
          and other national leaders were not deaf to the pain 
          and suffering of those whom our institutions defined as 
          the least of these their sisters and brothers; but for 
          much of even Jackson's speech, my attention rambled, 
          as did that of many others present.

               Earlier Phil Donohue got more response to his 
          litany, "Get over it!"  How ironic that a talk show host 
          has won major moral authority in our time, but why 
          should I be surprised:  the House of Bishop has 
          dialogued itself into irrelevance; Churches can't even 
          decide whether to be churches; arts consumers can't 
          even decide whether the massive death of artists should 
          even be noticed. Why should I be surprised if God uses 
          the very stones to cry out?

               At one point I fetched Bishop Otis Charles 
          (formerly Bishop of Utah, now Dean of Episcopal 
          Divinity School) from the EDS/Harvard Divinity 
          contingent and brought him like a prize to the Integrity 
          area.  Predictably, his episcopal shirt set up a murmur of 
          "Who's that bishop?" and some eased over to meet him.

               For a brief moment when we did begin to move, 
          Bishop Jane Dixon appeared, almost like an apparition, 
          shook about 10 sets of palms, and disappeared. Mainly 
          we pilgrims seemed a leaderless crowd, and that seemed 
          good.  So many hundreds of thousands of persons 
          together, with folks vying to lead us, or merely to get 
          our attention.  It seemed to me we did quite well 
          without a leader.  Perhaps someone needed to be on a 
          platform to feed the media, but for the most part, 
          people about me seemed to feed on our massive 
          presence itself, in all our glorious diversity.

               Several Episcopal Bishops showed up the 1963 
          March on Washington.  Only two showed up for our 
          much larger march in 1993.  That's part of the problem!  
          Thank God for Bishop Jane and for Bishop Otis 
          Charles!  I wish Bishop Ron could have been there with 
          his gay son, whom he affirms, but Mary, his wife, is still 
          trying to get the young man "regenerated" as straight.  
          Pray for them.

               For me, the main moment of the weekend was a 
          personal one.  While I lay on the grass I realized that 
          my spouse had sat down next to me.  I was on my back 
          with my eyes closed, my knees elevated to improve 
          circulation.  He rested himself by leaning on my right 
          leg, for a very long time.  I began to be uncomfortable 
          with the pressure of his weight, and realized I was 
          crying, but I struggled to give no indication whatever of 
          my discomfort, lest he stop resting on my knee, because 
          I realized for for the first time in two decades of 
          married life we were in a space where such simple 
          public affection called no attention to itself, in a space 
          where no one needed to monitor or take note of our 
          simply touching, and quite beyond the discomfort, I 
          wanted the joy of this simple touch to last forever and to 
          be available to everyone in the whole wide world.

          ********************

          *AN ABIDING PLACE*

          A Sermon by the Rt. Rev. Jane Holmes Dixon, 
          Suffragan Bishop of Washington, at the 
          Integrity/Washington Eucharist, April 23, 1993

               It is a privilege for me to be here with you this 
          night.  When Michael Hopkins called me some months 
          ago and invited me to be the celebrant at this Eucharist, 
          I had to do what we do when we think about what is the 
          thing we should do.  

               I'm in a new position, as you well know, with all 
          my fine garb.  Statements that I make and places that I 
          go and pictures that are taken are seen in a different 
          way, and there's a part of that that I hate.  I hate it that I 
          had to think about whether I would come here tonight.  
          I have celebrated for Integrity before, in this very nave, 
          and I thought, what a state to which I have been 
          elevated!

               But I work for a wonderful man -- a man whom I 
          admire more than I can ever tell you, or I would never 
          have let my name be put forward last year when we 
          elected a suffragan.  And I went into him and I said, 
          "Bishop, do you have any problems with my going to 
          celebrate for Integrity the weekend of the Great 
          March?"  He said, "It's a celebration for Integrity, isn't 
          it?"  I said, "Yes."  He said, "Do you celebrate there?"  I 
          said, "Yes."  He said, "Then, what's the question?"  I 
          want you to know that, because there are times that he 
          and I will make you angry and you will feel left out.  
          Whatever you think about me, I want you to think the 
          best of him because he's a brave and courageous man.

               I also was a little stunned when I read the lessons 
          that are appointed for human dignity and rights that had 
          been chosen for tonight's lessons.  When I saw that 
          when Michael sent me the service of liturgy, I thought, 
          well, we're really going to get into justice big-time 
          tonight!  And there was that astonishing letter where 
          John begins with "God is love" and then in Matthew's 
          gospel where those two commandments on which all the 
          law and the prophets rest, and there are only two that 
          our Lord, Jesus Christ says, that we love God and that 
          we love our neighbors as ourselves.

               And so we gather here tonight to talk about what it 
          means to love when we don't feel very loved in this 
          world.

               It was exciting driving down here tonight.  The 
          streets are full of people!  And a rather extraordinary 
          experience took place just before I got here.  I was 
          invited to tea at the Rector's home, the Rectory.  As we 
          were sitting there we thought, was this a new beginning 
          for the church of God?  There we sat in Jim's Holmes' 
          rectory -- a woman bishop and an openly gay priest -- 
          thank God!  And his loving partner was with us and I 
          have to tell you as we walked back to the church and we 
          heard the music over at Dupont Circle, Tim and I were 
          a little tempted to make a stop over there.  But Jim said 
          we had to be here so we came over.

               I want to talk about loving tonight.  Because you 
          and I can go out of this place and we can be so filled 
          with bitterness and so filled with feeling oppressed that 
          we will not do what God would have us to do.  For there 
          are goings-on in the church down in Texas this weekend 
          that break my heart as well.  And I had to struggle as to 
          whether I would be there or not, and I have let women 
          down by not being there.  So I ask you to pray for those 
          in that diocese, and for the men and women who are 
          part of that world, and for the oppression that they feel, 
          and for those who are even more oppressed who will 
          not ordain women.

               You and I are called to tell the world about 
          another way of being and it's very appropriate that this 
          Great March is taking place in Eastertide, because you 
          and I are Easter people.  We always believe that God is 
          doing a new thing and that no matter what humankind 
          can do, God can always overcome it.

               In the epistle for tonight there is a word John 
          uses frequently.  It is the word "abide" and that word 
          comes from the Hebrew word which means "to 
          tabernacle together."  And so as you've gathered here 
          tonight and you have given me the privilege of gathering 
          with you, we've come to make that safe place, that tent 
          of meeting, that place of abiding, where we can come to 
          be refreshed and restored and healed and sent out into 
          the world.  We need gatherings like this because 
          sometimes the world seems overwhelming and it's very 
          appropriate that people have come into this town this 
          weekend to say to the world, there are many of us who 
          care, straight and gay, for the dignity and worth of every 
          human being.  But it is important that we find those 
          places, those abiding places where we can come for 
          strength and solace and courage.

               Because the message, of course, is about loving, 
          it is about loving those that we do not want to love.  For 
          if we go out of here tonight only thinking about 
          ourselves and the things that have been inflicted upon 
          us, we will not be doing what God has commanded us to 
          do.  God has commanded us to love our neighbor as 
          ourself.  And we know, when the lawyer asked Jesus 
          who our neighbor was, we got the story of the 
          Samaritan.  But the neighbor for me is that one I really 
          don't want to love, and there are lots of those out there.  
          But if I hear these words and understand them, as I 
          know God has intended for me to understand, it means 
          that I am to love those who are the least lovable, those 
          who say things to me that are hurtful, because God has 
          called me to show the world another way.  And I need 
          that abiding place, that tabernacling together with 
          people where I feel safe and I feel loved so that I can go 
          into a world that often I feel does not love me.

               I am grateful that these are the lessons for 
          tonight for it would be very easy for us to be here 
          talking about our sorrows and the oppression that you 
          have felt in ways that I will never know.  And there are 
          those among you who are people of color who have felt 
          oppression in ways that those of us who are white will 
          never know.  And it is also important that this 
          Holocaust new museum has been opened here in 
          Washington this week to remind us what hatred can do.  
          People who are oppressed are not free from hatred.  
          And so that is a great reminder to me that hatred 
          withers my soul and makes me bitter and stingy and 
          mean, and we know what happens to people when we 
          become that way.

               So I challenge you tonight as I challenge myself, 
          as we hear the words that were read to us in the lessons 
          from Holy Scripture, to love God and know that God 
          loves you and me.  It is because God loves us and deems 
          us worthy that you and I are to go out in the world and 
          love others.  The passage from Isaiah tells us what we 
          are to be -- a light to enlighten the nations.  And so we 
          have a responsibility, we have a duty as Jim was saying 
          to me before we came tonight.  We have a duty -- we 
          have a duty to show the world another way.

               I pray for you as you are here this weekend, that 
          you connect with those that maybe you've not seen for a 
          long time, and that that abiding place which is begun 
          here will go with you out into the world, and you will 
          feel that kind of love of God and neighbor that will give 
          you the courage to do the things that you were called 
          upon to do, for the struggle is just beginning.  

               Being here with you tonight gives me courage.  I 
          have been in a really bad mood all week.  I have felt 
          oppressed.  Excuse me, gentlemen, I have had men put 
          me down the last three days, and I've had to smile and 
          be nice and keep on going.  And I'm sorta sick of it.

               But I needed to hear those lessons.  I needed to 
          hear that God loves me no matter what I do.  And 
          because God loves me, then it is my privilege to serve 
          my God and to love those who seem most unlovable to 
          me.

               God bless you all.  Thank you once again for the 
          privilege of being the president of this Eucharist, and 
          God be with you as you go out into this world to make a 
          difference in the quality of life for all human beings.

               In the name of God who creates us, liberates us, and 
          who sanctifies us.  Amen.

          ********************

          *RELIGIOUS LEADERS SUPPORT MARCH*

               Representatives of several national religious 
          communities announced their support for the March on 
          Washington for Lesbian, Gay & Bisexual Equal Rights 
          and Liberation.  Endorsement were announced at a 
          March 17 press conference organized by the United 
          Church of Christ, which ended the Interfaith IMPACT 
          Annual Legislative Briefing, a national gathering of 
          people of faith for justice and peace held in 
          Washington, DC.  The Episcopal Church did not 
          endorse the march.

               Rabbi Lynne F. Landsberg of the Union of 
          American Hebrew Congregations discussed the need 
          for religious people everywhere to fight discrimination 
          against lesbians and gays.  "We are here today to say, 
          loudly and clearly, that the real traditional values of 
          American life -- if not always of American history -- are 
          those of freedom, liberty and equality."

               The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America 
          (ELCA) joined in these statements of support, with Kay 
          Dowhower saying, "The ELCA has committed itself to 
          participate in God's mission by 'advocating dignity and 
          justice for all people' ... which commits the church to 
          the civil rights of homosexuals ...  The ELCA continues 
          its support of the Civil Rights Amendments Act for Gay 
          and Lesbian Civil Rights.  We urge swift passage of this 
          legislation.  We look upon the upcoming March on 
          Washington as one way in which those supportive of the 
          civil rights for all persons, regardless of sexual 
          orientation, can join together to support one another in 
          that effort."

               Robert F. Glover of the Christian Church 
          (Disciples of Christ) agreed, saying, "The church stands 
          firm today in its support for civil rights and in its 
          solidarity with those who have too long endured the 
          burden of fear, ignorance, hatred and violence ...  We 
          strongly support the April 25th March on Washington ... 
          in the hope that the day will soon come when all 
          Americans will enjoy equally the rights of their 
          citizenship."

               Robert A. Alpern, director of the Washington 
          office of the Unitarian Universalist Association, spoke 
          of the long history of many religious groups in support 
          of gay and lesbian rights, saying, "After passage of the 
          anti-civil rights initiative in Colorado, the Unitarian 
          Universalist's General Assembly Planning Committee 
          withdrew its reservation for the $3 million 1997 General 
          Assembly in Colorado.  And our Beacon Press mailed 
          copies of a newly published book "Homophobia:  How 
          We All Pay the Price" to 150 public libraries in 
          Colorado.  So it is in this spirit ... that we have for 
          months urged Unitarian Universalists from across the 
          continent to come to Washington and join this historic 
          manifestation to reverse the cruel discrimination 
          practiced against 25 million or more of our relatives, 
          friends and others we do not know."

          ********************

          *JOURNEY FOLK*
          by Donald Snyder

          Ubi sunt gaudia, In any place but there?
          There are angels singing Nova cantica,
          And there the bells are ringing, in Regis curia,
          O that we were there!

               This stanza from "In Dulci Jubio," especially the 
          line, 'O that we were there!' kept flowing through my 
          mind as the various events surrounding the March on 
          Washington for Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Equal 
          Rights and Liberation began to unfold.  I knew the 
          special importance of this event, as did everyone in the 
          gay and lesbian community.  Even so, it soon became 
          apparent that others saw the event's importance as well.  
          The mainstream media, such as The New York Times, 
          NBC, and National Public Radio, did a number of 
          stories on gay and lesbian issues and used the march as 
          a way to introduce them.  I couldn't help but feel some 
          support from these articles and stories, as the 
          momentum in my own mind began to build.

               The significance of the march was in evidence as 
          Allen Lowe, my close friend and traveling companion, 
          and I began our journey toward Washington on Friday 
          morning.  As we drove on I-95 we came upon two 
          women from New Hampshire with the hand-made sign, 
          "Honk If You're Queer," in their back window and four 
          men in a rental car from New York with a large 
          lavender triangle in the rear window.  No guessing was 
          needed as to their destination.  Even the four people 
          from New Jersey with the Rand-McNally Street Map for 
          Washington in their side window subtly stated their 
          weekend location.

               At a well reviewed restaurant in Philadelphia, 
          our sense of anticipation continued.  Our server shared 
          stories about people she knew who were going, and the 
          bartender told of his plans to leave on Saturday.

               Upon arrival in the Dupont Circle area, I had 
          the impression that the nation's capital had been 
          transformed into a gay and lesbian small town.  People 
          walking to their destinations and visiting with strangers 
          proved that given half a chance, we don't have to 
          maintain the icy veneer that is often present in gay and 
          lesbian bars.

               There was a family reunion feeling as Integrity 
          members and friends began to gather at St. Thomas 
          Church.  As the service began and we sang the hymns, 
          the standing-room-only congregation exuded more spirit 
          and verve than the acoustics and architecture of the 
          church could contain.  It was so inspiring to hear the 
          epistle reader for the evening share her heartfelt 
          thoughts about having been alienated by the Southern 
          Baptist Church several years earlier, and how she had 
          found a special sense of reconnection with organized 
          religion through Washington's Integrity chapter.  As a 
          musician, I found a special warmth in hearing "Es flog 
          ein kleine Waldvogelsin," "Noel nouvelet," and "Land of 
          Rest," three of my favorite hymn tunes.  Jane Holmes 
          Dixon, Washington's new Suffragan Bishop, spoke so 
          thoughtfully of the ease with which she happily accepted 
          the invitation to be our preacher and celebrant.  The 
          Washingtonians outdid themselves, providing a 
          sumptuous buffet for all in attendance.  Talk about 
          feeding the five thousand!  As we dined, we had more of 
          an opportunity to greet old friends and make new ones.

               Dupont Circle was presenting its own spring 
          flower show as the last of the cherry blossoms and tulips 
          as large as my cupped hand were in great evidence.  The 
          Circle proved to be an impromptu "meet and greet" for 
          many people, including me.  It was hard to believe that I 
          would have to go to Washington to see friends and 
          associates who were fellow New Yorkers.

               My sense of anticipation was as bright as the 
          early sun as Sunday morning arrived.  Even though an 
          estimated one million of us were in the District of 
          Columbia area, Washington was quiet at the 7 o'clock 
          hour as I drove from the home of our host family in 
          suburban Maryland to downtown for the Integrity 
          gathering at St. John's, Lafayette Square.  Several of us, 
          bleary-eyed, met for the 8:00 Eucharist.  Even though 
          our contingent swelled the number in attendance to 
          nearly one hundred from its usual half dozen or so, no 
          mention of the march or our presence was made during 
          the intercessions or announcements.  Only the slightest, 
          if veiled, referenced could be detected during the brief 
          homily.  My firm disappointment was tempered with a 
          sense of satisfaction in knowing that we, subtly but 
          assuredly, made our presence known.  It seems like a bit 
          of a coup, knowing that we had accomplished this in the 
          "Church of Presidents," and done so in a very positive 
          way.  Music helped redeem the service, as the organist 
          played Vaughan Williams' "Variations on 
          'Rhosymedre,'" another one of my favorites.

               As I moved the car and rode the Metro back to 
          the Mall, I thought of others who weren't going to be in 
          our number that day.  There was a renewed sense of 
          loss and grief for those who had died of AIDS or as a 
          result of anti-gay hate and violence.  There was dismay 
          and even some anger for those who wouldn't have 
          considered coming, since being homosexual is not a real 
          issue or even "discussed in polite company."  I knew, 
          however, I could take a sense of pride in representing 
          those who, because of distance, finances, career, or 
          other legitimate reasons, couldn't be there.

               A sea of humanity was making its way toward the 
          Mall by late morning.  T-shirts seemed to be the 
          uniform of choice for most marchers.  The official 
          march shirts proliferated.  Of the others, my favorite 
          was the one which said, "One Percent is a Fairy Tale."

               Those of us in the Integrity contingent began to 
          gather at the appointed place with the other religious 
          groups.  The only weather worry was that of sunburn.

               There seemed to be a sense of relief more than 
          anything else, when we were finally led to the street to 
          join the march.  We had a good number of chapters 
          represented in our gathering by them, as Bishop Dixon 
          came to greet us at the edge of the Mall.  We had 
          visible support from those in the straight community as 
          well.  Together the one million of us in attendance had 
          the opportunity, even the duty, to sign our names to the 
          petitions provided by the march organizers.  This way 
          we could prove the National Park Service wrong with its 
          woeful under count.

               It was gratifying to be in the majority as we 
          passed in front of the Treasury Building and were 
          confronted by those from the so called "religious right."  
          Their attempts at swaying opinions were easily rebuffed 
          by our refrain, "We're here!  We're queer!  We're 
          Anglican!  Get used to it!"  Militant as it sounded, those 
          statements seemed to sum up the sentiment for all of us.

               With another passenger in the car we departed 
          Washington, spending time recounting various aspects 
          of our weekend as we drove north.  I counted no less 
          than twenty-six autos with fellow "journey folk" on their 
          respective homeward treks.  As I reflected upon the 
          impact of the march and its related events, I found that 
          the words 'O that we were there!' were transformed into 
          the affirmation, 'Oh, yes, we *were* there!'

          ********************

          *ALL THINGS NEW*

          A sermon preached by the Rev. Ted Karpf on April 24, 
          1993 at the Church of the Epiphany for the service 
          organized by the Washington Area Gay and Lesbian 
          Interfaith Alliance in observance of the March on 
          Washington for Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Equal 
          Rights and Liberation.

               We're here!  We're gathered to witness to the 
          hope and fear, the joy and trauma of being lesbian and 
          gay, transgender and bisexual in America.  By these 
          days in the nation's capital we are challenged to take 
          our vision back to our communities to begin or continue 
          and invigorate our movement for equal rights across 
          America.

               As people of faith, we hold the conviction that 
          no change happens apart from the presence of God.  
          The very content of justice is based on a holy vision of 
          God's ultimate victory over all that reduces and destroys 
          life.  Such a vision informs us in the words of Isaiah:  

            Behold I create new heavens and a new earth; and 
          former things shall not be remembered or come to 
          mind.  

          The Prophet continues, 

            Before they call I will answer, while they are yet 
          speaking I will hear.

               This vision is dramatic.  For it suggests a new 
          order built out of the old -- a renewal, if you will, of 
          what has been transformed to what can be.  We gather 
          here with no less dramatic and compelling 
          determination.  And what are some of our visions?   
          They include tragedy and trauma, outrage and 
          revolution, and hope and wholeness.  At the heart of 
          this visioning of what we have endured, what we are 
          demonstrating, and of that for which we yearn is the 
          Shalom -- peace -- envisaged by Isaiah when the whole 
          of creation comes to terms with itself in peace.

               This hope is as old as humanity.  But for bisexual 
          and transgender, gay and lesbian people our peace is 
          found in obtaining basic equal rights that we may join in 
          the struggle for meaning and value with all other human 
          beings.  Gandhi is reputed to have said, "It would be a 
          sin if God were to appear before a hungry man in any 
          other form but a loaf of bread."  For our community -- 
          for we who have settled too often for the half a loaf that 
          wasn't always better than none -- for God to come 
          before us in any form but the full -- and fulfilling -- loaf 
          of equal rights to enter the struggle for wholeness is a 
          sin.

               For us to be at peace requires not only faith, 
          which enables to us to rise above the terror, but the 
          basic human rights to participate in the struggle toward 
          meaning with all humanity.  This expectation -- no, this 
          demand -- of ours is consistent with God's promise that 
          creation will be at peace with itself.

               We have reached a time where our critical mass 
          in society is being felt.  We have reached a time when 
          the powers and principalities of this age can no longer 
          ignore our presence, try though they may.  There are 
          simply too many of us, though some surveys say we are 
          not enough.  To that I say, if there are ten of us and we 
          are deprived of our rights to give and be given in 
          relationships and to enjoy the blessing of children, then 
          there are too many of us to deny.  If there are only five 
          of us, and we are told that we cannot enter the struggle 
          for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, then there 
          are too many of us to ignore.  And if there is just one of 
          us, and even this one cannot be allowed to just be, then 
          there are too many of us who are oppressed.  And for 
          just this one, we -- all of us -- must engage in the 
          struggle for human rights.

               There is an old Sufi legend told by Shams of Tabriz 
          about himself.  It talks about the meaning of being 
          different, which is at the core of our struggle:  how 
          others can live with the differences which our lives 
          present in the arena of the human struggle.  The story 
          goes like this:

            I have been considered a misfit since my childhood.  
          No one seemed to understand me.  My own father once 
          said to me, "You are not mad enough to be put into a 
          madhouse, and not withdrawn enough to be put in a 
          monastery. I don't know what to do with you."

            I replied, "A duck's egg was once put under a hen.  
          When the egg was hatched the duckling walked about 
          with the mother hen until they came to a pond.  The 
          duckling went straight into the water. The hen stayed 
          clucking anxiously on land.  Now, dear father, I have 
          walked into the ocean and find in it my home.  You can 
          hardly blame me if you choose to stay on the shore."

               How many of us have lived through this story?  
          All of us in some way or other, I expect.  This is our 
          reason to celebrate:  we have entered the ocean and 
          have not drowned!  We celebrate the fact that we are 
          here today together.  And what of the times in which we 
          live?  What have they taught us to celebrate?

               We are celebrating the triumph of making the 
          break and entering the ocean.  We are celebrating the 
          triumph of passion become compassion as lesbian 
          sisters and gay brothers demonstrate unremitting love in 
          caring for those of us dying with AIDS.  We are 
          celebrating the witness of our community in making 
          itself felt and heard in politics of the nation.  We are 
          celebrating the commitment in love of bisexual and 
          transgender, lesbian and gay parents who have managed 
          to keep and raise their children and grandchildren in 
          the face of overwhelming and painful opposition. Thus, 
          we are celebrating our determination not to drown, but 
          to swim.  Some wi}l say that we are celebrating the 
          limitations of those who stay on the shore, but that is 
          not true; would that the whole world be ducks!

               But what gift can we ducks give to the world as 
          we celebrate this weekend? What can endure? We 
          come to live as different.  To a large extent as a 
          community we shy from our calling to be different.  
          Years ago, Don Clark, in "Loving Someone Gay," said, 
          If you're going to be gay, you might as well be different!  
          Even in the late seventies, ten years after Stonewall, 
          many gay commentators were beginning to identify an 
          emerging conformity to behavior, style, language, 
          attitudes, and beliefs.  But everything in the gay/lesbian, 
          bi and transgender subculture says no matter how hard 
          we try to look like everybody, we don't.  We can't pass 
          and we shouldn't try.  Remember:  *If it walks like a 
          duck and talks like a duck then no matter how it looks, 
          it must be a duck.*  Or so the story goes.  I see a 
          dangerous desire on the part of many us to be like 
          everyone else.  But if we who exist in the reality of exile 
          must become like our oppressors to get along -- to 
          "pass" -- then we dare not try to be anyone but who we 
          were created to be.

               For the God-given gift is that equal rights 
          include the right to be different.  Isaiah gives us a clue 
          in describing the New Creation:  

            The wolf and the lamb shall feed together, the lion 
          shall eat straw like the ox; and dust shall be the 
          serpent's food.  They shall not hurt or destroy in all my 
          holy mountain.  

               It is not just a matter of differences existing side 
          by side: it is the promise that the predatory nature of 
          creation -- the enmity and the need to consume each 
          other -- will be removed from the order.

               What this vision says is that we shall exist side by 
          side with all people.  Color will be real, but not divisive.  
          Sexual orientation will be real, but not fear inducing.  
          Differences will be celebrated not abhorred.  For 
          central to the spirit of gaiety is the spirit of difference -- 
          of constantly being made new and different.

               How then shall we live?  In this week of the 
          dedication of the Holocaust Museum there is a message 
          for us in the screams, the whispers, the cries of the 
          captives.  Several years ago I was given the horrific gift 
          of visiting two of the concentration camps of the 
          holocaust -- Dachau and Terezin.  Dachau, you may 
          recall, was the place in Germany were those residing in 
          the town -- just outside the camp walls -- denied any 
          knowledge of the thousands upon thousand who were 
          killed and cremated inside the walls.  Orderly, 
          systematic and carefully planned, Dachau was the 
          prototype for the Final Solution.  Strangely, because 
          conformity was demanded and enforced, there was no 
          record of resistance in this systematized, planned, 
          hygienic industrial setting.  Thousands died and 
          thousands more denied.  And in that place there is a 
          prevailing sense of hopelessness and despair.  Dachau is 
          a monument to death and destruction and human 
          cruelty -- systematized, planned, conformist, in every 
          way.

               And then there is Terezin.  There is the medieval 
          fortress and prison, and the village.  This was the village 
          where the children were sent and from which we have 
          the record of their art and letters about the camps.  The 
          prison and concentration camp are eerie in that the 
          original bunks, signs, window covering, bowls and 
          spoons remain on the tables where they were on the day 
          of liberation.  The wind blows softly through the camp, 
          which feels as if its inhabitants had just left.  This camp 
          -- which saw the execution of 35,000 through disease, 
          overwork, and firing squads -- is a monument to the 
          constant resistance of humanity to conform.  For in this 
          camp, uprisings and escapes occurred regularly and 
          often.  The Nazis could not control the prisoners, so 
          prisoners were regularly executed before all of the 
          camp's inmates to reinforce fear and create order.  It 
          failed.  So it had to be repeated often.

               As I stood touching the bullet holes in the wall 
          where these executions took place, I surprisingly felt 
          hope.  The unconquerable will of the human spirit to 
          survive pulsed through me.  Even in a world of limited 
          choices and few options, we still can choose to be 
          different ... to not submit to those who would break us, 
          and beat us, and even kill us.  I have had the same 
          experience again and again when ministering at the 
          bedside of those dying with AIDS; in the life-giving, 
          death-defying pangs of childbirth of lesbian mothers; in 
          counseling adolescents struggling mightily with 
          questions about their sexuality; and at the altar of the 
          church where gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender 
          people have come to offer again their lives to God -- 
          and to each other -- as people of faith.

               How do we live?  We live by faith that the vision 
          of Isaiah will come to pass and that we are part of that 
          vision.  We live by celebrating the differences and 
          embracing the vast array of our choices.  We live by 
          drawing strength from the witness of our compassion, 
          and by the power of our passion.  We live by respecting 
          the dignity -- and the differences -- of every human 
          being.  We live by coming together in peace, to seek 
          peace and wholeness in a world which doesn't really 
          know what that looks like.  We live by trust, by faith, by 
          courage, and by hope.  That's how we live.

               May the God of each of us, of our calling, be 
          with us and upon us all-ways in our search for a new 
          heaven and a new earth. Amen.

          ********************

          *THE WEDDING*
          by Kim Byham

               Scott had a good excuse for not attending "The 
          Wedding" on Saturday morning.  He had arrived on a 
          red-eye train from New York at 8:00 am and was at our 
          motel asleep when several thousand people gathered in 
          front of the IRS building.  We had had the Rev. Troy 
          Perry, founder and moderator of the Universal 
          Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches and 
          chief officiant at the event, for dinner at our home only 
          a couple of weeks before.  We had discussed the 
          ceremony and I decided to let my journalistic curiosity 
          overcome my Anglican disdain.

               It was marvelous.  Despite the name, it made no 
          pretense of being a wedding service or even a blessing 
          of union.  It was, instead, a wonderful rally in support of 
          couple-rights.  That's why it was held in front of the IRS 
          building -- where better to protest the inequality of 
          lesgay and straight couples.

               The highlight was the introduction of America's most 
          famous lesbian couple: Karen Thompson and Sharon 
          Kowalski.  Thompson announced that she was that 
          month taking Kowalski home from the nursing facility 
          where she has been for many years following the car 
          accident that left her paralyzed.  Thompson's successful 
          custody battle with Kowalski's parents is a landmark in 
          lesgay couple rights.

               Introduced as the oldest lesbian couple were a 
          delightful, though anachronistic couple from Florida.  
          Bobby Smith, 69, and her life partner of 33 years, Kay 
          Thompson, also 69, dressed in "masculine" and 
          "feminine" garb, respectively.  The longest-term gay 
          couple had been together 46 years.  Jim Busby and 
          Dusty Keyes of Arlington, VA had been brought 
          together by a federal government roommate service.

               A number of religious "dignitaries" were briefly 
          introduced.  They included the Rev. Karen Murphy, 
          Assistant Rector at Grace Church, Madison, NJ, 
          "representing that part of the Episcopal Church that 
          affirms lesbian and gay unions."

               After a brief exchange of expressions of love and 
          the statement, "We proclaim together our rights as 
          couples,"  Perry said, "Couples, you may kiss."  At that 
          point, the Wedding March was played and rice filled the 
          air.  The schmaltzy ending did not detract from a 
          significant event, the symbolism of which was largely 
          lost on the straight media.

          ********************

          *CELEBRATING LIFE*

          by Bruce Garner

               Well, by now, we have all learned that the 
          National Park Service can't count.  (They give the rest 
          of us federal employees a bad name - if they worked for 
          me, they would either be in a math class or looking for a 
          job!)

               Empowered is the word I think best describes 
          being in Washington along with over a million of us 
          homosexual types.  There is nothing that can ever 
          compare with being among your own people, knowing 
          that it is your time to be, and to be who you were 
          created to be, without shame, without hesitation, 
          without fear.  It was indeed our time, and I hope it was 
          the beginning of the end to our oppression.  (I ain't that 
          naive, children - but I *can* hope, can't I?!)

               The Eucharist on Friday night was incredible.  
          St. Thomas was filled to capacity.  The responses of the 
          congregation shook the building.  The singing almost 
          overpowered the organ.  Bishop Dixon inspired us with 
          a homily about love and with her obvious love and 
          compassion for us.  And as usual, our DC chapter put 
          on an impressive spread during the reception.  It was a 
          welcomed reunion for so many of us, seeing folks we 
          hadn't seen in quite a while.

               Sunday morning at St. John's Lafayette Square 
          was special too.  It was appropriate that we begin the 
          day in the house of God, fed from God's table.  I doubt 
          the 8:00 am service had seen quite so many folks in 
          many a day.  We were acknowledged, though safely and 
          subtly.  A bit of reality was reintroduced to us in the 
          realization that, even in that place, on that particular 
          Sunday, some of us still cannot live our lives as they 
          were created to be lived.  We all must remember that 
          reality.

               The rainbow of our family was quite impressive.  
          We looked just like who we are:  ordinary, average 
          looking, American citizens.  Our folks included the 
          same variations in color, appearance, dress, and attitude 
          that we find in the American public at large, despite 
          how much so many would like to deny that truth.  We 
          really are not all that different - at least in appearance.

               I visited back and forth between our Integrity 
          contingent with the religious organizations and the 
          extremely large (rumor had it to be the third largest) 
          Georgia delegation.  (We had to make up for producing 
          the likes of Sam Nunn!)  If we really are only 1%, there 
          weren't many queers anywhere else but DC that 
          weekend.

               One of the most moving and empowering 
          moments for me was looking up and seeing Integrity's 
          banners with their cross-topped standards, some 
          wrapped in palm branches, processing forward with the 
          movement of the march.  In front of us were other 
          religious symbols such as the orthodox processional 
          crosses.  I saw it all again in a picture and realized how 
          powerful that sight really was.  God was there.  God was 
          marching with us.  The symbols of God's demonstration 
          of love for us all led the way.

               While this was a indeed a civil rights 
          demonstration, it was also a glorious celebration of life.  
          We celebrated who we are and did so in the bright light 
          of day - no hiding in the darkness, no cowering in 
          corners - but out in sight of God and everybody.  

               And there we were.  All over the Mall (and we 
          weren't shopping - well maybe we were at that!).  There 
          was the Quilt - a powerful reminder still of what 
          homophobia can produce when disease is linked to 
          prejudice.  There were the entertainers and speech 
          makers.  There were folks so angry that they made no 
          sense.  There were others who spoke from a peace that 
          comes from making progress, however slowly, and 
          understanding that the road is still rocky and steep, but 
          we must plod along if we are to reach our destination.  
          There were those who touched us with humor - the one 
          salve we have for the pain that sometimes results from 
          our being who we are.  It was good.

               I hope someday we can go to DC for the sole purpose of 
          celebrating who we are, no political agenda's, no need 
          for demonstrations to get our rights, just to celebrate.  
          Until then, we must continue to struggle to obtain our 
          birthright.  With the help and grace of God, I believe we 
          will finally take our place at the table.  I pray I am alive 
          to see it.

          ********************

          *EURRR's Cannons Flaming Again*

          The sexuality dialogues in most parishes are now 
          complete.  The process was extremely biased, and many 
          participants felt that the conclusions were preordained.

          Although less than 1% of our Church's membership 
          participated in the dialogues, their opinions will be 
          proclaimed as representative of the entire Church.

          Now the homosexual lobby is preparing yet another 
          attack.  Please, read this letter carefully ...

                                              April 22, 1993

          Dear Friend,

               The homosexual lobby is on the march against 
          the Episcopal Church ... and the next stop may be a 
          courtroom where "homosexual rights" replace biblical 
          teaching on morality.

               The defendants:  your parish priest and your 
          vestry.

               How can this be happening?  Here's how.

               The homosexual lobby in our Church is copying 
          a strategy that's being used successfully on the national 
          political level.

               Their agenda for the 1994 General Convention 
          calls for:

               1.  Passage of a non-discrimination cannon [sic].
               2.  Access to ordination without regard for sexual 
          orientation.
               3.  An authorized liturgy for the blessing of 
          same-sex unions.

               The path leading to approval of the homosexual 
          agenda has been carefully plotted by both the 
          homosexual lobby, which ironically calls itself 
          "Integrity," and by many within our own Church 
          leadership.  *We need your help now to counter their 
          efforts.*

               We can only stop them if we act now ... and that's 
          why I'm asking for your help today.  *No matter how 
          painful, we must face the truth.  Our Church is feeling 
          the impact of the gay agenda.*
               Bishops and priests violate the expressed position of the 
          Church by performing ordinations of practicing 
          homosexuals and blessing homosexual "unions."  HOW 
          CAN WE BE SILENT?

               This is a battle for the very soul of the Episcopal 
          Church.  If we remain quiet we will lose.  We must 
          speak out!  We must stand together now!  *The ministry 
          of Episcopalians United has never been more vital*.

               Homosexual activists within the Church are 
          encouraged ... and with good reason ...

               They have influenced key leaders within our 
          Church.  On February 5, the Rt. Rev. Edmond L. 
          Browning, our Presiding Bishop, wrote to President 
          Clinton, commending him on his efforts to end the 
          military's ban on homosexuals in the armed forces and 
          expressing his belief that "gay rights" is a justice issue.

               And sadly, there are a large number of lay 
          people within our Church who will be swayed by the 
          arguments of leaders like Bishop Browning ... even 
          though he's dead wrong!

               Within the Church, the ordination of practicing 
          homosexuals to our clergy and the blessing of same-sex 
          unions are not civil rights issues ... and they are *not* 
          justice issues.  They are theological issues, and they 
          must be addressed on sound theological grounds.

               To bless the experience of homosexuality, we are 
          being asked to assent to a process which rewrites 
          Scripture ... nullifies the Word of God ... and disavows 
          2000 years of Christian moral teaching.

            Approval of the homosexual agenda will so warp the 
          doctrine, discipline and worship of our church that 
          within a generation the Episcopal Church will no longer 
          be recognizably Christian.

               And that's why we cannot give in.  We must 
          prepare for battle and we must fight.

               We must prepare sound, convincing Scriptural 
          arguments.  We must mobilize every concerned 
          Episcopalian in every parish ... and we must equip them 
          with the information and understanding they need in 
          order to make a difference.

               We cannot afford to lose.  *Our families, our 
          country ... and the very soul of our Church ... these are 
          all at stake*.

               Some 450 years ago, Martin Luther wrote:

            "If I profess with the loudest voice and the clearest 
          exposition every portion of the truth of God, except 
          precisely that little point which the world and the devil 
          are at the moment attacking, I am not confessing Christ.  
          *Where the battle rages, there the loyalty of the soldier 
          is proved, and to be steady on all the battlefield besides 
          is mere flight and disgrace if he flinches at that point."*

               Please stand with us today.  If you don't take a 
          stand with us, where will you stand?  If you won't stand 
          now, then when?

               We are fighting for the right to teach our 
          children and grandchildren the truth of Scripture when 
          it comes to sexual morality ... and to give them at least 
          one place in our society where they can learn from 
          positive role models.

               *We are fighting to save our Church and country 
          from judgment*.  God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah.  
          He will judge America too.

            Remember, the Scriptures says, "It is time for 
          judgment to begin with the family of God; and if it 
          begins with us, what will the outcome be for those who 
          do not obey the gospel of God" (1 Peter 4:17).

               We must throw aside our lethargy.  For years we 
          thought America's values where [sic] secure -- protected 
          by our President, our Congress and the Supreme Court.

               We also believed that the Church would protect 
          our values -- and it should -- but we were wrong.  Many 
          of the leaders of the Church are unwilling to defend our 
          values.

               *Each one of us must take a stand for what we 
          believe, and we must unite with others who share our 
          convictions.  It is our only hope*.  We can have an 
          impact on the issues of our day, but only if we have 
          courage enough to stand ... and only if we're wise 
          enough to stand together.

               That's why Episcopalians United was founded.  
          It's the reason we continue to work for reform and 
          renewal in the Episcopal Church.

            Our job is to empower you to save the Church we love.  
          We're committed to giving you the weapons to fight the 
          battle ... to fight it well.

               Episcopalians United helps you promote a 
          correct view of sexuality issues ... one that's faithful to 
          Holy Scripture and the long-held tradition of the 
          Church.  We share successful strategies about how to 
          influence decisions ... not just at your local level, but 
          also at the diocesan and national levels.

               So I urge you to become involved today, while 
          there's still time.  The sexuality debate will be a key part 
          of the 1994 General Convention.  *Those who believe 
          in the ordination of homosexuals to the Episcopal clergy 
          and seek the Church's blessing for same-sex unions will 
          be there in force*.
               We must begin our preparations today!  We must match 
          their efforts delegate-for-delegate, argument-for-
          argument, dollar-for-dollar.  No effort can be spared in 
          this critical battle.

               *This is not time for passivity.  If you're not 
          willing to stand now, then our Church is in deep 
          trouble*.

               Perhaps you're tired of fighting -- so am I.  
          Frankly, I'm so sick of this issue that I just want it to go 
          away.  During the past 5 years, the trauma of the 
          debate, dialogue and confrontation we've been though 
          has occasionally led me to despair.

               But despair and discouragement are not from 
          the Lord ... and 2 Timothy 1:7 has been a wonderful 
          encouragement:

            "For God did not give us a spirit of timidity, but a spirit 
          of power, of love and of self-discipline."

               That's why Episcopalians United will keep 
          fighting.  God is our true source of strength ... and as 
          long as we remain faithful we will see His provision.

               *I invite you to be part of that provision*.  Help 
          us redouble our efforts during this critical year for our 
          Church.  Please search your heart today ... ask God to 
          show you the role He wants you to have ... then send the 
          most generous gift you can.

               Your support will make a critical difference as 
          Episcopalians United continues the fight with you to 
          preserve the soul of our Church ... you will be helping to 
          save our godly heritage, not just for ourselves, but for 
          our children and grandchildren.

               And please, don't just send a gift -- as vitally 
          important as that is.  Humble yourself before God in a 
          prayer of repentance for our Church's many sins.  Plead 
          for His mercy and grace.  Ask for His divine 
          intervention.

               Commit yourself to help fight the battle today!

               Together, we can make a difference.  If we 
          persevere, we will see God triumph.

                       Yours by His grace,

                       The Rev. Todd H. Wetzel

          P.S.  May God bless you for your concern for the 
          Episcopal Church.  Please be encouraged.  There are 
          already over 18,000 people who stand with you in 
          support of our ministry.  Many more are with us in their 
          hearts.  But remember, winning this battle will be 
          expensive!  That's why I need to hear from you today.
          [Editor's Note:  Enclosed with this fund raiser was a 
          copy of page 9 of the Spring, 1993 issue of The Voice of 
          Integrity, which was the ad encouraging participation in 
          the March on Washington.  We hope they enjoyed 
          reprinting our material as much as we enjoy reprinting 
          theirs.]

          ********************

          *FORMER INTEGRITY CHAPLAIN ELECTED 
          FIRST FEMALE DIOCESAN*
          based on a release from the Episcopal News Service

               After three short ballots, the clergy and lay 
          delegates to a special June 5, 1993 convention of the 
          Diocese of Vermont elected the Rev. Mary Adelia 
          McLeod of West Virginia to be the first woman to serve 
          as a diocesan bishop in the Episcopal Church.

               McLeod, rector of St. John's Church in 
          Charleston, West Virginia, was co-chaplain, together 
          with her husband, the Rev. Henry M. (Mack) McLeod, 
          of Integrity/Charleston until it disbanded in 1986.  She 
          is strongly supportive of equal rights for lesbians and 
          gay men in the Church.  

               In an interview with the press, McLeod said that 
          the election of women to the episcopate is important.  
          She added, however, that the diocese "in great prayer 
          and consideration and thought were led by the Holy 
          Spirit to elect me" and the fact that "I just happen to be 
          a woman is incidental."

               When she is consecrated in October, pending 
          consents from a majority of standing committees and 
          bishops in the church, McLeod would become the third 
          woman bishop in the Episcopal Church. Bishop Barbara 
          Harris was elected suffragan bishop of Massachusetts in 
          September of 1988 -- and the first woman bishop in the 
          history of the Anglican Communion -- and Bishop Jane 
          Dixon was elected suffragan bishop of Washington 
          (DC) in May of 1992.  Bishop Penelope Jamieson of 
          New Zealand was consecrated in June 1990 as the first 
          woman in the Anglican Communion to head a diocese.

               Women have been candidates in a number of 
          recent elections in the Episcopal Church.  McLeod was 
          among the first women considered for the episcopate 
          and Vermont was the fifth time she had been a final 
          candidate.

               Presiding Bishop Edmond L. Browning offered 
          his prayers for the new bishop and said that "this new 
          chapter in her ministry is a new chapter in the life of our 
          church as well."  Contending that the ministry of the 
          church "is enriched by the gifts of both women and 
          men," the Presiding Bishop added, "We can rejoice as 
          another step is taken toward our episcopal ministry 
          better reflecting this blessing."

               McLeod was born and grew up in Alabama and, 
          after a number of years as a mother (she and her 
          husband have five grown children) and homemaker, she 
          took her seminary degree at the School of Theology at 
          the University of the South in Sewanee, Tennessee.  As 
          archdeacon for the western region of West Virginia, she 
          has helped shape an innovative cluster ministry and has 
          been active in supporting rural deans, clergy 
          deployment and she has served on Diocesan Council, 
          president of the Standing Committee and a deputy to 
          General Convention in 1988 and 1991.

               Ironically, the current bishop of West Virginia, 
          the Rt. Rev. John H. Smith, who has strongly opposed 
          full inclusion of lesgay persons in the Episcopal Church, 
          was a priest in Vermont at the time of his election in 
          West Virginia.

          ********************

          *JUDGE DISMISSES $4 MILLION LAWSUIT IN 
          VIRGINIA*
          based on a release from the Episcopal News Service

                 During a preliminary June 2 hearing in Arlington 
          Circuit Court, Judge Benjamin Kedrick dismissed a $4 
          million lawsuit against the Rev. Bruce Newell, accused 
          of sexual misconduct, the parish where he served, its 
          rector and the bishop of Virginia.  The suit was filed by 
          a woman who said that Newell had sexually abused her 
          for 11 months when he was serving Falls Church.  And it 
          charged that the diocese, Bishop Peter James Lee, the 
          church and its rector shared responsibility for the injury.  
          The judge said that the complaint exceeded the two-
          year statute of limitations on personal injury case and 
          would have required the court to delve into theological 
          issues in violation of the separation of church and state.  
          It would have required "a secular court of law to 
          establish standards of conduct for members of the 
          clergy, which would undermine the First Amendment of 
          the United States Constitution," according to a 
          statement from Bishop Lee.  The bishop said that, after 
          a presentment and an investigation by a church-
          appointed board, the diocese had decided to proceed 
          with an ecclesiastical trial of Newell.

          ********************

          *I WAS IN PRISON AND YOU CAME TO ME*
          by (the Rev.) Barry L. Stopfel

               When I was a young boy growing up in the farm 
          country of Pennsylvania, I spent most of my own time 
          roaming the corn fields, meadows and woods.  Each 
          year I would bargain with my parents to lengthen my 
          tether, and they would reluctantly allow me to explore a 
          little farther.  By the time I was 12, I could be gone for 
          the day lost in the seasons of the earth.

               When I was eight years old, my father took me to 
          an invitation-only open house for the new county prison.  
          I was enthusiastic and a little afraid about being on the 
          inside of such a place.

               More than thirty years later I can close my eyes and 
          hear the sounds, sense the smells, and picture the colors 
          of the floors and cinder block walls, and the pattern of 
          steel, cement and wire.  During the tour I stuck to my 
          father like glue.  I figured they would let me leave with 
          him -- unless of course someone told them that I had 
          stolen some corn out of Mr. Schaeffer's corn crib to 
          throw against people's houses on Halloween.

               One of the guards asked me if I wanted to into a 
          cell.  My curiosity overcame my anxiety and into the 
          terrifying unknown I went.  I walked only a few steps 
          when the cell door crashed shut behind me.  It was an 
          isolation cell with no windows and a solid steel door.  I 
          panicked.  Trapped!  Doomed!  Someone knew of my 
          corn caper!  I'm dead, I thought -- an eternity of 
          captivity is a terrible price to pay for a few ears of corn 
          the pigs would never miss in their trough.

               I started kicking everywhere, hollering as loud as 
          I could.  I vowed that I would never commit even the 
          tiniest infraction of the law because I would die if I 
          ended up in a prison.  In my young boy's way I knew 
          that the source of my life was my freedom to roam.

               The childhood memory made a return visit in 
          technicolor and SenseSurround the night I walked into 
          the Bureau of Correction's Adult Diagnostic and 
          Treatment Center to participate in a Bible study group 
          with gay sex offenders.  I saw the building and the 
          guards through the eyes of a familiar eight-year-old who 
          seemed to have taken over my senses.  And the faint 
          sketches of Jesus' words filtered through my awareness, 
          "I was in prison and you came to me ... as you did it to 
          one of the least of these you did it to me."

               I often say that proclaiming the Gospel and 
          living by the way of Jesus is risky business with a cost 
          attached.  In the first moments at Avenel the cost for 
          me was walking through those sense memories that 
          created fear and dread in me, for I still need to roam 
          the seasons of the woods to stay lodged in my faith and 
          close to my God.  The thought of imprisonment by 
          walls, by ideas, by fear, or by any tyranny strikes fear in 
          my heart.

               I learned very quickly the cost of caring about 
          the spiritual journeys of the men in the Bible study 
          group.  I had been invited into the ministry by my good 
          friend Louie Crew and so we arrived together.  As 
          would be expected the security procedures to enter the 
          prison are rigorous.  One of the corrections officers on 
          duty had heard that a guest had been invited to lead the 
          Bible study.  It was soon obvious that the officer would 
          abuse his ultimate authority through his immunity to the 
          demands of human kindness.  He seemed all too happy 
          to dish out an abusive and deliberately insulting security 
          process on my behalf.  In the face of the hatred of this 
          prison guard's demeaning the humanity of a stranger 
          priest, the little boy and I joined hands waiting for the 
          sound of the slamming door.  I imagine there must be a 
          similar chilling sound when the doors on our lives slam 
          shut when we give words or actions to bigotry and hate.

               The following week we filed a complaint.  A 
          member of the Bible group wrote later, "you will be 
          pleased to know that the officer has been removed from 
          contact with civilians.  The bad news is that he'll have 
          more contract with us inmates.  I think he learned his 
          lesson.  And besides, we're used to him.  Perhaps it's 
          just as well that he works here.  It keeps him off the 
          streets for eight hours a day.  I feel better knowing that 
          the public is safe one shift a day."  In his letter there was 
          no rancor, no malice, just graceful human wisdom 
          destroying the power of human hate.  As I read the 
          letter, the line between who should be on the inside and 
          who should be on the outside of the prison walls grew 
          suddenly thin.

               Each month in the prison, I encounter a group of 
          men who have been willing to suffer shame and abuse 
          in order to hear a gospel of hope, healing, acceptance 
          and forgiveness proclaimed to them.  In their world 
          there is little evidence of a regard for religious 
          experience of the human spirit.  These men are 
          searching for the goodness of God in themselves and in 
          each other amidst the wreckage of their own lives.

               Before I was an authorized volunteer at the 
          prison I submitted to regular humiliation so that they 
          could hear a Gospel of hope, a Gospel that reflected 
          back to them their goodness as a creature of God.  
          After my visits they willingly endured the personal 
          degradation of strip searches for I might be smuggling 
          drugs in my Bible.  I heard the echoes of the soldiers 
          voices as they stripped Jesus and cast lots for his 
          garments when I heard the guard enter the room and 
          bark the command, "clothes off" while he slipped on his 
          latex gloves to do the rectal exams.

               It felt hard bearing the burden of the one whose 
          presence forced these brothers in Christ to undergo a 
          humiliating procedure.  Even so, one of the men with 
          profound and redeeming humor wrote later, "It was 
          always wonderful to have Barry with the group.  Tell 
          him none of us minded taking our clothes off for him."

               His comment may startle all of us with its many 
          layers of human sexual innuendo.  But the truth of his 
          comment is that within this particular context of 
          physical violation and certainly within the context of the 
          community of gay men, innuendo and humor are covers 
          for lifetimes of hurt.  Such humor is a life-giving balm to 
          those who suffer personal and verbal abuse at the hands 
          of other human beings who have the social and 
          institutional power to do so.

               The men were grateful for my being there.  And 
          they were powerfully enlivened by the Gospel.  They 
          proved, in their very spiritual survival, the power of the 
          Word and its healing spirit to overcome the power of 
          death in systems of violence.

               These men are not the demons that we somehow 
          need them to be when we debate crime and 
          punishment.  Like each of us they are formed by God in 
          their Mother's womb.  But the sacred fabric of their 
          selves has been torn by a complex weaving of 
          circumstances early in their lives that was largely 
          beyond their control.  In nearly every instance they have 
          been sexually abused.  They know too well the 
          degradation born by both the abused and the abuser.  
          They understand instinctively the human nature of 
          those who abused Jesus, and they know the suffering 
          that results from such abuse.  Jesus understood the 
          suffering of the abused and the rage of the abuser and 
          was willing to offer forgiveness to both.

               I have come to know that when I hear the doors 
          slam, sense the cold steel and barbed wire, climb the 
          concrete steps to the prison room, I walk the steps that 
          Jesus walked.  When I sit down and open the Bible 
          amidst the brokenness of these men's lives and the 
          broken places of my own, I know that Jesus is there.  I 
          am on sacred ground with gay men who know, like 
          Harvey Milk, that the important thing is not that we can 
          live on hope alone, but that life is not worth living 
          without it.

               Yes, some of my brothers have made damaging 
          choices for which they have come to freely accept 
          responsibility.  Daily in their therapy and study, they 
          take responsibility for their actions and work hard on 
          themselves to grab a measure of psychological and 
          spiritual health.  In their search for healing I see the 
          Christ embracing their need and pain.

               I am touched by their willingness to express their 
          thirst for living water.  With these men I have seen 
          grace and hope emerge over and over, and my faith is 
          fed.

               All of us in that small prison Bible study room 
          become free to roam the endless banks and swim the 
          ever-flowing rivers of our God-given human spirits.  
          There is more than death inside those walls after all.  By 
          the grace of God and the hope of the men in our group, 
          the fear in the little boy within me who shows up each 
          month is both calmed and liberated.  The prisoners 
          have set me free.
          -----
          Barry L. Stopfel was installed on June 19, 1993 as rector 
          of St. George's, Maplewood, New Jersey.  He was 
          ordained as an openly gay man in September, 1991.  
          This article appeared in the May, 1993 issue of "The 
          Voice," the publication of the Diocese of Newark, and 
          was part of their "Journey of the Spirit Series."  It is 
          reprinted with permission.

          ********************

          *CELEBRATING A SEASON OF PRIDE!!*

          The National AIDS Memorial Established in 1985 
          Located in The Cathedral of St. John the Divine, 112th 
          & Amsterdam Ave NYC

          The National AIDS Memorial "honors the dead" 
          through the AIDS Memorial Shrine and the Book of 
          Remembrance in which the names of those who have 
          died of HIV/AIDS related conditions are inscribed.  
          We "serve the living" through the provision of small 
          (primarily start-up or special project) grants to 
          organizations who serve those with HIV.  Over 
          $80,000.00 in grants have been made since 1985, drawn 
          from the contributions which have been sent in with 
          names.  Our Board is all volunteer, and only 5% of 
          donations to the memorial goes for maintenance.  85% 
          of contributions to the Memorial are returned to the 
          community in grants and 10% is reserved for the 
          establishment of a permanent memorial to all who have 
          died in this epidemic.  Contributions are always 
          welcome, but not required for the submission of names 
          for the book.  We have a "master list" of names, and will 
          check for duplications.  To submit names or for more 
          information please fill out the coupon and mail to:

          The National AIDS Memorial,
          P.O. Box 5202,
          NYC, NY 10185-0043
          -----------------------------------------------------------------
          Your 
          name:__________________________________________________
          Address:________________________________ 
          Apt./Box # ________
          City(Boro)____________________State:________Zip:____________

          Please send me additional information
          ___about the memorial ___about the grant process
          ___about making a bequest
          I have enclosed the following donation $______

          -----------------------------------------------------------------

          Please inscribe the following names in the Book of 
          Remembrance:  (Use additional paper if needed)
          Note:  We do have a Master List of the Names already 
          in the Book, and will check for duplications before 
          entering names that are submitted.

                 Name              Dates (if known)         Comments
          1)__________________________________________________________
          2)__________________________________________________________
          3)__________________________________________________________
          4)__________________________________________________________
          5)__________________________________________________________

          ********************

          *BOOK REVIEWS*

          NOTHING NEW
          "New Millennium, New Church:  trends shaping the 
          Episcopal Church for the 21st Century"

          Kew, Richard and Roger J. White.  "New Millennium, 
          New Church:  trends shaping the Episcopal Church for 
          the 21st Century."  Boston, MA:  Cowley Publications, 
          1992.  $12.95.

          Review by (the Rev.) W. Keith McCoy

               Easily the most talked about book in the 
          Episcopal Church in the past few months, "New 
          Millennium, New Church" is offered as a "compass for 
          the 1990s," which will guide local parishes, as well as the 
          national church, away from self-wounding controversy 
          and towards a more Anglican (read:  polite and quiet) 
          existence.  While chock-full of ideas and opinions, it is 
          not so much a compass as a conservative wish book for 
          the near future.  Another book would be needed to 
          comment on the authors' many thoughts, too many of 
          which I found unfinished, but let me tackle a few that 
          may be of interest to readers of this forum.

               One theme that runs under the entire text is that 
          the Episcopal Church is essentially conservative, but 
          good-hearted, but it has been the captive in recent years 
          of a small band of liberal experimenters and social 
          activists.  Somehow, this minority always manages to 
          elect sheep-like delegates to General Convention, and 
          then lead them into temptation with strange resolutions 
          and canons.  Kew and White suggest that the time has 
          come when right-thinking people will start attending 
          these conventions and begin making decisions that will 
          not upset the real majority anymore.

               As an observer of and participant in diocesan 
          politics for almost twenty years, my opinion is that the 
          clergy and laity sent to General Convention are 
          generally among the most caring, thoughtful, and 
          religious people of our church.  As such, they have 
          voted to allow women into the priesthood, revise the 
          BCP, and recommend the tithe because, having weighed 
          all the arguments, they made what they felt was a 
          Christian decision.  It so happens that the liberals have 
          made all of the arguments in favor of those actions.  
          The conservatives, on the other hand, have been against 
          everything, and never for anything.  They say, 
          "Whatever justice (hymnal, program ...) we have today is 
          fine -- I'm satisfied, and so should be the rest of the 
          Episcopal Church."  Faced with a choice of thoughtful 
          progress or mere stand-patism, General Convention has 
          rightly opted for progress.

               The authors stumble over this right at the 
          beginning of their book.  While lamenting our decline in 
          numbers from the boom years of the 1950s, they ignore 
          their own quote from Vance Packard that many people 
          joined our denomination at that time because it was the 
          social thing to do.  Many then chose to leave when 
          issues of faith vs. the world were raised, beginning with 
          the Vietnam War.  The church population has stabilized 
          because almost everyone left believes that we are a 
          religious organization, not a club.

               When they get into their chapter on single-issue 
          organizations, Kew and White again suggest that good 
          people have been chased away by irresponsible actions.  
          I can respect the decision of a person who leaves 
          because their theology no longer meshes with that of 
          the parish or the wider Episcopal Church.  I wonder, 
          however, at how great a loss it is when someone 
          flounces out over the "imagined 'unbelief' of their 
          rector, an ill-considered pronouncement or action by a 
          bishop, or an objection to the policies of the national 
          church."  (p. 124)  Parishioners who leave over imagined 
          issues or statements from regional and national 
          headquarters are more interested in feeling cosseted 
          than in grappling with matters of faith.  Moreover, if we 
          express regret because someone leaves over, say, the 
          ordination of women as priests, aren't we also regretting 
          taking that step and those priests?

               Integrity is only mentioned once specifically, but 
          the reader gets the sense that it is a part of that cabal 
          which has hijacked the true faith.  While credited with 
          media savvy and a sound knowledge of the political 
          process, we are, in the authors' words, "speak[ing] for a 
          relatively small group of activists."  p. 126)  This 
          contrasts with Episcopalians United, with 20,000 
          "members" and a big budget.  Kew and White feel this is 
          evidence of something; might I suggest the hollowness 
          of EU's arguments?

               Using a Gallup survey, a few publications from 
          other denominations, and their own impressions, most 
          of what Kew and White provide as planning fodder for 
          the future of our denomination is only speculation.  
          They have adopted every progressive action in the 
          Episcopal Church over the last thirty years as their own, 
          and then decry the possibility of further change.  They 
          have decided what they want the church to look like in 
          ten years, and then found the material to back up their 
          concept.

               This book has nothing new.  It is just the lament 
          of those people who would never be moved to change 
          one iota of their current existence, but, once moved, 
          find that change acceptable.  Now they ask the church 
          not to make them move forward again.  Come 2000 AD, 
          we will probably find Kew and White again celebrating 
          the current state of the Episcopal Church, and still 
          warning against some further progress.

          NEW PRAYERS FOR OLD OCCASIONS
          "Daring to Speak Love's Name, A Gay and Lesbian 
          Prayer Book."

          Stuart, Elizabeth, Editor.  "Daring to Speak Love's 
          Name, A Gay and Lesbian Prayer Book."  London: 
          Hamish Hamilton, 1992.

          Review by (The Rev.) Paul Woodrum
          
               Editor Elizabeth Stuart's "Daring to Speak Love's 
          Name, A Gay and Lesbian Prayer Book," fulfills three 
          functions.  First, it provides a lot of apologia for gay 
          people liturgically celebrating life's transitions.  Second, 
          it's a resource for gay/lesbian specific public rites.  
          Third, it provides prayers and readings for private 
          meditation.

               It's not quite clear to whom most of the apologia 
          is directed, especially the extensive justification given 
          for celebrating lesbian and gay relationships."  Most of 
          it is pretty familiar stuff to lesbians and gay men who 
          have experienced any sort of consciousness raising what 
          so ever.  All the right people are quoted from John 
          Boswell to John McNeill to Carter Heyward.  It is a 
          helpful summary of the polemics, useful perhaps, for a 
          quick refresher course before trotting off to a meeting 
          of the diocesan commission on human sexuality.

               A straight audience who might benefit most from 
          this part of the book is probably the least likely to read 
          it.  Much of the apologia may be in response to the 
          rather strange publication history of the volume.  
          Initially, it was to be published by the SPCK which, not 
          untypically, developed a case of the jitters about dealing 
          with subjects gay and lesbian.  Unable to get its own 
          auditors to condemn the publication, it finally resorted 
          to an unprecedented appeal to Archbishop of 
          Canterbury and SPCK President George Carey for an 
          opinion.  He disapproved.  The SPCK backed away 
          from publication.  The C of E breathed a sigh of relief 
          at once again being able to avoid sex.

               If the apologia isn't directly in response to all this 
          heterosexist nonsense, the extensive Preface, Foreword 
          and Introduction certainly are.  The Preface and 
          Forward are worth reading for the insights they provide 
          into the fragility and fears of heterosexuals.

               The Introduction by Dr. Stuart counters with a 
          splendid discussion of Blessed Aelred of Rievaulx's 
          theology of Christian friendship and relates his 12th 
          century thought to 20th century feminist and gay and 
          lesbian thought, especially as applied to liturgical 
          understanding and expression, naming and claiming the 
          validity of the lesgay experience of the holy.

               Stuart provides extensive and varied resources 
          for liturgies celebrating relationships, housewarmings, 
          coming out, partings, illness (particularly HIV & AIDS), 
          and death.  Considering the contributions of gay people 
          to liturgy for which they seem to have had a special 
          affinity over the centuries - at least 60% of the official 
          revisers of the American BCP and Hymnal were gay or 
          lesbian - it may seem somewhat ironic that anything 
          more is needed.  Stuart, by the way, is Roman Catholic 
          but, being British, just sounds Anglican and her views 
          are certainly not those in much favor with the Vatican.

               Stuart's contribution is not in replacing the standard, 
          general and common devotions of the church, but in 
          augmenting them with expressions growing from and 
          applicable to the lesbian and gay life of prayer, public 
          and private.  Her audience is ecumenical.  Her 
          resources are diverse.  Her coverage including rites and 
          prayers for coming out, for partings, and for HIV/AIDS 
          is comprehensive.  One would be hardpressed not to 
          find something helpful for either planning public 
          worship or for private devotion.

               "Daring to Speak Love's Name" is not the final 
          word, nor even the penultimate, but it is a valuable 
          addition to a growing body of resources which openly 
          incorporate and informs the lesbian/gay experience of 
          the common prayer of God's holy people.

          ********************

          *Chapter Updates*

          Changes in Integrity Chapters since the Winter 1993 
          issue:

          New:

.LM 16
               Integrity/Boston-Metro
               Christ Church, Episcopal
               12 Quincy Ave.
               Quincy, MA 02169

               Integrity/East Tennessee
               P.O. Box 4956
               Chattanooga, TN 37405

               Integrity/Maine
               P.O. Box 25
               Waldoboro, ME 04572

               Integrity/Toledo
               2272 Collingwood Blvd.
               Toledo, OH 43620

               Integrity/Twin Cities
               c/o University Episcopal Center
               317 17th Ave. S.E.
               Minneapolis, MN 55414

               Integrity/Melbourne
               St. Stephen's Anglican Church
               3 Docker St.
               Richmond, VIC 3121
               AUSTRALIA

.LM 11
          New Name and New Address:

.LM 16
               Integrity/Los Angeles
               7985 Santa Monica Blvd. #109-113
               West Hollywood, CA 90046

.LM 11
          New Addresses:

.LM 16
               Integrity/Central Florida
               P.O. Box 530031
               Orlando, FL 32853-0031

               Dignity-Integrity/Charlottesville
               P.O. Box 3670
               Charlottesville, VA 22903

.LM 11
          No longer meeting:
.LM 16
               Integrity/Central Indiana
               Integrity/Colorado
               Integrity/San Antonio

.LM 11
          ********************

          *The University of South Dakota Press*
          Announces Publication of
           *Don't Hang Up...*
          an anthology of poems about AIDS
          edited by Andrew Miller

               This unique volume of poetry is a collection of 
          works by both professional and amateur writers from 
          across the country, all of whom have lost loved ones to 
          AIDS.  The works are expressions of their pain and 
          confusion, their fears and hopes.  Their voices, too often 
          drowned out by those who would pass judgment, 
          represent the humanness of the suffering caused by this 
          ongoing tragedy.  Their cries of loss transcend the 
          cultural, political and religious barriers that divide us, to 
          reveal the universality of their experience.  The book's 
          title is taken from a poem by Dr. Louie Crew, Integrity's 
          founder.  "Don't Hang Up" has also been made into a 
          short-subject film.

               It is the hope of the editor and the University of 
          South Dakota Press that this volume can bring comfort 
          to those who are still suffering and can bring new 
          understanding and compassion to those who are still 
          trapped by fear and prejudice.  All profits from the 
          volume will be donated to an AIDS research or 
          education program.

          The book sells for *$8.95 postpaid* *

          For more information, contact USD Press at either 
          (605) 677-5401 or (605) 624-8258.  To order, send your 
          check, money order, or credit card information to: The 
          University of South Dakota Press, 301 East Hall, USD, 
          414 East Clark, Vermillion, SD 57069.  
          ISBN 0-929925-20-3

          * South Dakota residents please add 5% sales tax.
          ********************

          *DISCIPLES' CANDIDATE SUPPORTIVE*
          Based on an Episcopal News Service Release

                  Members of the General Board of the Christian 
          Church (Disciples of Christ) endorsed the Rev. Richard 
          Hamm, a 45-year-old Tennessee church executive, for 
          general minister and president of the denomination.  
          Hamm told members of the board that decisions on  the 
          ordination of homosexuals should be left up to local 
          regions and congregations.  "After working through my 
          homophobia, Bible study and much prayer, I came to 
          believe that homosexuality in and ofitself should not be 
          a bar to ordination," he said.  Hamm added that he has 
          no intention, however, of forcing his views upon the 
          denomination.  He said he would speak the truth as one 
          Disciple, while encouraging others whose views are 
          different to speak.  In 1991 the Rev. Michael Kinnamon 
          was not elected president of the denomination because 
          of his support of lesbian and gay Disciples in the 
          ordained ministry.  The election of a new president will 
          take place in the meeting of the church's General 
          Assembly in July.

          ********************

          *CLAUDIA'S COLUMN*

          "Our nettlesome task is to discover how to organize our 
          strength into compelling power so that (the church) 
          cannot elude our demands.  We must develop, from 
          strength, a situation where (the church) finds it wise and 
          prudent to collaborate with us.  It would be the height 
          of naivete to wait passively until (the church) had 
          somehow been infused with such blessings of good will 
          that it implored us for our programs.  The first course is 
          grounded in mature realism; the other, in childish 
          fantasy."
                       (I have replaced "government" with "the 
          church")
                       -- *The Words of Martin Luther King, Jr.*, p. 45

               Several weeks ago the people of the Diocese of 
          Minnesota gathered to meet the three clergypeople who 
          had been chosen as candidates for bishop.  One 
          question, especially, surfaced for each of the candidates, 
          "In this decade of evangelism, how do you see church 
          growth occurring?"  The questioner then proceeded to 
          explain that parishes are interested in techniques to 
          attract new members and that they expect help from the 
          bishop in this area.  Each of the candidates responded 
          similarly in that they emphasized introspection before 
          outreach.  That is, they would encourage individual 
          congregations to ask what it is that they have to offer 
          their members and what is preventing the active 
          participation of those who are on the fringes of parish 
          communities; those who rarely attend service or 
          participate in parish functions yet do just enough to 
          keep their names on the parish register.

               The question of increasing chapter membership 
          surfaces often for those of us involved with Integrity and 
          local chapters.  What, we want to know, can we do to 
          enlarge our membership; to increase growth.  In 
          response to that question, I turn to the reply of the 
          bishop candidates.  We must first look inward asking 
          ourselves what we have to offer our present members 
          and what is preventing active participation of those who 
          continue on our membership rosters while participating 
          only on the fringes.

               Despite the objections of some African-
          Americans, I see many parallels between the civil rights 
          struggles of their community and those of our lesbigay 
          community.  Although racism continues to exist in our 
          church, progress towards its obliteration has been made.  
          In search of answers to what we can learn from our 
          African-American sisters and brothers I have turned in 
          part to the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.  One of Dr. 
          King's most powerful attributes is the immediacy of a 
          well defined and confidently voiced vision and 
          understanding of mission as well as a strategy for its 
          fulfillment.  I believe that it is a vision and strategy that 
          is of utmost importance to members of Integrity 
          chapters yet is often either lacking or poorly presented.  
          If we cannot articulate who we are, what we expect of 
          the church, and how we intend to accomplish our goals, 
          what exactly is it that appeals to our membership?  
          What do we have to offer them?

               I often wonder how many of our members would 
          be able to articulate the vision of their individual 
          chapters.  It seems to me that not only does the vision 
          vary from chapter to chapter, but in many cases it varies 
          dramatically from chapter member to chapter member.  
          "Our nettlesome task is to discover how to organize our 
          strength into compelling power ..."  We will not attain 
          that power, my sisters and brothers, until we define 
          common goals and strategies and I believe that the hope 
          of a compelling power "so that the church cannot elude 
          our demands" is the greatest gift that we have to offer 
          our members and that lack of cohesiveness, vision, and 
          strategy is what keeps many members on the fringes.  
          Had members of the civil rights movement been asked 
          to define their goals, and had the responses varied from 
          goals of socializing with other African-Americans to 
          working for the inclusion of all African-Americans in 
          every aspect of American life and society, I believe 
          there would have been no civil rights movement, no 
          strength organized into compelling power to move white 
          America to welcome our African-American sisters and 
          brothers.  In the same vein, my friends, I believe that if 
          our goals are as divergently defined as providing a safe 
          social environment for Episcopalian lesbigay persons, to 
          working for the inclusion of all lesbigay persons in every 
          aspect of the life and ministry of our church, I fear that 
          there will be no strength to organize into a compelling 
          power to move our church to welcome us to full 
          inclusion.

               It's not uncommon for us to question whether 
          lesbigay persons are included in "The Episcopal Church 
          Welcomes You" signs.  How willing and able are we to 
          say, "This Integrity Chapter Welcomes You"; persons of 
          color, women, feminists, users of inclusive language, 
          differently abled persons, conservative, and bi-sexual 
          persons?  Until we practice the inclusion that we 
          demand from our church, there will be no strength in 
          our chapters and our goals might as well be to provide a 
          safe place to socialize, or for lesbigay persons to meet 
          prospective partners, or to catch up on local gossip.  In 
          each of these activities we can talk about the wish for 
          inclusion for each of us into the full life and ministry of 
          our church, but "it would be the height of naivete to wait 
          passively until the church had somehow been infused 
          with such blessings of good will ..."  There would be no 
          church, my friends, if the early disciples had no common 
          goal; where some saw their mission to proclaim the 
          Christ, and others, to band together solely for strength 
          against the Roman government, and others yet, to set 
          themselves up as better than the Jews who still 
          practiced the old law.  Their strength was their common 
          goal to proclaim Jesus Christ which became the 
          compelling power that brought those to whom they 
          witnessed to Christ and the new law.

               Advertising in local lesbigay papers and diocesan 
          newsletters might attract a few new members and 
          increase your chapter size, my friends.  Your strength, 
          however, lies in the power of a unified goal:  the 
          inclusion of lesbigay persons in the full life and ministry 
          of the Episcopal Church.  When that goal is identified 
          and articulated and when all those who count 
          themselves members of your chapters feel their 
          inclusion in the life of the chapter, the strategies can be 
          defined and others will want to add their commitments 
          and strengthen your power in the church.

          "We are now faced with the fact that tomorrow is today.  
          We are confronted with the fierce urgency of now.  In 
          this unfolding conundrum of life and history there is 
          such a thing as being too late.  Procrastination is still the 
          thief of time.  Life often leaves us standing bare, naked, 
          and dejected with a lost opportunity ... over the 
          bleached bones and jumbled residues of numerous 
          civilizations are written with the pathetic words:  'Too 
          late' ...  This may well be our last chance to choose 
          between chaos and community."
                -- *The Words of Martin Luther King, Jr.*, p. 90

               We can't wait until next June to articulate our 
          goals, define our strategies, and muster our strength just 
          in time for the General Convention.  "Tomorrow is 
          today."  Let us welcome all who have chosen to affiliate 
          with our chapters to discuss and define our goals and to 
          develop strategies so that those goals can and will be 
          met.  When that has been accomplished, we will witness 
          a renewed strength, an inviting organization, chapters so 
          powerful that, in joining forces with all other chapters, 
          the church will no longer be able to exclude us from full 
          life and ministry within her.

          ********************
          *JOSHUA'S BAPTISM PUSHES THE BOUNDARIES 
          OF THE FAMILY OF GOD*
          by Lily DeYoung

               In the early church, the celebration of Easter was 
          preceded by an all-night vigil.  When dawn broke, 
          neophytes were baptized into the Christian family, and 
          the Easter festival began.

               But the baptism of three-month old Joshua 
          Kilian Meneghin on February 14 at the Church of the 
          Redeemer, Morristown, was preceded by a five-year 
          vigil kept by Cindy Meneghin and Maureen Kilian, his 
          parents.

               Cindy and Maureen are a lesbian couple who 
          have been together since 1974, shortly after they met in 
          high school.  Although both were raised as Catholics, 
          they never felt personal anxiety about their sexuality.  
          From the beginning, they have lived openly as a couple 
          hoping that family and church would accept them as 
          other couples were accepted and celebrated.  When 
          acceptance and celebration did not come, they began 
          the long, slow process of helping people to understand.

               "We have always been 'out' and open so that we 
          could be a role model to other lesbians and gays, and 
          for their families ... especially for families because they 
          often fear that being gay means being unhappy," said 
          Cindy.  "As people got to know us, they began to 
          understand that we were a couple, in love and very 
          happy."  She said, "It took many years of struggle to help 
          our parents and siblings to see that a 'couple' was not 
          necessarily a man and a woman, that we were just as 
          much a couple as they were with their spouses."

               One meaningful sign of their acceptance as a 
          couple came when Maureen's parents included a 
          picture of Maureen and Cindy on the wall with the 
          pictures of her six siblings and their spouses, and when 
          the family began sending anniversary cards to them 
          each August 28.

               Like many other couples, they wanted a child.  
          "We started talking about having a baby five years ago," 
          said Cindy.  "But we knew that 'our world' wasn't quite 
          ready yet."  So again, they started the slow process of 
          helping people to understand.

               They told family, friends and co-workers about 
          their desire to start a family.  At first people were 
          surprised.  Gradually, as their notions of "family" grew, 
          friends told the couple, "You'd be good parents!"

               Cindy and Maureen wanted church to be a part 
          of their child's life too.  But unlike the family and 
          friends who had openly accepted them, their church did 
          not.  After years of committed service as parish lectors, 
          eucharistic and youth ministers, Cindy and Maureen 
          were told that they could not participate in couples' 
          programs or start a gay group, and if they had a child, 
          he or she could 'probably' be baptized, but in private.  
          To Cindy and Maureen it seemed that the Catholic 
          Church was the only place where their child and his 
          family would not be welcome.

               To forego church was not an option.  Said 
          Maureen, "We need organized religion.  We want 
          community.  And we decided we would either find it or 
          make it!"

               Their search brought them to a visit one Sunday 
          to Redeemer.  There, they were impressed by the 
          diversity of the congregation and the inclusive liturgical 
          language.  But they wanted to find a church closer to 
          home.  Redeemer was eighteen miles away, and they 
          were used to a neighborhood church.

               They visited many Episcopal churches, and 
          deeply appreciated the welcome they found.  They 
          decided to return to Redeemer when they learned that 
          its inclusiveness was not the personal initiative of a few 
          but rather a parish-wide commitment officially 
          undertaken by the vestry.  Vestry member Ann Johnson 
          assured them that homophobia was not acceptable at 
          Redeemer and that if anyone felt uncomfortable with 
          that, it would be their problem, not Cindy's or 
          Maureen's ... and not Joshua's.

               Said Cindy, "That was a complete reversal for us.  
          For once, we wouldn't have to struggle with others' 
          exclusionary concepts of family and fears about gay 
          relationships."  "And we knew," said Maureen, "that 
          Redeemer was not a gay parish either.  That wasn't 
          what we wanted.  We have always wanted to belong to a 
          community that includes people of different races, ages, 
          ethnic backgrounds and sexual orientations.  It's what 
          we want for Joshua:  to experience the real world within 
          his church community."

               Preaching at Joshua's baptism, rector Philip 
          Wilson said that if teaching today, in place of 'the 
          Kingdom' Jesus might use the image of 'the Family of 
          God.'  "If we accept 'the Family of God' as the 
          definition of Jesus' vision," Wilson said, "then the action 
          of God is to ever enlarge the family, ever to push the 
          circle wider."

               That day, the Redeemer community 
          enthusiastically embraced Josh and his family.  After 
          their vigilant five years of preparation, his parents are 
          happy and confident:  Joshua is a member of the family 
          just as much as anyone else.
          -----
          Lily DeYoung is a member of Church of the Redeemer, 
          Morristown.  This article first appeared in the April, 
          1993 issue of "The Voice", the publication of the 
          Diocese of Newark, and is reprinted with permission.

          ********************

          *Special Section:*

          *LESGAYS IN THE MILITARY  *

          The Beat Goes On
          by Jim Lewis

               As some people waved Bibles over their heads 
          and shouted "amen," one questioner denounced what he 
          said was a lessening of moral standards in American 
          Society.

               "Is being old a sin?' asked the citizen, who did 
          not identify himself.
               "No!" the crowd yelled back.
               "Is being handicapped a sin?" the man asked.
               "No!" the crowd screamed, louder this time.
               "Is being homosexual a sin?" he came back.
               "Yes!" roared the crowd, loudest of all.

            March 25 - "New York Times" article describing a 
          forum held in Jacksonville, N.C.  The subject was gays 
          in the military.

               The matter of lifting the ban on gays in the 
          military is heating up.  Just how hot this struggle really 
          is was driven home to me after reading copies of the 
          "Marine Corps Gazette" (MCG), the professional 
          journal of the U.S. Marine Corps.

               William Lind, Director of the Center for 
          Cultural Conservation of the Free Congress 
          Foundation, writes in the March issue of the MCG:  
          "Allowing homosexuals to serve in the military is part of 
          a larger, hidden agenda, one that is dangerous to the 
          whole of American society and culture."

               The "hidden agenda" for Lind is "the destruction 
          of traditional Western, Judeo-Christian culture, morals, 
          and values." In a November 1992 MCG article, Lind 
          identifies feminism as "an element in the coalition" of 
          forces out to destroy Western, Judeo-Christian culture.

               And just how will Marines react to this battle?  
          "Marines will opt," he says, "for massive passive 
          resistance -- resistance that makes the open homosexual 
          an 'unperson' (the homosexual who remains 'in the 
          closet' is not an issue since nobody knows he is one).  
          The more organized the passive resistance, the more 
          likely it will include too many people to overcome.  
          There is strength in numbers:  No administration can 
          maintain a policy when the vast majority of those 
          affected by it reject it.

               The fact that "passive resistance," on the part of 
          the military, is but one bullet in the chamber of this gun 
          being used to kill Clinton's proposed plan to lift the ban 
          on gays is best seen in the frontal attack being used by 
          the military.

               Marine Corps commandant, General Carl 
          Mundy Jr., has been circulating a 20-minute videotape, 
          "The Gay Agenda" to Marine bases throughout the 
          country to be shown to all the troops. Produced by a 
          fundamentalist church in California, Antelope Valley 
          Springs of Life Ministries, it features nudity, and 
          assertions that homosexuality is unnatural, a sickness 
          and not worthy of legal protection.

               This California church, by the way, uses armed 
          security guards who patrol the aisles during services, 
          along with electronically locked doors.

               In the January issue of the MCG, Major Arthur 
          J. Corbett likens the gay effort to the vandal who took a 
          hammer to the Pieta a few years ago.  His message is 
          simple:  The Marine Corps should disband rather than 
          admit gays.

               For those with eyes to see and ears to hear the 
          mood and terms of this struggle are pretty clear.

          @  There is a concerted campaign to defeat an effort to 
          left the ban on gays in the military.  It is a crusade based 
          in fear, appealing to every stereotype and distorted 
          image associated with gays.

          @  This struggle over the military is the most visible 
          place to observe all the issues surrounding gay 
          liberation in our society.  Gay military folk have come 
          front and center to articulate and personify the issue.  
          Hollywood, despite the liberal image, isn't doing it.  The 
          test:  How many openly gay actors can you identify.  As 
          for the church, supposedly engaging the issue:  Not one 
          bishop in the Episcopal Church has come out of the 
          closet, and very few gay priests and lay people are 
          willing to be out and open.

          @  When all is said and done, these fearful, angry 
          military voices are on to something -- something 
          radically different is going on here.  Keeping in mind 
          that the word radical is defined as "going to the root of 
          the origin," this struggle is one among many that address 
          racial, class, sexual and power issues.  An old way of life 
          is dying and a new way of life is being born and the 
          generals and scout leaders of the world, not to mention 
          some politicians and church people, understand this 
          movement only too well.

          @  The military opposition centers around "the 
          military's ability to fulfill its mission of fighting and 
          winning wars."  In other words, can men and women 
          who love their comrades enough to lay down their lives 
          for one another maintain that intimacy given the 
          possibility of romantic love and sexual attraction?  This 
          is a huge issue and takes all of us to the key matter of 
          spirituality and eroticism, the likes of which good 
          church folks need to discuss and understand as well.

          @  Trying to closet and silence people, gays or anyone 
          else feeling the boot on their neck, just plain won't 
          work.  Stuffing people and issues into boxes just 
          postpones justice.
               From a faith perspective, self knowledge and revelation 
          of self is at the heart of God's revelation in and through 
          human beings.  For a person to turn his or her back on 
          their sexual orientation is to block a deeply spiritual 
          connection.  It is to hide God's very basic gift to us -- 
          our sexual orientation -- under a basket -- in a closet, if 
          you will.

          *    Recently I heard Kathleen Carlin, a feminist 
          (sorry boys), speak to this matter.  She said, "Oppression 
          relies for its continuation upon the silencing of the 
          oppressed.  Silencing works this way.  Part of the 
          dominant's self-identity is *not to hear* the 
          subordinate's reality.  ln other words, part of what it 
          means to be male, or white or heterosexual, is to be 
          able to exclude from dominant reality the experience of 
          those who are oppressed by the social construction of 
          male and white and straight and have that be *right*.

               Once again, from a faith perspective, listening to 
          God, who is present in the lives of those who have been 
          subordinated by the dominant political and cultural 
          interests of a society, is the very posture of faith.  The 
          most important moments for Jesus were those in which 
          he paid attention to people who had been shoved to the 
          fringe of society and beaten down to the bottom of 
          society.  Justice/love became known in those 
          encounters.

               The military, along with a host of other 
          institutions in our society, including the Church and the 
          Boy Scouts, is out of step with justice and it's time to get 
          squared away.
          -----
          The Rev. Jim Lewis has been Director for Christian 
          Social Ministries of the Diocese of North Carolina since 
          1987.  He served as assistant lacrosse coach at the U.S. 
          Naval Academy while serving as curate at St. Anne's, 
          Anapolis.  This appeared in Jim's April 4, 1993 
          newsletter:  "Notes from under the Fig Tree."

          *LETTERS TO PRESIDENT CLINTON*

          A RETIRED CHAPLAIN ON GAYS IN THE 
          MILITARY

             The Rev. Charles Dunlap Brown
             Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
             April 20, 1993

          President Bill Clinton
          The White House

          Dear President Clinton:

               I am writing in support of ending the ban against 
          lesbian and gay people in the military of the United 
          States.  We are one of only three countries in the 
          Western Alliance who ban homosexuals.  The current 
          policy of discrimination denies able bodied men and 
          women the opportunity to serve our country and costs 
          taxpayers millions of dollars each year.  I agree that the 
          cause of discipline and discharge from military-service 
          should be conduct and job performance and not status 
          which judges a person because of what they "might" do.

               I retired from the United States Army Reserve 
          March 31, 1990 after serving almost 42 years in the 
          Army National Guard, the Army Reserve and extended 
          active duty.  At the time of my retirement I was the 
          senior Colonel in the Army Reserve and was the Staff 
          Chaplain for the 77th USARCOM at Ft. Totten, New 
          York which is the largest Reserve Command in the 
          United States.  I was responsible for the recruitment, 
          professional education and assignment of 43 unit 
          chaplains in the State of New York and northern New 
          Jersey.  I was advisor to the Commanding General of 
          the 77th ARCOM in matters of morale, morals and 
          religion.

               During the Korean conflict I was mobilized with 
          the 45th Infantry Division, Oklahoma Army National 
          Guard.  I earned the Combat Medic Badge and Bronze 
          Star for meritorious service and was offered a 
          battlefield commission.  I was a Platoon Sergeant 
          responsible for 75 Medical Corpsmen with an Infantry 
          Battalion.  It was this experience which influenced my 
          going to Seminary instead of Medical School upon 
          being released from active duty.  In all my years as an 
          enlisted man, medical service corps officer and 
          chaplain, I knew and counselled many gay and lesbian 
          soldiers as well as heterosexual soldiers.  The only 
          sexual conduct unbecoming a soldier that occurred in 
          the various units to which I belonged was that of males 
          harassing females.

               I was an enlisted person with an Infantry 
          Battalion in Korea when we were integrated with our 
          first black soldiers.  We had heard the same arguments 
          then against having blacks in the Army as are being 
          used today against gays and lesbians.  With good 
          leadership and teaching the Army made great progress 
          in solving racial discrimination.  The same can be said 
          for the acceptance of female soldiers.  With this same 
          good leadership gay and lesbian soldiers are accepted 
          today in many units.  Gay and lesbian soldiers are not 
          asking for special rights, only those rights and freedoms 
          provided by our Constitution for all citizens.  Witch 
          hunts should be stopped and all people should be 
          judged by their job performance and not their sexual 
          status or orientation.

               In addition to being an Episcopal Priest, I have a 
          Ph.D. from the University of Oklahoma in Counseling 
          Psychology.  My professional education and experience 
          has made me realize that a person can no more change 
          their sexual orientation that they can change the color 
          of their skin.

               When I retired, the Army awarded me the 
          Legion of Merit, which is the highest award that can be 
          given for meritorious service.  Over the years I was also 
          awarded the Bronze Star for meritorious service in a 
          combat setting, the Army Commendation Medal twice, 
          the Army Achievement Medal as well as the Good 
          Conduct Medal.  Had the Army known my sexual 
          orientation I would have been given a dishonorable 
          discharge instead and not have been allowed to do the 
          good job for our country which I did for 41 years and 9 
          months.

          Sincerely yours,
          Charles H.D. Brown
          Chaplain (COL) AUS Retired

          PB SUPPORTS AN END TO THE MILITARY BAN

             The Most Reverend Edmond L. Browning
             Presiding Bishop, The Episcopal Church
             February 5, 1993

          The Honorable William Clinton
          The White House

          Dear Mr. President:

               I write to commend you for your position on the 
          issue of ending discrimination against gay and lesbian 
          members of the Armed Services.  We as a nation are 
          well served by your openness in addressing this difficult 
          issue, which is before all of our churches as well.

               The current situation in our armed forces with 
          regard to gays and lesbians is most unfortunate.  It is my 
          deep sense that we live in a time when we need to 
          honor the contributions of *all* men and women who 
          serve our country, regardless of sexual orientation.  In 
          so doing, we will define in a better way who we are as a 
          nation.

               At my request the Suffragan Bishop of the 
          Armed Forces has developed a means of assisting our 
          military chaplains as a change is contemplated.  I have 
          attached for your information a copy of a letter to our 
          chaplains.  [See page 20 for text of letter.]  It is my hope 
          and expectation that they will be of service in a time of 
          transition.

               In 1991 our General Convention initiated a study 
          on attitudes toward human sexuality that is now 
          underway around our church.  Part of the outcome of 
          the study will be a heightened awareness of the thoughts 
          and opinions of one another, and a deepened 
          commitment to make creative decisions about difficult 
          issues in the midst of these differences.  Also, our 
          General Convention is clearly on record in support of 
          upholding the full civil rights and equal protection 
          under the law of homosexual persons.

               The struggles of our church around issues of 
          homosexuality have given me a pretty clear 
          understanding of some of the complex dynamics.  It is in 
          light of this particular experience that I offer to be [of] 
          assistance to you in any possible way.
               I know that change is difficult in the absence of 
          converted hearts.  At the same time, I do believe this is 
          a justice issue and there is a real need to press on.  I 
          much applaud your way of going forward.  Please be in 
          touch with me if you believe there is merit in exploring 
          a way I might be of assistance.

               I welcome this opportunity to let you know that 
          you, your family and the group of men and women who 
          will be part of your team are in my prayers.  You have 
          been called to a responsibility few can imagine and an 
          opportunity most never have.  In an abiding awareness 
          of both the responsibility and opportunity of your office 
          I will continue to hold you in my prayers.

               I will share with you that I am enormously 
          strengthened knowing of the prayers for me of people 
          all around our church.  You are also prayed for in every 
          service.  I hope you find yourself similarly strengthened.

               This letter comes with my blessings and my warm 
          personal greetings.

            Faithfully yours,
            Edmond L. Browning

          [Presiding Bishop Browning's letter to Armed Forces 
          Chaplains in on page 20.]

          *MORE ON LESGAYS IN THE MILITARY*

          UCC LEADER TESTIFIES FOR END OF 
          MILITARY BAN
          By James Solheim

               Testifying for the church leaders before the 
          House Armed Services Committee in Washington, D.C., 
          Dr. Paul Sherry, president of the United Church of 
          Christ (UCC), said, "While each of us would want to 
          speak out of our distinctive theological traditions, we 
          share a common conviction that the civil rights 
          guaranteed for all citizens should be guaranteed for gay 
          and lesbian persons as well."

               Sherry said that the "moral fiber of our nation is 
          very much at stake" in the current debate.  "Some would 
          argue that our society's very structure is being 
          undermined by gay and lesbian persons declaring their 
          orientation openly and demanding the civil rights 
          guaranteed to all other American citizens," he observed.  
          "We see it quite the opposite," he said in referring to 
          actions taken by the UCC and other churches. 

               The ban against gays and lesbians runs counter 
          to "the basic principles of our nation -- liberty and 
          justice for all," Sherry said.  "To allow the military to 
          discriminate is morally intolerable and contrary to the 
          values that undergird our society."

          MISCONDUCT NOT ORIENTATION

               The sexual misconduct of military personnel, not 
          their sexual orientation, should be the issue, Sherry said.  
          "While the religious community and the nation are still 
          in the midst of a profound and difficult debate about 
          the moral character of various forms of sexual behavior, 
          there is growing conviction that sexual orientation, in 
          and of itself, is not an adequate or appropriate basis for 
          judging others, any more than is one's gender, race or 
          ethnic background."

               Sherry praised military leaders who "have 
          demonstrated the capacity to lead our forces effectively 
          through transitions that have included racial integration 
          and the admission of women."  He said that military 
          leaders "can be responsible for insuring that sexism, 
          racism and homophobia are not supported or condoned 
          in their units."

                In challenging Sherry's testimony, Rep. Herb 
          Bateman (D-VA) said that "specially protected rights" 
          should not be legislated for "people who profess to be 
          homosexuals on the grounds that it is a civil liberty to 
          which they are entitled."

               Sherry responded by arguing that gays and 
          lesbians do not seek special consideration.  "People 
          simply want those rights which every citizen of this land 
          -- by virtue of birthright and by virtue of citizenship -- 
          have a right to expect." 

               Presiding Bishop Edmond L. Browning has 
          joined leaders of other churches in calling for an end to 
          the ban on gays in the military.  Other church leaders 
          endorsing Sherry's Congressional testimony represented 
          the National Council of Churches, the Evangelical 
          Lutheran Church in America, the African Methodist 
          Episcopal Church, the Christian Church (Disciples of 
          Christ), the Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan 
          Community Churches, the Unitarian Universalist 
          Fellowship, the Moravian Church in America, the 
          United Methodist Church, the American Baptist 
          Churches and the Union of American Hebrew 
          Congregations.
          -----
          James Solheim is Director of the Episcopal News 
          Service.

          PB WRITES TO ARMED FORCES CHAPLAINS

             The Most Reverend Edmond L. Browning
             Presiding Bishop, The Episcopal Church
             February 5, 1993

          A letter for all Armed Forces Chaplains

          Dear friends:

               As various governmental agencies spend the next 
          six months studying the subject of the President's lifting 
          of the Department of Defense ban on gay and lesbian 
          persons serving in the Armed Forces, I have conferred 
          with Bishop Keyser as to how best the Episcopal Church 
          might respond to the strong probability of this policy 
          change.  As we discussed the implications of lifting the 
          ban, I was impressed by the fact that many changes may 
          no doubt be taking place in your units.

               With full awareness that it will demand your best 
          efforts I want you to be at the forefront in alleviating all 
          discriminatory practices and to continue to be pastorally 
          sensitive in the care of your people during this 
          particular transition.  This six-month period of study 
          should be a significant time for you to teach those for 
          whom you are responsible.  Please encourage others to 
          study the policy change with an open attitude regarding 
          the priority of carrying out the mission of the Armed 
          Forces in the defense of our nation.  Above all, do all 
          you can to prevent verbally and physically hostile acts 
          from taking place.

               At the recent meeting of the National 
          Conference on Ministry to the Armed Forces a 
          resolution was passed affirming "the right of Chaplains 
          to publicly discuss the position of their faith community 
          concerning the integration of homosexual persons into 
          the Armed Forces."  To assist you in such dialogue I am 
          enclosing pertinent resolutions which have been passed 
          by the Episcopal Church in General Convention.  Share 
          them with your people, and teach them the significance 
          of these resolutions.

               Bishop Keyser has briefed me on the process 
          being developed to facilitate the participation of clergy 
          serving in federal agencies in the church-wide dialogue 
          on human sexuality as directed by the 1991 General 
          Convention's Resolution - A-104sa.  With my full 
          concurrence he intends to insure that an important 
          portion of each dialogue will specifically deal with the 
          complex changes that will take place with the lifting of 
          the ban and your role as a chaplain to all persons in the 
          midst of these changes.  Your role, as always, includes 
          teaching, preaching, counseling, advising, and healing.  
          The regional dialogues Bishop Keyser has planned will 
          help equip you to represent the Episcopal Church well 
          during this critical time.  I commend that opportunity 
          for dialogue to you.

               The world is changing in many ways, and this can 
          be frightening to many.  As ministers of the gospel of 
          Jesus Christ, we can respond with the good news that he 
          is Lord and calls us to work for justice and peace 
          through the power fo the Holy Spirit.  May our wise 
          counsel and Christ-centered pastoral care be an impetus 
          for our people to more fully "seek and serve Christ in all 
          persons, strive for justice and peace among all people, 
          and respect the dignity of every human being."

               I continue to be inspired by your ministry to 
          Episcopalians in uniform and to your people of various 
          denominational affiliations and cultural backgrounds.  
          Please know that you are in my thoughts and prayers.

            Faithfully yours,
            Edmond L. Browning

          ********************

          *AN EXCHANGE OF PLEASANTRIES*

          Letter to the Editor: "The Living Church," March 14, 
          1993

          IDEOLOGICAL TERRORISM

               The board of Integrity dissociates itself from the 
          National Council of Churches' (NCC) vote which 
          refused observer status to the Universal Fellowship of 
          Metropolitan Community Churches, a predominantly 
          homosexual group ["TLC," Jan. 3].

               It also calls for "the immediate replacement of 
          the Rev. William Norgren as ecumenical officer of the 
          Episcopal Church and the replacement of four other 
          members of the Episcopal delegation" who voted 
          against observer status.  This comes from a group which 
          has now begun a new buzzword, "gentle," as a self-
          description.  It is a group which has terrorized 
          everybody, not only to give its members freedom of 
          democratic voice, but also a place to make decisions 
          (even if they offend others) while, at the same time, 
          withdrawing the same freedom from others.

               When will we realize that the ideological 
          terrorism of Integrity, a despotic and ruthless segment 
          who simply want everything their own way and on their 
          own terms, is running the program of this church and 
          the rest of us who are paying the growing costs?

               Fr. Norgren is entitled to opinion and vote, even 
          if it is contrary to Integrity's wishes.

               Frankly, I don't care who goes to the NCC or 
          who observes, since I have never followed the fortunes 
          or misfortunes of the WCC.  Both are too great a pain 
          for the church and have outlived their usefulness.  But I 
          do wonder if, politically and in the church, we have 
          entered an era of despotism under the guise of 
          democracy.  Certainly that is the way Integrity and its 
          friends seem to work.

          (The Rt. Rev.) Terence Kelshaw, Bishop of the Rio 
          Grande


          Letter to the Editor:  "The Living Church," April 11, 
          1993

          CASE OF PROJECTION

               Methinks the bishop doth protest too much.  For 
          Bishop Kelshaw to describe Integrity as "despotic" is a 
          case of projection.  To be a despot implies having power 
          to misuse.  Integrity has never had "power" in the 
          Episcopal Church comparable to that of any bishop.

               Bishop Kelshaw attacks a straw man of his own 
          creation when he says that the church's ecumenical 
          officer has a right to vote contrary to the wishes of 
          Integrity.  No one suggests otherwise.  What our 
          national board protested was Fr. Norgren's voting 
          contrary to the mandate of the 1991 General 
          Convention to promote dialogue with lesbian and gay 
          Christians.  Contrary to Bishop Kelshaw, Integrity 
          thinks the work of the National and World Councils of 
          Churches is important.

               Unfortunately Bishop Kelshaw's letter is replete 
          with other factual inaccuracies.  For example, Integrity 
          has never used "gentle" to describe itself.  The use of 
          such a term to describe oneself would always be suspect.

               Perhaps what is really wrong with the Episcopal 
          Church is the quality of the leadership in some of our 
          dioceses.

          Edgar K. Byham, Director of Communications, 
          Integrity, Inc.


          Letter to the Editor:  "The Living Church," May 2, 1993

          RAW ANGER

               I have never seen such raw anger, such 
          dysfunctional hatefulness, or such naked self-
          righteousness as in Bishop Kelshaw's letter.  Integrity, 
          certainly, is a flawed organization as are the Episcopal 
          Church and the Diocese of the Rio Grande.  However, 
          Integrity is not ACTUP.  Can it be in any way pastoral 
          to call a Christian group despotic, ruthless and terrorist?  
          Why is a bishop saying such things?  What would Jesus 
          say?

          (The Rev.) Thomas W. Philips, Providence, R.I.

          ********************

          *EAST TENNESSEE SYMPOSIUM TO EXPLORE 
          SEARCH FOR STRUCTURAL REFORM OF THE 
          EPISCOPAL CHURCH*
          Based on an Episcopal News Service release

               In recent years, members of the Episcopal 
          Church from the tiniest parishes to bishops and national 
          leaders have asked aloud what kind of structure is 
          needed for the challenges of the 21st century.

               The question has been uttered by Episcopalians 
          of a variety of  viewpoints and theological perspectives.  
          Whether the dialogue includes such terms as "long-
          range planning" or "paradigm shift" or  
          "decentralization," there seems to be a crescendo of 
          voices asking if the Episcopal Church should make 
          some significant changes in its institutional life. 
               Just as the church's Executive Council has embarked on 
          a  churchwide process to gather concerns from the 
          grassroots, a symposium in St. Louis this August may 
          serve to turn up the volume in the conversation about 
          church structure. 

               The August 12-15 symposium, "Shaping Our 
          Future:  A 
          Grassroots Forum on Episcopal Structures," sponsored 
          by the  Diocese of East Tennessee had hoped to bring 
          as many as 2,000 Episcopalians together to talk about 
          structural reform, though it appears the numbers will be 
          far smaller. 

                 Some of the original motivation for the symposium 
          was sparked by two rectors from the Diocese of East 
          Tennessee, the Rev.  Stephen Freeman and the Rev. 
          Peter Keese.  Freeman and Keese offered a resolution 
          at the 1991 diocesan convention that called for 
          significant changes in the structure of the Episcopal 
          Church.  Among other things, Freeman and Keese 
          called for the General Convention to meet once every 
          10 years, and for a diocesan bishop to serve as the 
          presiding bishop.

                 Although the proposal was not adopted by the 
          diocesan convention, it was referred to a committee for 
          further study.  The committee, later known as the "East 
          Tennessee Initiative," initially proposed to convene a 
          small symposium of scholars and church leaders at the 
          University of the South in Sewanee, then suggested a 
          larger meeting in St. Louis.

                 Some skeptics of the upcoming symposium have 
          criticized it as an uncontrollable "shadow General 
          Convention."  One observer said that it could well be a 
          "magnet for the discontented."  Another suggested that 
          cool passions and calm heads would not necessarily 
          prevail in the "heat and humidity of an August in St. 
          Louis."

               Bishop Robert Tharp of East Tennessee in a 
          telephone interview with ENS's Jeffrey Penn dismissed 
          such characterizations.  "This is not an  alternative to 
          General Convention nor a mini-General Convention.  I 
          would disavow the whole thing if it turned into 
          something like that."

               Tharp said that, although there would be some 
          plenary sessions at the meeting, "none of them would 
          resemble the House of Bishops or Deputies.  There 
          will be no opportunity to debate in the  plenary sessions.  
          I don't believe that any resolutions will come out of this 
          meeting." 

               To explore whether opposition to the inclusion 
          of lesgay persons has helped motivate or will play a role 
          in the symposium, Integrity will be represented by Dr. 
          Louie Crew.

          *MUCH FUSS DOWN UNDER*
          *FIRST "OPENLY" GAY ORDINAND IN 
          AUSTRALIAN CHURCH QUITS*

          The first article below appeared in "The Australian 
          Magazine" prior to the Rev. David McAuliffe's decision 
          to leave the Anglican priesthood.  Off-the-record 
          remarks by Archbishop Carnley, while visiting 
          Integrity/New York in May, suggest that parts of the 
          story may be innaccurate.  The second article appeared 
          in "The Australian" (the Perth newpaper in which the 
          Magazine is a Sunday supplement) shortly after the 
          resignation.

          *HONEST TO GOD*

          Still divided over women priests, the Anglican Church is 
          now being urged to confront its other contentious 
          problem -- gay priests.  The case of David McAuliffe 
          epitomises the forces, fears and theories at work.

          By Janine Cohen

               The Reverend David McAuliffe regularly gets 
          hate mail, despite the fact that he has devoted his life to 
          God.  Most of it comes from members of his own 
          Church.  They warn him that he is going to burn in hell 
          and that his soul will perish in the eternal flames.  They 
          ask him to repent and give up his wicked ways.

               McAuliffe believes his only sin is that, unlike 
          many other Anglican clergy, he has refused to lie about 
          his sexuality.  He would rather be hated for something 
          he is than loved for something he is not.  Seven months 
          ago, the tall, urbane 51-year-old was ordained the first 
          self-proclaimed homosexual in the Anglican Church in 
          Australia, an event that has propelled the Anglican 
          Church into yet another controversy -- one that many 
          think the Church is not ready to deal with, particularly 
          with the continuing divisions over the ordination of 
          women priests.  For the moment, the Church has gone 
          to ground on the issue.

               McAuliffe, who was told not to speak to the 
          media, agreed to talk to me only after finding himself in 
          what he considers an impossible position.  His honesty 
          has come at a cost.  He is now a priest without a parish 
          and on the verge of reconsidering his future with the 
          Church.  "I am not going to sit around in limbo for the 
          rest of my life," he says, clearly frustrated.  "I can do 
          other things."  Since news of his ordination became 
          public, he has been shunned by his peers and left 
          jobless.  "What the Church, and I mean the Church in its 
          totality, has to do is to just be honest for once and say 
          there are gay people in the Church, there have always 
          been gay people in the Church, and the Church and the 
          family has not fallen apart."

               Western Australia's Archbishop Peter Carnley, 
          the man who defied many in his Church and ordained 
          the first women priests in Australia, ordained McAuliffe 
          last August, knowing he was homosexual.  After all, he 
          had come from Perth's gay Resurrection Community 
          Church where for three years he had ministered openly 
          to many gays and lesbians.  The church began with 12 
          people meeting in McAuliffe's lounge and grew to 
          about 250 members.

               Many in the Anglican Church were angry that 
          there was no debate on the issue before McAuliffe was 
          ordained.  The Archbishop was accused of not 
          consulting his flock and the fundamentalists were 
          furious.  Liberal theologians argued that there have 
          always been homosexual clergy in the Church.  The only 
          difference here was that the latest recruit had been 
          open about it.

               The violent reaction to McAuliffe's ordination 
          caught even the Archbishop unprepared.  Letters 
          poured in from disgusted Christians.  The clergy was 
          divided.  Some preached from the pulpit about the evils 
          of homosexuality while others said it was God's way.  
          Some simply remained tight-lipped, too confused to 
          counsel their congregation.  Homosexual priests, who 
          had not made their sexuality known to their parish and 
          peers, started deadlocking the closets.

               McAuliffe is pragmatic about the homophobia.  
          "I never take it personally because they don't know me 
          personally.  Really what they are doing is just voicing 
          their own prejudices or their own feelings or their own 
          very consciously held beliefs."  Part of his week is spent 
          replying to the "more rational" letters he receives 
          condemning his ordination.  His critics cite passages 
          from the Bible supporting their stand and he writes 
          back quoting others.  The irony is that when he was 
          considering entering the Anglican Church he took 
          counsel with a number of homosexual Anglican 
          ministers.  They were all encouraging.  Then the story 
          broke in the media and a public storm followed.  "It has 
          been rather fascinating really," says McAuliffe.  "I have 
          had no support at all from the Anglican clergy.  
          Through the whole crisis I had no support at all from 
          any of the gay priests in the Church.  Absolutely 
          nothing.  I am just stunned that these men can be so 
          cowardly."

               McAuliffe is a stately man with heavy dark 
          eyebrows and a calming, well-modulated voice.  
          Extremely well-read, he is a moderate on most things, 
          although a self-confessed socialist on social issues.  
          While working as a Liberal Catholic priest in the mid-
          eighties, his parishioners used to complain that his 
          sermons were too conservative.  Many find him a 
          dichotomy.  He has a striking intellect and a wry, earthy 
          sense of humour.  His vocabulary is peppered with long 
          theological terms, although when the issue of 
          homosexuality is raised he uses some language that is 
          common only to the gay community and seems 
          incongruous coming from such a seemingly 
          conventional minister.

               In a photograph taken at his ordination are his 
          85-year-old mother, his homosexual lover, a gay 
          Christian friend, the Archbishop and several bishops, all 
          of whom knew about the new priest's sexual 
          preferences.  It was a lovely ceremony, he recalls, a 
          pleasant day.  Everyone was hospitable.  They all agreed 
          the new minister had a bright future.  One of the clergy 
          present even invited him to assist him in his parish 
          duties until he was allocated his own.  Then word got 
          out of the gay priest's ordination and the furore 
          erupted.  McAuliffe heard nothing more.  Since then, he 
          has not been invited to a single church to celebrate the 
          Eucharist.  "It is unusual to know there is a priest 
          around on the loose and there are priests who go away 
          on holidays and you go and help out, but nothing.  
          Obviously they are too afraid to broach it."

               McAuliffe estimates that almost 40 per cent of 
          the Anglican clergy in Perth are gay (a figure disputed 
          by some clergy and confirmed by others).  It seems 
          some marry as a front while others live with their 
          partners and are known to the gay community.  
          McAuliffe says traditionally the bishops were aware that 
          they had ordained gay priests, but as the issue was never 
          discussed their sexuality had not been a problem.

               "If I had gone through the training system as 
          most Anglican priests do, and not come in as an 
          ordained priest and having been known as a gay person, 
          then I would have slipped into a parish and become the 
          usual parish priest living a quiet life with a good salary."  
          Instead, he has been jobless for more than six months 
          and has received no financial support from the Church.

               As he sees it, his only sin is that he refuses to lie 
          about being in a long-term monogamous relationship.  
          He believes vast numbers of Anglicans throughout the 
          history of the Church have been ministered to, married 
          by and buried by gay clergy.  "Probably the people who 
          have written to me condemning [me] or condemning the 
          Archbishop for ordaining me, probably their rector is 
          gay," he says nonchalantly.

               Some fundamentalists believe gay people have a 
          choice despite the fact that modern psychiatry disagrees.  
          Born-again Christians believe if gay people repent and 
          throw themselves on the mercy of God, they can cast 
          aside the demons that tempt them into this life.  
          McAuliffe says he knows from experience this is not 
          true.  As a young man, he fought hard to suppress his 
          homosexual feelings.  He led a devoted life and prayed 
          diligently, and when that failed he became engaged to a 
          young woman, but could not continue with the 
          engagement.

               The stir over McAuliffe's ordination presented 
          Perth's Archbishop with a problem.  He needed to find 
          a parish for his latest recruit, but which one?  Last year, 
          he chose the trendy, middle-class Perth parish of 
          Subiaco.  The congregation there had a history of 
          supporting progressive social-justice issues.  They were 
          in the main modern and well-educated.  They had a 
          woman priest on staff.  But their reaction shocked the 
          Archbishop.  The Subiaco flock went into a flap.  What 
          would happen when the rector went away?  Would 
          McAuliffe have to conduct the service.  And what about 
          the altar boys?  (McAuliffe points out that the 
          heterosexual parish priest was never considered a threat 
          to the altar girls.)  After months of heated meetings, 
          which McAuliffe was not allowed to attend, the 
          parishioners decided to give their gay priest a trial.  But 
          in the meantime, another problem had arisen.

               In answer to growing criticism of his decision to 
          ordain a self-proclaimed homosexual, Archbishop 
          Carnley told the media that McAuliffe was celibate.  
          McAuliffe has had a live-in lover for two years.  Until 
          this was cleared up, the new priest felt he could not 
          accept the Subiaco position.  When McAuliffe 
          complained about the celibacy issue, the Archbishop 
          said he was given to understand that he was celibate.  
          "But you didn't ask me, did you?" McAuliffe complained 
          to his superior.  "No, but you didn't tell me either," the 
          Archbishop replied.  McAuliffe says the Church may 
          not have known he had a partner but that should have 
          been a natural assumption.

               What really riles him is that as the controversy 
          over his ordination continued, the Church gave the 
          impression that he had given assurances he was 
          celibate.  "I had not.  I absolutely had not."  His chief 
          concern was that people who knew his true position 
          would think him a hypocrite.  "There has been this 
          perception in the community that I have turned my back 
          on the whole gay issue and walked away from it."

               After the Archbishop's comments about his 
          alleged celibacy, members of the gay community called 
          him wanting to know why the lie.  Suddenly, his 
          credibility was at stake and this was the main reason 
          that moved him to talk publicly.  He wanted to set the 
          record right.  He knows that as a non-celibate priest he 
          poses ethical problems for a Church that condemns sex 
          outside of marriage.  "I think what is happening is the 
          Church is using a heterosexual -- a straight model -- and 
          imposing that on the gay community and you cannot do 
          that.  What the Church has to do -- whether it is the 
          Anglican Church, the Roman Church or any other 
          Church -- is to theologise the thing right through, look 
          at all the scriptures and then come up with a model that 
          suits gay relationships.  The Church is trying to crush 
          gay people into a model that doesn't fit."

               McAuliffe only ever planned to stay three years 
          with the gay Resurrection Community Church.  
          Eventually, he wanted to return to a more orthodox 
          Church.  He approached the Anglican Church which 
          was very responsive.  "The sexuality issue came up but it 
          was basically laughed out of court," he says.

               He has no doubt that Archbishop Carnley is 
          supportive of homosexual clergy in the Church from a 
          justice perspective but he doubts that he would ordain 
          another practising homosexual because of the anger in 
          the community and his own Church.  Archbishop 
          Carnley, in the US until May, was unavailable for 
          comment, but his acting administrator, Bishop Brian 
          Kyme, says he is unaware of any plans the Archbishop 
          may have for McAuliffe and such decisions will have to 
          wait until his return.  "The Church has been very 
          accepting in his [McAuliffe's] case and it is just 
          unfortunate that the planned appointment [to Subiaco] 
          didn't come off."

               Kyme believes the issue of homosexuals and the 
          Church is becoming less contentious.  "Today, the vast 
          majority of Church people accept that there are people 
          that have a homosexual orientation and that they ought 
          to be accepted as persons, and that it is not of their own 
          making.  It is the way they are."  However, he also 
          believes that certain "homosexual acts" are contrary to 
          what the Bible teaches.  "I think the Church recognises 
          that some of the clergy have a homosexual orientation 
          and that is true across the population and we would 
          expect that to be true of the clergy, too.  Now that is one 
          issue and the other issue is that most members of the 
          Church believe that certain sexual acts are prohibited in 
          the scripture so we draw a distinction between the 
          sexual orientation of the person and the things that they 
          do or don't do.  So while we would not be happy to 
          condone certain homosexual acts, at the same time we 
          are ready to accept that some people have a 
          homosexual orientation."

               This is where the issue gets cloudy for the 
          Church.  Does this mean that in order to be accepted by 
          the Church, homosexual clergy should be celibate?  
          "Well certainly they either should be celibate ... but I am 
          sure there are cases where we don't probe into the 
          private behaviour of our clergy leaving it to them as a 
          matter of conscience," Kyme says.  "There may well be 
          homosexual clergy who are not celibate and we are 
          unaware of it.  But we don't make an issue of, aah ... we 
          don't interrogate prospective ordinands about their 
          sexual behaviour.  We have never done that."

               Kyme does "not believe for a moment" 
          McAuliffe's claim that as many as 40 per cent of 
          Anglican clergy are homosexual.  "I am sure there are 
          some and I am sure I know who some of them are, but I 
          am not interested in going around asking the clergy 
          what their sexual orientation is."

               The Anglican view of homosexuality and the 
          Church depends on whom you speak to.  One of the 
          more liberal voices is Rev. Roger Sharr, director of the 
          Wollaston Anglican Theological College in WA, who 
          says there is nothing in the scriptures that says 
          homosexuality is a sin; there are mentions of 
          homosexuality that are not favourable in relationship to 
          promiscuity but the same is so of heterosexuality.  It has 
          to be read on context.  Some people believe the issue 
          means bad publicity for the Church, but his view is that 
          it has nothing to do with publicity.  "It is what the truth 
          is which is far more important.  Therefore the question 
          needs to be addressed."  He says many clergy and 
          parishioners are uninformed about homosexuality.  
          "There is an automatic association with child molesting 
          and other things that really have nothing to do with the 
          debate at all."

               For Rev. Greg Harvey, the chairperson of the Anglican 
          Social Responsibility Commission, the Church has been 
          ambivalent on the issue for centuries, and it is time to 
          develop a more open position on the matter.  "If you get 
          hold of one of these fundamentalist clergy and you 
          speak to them about one of their friends who might be a 
          gay priest, of whom there are a very great number 
          around the place, they would say 'Look we really like 
          that guy, but we can't deal with the fact that he is a 
          homosexual.'"  Harvey says a person's sexuality has not 
          bearing whatever on their ability to be a priest.  "It is 
          clear that God calls homosexual people as well as non-
          homosexual people.  I certainly support the ordination 
          of people who are homosexual, but I do not believe that 
          priest's sexuality is the issue for his or her people."

               Others disagree.  Rev. Peter Brain, a rector of an 
          outlying Perth parish who unsuccessfully tried to put a 
          motion to the last WA synod indirectly condemning 
          homosexuality, was upset when he heard that McAuliffe 
          had been ordained.  He immediately contacted the 
          Archbishop who, he says, assured him that the new 
          minister was celibate.  The only way the Wanneroo 
          minister would accept the new priest was if he was no 
          longer a practising homosexual and did not condone 
          such a lifestyle for others.  He says he knows of people 
          who have left the Church because of McAuliffe's 
          ordination.

               Brain has been surprised at other clergy's claims 
          that there is a considerable number of gay clergy, as he 
          knows of only two.  He believes practising homosexual 
          ministers should be asked to resign from the Church -- 
          because being a practising homosexual and a Christian 
          is a total contradiction.  And he maintains that a 
          homosexual can be "cured" if he or she turns to the 
          gospel.  "My understanding is that there are some 
          [homosexuals] who are cured in the sense that no longer 
          do they practise and no longer do they experience the 
          actual temptation in terms of their orientation.  With 
          good support from a caring congregation and with 
          God's help, although the orientation may well remain, 
          the grip over them gets less and less."

               Last October, an Anglican commission was set 
          up to look at the theology of the human person and 
          incorporated in this will be the issue of homosexuality.  
          It is not expected to report for at least a year.  Some of 
          its members are sympathetic to the issue of gay clergy, 
          others are not.  One is Rev. John Yates, who runs a 
          group called "Genesis," which tries to save Christians 
          who are tempted by homosexual feelings.  It started last 
          year and has five members, all from his congregation in 
          Leederville, an inner Perth suburb.  Yates believes it is 
          possible for people with "homosexual feelings" (he 
          refuses to call any of his flock homosexuals) to be cured 
          by long-term spiritual psychotherapy.  "It is something 
          we believe will happen but it takes time.  There are 
          plenty of people in the Church who have homosexual 
          temptations or orientation and that is their disposition.  
          A disposition is not, in terms of Christian morals 
          theology, a sin.  It is only when you act on it."

               Yates says practising homosexuals cannot be 
          ordained.  "Now according to the Archbishop, the man 
          [McAuliffe] has renounced open homosexual activity 
          and so is living a celibate life.  In that case, there is 
          nothing extraordinary about that because there are 
          plenty of people in the ministry who have had problems 
          with drugs, with alcohol, with adultery ... you name it.  If 
          he was practising, it would be entirely different."

               He intends to submit a paper to the commission 
          detailing his views on how physical sexual intimacy 
          between two people of the same sex is impossible.  He 
          believes poor nurturing is responsible for much of our 
          homosexuality, in particular emotional deprivation in 
          relationship to the same sex parent.  His theory is that 
          men have been characteristically more distant as 
          parents and believes this explains why there are more 
          male homosexuals than lesbians.

               Yates says he knows of a significant number of 
          homosexuals who have been attracted to the priesthood, 
          some of whom have been practising.  He suspects they 
          are attracted to the Church because of the brightly 
          coloured vestments and the drama and colour of 
          sermons.  "It is a hypothesis, but I think it is a hypothesis 
          that fits some of the homosexuals I have know."

               There has never been an official Church position 
          on homosexuality, but Yates believes it will increasingly 
          be on the Church agenda.  Even his colleagues, who do 
          not share his other views, agree with him on this point.
          
          FIRST OPENLY GAY PRIEST QUITS CHURCH*
          By Mark Irving

               The Anglican Church's first self-proclaims 
          homosexual priest, [editor's note:  first openly gay 
          ordinand, if McAuliffe's was that, has incorrectly been 
          transformed into first openly gay priest] the Reverend 
          David McAuliffe, has quit the church after a row with 
          the hierarchy over his sexual orientation.

               Mr. McAuliffe's decision follows his public 
          denial in "The Australian" colour magazine earlier this 
          month of statements by the Archbishop of Perth, the 
          Most Reverend Peter Carnley, that he was celibate.

               Mr. McAuliffe is not celibate.  He has a long-
          time partner  -- something, he says, that many people in 
          the church knew about when he was ordained last 
          August.

               "He (Archbishop Carnley) went out on his own 
          and said I was celibate and then went further and said:  
          'This man has given me assurances that he is celibate.'  
          But that never happened.  I've never been asked to this 
          day ... whether I was celibate.  I had the impression all 
          along the line that they didn't want to ask that 
          question," Mr. McAuliffe said.

               Archbishop Carnley's "off-the-cuff" remarks, as 
          Mr. McAuliffe describes them, had placed him under 
          intolerable pressure -- both personally and from gay 
          friends  who queried whether he had "sold out ... in 
          order to get a nice cosy rectory somewhere."

               He had "hassled" for six months to get the record 
          set straight before he decided to go public in "The 
          Australian."  Now he finds himself a reluctant 
          homosexual cause celebre in the church.

               A former Catholic and leader of a gay church in 
          Perth, Mr. McAuliffe was ordained by Archbishop 
          Carnley (who also ordained the church's first women 
          priests).

               He had been earmarked for a position in a 
          church at Subiaco, an inner suburb of Perth, until his 
          sexual orientation became an issue and church-goers 
          were misinformed about his celibacy.

               "They had been sold the idea I was gay and 
          celibate," Mr. McAuliffe said.  "I said in conscience I 
          couldn't accept the post because it would have been 
          giving the lie to everything I stood for."

               Archbishop Carnley is now overseas lecturing 
          and the matter has been handled by Bishop Brian 
          Kyme, the assistant bishop of the Perth northern region.

               Mr. McAuliffe's decision to quit the church 
          followed a meeting last Friday with Bishop Kyme.  Two 
          days ago, he resigned his licence to officiate as a priest 
          and now faces an uncertain future as a "freelance" 
          priest.

               Yesterday, Bishop Kyme published a statement 
          he had issued to all diocese clergy.

               "Most of your will have seen the article in the 
          magazine supplement to 'The Australian' which raises 
          the whole question of the employment of priests with a 
          homosexual orientation," the statement reads.

               "The bottom line is that parishes are not willing 
          to entertain the nomination of a priest who openly 
          acknowledges he is a sexually active homosexual with a 
          live-in partner."

               Mr. McAuliffe said:  "When I approached the 
          church (to join) I had no wish to rock the boat.  All I 
          wanted to be was a fairly quiet priest with a parish.

               "I realise there is not very much emancipation out there 
          at all, that the battle was hardly joined, let alone won."

               Honesty, he said, had not paid off.  Many other 
          priests in Perth (he claims the figure is as high as 40 per 
          cent) were gay, some living in rectories with their lovers.

          ********************

          *TOPEKA PARISH GAY BASHED*
          by Patricia Wainwright

               On Sunday morning for more than a year, 
          members of St. David's Church, Topeka, Kan., have had 
          to walk by a group of pickets to enter their church.  
          Members of Westboro Baptist Church have stood on 
          the sidewalk outside the front door of St. David's, 
          proclaiming with placards and shouts their opinions of 
          homosexuals, their sympathizers, families, or friends.

               The Rev. Fred Phelps, Sr., is pastor of Westboro 
          Baptist, a small independent church.  According to 
          several sources in Topeka, Mr. Phelps is a disbarred 
          attorney whose activities stay carefully within the law.  
          His congregation consists largely of family members, 
          several of whom are also lawyers.  Mr. Phelps and his 
          followers regularly picket in Gage Park, a popular site 
          of civic events and family gatherings, which they 
          perceive as an area of homosexual activity.  St. David's 
          became a target of pickets after some church members 
          were part of an ecumenical group that countered Mr. 
          Phelps' activities with a "Sunday in the Park Without 
          Fred."  The Rt. Rev. William Smalley, Bishop of 
          Kansas, said it was simply "a day in the park -- just be 
          there to reclaim the park for the community."  The 
          people from St. David's were easily identifiable, wearing 
          "St. David's Deacons" shirts, which are worn at various 
          church activities.

               "St. David's has always been a very active 
          parish ... which sees liturgy and mission as one," said 
          parishioner Winnie Crapson in a telephone 
          conversation. She agreed with the Rev. Robert Layne, 
          rector of St. David's, in feeling that the Westboro 
          activities affected not only St. David's but the entire 
          community.

               Several Topekans interviewed described the 
          group's picketing of civic concerts, plays, and most 
          recently, funerals.  Both Bishop Smalley and an 
          American Baptist pastor told of demonstrations outside 
          funeral homes where services were being held for 
          someone perceived to have died of AIDS.  The group 
          has sent "certificates" to families of recently deceased 
          homosexuals, causing a brief arrest of Mr. Phelps on a 
          charge of defaming the dead.  The AIDS memorial quilt 
          was the target of protest when it was on display at 
          Washburn University.

               Fr. Layne described in a letter a typical Sunday 
          morning:  "We have faced obscene and cruel signs, and 
          on many occasions individual parishioners have 
          received verbal assaults such as elderly female 
          parishioners being called 'sodomites,' or one of our 
          Oriental parishioners being called 'slant-eyed bastard,' 
          as well as my being called 'son of perdition' and 
          'antichrist rector.'"

               People entering the church have not been 
          physically assaulted, but many feel threatened and have 
          begun avoiding the front door.

               On Palm Sunday, St. David's and four other 
          churches held their traditional procession and blessing 
          of the palms. "We obtained a parade permit this year -- 
          something we never did in previous years," said Alan 
          Fries, senior warden.  For the last 25 years, the 
          procession has used the sidewalks which the Westboro 
          group now occupies. "They stayed out of the way," said 
          St. David's youth leader, Rita Hernault.  "The protesters 
          were on three corners [of the intersection].  They 
          stepped off the sidewalk to let us pass.  It was a 
          wonderful procession!"

               Fr. Fries said the vestry supports Fr. Layne's 
          decision to stand up to the Westboro group.  "There is 
          something wrong about having to scurry into your own 
          back door," he said.  "The vast majority supported 
          taking a stand against hatred, vile language, and the 
          misuse of God's word."  Members of the church have 
          been meeting to develop appropriate non-violent 
          responses.  Fr. Layne's letter to TLC ["The Living 
          Church"] said, "We want our response to be Christian -- 
          purposeful, powerful, peaceful, with perseverance.  We 
          don't want to return hate for hate, or allow evil to 
          provoke us to violence."

               The First Southern Baptist Church in Topeka 
          was picketed by members of Westboro Baptist for four 
          or five weeks. The Rev. Clark Johnson, pastor of First 
          Baptist, said one reason the picketers chose plays and 
          concerts, as well as his church was "that's where the 
          audience is.  If you can't generate an audience, you go 
          where it is."

               Neither Mr. Johnson nor the American Baptist 
          pastor supported Mr. Phelps' activities.

               "He's a poor representation of the church ... 
          quick to jump on anyone in opposition," said the 
          American Baptist minister, who asked not to be 
          identified.  He quoted a member of his congregation 
          who complained.  "He *would* have to be a Baptist."  
          Mr. Johnson expressed regret that small group of 
          people preaching hate attract a large amount of 
          attention.  "There are some 260-some churches in 
          Topeka who preach the gospel and love," he said.  "They 
          don't get headlines."

               Several people expressed the fear that the 
          community was becoming polarized around the issues of 
          Mr. Phelps and his targets.  Awareness and compassion 
          for homosexuals may have increased as a result of the 
          verbal attacks seen as vicious and obscene.

          FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT

               Mr. Phelps has "caused people to hate -- him -- 
          who otherwise wouldn't," said Joe Sullivan, executive 
          editor of the Topeka "Capital-Journal" and a deacon at 
          St. David's.  Even so, his newspaper has opposed 
          censorship of Mr. Phelps' message because "he has his 
          First Amendment right to do his thing."  Deacon 
          Sullivan predicted violence as the situation becomes 
          more tense.  While he admires Fr. Layne's courage and 
          agrees that "it's time somebody said Christians have a 
          responsibility to resist hate," he was somewhat worried 
          about the Palm Sunday plans.  "Why risk 
          confrontation?" he said.  "These are not benign 
          picketers.  [There verbal abuse] wouldn't add to the 
          Palm Sunday experience."

               The pickets carried their signs on Palm Sunday, 
          and "sang songs; they weren't shouting," said Ms. 
          Hernault. "We had one TV station, our own video 
          camera, and the police.  They were pretty quiet."  She 
          offered an explanation:  "The protesters have always 
          claimed that others shouted hateful things at them.  The 
          cameras would prove that's not true."

               Deacon Sullivan also played devil's advocate in a 
          telephone conversation:  "Fred Phelps has his 
          interpretation of the Bible.  He sees his role as prophet; 
          his intent is to drive homosexuals out of the city.  Who 
          are we to say he is not called by God to do what he's 
          doing?  How many of the Old Testament prophets were 
          poster children?"
          -----
          This article first appeared in "The Living Church," April 
          25, 1993 and is reprinted with permission.
           
          ********************

          *COMMISSION ON AIDS/HIV SURVEYING 
          CHURCH'S MINISTRIES* 
          Based on a report by the Episcopal News Service

               The Episcopal Church's Joint Commission on 
          AIDS/HIV is sending out about 800 letters in an 
          attempt to assess the church's ministries in the first 
          decade of the epidemic.  In preparation for its report to 
          the 1994 General Convention, "we want to know what 
          the people of the Episcopal Church want to see done....  
          We want to learn from your experiences with 
          HIV/AIDS.  We want to know of your hopes and fears.  
          We want the larger view, the view that dares to dream 
          dreams and seek visions," said the letter, signed by 
          Bishop Douglas Theuner of New Hampshire, chair of 
          the commission.  "As we live with people who know 
          suffering and for whom death is not a matter of 
          contemplation about a far-off time and place, but an 
          everyday reality, we have a sense of urgency about the 
          Gospel response to that.  We need to know how the 
          membership of the Episcopal Church shares that 
          urgency and can help us to translate it into our lives," 
          the letter said.  The commission is seeking an answer to 
          one big question:  "Through your work with others and 
          your own prayer life, what do you believe God is calling 
          the Episcopal Church to do in response to HIV and 
          AIDS by 1997?  By 2001?"  Responses can be sent to the 
          AIDS ministry office at the Episcopal Church Center in 
          New York. 

          ********************

          *EURRR OPPOSES MINNESOTA BISHOP-ELECT*
          based in part on a release from the Episcopal News 
          Service

               Episcopalians United for Revelation, Renewal 
          and Reformation (EURRR) is challenging the election 
          of the Rev. James Jelinek as Bishop of Minnesota 
          because of his support for equal access to the ordination 
          process for lesbians and gay men.  John Winslow, 
          convener of the EURRR in Minnesota, said that his 
          organization has sent letters to 110 standing committees 
          in dioceses throughout the Church asking them to vote 
          against the ratification of Jelinek's election.  A majority 
          standing committees must ratify the election in order 
          for Jelinek to be consecrated as a bishop.  "This diocese 
          [Minnesota] is controlled by a very liberal element," 
          Winslow said.  "That's what I've been fighting.  Here 
          you have a bishop who will violate a church resolution.  
          It makes a mockery of the church."  Jelinek said that he 
          believes church laws do not prohibit the ordination of 
          noncelibate homosexuals.  He maintains that "if a 
          person is going through the entire discernment process 
          and they appear to be a healthy, whole person, the 
          decision should not be made on the basis of their 
          sexuality alone.  Bishop Robert Anderson of Minnesota 
          said he was "confident that the will of the lay people and 
          clergy of the Episcopal Church in Minnesota would be 
          upheld by the bishops and lay leaders of other dioceses 
          around the country.  The larger church will not easily 
          set aside the will of the people of a diocese expressed in 
          a fair and open election," he said in a statement.

               Jelinek, who is Rector of St. Aidan's Church in 
          San Francisco, said during the election process that as a 
          priest he has presided at several blessings of lesgay 
          relationships, but that he would not do so as a bishop 
          since that would be a "political" rather than a "pastoral" 
          act.

          ********************

          *NEW DALLAS BISHOP SAYS HE'S OPEN, WE'LL 
          SEE*

          from "The Dallas Morning News" March 6,  1993
          by Daniel Cattau

             When James M. Stanton officially becomes bishop of 
          the 36,000-member Episcopal Diocese of Dallas on 
          March 6, two bishops from opposite sides of the 
          theological spectrum will serve among five co-
          consecrators.  Bishop John-David Schofield of San 
          Joaquin, Calif., a member of the traditionalist Episcopal 
          Synod of America, opposes the ordination of women.  
          Bishop Frederick H. Borsch of Los Angeles, by contrast, 
          is known as one of the more liberal Episcopal bishops.
          ...
             [Stanton] said he hasn't met yet with members of the 
          Episcopal Synod or with Integrity,  a group of gay and 
          lesbian Episcopalians.  "I have not met with people who 
          are part of any affiliated group," he said.  "But my door 
          is open to all Episcopalians."

          ********************

          *SUFFRAGAN BISHOP-ELECT IN VIRGINIA 
          ACCUSED OF SEXUAL MISCONDUCT*
          BY James Solheim

               A month after he was elected suffragan bishop of 
          the Diocese of Virginia, the Rev. Canon Antoine 
          (Tony) Lamont Campbell has been accused of sexual 
          misconduct and the consent process has been put on 
          hold pending an investigation into the charges.

               Campbell, who is canon missioner in the Diocese 
          of South Carolina in Charleston, would be the first 
          African American bishop in the 207-year-old Diocese of 
          Virginia and youngest member of the church's House of 
          Bishops.

               Presiding Bishop Edmond L. Browning said in a 
          June 7 statement that he learned of the accusations 
          "made by an adult woman" in late May.  "Canon 
          Campbell denies the truth of the accusations," Browning 
          said.  "Canon Campbell agrees that the investigation 
          proceed and a prompt resolution be reached," he added.

               In a letter to the diocese, Bishop Peter James 
          Lee of Virginia express his "great sorrow" and asked for 
          prayers for Campbell and his family "in these difficult 
          days."  Campbell was one of two suffragan bishops 
          elected at a special convention on May 1.  "Our diocese 
          exhibited great strength and energy in the election of 
          our two suffragan bishops-elect and that energy and 
          unity are still realities for which we can be thankful.  As 
          the weeks unfold, we must trust these events will be 
          used for God's purposes," Lee concluded.  

               Campbell is former rector of Baskervill 
          Ministries in Pawleys Island, South Carolina.  He is a 
          graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy and served in the 
          U.S. Marine Corps before entering Yale Divinity 
          School, graduating in 1985.  He and his wife Julia have 
          three children.

          ********************

          * A NOT VERY PASTORAL LETTER*

          [Editor's Note:  This "Pastoral Letter" by the Bishop of 
          Georgia is important not because it recommends 
          excommunication for all sexually active lesbians and gay 
          men, but because the Rt. Rev. Harry W. Shipps is a 
          member of the committee charged with writing a 
          pastoral teaching for the entire Church on human 
          sexuality pursuant to resolution A-104sa of the 1991 
          General Convention.  This letter was issued in March, 
          1993 and was read in all parishes in the Diocese of 
          Georgia.]

               I write to define my position, and what I believe 
          to be that of the House of Bishops generally, concerning 
          human sexuality, with special attention regarding sexual 
          conduct of persons seeking ordination.

               The Church includes persons of all sexual 
          persuasions amongst its members.  It asks that 
          unmarried persons, heterosexual and homosexual, be 
          and remain celibate.  It asks of married persons chastity.  
          There can be no marriage of same-sex persons or 
          blessing of their relationship.

               Single heterosexual persons who are fornicators, 
          and married heterosexual persons who are adulterers 
          may not be ordained.  Non-celibate homosexual persons 
          may not be ordained.  (The fact that some bishops have 
          broken this rule of the Church, and the attendant 
          notoriety, demonstrates the explicitness of the rule.)

               There is no disparity between heterosexual 
          misbehavior and homosexual misbehavior.  There is no 
          more stringent behavioral check made of homosexual 
          persons than of heterosexual persons.

               *Open and notorious sexual misbehavior by 
          either heterosexual persons or homosexual persons 
          should disallow reception of Holy Communion* (pg. 
          409 of the Book of Common Prayer).  Heterosexual 
          persons living together before intended marriage fall 
          under this principle.  This statement should answer the 
          question concerning the inclusivity of the Church and 
          also the naming of unacceptable conduct, particularly 
          for those persons seeking ordination, who would be 
          required to be "wholesome examples."

               In pastoral terms, I explain it this way to either 
          heterosexual or homosexual persons:  *Precept* (or 
          principle):  The precept of the Church is outlined 
          above, and is a given.   *Practice:*  All mortals fall and 
          transgress.  This does not alter the precept.  *Pastoral:*  
          The pastor always counsels the sinner in the most 
          helpful and sensitive way possible, dealing with the 
          practice that is at variance with the principle and calling 
          for repentance and amendment of life.

          ********************

          *BRITISH BISHOP ADMITS CHARGES, RESIGNS*
          by Kim Byham

               The Bishop of Gloucester, the Rt. Rev. Peter Ball, has 
          resigned after admitting gross indecency with a 17-year-
          old man apparently interested in joining a monastic 
          order that the bishop had founded.  [See "The Voice," 
          Spring, 1993.]

               The bishop decided to resign immediately after 
          police formally cautioned him, a legal step that is taken 
          only after a clear admission of guilt.  Police did not file 
          charges.

               "I regret, with great penitence and sorrow, the 
          circumstances that have led to this police caution," Ball, 
          61, said in a statement.  Ball remains a bishop although 
          he has resigned his position as Bishop of Gloucester.

               Under British law when a suspect is released 
          without charges, police can warn him that if he is later 
          investigated for another offense, the circumstances 
          relating to his first offense can be taken into account.

               Gloucester police said Ball was cautioned for an 
          offense of "gross indecency," which means a sexual 
          offense that falls short of intercourse.  Any homosexual 
          act involving a male under the age of 21 is illegal in 
          Britain.

               Canon Andy Radford, the diocesan press 
          spokesman, said:  "He decided, having admitted guilt, 
          that it would be inappropriate both for the church in 
          Gloucester and for the wider church if he were to 
          continue.  The fact that he admitted guilt has been a 
          severe shock to the diocese and people are taking it 
          hard.  But we must keep this in proportion.  This is one 
          incident and should not be enough to negate 30 or 40 
          years of devoted pastoral work."

               The Archbishop of Canterbury said:  "Bishop 
          Peter is a highly gifted and original man who has 
          inspired many people to deepen their faith in Jesus 
          Christ.  He has been much loved, both in his diocese 
          and in the wider church, including the House of 
          Bishops.  His resignation is therefore a cause of great 
          sorrow."

          ********************

          *HOMOPHOBIA DOESN'T JUST HURT GAY 
          PEOPLE - PART II*

          STRAIGHT INTEGRITY MEMBER FIRED FOR 
          SUPPORTING EQUALITY

               When Prof. June Stefensen Hagen wore a one 
          inch square "Support Gay Rights" button on her book 
          bag at Nyack College last fall she had little idea that it 
          would lead to the end of her job at the conservative, 
          evangelical school up the Hudson River from New York 
          City.

               Most of the college's 560 undergraduates live in 
          dormitories on the wooded campus and have little to do 
          with the nearby town.  They take a pledge not to smoke, 
          drink or dance.

               But in the last five years, under its president, Rexford A. 
          Boda, Nyack College had become more diverse.  It 
          began to attract more students from inner-city 
          neighborhoods, increasing its minority enrollment to 40 
          percent in the current academic year.  In 1991, for the 
          first time, the campus radio station was allowed to play 
          nonreligious music.

               In December, a student complained to the 
          president that Hagen was advocating tolerance of 
          homosexuality by wearing a button in support of gay 
          rights.  After interviewing Professor Hagen and students 
          in her classes, Mr. Boda defended her at a chapel 
          service, saying she was trying only to make students 
          aware of attacks on homosexuals and of legal 
          discrimination against them.

               Boda said that he had hired Hagen knowing that 
          she was a feminist and was likely to lead discussions on 
          current events in her classes.  Before last year's 
          elections, Hagen found her students quarreling about 
          how the issue of civil rights for gays and lesbians was 
          being handled during the presidential campaign.  She 
          said she wore the button to stimulate that discussion but 
          that she also made it clear she personally supported 
          civil rights for everyone, including gays and lesbians.

               Hagen is filing a complaint with the American 
          Association of University Professors.  Prof. David Turk, 
          head of the  college's English department, called Hagen 
          "a very fine teacher and a person of great integrity" and 
          was surprised when the contract was not renewed.

               The case has attracted widespread media 
          attention, including articles in "The New York Times."  
          Dr. Hagen, who is an Integrity member, was anxious to 
          share some of her reaction to the events with us:

               "Anyone's motivations for such action/speech as 
          mine are complicated.  My motivations come from my 
          Christian commitment.  In fact, one of my reasons for 
          speaking is that I am fed up with the religious right's 
          assumption that only they are moved by the Gospel.

               "Every time the congregation reaffirms its own 
          Baptismal Covenant, the two last questions are: 'Will 
          you seek and serve Christ in all persons, loving your 
          neighbor as yourself?  Will you strive for justice and 
          peace among all people, and respect the dignity of every 
          human being?'

               "When I answer each time, 'I will, with God's 
          help,' I do mean that.  And it seems to me that the 
          struggle for equal rights for lesbians and gay men is a 
          part of my working out of this Covenant.

               "Another part of my motivation comes from this: 
          During the last three years my husband, the Rev. James 
          B. Hagen, Rector of the Church of the Redeemer, 
          Astoria, New York, has been an official nominee for 
          Bishop in three dioceses in this country: Los Angeles, 
          Chicago, and San Diego.  From our visits nationwide we 
          realized that gay rights even within the Church are in 
          need of the support of those who might define 
          themselves as 'straight but not narrow!'  We both speak 
          out on this issue.

               "Finally, through the ministry to me of several 
          good friends who are lesbian, I have learned firsthand 
          of the constant threat of physical violence just because 
          of who one is -- or who one is presumed to be -- and the 
          subtle threats to one's vocation and free pursuit of the 
          usual happiness of an American citizen: housing, job, 
          free association, etc.

               "Second only to my Christian commitment is my 
          commitment to the liberal arts education.  I ma a 51-
          year-old Ph.D., I've been teaching for 26 years, 17 of 
          those years in evangelical Christian liberal arts colleges.  
          Colleges give lip-service to the basic principles of free 
          discussion, 'the free play of the mind,' etc.  I believe it is 
          my duty as an educator to help the institutions I serve to 
          grapple with ideas, including controversial ideas."

          ********************

          *BISHOP PLUMMER CHARGED WITH SEXUAL 
          MISCONDUCT:  THE CHURCH AND THE MEDIA 
          REACT*

          THE PRESIDING BISHOP'S LETTER

          May 26, 1993

          To the members of the House of Bishops

          Dear Brothers and Sisters:

               I write to share with you a painful matter in the 
          life of our House and our church.  I also want to ask 
          your prayers that we may approach these difficult 
          realities as God would have us do, and that healing will 
          proceed for all concerned.

               More than two years ago the Rt. Rev. Steven T. 
          Plummer, bishop of Navajoland Area Mission since 
          March 1990, contacted me to tell me that he had 
          engaged in sexual activity with a male minor in a breach 
          of a trust relationship over a period of time ending 
          approximately four years ago.

               I requested a thorough medical and 
          psychological evaluation of Bishop Plummer at a highly 
          respected medical institution.  The evaluation indicated 
          that he was not "at risk" for repeating the behavior.  He 
          has been undergoing therapy since that time and I have 
          continued to monitor the situation and to keep in touch 
          with Steven and Cathy.

               At the time Bishop Plummer brought this matter to me 
          the young man was no longer a minor and unwilling to 
          pursue this any further.  As is always the case in 
          instances of sexual misconduct, the protection of the 
          right to privacy of a victim is a primary consideration.  
          The healing of the young man continues to be of grave 
          concern to me.

               This situation was discussed at a meeting on May 
          8, 1993 in Farmington, New Mexico of the Council, 
          Standing Committee and Staff of the Episcopal Church 
          in Navajoland.  At the meeting, the Rev. Gary Sosa, a 
          deacon of Navajoland, made a statement that included 
          a report that some two years ago Bishop Plummer had 
          told him in confidence of the relationship with the 
          young man.  Bishop Plummer made a brief response 
          and asked for prayers.  He indicated that he is taking 
          responsibility for his healing, and that he believes God 
          has forgiven him.

               After a two-week period for prayerful 
          consideration, the Council reconvened for a special 
          meeting at my request on May 22.  The purpose of the 
          meeting was to review all of the information and to 
          discuss their recommendation to me concerning the 
          ministry of Bishop Plummer amongst the Navajo 
          people.  Enclosed is a copy of a resolution they passed 
          unanimously.  I commend the Council for moving to 
          consensus around a painful issue.  The spirit of their 
          resolution and the compassion they have shown 
          indicates to me that a process of healing is beginning.

               The recommendation of the Council has been 
          helpful to me as I have made some decisions concerning 
          the next steps.  I note that in addition to my pastoral 
          concern for Steven and Cathy Plummer, their families, 
          the victim, and others most closely involved, also of 
          tremendous concern is our Indian ministry, and 
          specifically the ongoing ministry of the Episcopal 
          Church in Navajoland.

               At my request Bishop Plummer has commenced 
          a one-year leave of absence during which time he has 
          agreed not to perform any priestly or episcopal 
          functions without my permission.  He will continue in 
          closely monitored program of therapy.  In addition, I 
          have asked the Rt. Rev. Stewart Zabriskie, who as 
          Bishop of Nevada is in a neighboring area, to serve as a 
          mentor for Steven and his family.

               In the meantime, I have appointed the Rt. Rev. 
          William Wantland, Bishop of Eau Claire, who is the 
          senior active Native American bishop, as the Interim 
          Bishop of the Navajoland Area Mission.  Bill has 
          graciously accepted this responsibility.  I have also 
          conferred and will continue to be in consultation with 
          the Native American leadership of the church about the 
          ministry of Navajoland.  Specifically, I have been in 
          consultation with the Episcopal Council of Indian 
          Ministries and asked their help in the evaluation both 
          long and short range of the mission and ministry of 
          Navajoland.

               Prior to the end of the one-year period the situation will 
          be reviewed to determine most appropriate next steps 
          for Steven and his ministry, and for the ministry of 
          Navajoland.  As the House of Bishops has ultimate 
          responsibility for the program and oversight of the 
          Navajoland Area Mission, I will then communicate with 
          the House concerning any actions that might be needed 
          as the 1994 General Convention.

               In closing I again ask for your prayers.  Let us 
          pray that the healing love of Christ will transform the 
          pain of this situation and that redemption can be found.

          Faithfully yours,
          The Most Rev. Edmond L. Browning
          Presiding Bishop

          RESOLUTION OF THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH OF 
          NAVAJOLAND

          Whereas:

               1)  Our Bishop, Steven T. Plummer, has 
          acknowledged before this Council that he has been 
          guilty of certain misconduct in the past; and

               2) We are all concerned about the victim and do 
          not approve of legal or illegal sexual misconduct; and 

               3) He has sought and received help in this matter 
          through Christian prayer, modern psychology and 
          traditional Navajo ways; and

               4) We are convinced that his behavior is truly in 
          the past, that he has confessed his sin to the appropriate 
          people, and has done all in his power to make amends; 
          and

               5) In the Navajo tradition, the past is left behind, 
          and our concern is with the present and the future; and 

               6) In the Christian tradition, we are called to be 
          a redeeming community; and 

               7) Steven T. Plummer is one of our own, called 
          by God and chosen by the Episcopal Church in 
          Navajoland to be our Bishop.

          Now Therefore Be It Resolved That:

               1) It is our desire that Steven T. Plummer 
          continue to be our Bishop.

               2) Steven T. Plummer should be given an 
          indefinite leave of absence at the discretion of the 
          Presiding Bishop, beginning May 8, 1993, with full pay 
          and benefits and that during this leave of absence he 
          continue in therapy and do all other things reasonable 
          and necessary to care for his physical, mental and 
          spiritual health.

               3) After the leave of absence and treatment, 
          Bishop Plummer consult with the Presiding Bishop to 
          determine if he should continue his duties as Bishop of 
          Navajoland.

               4) This resolution should be sent to the Presiding 
          Bishop as our recommendation with the hope and 
          prayer that it be favorably considered by the Presiding 
          Bishop and the House of Bishops.

          *Approved 20-0 at a meeting May 22, 1993 of the 
          Council, Standing Committee and Staff of the Episcopal 
          Church in Navajoland.*


          THE PRESS REACTION

          All of the articles below are highly edited to avoid 
          repetition.

          "The Dallas Morning News," May 29, 1993
          HEADLINE:  *BISHOP PUT ON LEAVE AFTER 
          AFFAIR WITH BOY - EPISCOPAL CHURCH 
          LEARNED OF MATTER TWO YEARS AGO*
          Religious News Service

               The Rev. Gary Sosa, the deacon who went public 
          with the matter at a meeting in Farmington, N.M., 
          charged church officials with trying to cover up Bishop 
          Plummer's sexual affair to protect the church's 
          reputation.  Father (sic) Sosa has also accused Bishop 
          Plummer of harassing him sexually by making abusive 
          remarks.

               Bishop Harold Hopkins, director of the church's 
          Office of Pastoral Development in Maine and a key 
          player in the matter, said the bishop has "on a number 
          of occasions" denied "categorically and emphatically" 
          that he made any inappropriate comments to Father 
          (sic) Sosa.

          "Los Angeles Times," May 29, 1993
          HEADLINE:  *BISHOP PUT ON LEAVE AFTER 
          SEX REVELATION; EPISCOPAL LEADER ACTS 
          AGAINST THE PRELATE TWO YEARS AFTER 
          LEARNING OF THE MISCONDUCT WITH A 
          TEEN-AGE BOY.  THE ISSUE IS FORCED BY AN 
          ANGRY DEACON'S ACTION*.
          By LARRY B. STAMMER

               The deacon, Gary Sosa, said the disciplinary 
          action was far overdue.  "My feeling is that they buried 
          this," Sosa said Friday in a telephone interview from 
          Bluff, Utah.  "If Steven had been a social service worker 
          or counselor or school teacher and engaged in this kind 
          of behavior he would not be working with people who 
          were at risk for his kind of behavior," Sosa said.  In a 
          further twist to the story, Sosa has been suspended by 
          Plummer for breaking conditions of a self-imposed 
          leave.

               Although Browning has acknowledged that he kept 
          Plummer's disclosure secret and allowed him to 
          continue functioning as a bishop, Browning said he 
          promptly requested a thorough medical and 
          psychological evaluation.  The five-day evaluation 
          indicated, Browning said, that Plummer was not "at risk" 
          for repeating the behavior.  Plummer has remained in 
          therapy since then.

               Versions of how the church first learned of 
          Plummer's misconduct differ.  Browning and Bishop 
          Harold Hopkins, director of the Office of Pastoral 
          Development, said Plummer reported the activity 
          himself.  But Sosa said that Plummer went to Browning 
          two years ago only after Sosa first informed national 
          church authorities in March, 1991.  The local church 
          council, however, was not informed until this month 
          when Sosa went to them directly.

               Sosa said Plummer disclosed his sexual 
          encounters with the teen-age boy in November, 1990, 
          while they drove to a meeting.  Later, Sosa said,  
          Plummer used "sexually loaded" language with him that 
          rekindled disturbing memories of Sosa's own sexual 
          victimization as a child.

               Hopkins said Plummer categorically denied 
          Sosa's charge.  Sosa, who is married, said he is on 
          voluntary leave of absence and re-evaluating whether to 
          seek ordination to the priesthood.

               Sosa said he was later suspended from duties as 
          a deacon by Plummer, reportedly on grounds that Sosa 
          broke conditions of a his leave by reading the Gospel in 
          a church service without the bishop's permission.

               Plummer, 49, was ordained a deacon in 1975 
          after graduating from the Church Divinity School of the 
          Pacific.  The following year he was made a priest.  He 
          was elevated to the episcopacy in March, 1990.  He is 
          married and has four children.

          "The Arizona Republic," June 4, 1993
          HEADLINE:  *NAVAJOS' EPISCOPAL SEX 
          SCANDAL; BISHOP'S AFFAIR CONTINUES TO 
          HAUNT INDIANS, CHURCH*
          by Kim Sue Lia Perkes

               Their pride was shattered May 26, when the 
          1,500 Episcopalians who make up the Navajoland Area 
          Mission, encompassing parts of Arizona, New Mexico 
          and Utah, learned that their beloved Bishop Steven 
          Plummer had a two-year affair with a teen-age boy.

               Navajos dealing with the shock of the affair also 
          would come to find out that the national church 
          headquarters had known about the charges for two 
          years but had failed to take any ecclesiastical action 
          until Plummer's deacon, the Rev. Gary Sosa, went 
          public and forced the church's hand.

               Sosa, who implied that Plummer also made passes at 
          him, said the bishop confided in him about the affair.  
          Sosa said he reported it to church officials immediately.

               Church officials say they do not believe Plummer 
          made inappropriate remarks to Sosa.  "Gary was injured 
          by Steven's remark, but we would not agree with him" 
          that they were suggestive, said Bishop Harold Hopkins.

               "There are a lot of things in Gary's charge 
          (against  Plummer) that we don't agree with," Hopkins 
          added.  He declined to elaborate.

               However, Sosa says that church officials advised 
          him to keep the affair a secret, and that the two years he 
          spent in silence devastated him spiritually and 
          emotionally.  "At every point along the line, I was asked 
          to keep it a secret," Sosa said.  "Plummer asked me to 
          keep it a secret, and then the national church asked me 
          to keep it a secret.  It wasn't possible for me to work 
          with him (Plummer) after that."

               Church officials admitted they saw no need to 
          make the affair public.  They responded by sending 
          Plummer to Minnesota for an intensive psychological 
          evaluation that concluded he was not "at risk" of being a 
          repeat offender.

               Sosa took a leave of absence from the church 
          and now says he probably will not pursue his 
          ecclesiastical calling to become an  Episcopal priest - a 
          position he used to consider sacred.  "Before, I had a 
          great deal of faith in the church," Sosa said.  "I thought 
          they would do the right thing."

               Plummer, who lives in Bluff, Utah, declined to 
          be interviewed beyond making the statement Thursday 
          that "the Navajo people and the church are all 
          supportive of me."

               Hopkins, meanwhile, said it is difficult to decide 
          the right thing to do in cases of sexual-abuse allegations 
          involving clergy.  "The problem was we really felt we 
          had no way of making the matter public without 
          violating the privacy wishes of the person involved," he 
          said.  "We did not want to additionally victimize the 
          person injured.  I can't tell you how many times we're 
          caught in that bind.  When Gary Sosa, for his own 
          needs, decided to make it public, we had to shift gears 
          and make another form of attack."

               The publicity has taken its toll on Plummer's 
          health.  The week before his suspension, Plummer was 
          hospitalized for diabetic complications.  After 
          addressing the council [on May 8] Plummer suffered 
          what he thought was a mild heart attack and was 
          hospitalized for observation and tests, Wantland said.

               Sosa said he turned the matter over to police 
          authorities and family-service agencies, as well as the 
          church.  However, the young man, who now is in his 
          early 20s, has not filed charges, Sosa said.

          "The Phoenix Gazette," June 5, 1993
          HEADLINE:  *A SECRET ON THE 
          RESERVATION:  AFTER ADMITTING TO THE 
          HEAD OF THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH THAT HE 
          HAD MOLESTED A TEENAGE BOY FOR 
          NEARLY TWO YEARS, NAVAJO BISHOP 
          STEVEN PLUMMER WAS GIVEN A 
          PSYCHOLOGICAL EVALUATION AND, 
          EVENTUALLY, MINIMAL TREATMENT.  NOT A 
          WORD WAS SAID PUBLICLY, AND PLUMMER 
          KEPT HIS POST.  IT WOULD BE TWO YEARS 
          BEFORE THE SECRET WAS SPILLED BY A 
          CHURCH DEACON*.
          by Ben Winton

               When treatment did begin for Bishop Steven 
          Plummer, it consisted of twice-monthly visits with a 
          psychiatrist - far less treatment than what several 
          professionals said they would recommend initially for 
          child molesters.

               Plummer had confided several years ago to Sosa 
          that he had engaged in sex with a teenage boy over a 1 
          1/2 to two-year period that ended in 1989.  That 
          confession surfaced after Plummer learned that he had 
          something in common with Sosa - both had been victims 
          of sexual abuse as children.

               But early this year, Sosa said he had become 
          concerned because he said Plummer had made 
          intimidating remarks of a sexual nature to him, that he 
          seemed to show no remorse for the molestations and 
          that the church had engaged in a cover-up.

               "He's very compassionate, a strong leader for the 
          Navajo church," said Bishop Joseph Heistand, who led 
          the Diocese of Arizona until retiring last year.  "It just 
          shows that all of us have feet of clay and we're all 
          sinners at some point in our lives.  Nobody's immune."

               Bishop Harold Hopkins said the church had 
          difficulty finding a psychiatrist who understood the 
          Navajo culture well enough to adequately assess and 
          treat Plummer.  When it did find one, in Minnesota, the 
          psychiatrist recommended twice-monthly therapy 
          sessions.

          ********************

          *GOD'S VULNERABILITY IN OUR SEXUAL 
          CHOICES*
          by (the Rev. Canon) Gene Robinson

               Think for a moment about your growing up and 
          the messages you received about sexuality.  For most of 
          us, it will come as no surprise that we have a difficult 
          time with sexuality.  At best, we were confused about it; 
          at worst, we were downright frightened.  And indeed, I 
          believe that fear is precisely the message we were 
          meant to get:  NOT that sexuality is a wonderful, 
          wonderful gift from God, meant for our joy and 
          pleasure, and a means of communication with a beloved 
          -- but, rather, that sexuality is a horrifying Pandora's box 
          that must be kept sealed up, lest the demons of desire 
          and passion come rushing out, like so many 
          uncontrollable banshees, to devour our hearts and souls.

               My favorite of these crazy-making messages we 
          are given (first articulated for me by James Nelson) is 
          this:  "Sex is dirty; save it for someone you love."  We're 
          told that sex is this horrifying threat that must be tamed 
          and controlled.  Indeed, we're taught, sometimes 
          explicitly, but mostly through dirty jokes and innuendo, 
          that sex is sinful and dirty and disgusting.  Then, 
          somehow, in some magical and mysterious way, on our 
          wedding night, it is supposed to become this wonderful, 
          easy thing.  How can this fact of life, this force inside us, 
          that has produced more guilt than anything else in our 
          growing up, suddenly become the joyful gift of God in 
          marriage?  That kind of turnaround is crazy-making.

               Now, in defense of parents everywhere -- 
          including me, now faced with a 14-year-old daughter 
          who speaks and looks and acts about 22! -- I must say 
          that such a characterization of sexuality as a 
          beast-to-be-tamed, rather than a gift to be cherished 
          and enjoyed, comes from fear.  I love both my daughters 
          very, very much.  I don't want them to be hurt.  I fear 
          that they will make themselves vulnerable to deep and 
          lasting pain.  And because the potential for hurt is so 
          great in matters sexual, it is tempting to paint sexuality 
          with a frightening brush -- in hopes of scaring them off.

               There is hardly a more vulnerable place to be 
          than in a sexual relationship.  There is hardly a better 
          place to experience both the joys and dangers of 
          vulnerability.  In few places is "love of self and love of 
          neighbor" more important.  When I do AIDS education 
          and people ask whether or not I believe in abstinence 
          before or outside of marriage or a committed 
          relationship, I can say "you bet I do."

               We need to talk to kids and 30-year-old singles 
          and 40- and 50-year-old divorcees about how vulnerable 
          lovemaking makes you.  Not just vulnerable to 
          pregnancy and AIDS, but to damage to one's self-
          esteem, disappointment, and feelings of incredible 
          loneliness in the midst of the most intimate physical 
          connection two people can have.

               It seems to me that the vulnerability inherent in 
          God's own creation of the world and in God's 
          vulnerability in becoming flesh in Jesus Christ is a 
          central key in unlocking the power and meaning of 
          human sexuality.  The spiritual and physical union 
          between two people mirrors the relationship God 
          desires with humankind.  The longing of a husband for a 
          wife, a lover for the beloved, who has been away for a 
          few days or a few weeks, mirrors God's longing for us.  
          A lover's sheer delight in the body of the beloved 
          reflects God's sheer delight in us when we give our 
          attention and our love and our hearts back to God.

               When one fully gives oneself to another in lovemaking, 
          it's a participation in the kind of self-giving love that 
          God IS.

               If vulnerability is at the heart of the nature of 
          God, and if one of the ways we come close to God is 
          through the vulnerability we share in our intimate 
          sexual relations, what can we say about those 
          interactions?  Are there standards by which we can 
          judge our intimate sexual relationships?  Let me offer 
          three criteria:  equality, authenticity and appropriate 
          vulnerability.

               First, I believe that any healthy, moral 
          relationship which is sexually intimate requires equality 
          of the lovers.  For me, sexual partners need to be on the 
          same footing for their sexual acts to be moral.  Virtually 
          every sexual problem that has been brought to me as a 
          priest, most of the pain and discomfort and disease in 
          the sexual relationships I've counseled inside and 
          outside of marriage, has been related to this inequality.  
          Someone feels pushed too far, unable to say no; 
          someone feels powerless in the face of the partner; 
          someone feels like the entire responsibility for the 
          sexual relationship is on his/her shoulders.

               At its worst, this inequality actually defines the 
          abuse and sexual misconduct we hear so much about.  
          At its root, child abuse is wrong because of the unequal 
          power held by virtually any adult over any child -- an 
          inequality of power, experience, perspective.  Sexual 
          misconduct by clergy or professional counselors is 
          misconduct precisely because it is an inappropriate and 
          immoral use of the inherent inequality of the 
          counselor/counselee relationship.  Rape is by definition 
          a circumstance of inequality.  Incest is the manipulation 
          of someone through fear of physical or emotional 
          violence or the fear of the loss of an important family 
          relationship.  The inequality of these settings indeed 
          defines the immorality.

               Let me point out that while most of us are not 
          guilty of such gross immoralities of inequality, we 
          should not congratulate ourselves too quickly.  The 
          overt and covert inequalities between men and women 
          in this society carry over into our relationships and 
          marriages, and until we are willing to look at that, we'll 
          never get very far in our discussions about wholesome 
          sexual relationships between equals.

               I would maintain that authenticity is another way 
          of judging those relationships.  By authenticity, I mean 
          that what we exhibit on the "outside" with our bodies is 
          reflective of what is going on "inside" with our spirits.  
          For Christian moral relationships of sexual intimacy, 
          there must be an integrating of one's life, so that the 
          "outward and physical" actions of sexuality become the 
          sacramental signs of an "inward and spiritual grace."

               Finally, I would propose as a third criterion 
          Karen Lebacqz's notion of "appropriate vulnerability" 
          [in "Appropriate Vulnerability:  A Sexual Ethic for 
          Singles," *The Christian Century*, 5/6/87].  This notion 
          builds upon the earlier standard of equality, and gives 
          us some direction with respect to specific levels of depth 
          in our sexual relationships.  For a sexual relationship to 
          be healthy and moral, there must be a shared and equal 
          vulnerability.  Each partner must be a willing 
          participant in the level of vulnerability that is chosen -- 
          unmanipulated and unthreatened.  In addition, Lebacqz 
          maintains that in order to be proper, "the level of sexual 
          expression should be commensurate with the level of 
          commitment in the relationship."  In other words, you 
          don't have intercourse on the first date -- even if you are 
          equally vulnerable.  It is simply crazy and dangerous to 
          make oneself so vulnerable to hurt in a relationship in 
          which no trustworthiness is present.  "Appropriate 
          vulnerability" is a criteria by which to question intimate 
          sexual relations between very young people, between 
          casual acquaintances or for anyone *not* in a 
          relationship that includes a mutual commitment to love, 
          honor and trust the other and, in turn, to BE 
          trustworthy.
          -----
          Gene Robinson is Canon to the Ordinary for the 
          Diocese of New Hampshire and Executive Secretary of 
          Province I.  He serves as a consultant to the committee 
          on the A104sa resolution of the 1991 General 
          Convention, which called the church "to work to 
          reconcile the discontinuity between this teaching [that 
          physical sexual expression is appropriate only within the 
          life-long monogamous union of husband and wife] and 
          the experience of many members of this body."  This 
          article first appeared in the May 1993 issue of THE 
          WITNESS and is reprinted with permission.

          ********************

          *SONGS FOR ONE OF OUR UNSUNG HEROES, 
          HELPING OHIO SING A NEW SONG*

               The Rev. Ted Blumenstein, Rector of St. Paul's, 
          Marion, Ohio and a long-time Integrity member, was 
          named Citizen of the Year in Marion.  During his 12 
          years in Marion, he has helped spearhead an 
          ecumenical feeding program, an emergency shelter for 
          the homeless, a job counseling center for the 
          unemployed, and an AIDS task force.  Most recently he 
          helped start the Free Medical Clinic of Marion, in 
          response to the deep cuts in the state's General 
          Assistance program.

               Ted is also chairing the Gay & Lesbian Clergy 
          Caucus in the Diocese of Ohio.  Ohio has begun the 
          task of electing a new bishop and the caucus sent the 
          following to the Profile Committee
          on March 23, 1993:

               As Gay and Lesbian clergy in the diocese, this is 
          what we want from our next bishop:

          1.  Our bishop is a person who understands or is willing 
          to understand homophobia and can act pastorally and 
          politically based on that understanding.
          a.  Our homosexuality is not a cause for us to have 
          special pastoral needs.  We have the same pastoral 
          needs as others and for the same reasons.
          b.  We have special problems because we live in a 
          homophobic society and church, and we must constantly 
          accommodate to it.
          c.  Internalized homophobia in gay and lesbian people is 
          widespread and can be very destructive.  It is a factor in 
          much alcoholism and suicide.
          d.  Special pastoral concern is appropriate to those who 
          exhibit homophobia, just as it is to those with any 
          irrational fear.  (To say it plainly:  the hate mongers are 
          sick, not the homosexuals.)

          2.  Our bishop is a person who proclaims and teaches a 
          traditional Anglican view of Holy Scripture boldly and 
          fearlessly.
          a.  We are not literalists.
          b.  We do not apply ancient codes of behavior in present 
          day life.
          c.  We recognize that the sex negative attitudes of our 
          society are not found in either Hebrew or Greek 
          scripture unless we read them in.
          d.  Same sex loving relationships are affirmed in 
          scripture.

          3.  Our bishop recognizes and acknowledges our lives 
          and relationships.
          a.  The Blessing of Holy Union and the Burial of the 
          Dead have the same significance in our relationships as 
          they do with heterosexual life partners.
          b.  Events that include spouses can also include our life 
          partners.

          4.  Our bishop recognizes the responsibility of our 
          church to be an intelligent counter voice to the hysteria 
          and ignorance that emanates from churches and so-
          called Christian leaders. 

          ********************

          *SHOULD INTEGRITY CHANGE HOW IT 
          ADDRESSES THE CLERGY?*

               If you're a clerical member of Integrity, we'll 
          address you any way you want.  Just let us know.  Our 
          default, however, if you don't state a preference is 
          "Mother" and "Father."  The Committee on the Status of 
          Women of the Executive Council of the Episcopal 
          Church has some very different suggestions.  They are 
          charged with monitoring, investigating, advocating, and 
          recommending measures to promote the full 
          participation of women in the life of the Church and 
          their corollary well-being in society.

               The Committee recommends eliminating 
          "Father" as a form of address for male priests, in order 
          to decrease the distinctions made between men and 
          women in ordained ministry.

               The Committee notes that the most common terms 
          used for ordained women in places where ordained men 
          are called "Father" have been "Ms." and "Mother." "Ms." 
          is obviously not a parallel term, and the Committee 
          believes that "Mother" is not an appropriate equivalent 
          to "Father" because of the very different values and 
          roles assigned to male and female parents in our 
          culture.

               The Committee also questions the 
          appropriateness of parental terms for ordained persons, 
          which imply that lay persons should assume a 
          dependent or childish role vis-a-vis clergy.

               If the secular Mr./Ms. form of address is deemed 
          inadequate, the Committee recommends use of "the 
          Rev." (or the full "Reverend" when speaking) or 
          "Pastor," noting that grammatical objections to 
          "Reverend" reflect an upper class bias that is 
          denigrating to many of our Protestant sisters and 
          brothers.

               The Committee recommends the following forms 
          of title and address:

.TB 6 35 61 86 101 
          Full title:

          The Rev. John Doe       The Rev. Jane Doe
          The Rev. Mr. John Doe   The Rev. Ms. Jane Doe

          When speaking:

          Hello, Mr. Doe          Hello, Ms. Doe
          Hello, Reverend Doe     Hello, Reverend Doe
          Hello, Pastor Doe       Hello, Pastor Doe
          Hello, John             Hello, Jane

          Salutation:

          Dear Mr. Doe            Dear Ms. Doe
          Dear Rev. Doe           Dear Rev. Doe
          Dear Pastor Doe         Dear Pastor Doe

          Let us know whether you think Integrity should adopt 
          these proposals.

          ********************

.TB 6 16 21 26 31 36 41 46 51 56 61 66 71 76 
          *MEET AELRED OF RIEVAULX*

          Challwood Studio has a new mascot.  He's a Bichon 
          Frise and named Aelred.  Aelred spends brief periods 
          in his dog house, which Paul and Victor have named 
          Rievaulx.

          ********************

          *INTEGRITY PLAYS A MAJOR ROLE IN 
          COLORADO LOSING 1997 GENERAL 
          CONVENTION* 
               The General Convention of the Episcopal Church in 
          1997 will be in Philadelphia.  Up until June, it appeared 
          that despite the controversial constitutional 
          Amendment 2 adopted by Colorado  prohibiting civil 
          rights protection for lesbians and gay men in Colorado, 
          planners of the 1997 General Convention could not rule 
          it out of the list of possible sites for the meeting.

               Denver, Orlando and Philadelphia were the 
          three cities approved for consideration at the 1991 
          General Convention in Phoenix.  During a March 
          meeting of the church's Joint Standing Committee on 
          Planning and Arrangements (JSCPA), members of the 
          committee grappled with the issues surrounding 
          Denver.  Some members of JSCPA expressed concern 
          that lesbian and gay Episcopalians might be subject to 
          discrimination if the convention were held in Denver.  
          The committee concluded that Denver should be 
          removed from consideration in 1997, but that the 
          church should be in dialogue with Colorado 
          Episcopalians about the issues involved in Amendment 
          2, and Denver might be considered for the convention 
          in 2000.

               Almost as soon as the JSCPA had decided to 
          drop Denver from consideration, a series of new 
          developments emerged that lead the committee to 
          reconsider its decision.

               In response to a lawsuit filed by a group of 
          Colorado residents and the cities of Denver, Aspen and 
          Boulder, a Denver district judge has placed an 
          injunction on Amendment 2, preventing state officials 
          from enacting it into law until after a full legal review -- 
          expected by the end of 1993.  In addition, attempts to 
          repeal the amendment are under way, leading some 
          observers to conclude that it may never become law. 

               "Because of this and other new developments, we 
          felt that we  should at least look at Denver again," said 
          Pamela Chinnis, president of the Episcopal Church's 
          House of Deputies.  "We are not under the same kind of 
          time pressure that we had with Phoenix." 

               In a March 24 memo to members of the JSCPA, 
          Chinnis and Presiding Bishop Edmond L. Browning 
          wrote that "a number of extenuating circumstances have 
          developed which might suggest that  the committee 
          rethink its decision."  They reported that practical 
          problems with two other sites have developed -- in 
          Philadelphia a snag has developed regarding available 
          hotel space, and in Orlando there is difficulty with 
          proposed dates for the convention.

               Members of the JSCPA visited Denver in early 
          May.  In large part because of the clear message of 
          Integrity, however, Denver remained "unacceptable."  
          The national board of Integrity adopted a resolution on 
          April 13 calling on "our national church and the 
          agencies and institutions which report to it to refrain 
          from scheduling  General Convention, other meetings 
          or official activities in the State of Colorado until such 
          time as Amendment 2 is repealed or overturned."

          BISHOP WAS OPPOSED TO AMENDMENT 2 BUT 
          CONVENTION WAS AMBIGUOUS

               Prior to the vote on Amendment 2, Colorado 
          Bishop William Winterrowd publicly opposed its 
          adoption.  In the October-November issue of the 
          Colorado Episcopalian, Winterrowd wrote that it was 
          "inappropriate to ban local ordinances that protect the 
          basic civil  rights of any minority, including the rights of 
          the gay community."  Citing the baptismal covenant and 
          resolutions of General Conventions, Winterrowd said 
          that his opposition to Amendment 2 was "founded on 
          my understanding of the Gospel of Jesus Christ that all 
          people are children of God."

               Winterrowd still rejects an argument by 
          supporters of Amendment 2 that it upholds equal rights 
          for homosexuals but prevents the state from recognizing 
          "special rights" for them.  "Our understanding of justice 
          as Christians is to say that we feel compelled  to protect 
          the human rights of all people -- especially of minority 
          persons," he said.

               At its recent 106th annual convention, the 
          Diocese of Colorado adopted a resolution affirming 
          prior General Convention statements on the civil rights 
          of homosexuals.  However, a call for a repeal of 
          Amendment 2 was withdrawn and the diocesan 
          convention passed a compromise resolution that 
          condemns "all discrimination in matters of civil rights 
          based upon whether persons are gay men, lesbians, or 
          bisexuals, and calls for such persons to be guaranteed 
          the full protection of the civil laws, urging Colorado 
          Episcopalians to make every effort in public and private 
          to insure that such equal protection in provided in 
          actuality."

               Kim Byham, director of communication for 
          Integrity described the action by the Colorado diocesan 
          convention as "lukewarm."  Byham noted that other 
          denominations in Colorado specifically opposed 
          Amendment 2 or have called for its repeal.  He denied 
          the suggestion that there was a parallel between the 
          situation in Phoenix in 1991 and the current situation 
          with Denver.  "In Arizona, the Episcopal diocese passed 
          a resolution supporting a Martin Luther King, Jr., 
          holiday.  In contrast, the 1993 diocesan convention did 
          not call for a repeal of Amendment 2," Byham said.

          ********************

          *LESBIAN PROF HARASSED BY GENERAL 
          SEMINARY*
          by Nick Dowen

          Professor Deirdre J. Good has filed a complaint with 
          the City of New York Commission on Human Rights 
          against the General Theological Seminary, the 
          Episcopal Church's oldest seminary, alleging discrimi
          nation in housing and employment on the basis of 
          sexual orientation and marital status.  Dr. Good has 
          been ordered to vacate faculty houseing at the end of 
          her upcoming sabbatical for allegedly violating school 
          policy regarding cohabitation.  She is professor of New 
          Testament at General where she has taught since 1985.

          The seminary's Executive Committee took its action 
          expelling Good based on its interpretation of "The 
          Community Life Handbook," which states:  "Persons 
          living together as couples in seminary housing must be 
          married as this is understood by the Church."

          Prof. Good, who is a member of Integrity/New York, is 
          a lesbian and lives with her life partner.

          Prof. Good's living arrangements were brought to the 
          attention of seminary officials in February.  Although 
          the faculty subsequently advised that the housing policy 
          needed to be reconsidered, the seminary's dean since 
          May 1, the Rt. Rev. Craig Barry Anderson, former 
          Bishop of South Dakota, apparently decided to go along 
          with the Executive Committee.  However, the 
          committee wanted Prof. Good to move out immediately 
          and Bishop Anderson persuaded them that she ought to 
          remain until January 1994, after a sabbatical.

          The student/resident housing policy was written under 
          the previous Dean, the Very Rev. James C. Fenhagen, 
          who retired last year.  There is no question that it 
          applies to students and ostensibly to non-seminary 
          renters, but there is doubt about its application to 
          faculty.  The Faculty Bylaws make no mention of such a 
          policy.  The Faculty Bylaws, passed in 1981 before Dean 
          Fenhagen's tenure, do state that the faculty member 
          must live (with family, where appropriate) in seminary 
          housing, and must not sublet.  There are currently two 
          other faculty households in residence at the seminary 
          including persons not related by blood or marriage.

          General Seminary is historically a residential 
          community.  Faculty salaries express the fact that 
          housing is provided.  The Executive Committee does 
          not propose to dismiss Prof. Good from the faculty (she 
          has tenure) but neither does it offer to increase her 
          salary to compensate for the deprivation of housing.

          The City of New York Commission on Human Rights 
          offered to mediate this dispute, but the seminary 
          declined, anticipating legal proceedings.  The New York 
          City Lesbian and Gay Rights Law, enacted in 1986, 
          specifically prohibits discrimination in housing and 
          employment based on sexual orientation.  General 
          Seminary has for some years rented apartments to the 
          general public who have been required to subscribe to 
          "The Community Life Handbook" policy.  The 
          complaint states that the GTS housing constitutes "a 
          housing accommodation as defined by the 
          Administrative Code of the City of New York."

          It is hoped that the filing of legal papers will cause the 
          seminary to reconsider.  Bishop Anderson is perceived 
          to be supportive of lesbian and gay issues based on his 
          votes at General Convention and at House of Bishops' 
          meetings.
          -----
          Nick Dowen is President of Integrity/New York.

          ********************

          *AN AMAZING OPPORTUNITY*

          An Integrity member recently visited Rievaulx Abbey 
          and purchased an original print of St Aelred's home 
          from a local artist.  We thought many in Integrity might 
          be interested in having one of these *signed and 
          numbered prints* for themselves.  We arranged with 
          the artist to do a special pressing just for Integrity and 
          we now offer them to you.

                ONLY $25.00
                plus $2.00 shipping.

          Write:   Integrity, P.O. Box 5202
                   New York, NY 10185
                   or phone 201-868-2485
                    
          Don't miss this opportunity.  The picture, in browns and 
          blues, is extraordinary and will make a wonderful 
          Christmas gift for any Integrity member or Episcopalian 
          on your shopping list.  And chapters should consider 
          this as a thank-you gift for those who have made special 
          contributions to Integrity.

          ********************

          "Excellent Resource for Dialogue"
            -- Bruce Garner, mbr. Comm. on Human Affairs

          *A BOOK OF REVELATIONS*

          Stories of 52 Lesgay Episcopalians

          Now with a FREE Study Guide
          Perfect for Parish Study

          Individual copies $12 incl. shipping
          Contact:  Integrity, PO Box 5202
          New York, NY 10185-0043
          201-868-2485

          Write or call for quantity discounts

          ********************

          *ATTENTION INTEGRITY MEMBERS WITH A 
          COMPUTER AND A MODEM*

               Tired of Being Fed to the Lions?   Put away your 
          asbestoswear for awhile and come to a prayer-lit 
          electronic catacomb, *LUTI*.  Join more than 100 
          persons daily sending e-mail to uphold the faith. 

               In the catacomb, God dares to love absolutely 
          everyone.  You don't even have to speak or be known.  
          If you need to, you may sit in the corner and lick your 
          wounds.

               Lo, everyone that thirsts, come, drink eternal water 
          which Jesus revealed at Samaritan wells!

               For a guide away from the Coliseum down the 
          Appian Way, send e-mail with the SUBJECT:  LUTI, 
          yes to

               Dr. Louie Crew  
          or from CompuServe to:

               >INTERNET:lcrew@andromeda.rutgers.edu 

               In this space we know one another not by 
          whether we are circumcized or uncircumcized, male or 
          female, straight or gay, pigmented privileged or 
          pigmented vulnerable ... but by whether we love one 
          another.  Come, be the church with us.

          ********************

          *WHAT DO WOMEN WANT?*

          Well, we can't speak for all women everywhere, but we 
          can tell you what we want.  We are Women for Social 
          Witness, a group of Episcopal Women committed to 
          seeking justice in the world through the work of the 
          Church, and Women for Social Witness want:

          @    Justice in public policy.
.LM 16
.PM 11
          @    An end to oppression in our homes, in our 
               Church and in the world.
          @    A Church which welcomes and encourages the 
               ministries and leadership of women.

.LM 11
.PM 0
          And here's what we're doing about it:

.LM 16
.PM 11
          @    Preparing bi-monthly mailings on issues of 
               church and public policy affecting women, to 
               assist members of our grassroots network in their 
               advocacy work.
          @    Gathering and preparing resources on violence 
               against women, sexual abuse, and sexual 
               harassment -- especially as they occur within the 
               Church.
          @    Developing and implementing an advocacy 
               training program for grassroots women in the 
               Church.
          @    Working to see that Women for Social Witness 
               is, and remains, a model of inclusiveness by 
               continuing to represent the rich variety of the 
               Church's women's groups and by maintaining 
               geographic, racial/ethnic, and cultural diversity.

.LM 11
.PM 0
               To become part of the Women for Social 
               Witness Network, or to participate in any of its 
               activities write:
               Women for Social Witness, Women in Mission & 
               Ministry,
               815 Second Ave., New York, NY 10017 or cal
               1-800-334-7626 x5346 (N.Y. State: 1-800-321-
               2231)

               *What About YOU?  What Do YOU Want?  
               What are YOU Doing About It?*

               ********************

               *PRESIDENT'S COLUMN*

                    I began composing this column thinking 
               that I was angry.  Then I decided that I was, to 
               put it in the vernacular, pissed off.  And finally, I 
               reached the conclusion that I was simply weary 
               and tired.

                    I'm tired of sharing the intimate details of 
               my life with strangers who often listen with a 
               lurid curiosity at what I "do," but fail to learn one 
               damned thing about who I *am* as a human 
               being, as a child of God.

                    I am wearied by those who cannot seem 
               to understand that when the Presiding Bishop 
               says "no outcasts," he means *NO* outcasts - 
               from any part of the theological or political 
               spectrum of our church.  I'm weary of those who 
               cannot accept the Gospel entrenched fact that 
               the table of God is large enough to 
               accommodate the Episcopal Synod, EURRR, 
               the Prayer Book Society, Integrity, and everyone 
               else!  It's God's table anyway, not ours.  God can 
               make it as big as it needs to be.

                    I'm weary of reading about the 
               "homosexual agenda" and hearing those words 
               hurled at us with the dagger-like force of a filthy 
               epithet.  The only agenda I'm aware of is simply 
               that of nudging the church into living the 
               inclusivity of the Gospel and our baptismal vows 
               with regard to its lesbian and gay members.  That 
               "nudging" is not unlike what was required for the 
               church to include people of color, ethnic 
               minorities, and women, such as it does (or still 
               tries not to do).

                    I'm tired of bishops who accuse Integrity 
               of being terroristic in its actions and attitude, 
               while knowing nothing about us and refusing to 
               learn, refusing to see us as people striving to 
               follow the Gospel of Jesus Christ.  I'm equally 
               tired of bishops who ride fences, fearful of taking 
               a stand because they might offend someone with 
               the inclusive truth of the Gospel.  The real issue 
               is not "offending" anyone, it is discomfort with 
               being forced to deal with the fact that human 
               beings - bishops, priests, and deacons included - 
               are sexual creatures.

                    I'm tired of clergy-folk who will not 
               exercise the prophetic ministry to which they 
               pledged prayerful allegiance at their ordinations.  
               And I guess I'm tired of all of us who 
               conveniently forget the baptismal vows we took 
               and continually renew, the vows to respect the 
               dignity of every human being, to love our 
               neighbors as ourselves, even when we don't like 
               them very much.

                    The weight of my weariness and 
               frustration was lifted by a sermon preached by 
               the Associate Rector of my parish on the  Fourth 
               Sunday in Lent.  Martha Sterne preached on the 
               Gospel lesson, John 9:1-38, where Jesus restored 
               the sight of a blind man and got into all sorts of 
               hot water doing so.  That sermon is the bulk of 
               my column and it follows.  I am of the humble 
               opinion that it carries in it a message for every 
               single member of this church of ours:

                  *Grace to you and peace in the name of Jesus 
               Christ.*

                    I have been struggling the last couple of 
               weeks with a new pair of eye glasses, my first pair 
               of bifocals.  Before, whenever I had my glasses 
               on the only thing I could see was what I was 
               reading.  Standing up here, I didn't know what 
               you all were doing.  You could have been 
               reading the funnies or playing cards or you all 
               could have slipped out the back and gone to the 
               Varsity for all I would have known.  But NOW.

                    These bifocal things are not the end all 
               and be all of seeing.   I can see up close - my 
               fingers and my words down here and what time it 
               is.  And I can see you far off.  Not the details of 
               course.  Not the color of your eyes or the little 
               freckles you got in the sun last summer.  All I can 
               see really, even with these bifocals, is enough of 
               you to guess at who you are.  All I can see really 
               is my image, my guess of you.  And then there is 
               a sort of middle ground where I can't see much 
               at all.  A little out beyond me and my reach, but 
               not far enough away - right in the middle -I've 
               got a blind spot.  And that's where I need one of 
               you to say  "watch out.  You're fixing to trip!"  Or 
               I need one of you to say "Come quick.  Come 
               closer.  It's beautiful over here.  You'll love it 
               over here.  Come quick.  Come and see." 

                    So by myself, even with these things, I 
               can't see it all.  I can't see all of you or all of me 
               either for that matter.  And God knows I've got 
               some blind spots. 

                    There is a man, blind from birth.  And 
               Jesus comes.  And in the endless power and 
               wisdom and light of his humility, Jesus spits in 
               the dirt, the humus, and makes mud.  And heals 
               the man.  And gives the man sight. 

                    And what's so weird is nobody likes it.  
               Not really.  Nobody rejoices.  The neighbors say, 
               "What's going on here?  This looks strange to us."  
               And they take him to the church.  And the 
               preachers say, "We don't like the looks of this.  
               This looks suspicious.  Did it on a holy day, did 
               he?  How dare that guy spit and make mud or 
               whatever it was he did to you on a holy day?  
               And how dare you go and get healed?  How dare 
               you break the rules?  Well, we'll see about that."  
               And then the man's parents say, "This looks like 
               we could get into trouble.  You're on your own, 
               boy."  

                    Nobody likes it.  This new sight among 
               them.  And so they kick him out.  And Jesus 
               walks out after him.  And that's been happening 
               with regularity ever since.  

                    It happens most every time somebody 
               sees new or sees different.  We drive them out.  
               Away from us and away from God we suppose, if 
               we forget the end of this story.  Because the end 
               of this story says one more time for the 
               umpteenth time in the scriptures of the church 
               that Jesus walks out the door of the church right 
               behind the driven out.  Turns out that our God 
               doesn't take to driving people out.  And it turns 
               out the way we see God isn't the only way to see 
               God at all.  Every time we think we see the only 
               reality there is to see, what we will see eventually 
               is the back of Jesus' head walking out the door.  
               To be with people who don't think they can see it 
               all.  To be with people who know that everybody 
               doesn't see the same.  

                    I believe Jesus comes to places - to 
               communities of faith and homes and schools and 
               workplaces - where blind spots are 
               acknowledged.  I believe the light of God comes 
               to the community of people who say to each 
               other, "Look what I see from over here.  Yeah, 
               but look what I see from over here.  And over 
               there and over there.  Everybody telling each 
               other what they see and don't see, trying to 
               figure out what's going on and who and how and 
               what God is calling us to.  Everybody's sight 
               counting.  Nobody insisting we all see the same.  
               Because the people know that the only One who 
               sees it clear and sees it whole is the Holy One 
               who gathers us together - all us nearsighted, 
               farsighted, middlesighted, crosseyed, 
               blindspotted people - gathers all of us together to 
               care for each other and for the world.  To keep 
               each other from tripping.  To help each other 
               find what's beautiful and truthful and lifegiving.

                    Now I'm pretty good at picking up on 
               somebody thinking they 
.UL ON
               see it all and see it clear.  I am sure that is what 
               is happening with that crazed man in the standoff 
               in Waco.  And the murder of the doctor in 
               Florida by of all things a pro-life advocate.  And 
               even the fractures in our own national church by 
               those who claim to see rather exclusively the will 
               of God.  I believe violence and schism are always 
               evil, always evidence that the powers of darkness 
               are at work.  And I get troubled and enraged by 
               self-righteous people whose values and theology 
               I deeply reject.

                    But unfortunately for me and any of you 
               who are right now thinking about how 
               closeminded or wrongheaded or pharisaical 
               somebody else is, unfortunately for us, God isn't 
               interested in us repenting anybody else's sins.  
               When I repent somebody else's sins, then it 
               always, always flips-turns upside down and inside 
               out.  And my own rage and violence and self-
               righteousness fill me and block the light of God.  
               And once again the darkness comes to the ones, 
               even me, even you, who think we can see it clear 
               and that it is only the others who are blind.  

                    Now that does not mean that in living out 
               our faith with repentance and humility that God 
               calls us to sit silently by when people do evil.  
               The churches in Germany who sat in silence 
               during the holocaust were undeniably part of the 
               dark and the evil.  But interestingly, the churches 
               who spoke out against Hitler and actively worked 
               for the overthrow of the Nazis, those churches 
               identified themselves as the "confessing 
               churches."  Because they understood and 
               confessed and repented their own complicity in 
               the evils of the day.  They confessed before and 
               all the while they moved against the Third Reich.

                    What I cannot see without help from 
               somebody who sees different from me is how I 
               am part of the dark.  What I cannot see without 
               somebody who sees different is where I am blind.  
               I have no *in*sight without you.  I will always 
               assume that it is the other people who are blind 
               and in the dark, causing the violence and the 
               schism.  And I will always assume that things are 
               just the way I see them unless you are willing to 
               tell me you see something different.  If you are 
               not there or not willing, I will be blind indeed.

                    In the community of faith we have got to 
               have those who see differently if we are to see at 
               all.  We need restless eyes eager to let go and 
               move on and change the scenery.  We need 
               careful eyes watching, wanting to hold on and 
               honor that which has been handed to us.  We 
               need the eyes of octogenarians and children, the 
               singles and the married, the bean-counters and 
               the dreamers, the lonely, isolated and the over-
               connected, over-committed.  And we need the 
               eyes of the artists and the business people and 
               the straights with 2.2 children and the gays with 
               families formed out of the material at hand.  
               And we need the movers and shakers.  And we 
               need those who just simply shake in the night. 

                    We need eyes who see different from 
               each other.  Because all of us - every single one 
               of us - all of us have too many blind spots to 
               make it through the days, much less the nights, 
               alone.  And, too, all of us can see a piece of the 
               truth.  A piece of the vision.  All of us have eyes 
               that see what nobody else can see. 

                    The man says all I know is this.  Once I 
               was blind.  Now I see.  And they drive him out.  
               Because he sees different.  Maybe he was 
               conservative and they are liberals.  Maybe he's 
               left brain and they are right.  Who knows.  He 
               just sees different and tells them what he sees.  
               And they drive him away.  And Jesus walks out 
               the door behind him.

                    Love God and love our neighbor.  That's 
               all we must agree on.  Jesus says everything else 
               hangs on that.  However you see.  And however I 
               see.  And however we work at seeing more 
               clearly together.  

                  "By the grace of God, with all of our eyes, we 
               will surely see the kingdom.  Amen."
                                      Martha P. Sterne, March 21, 
               1993

                    As long as *anyone*, including us as gay 
               and lesbian persons, is made an outcast and 
               driven from the church, I am certain that the one 
               who joins us in our exile, the one who follows us 
               out the door, will be none other than Jesus 
               Christ himself.  And the path we tread will be 
               wet with his tears.

                    May those tears provide us all with the 
               mud needed to restore sight to the blind. And 
               may the restoration of sight let us all see the 
               glory of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

                    Amen - again.

               ********************

               *CHALLWOOD STUDIO*
               Victor Challenor   Paul Woodrum

               Custom designed and made ...
                    EUCHARISTIC VESTMENTS
                    PREACHING GOWNS - STOLES
                    ALBS - SURPLICES - TIPPETS

               100 Lexington Ave., Suite 1-L,
               Brooklyn, NY 11238
               Phone:  718-398-2877

               ANGLICAN CHOIR HABIT

               *Challwood Surplice*:  Neat pleats from yoke 
               and A-cut give deep folds and 26' circumference 
               at hem.  30" deep square cut sleeves.  Made to 
               measure in cotton/poly broadcloth.  $185.
               *Cape Style Hood*:  Wool and silk.  $150.
               *Tippet*:  15" wide scarf style in wool or silk.  
               $85.

               ********************

               *SHOULD WE SUPPORT THE ESA?*

               THE EPISCOPAL SYNOD'S PROPOSED 
               GENERAL CONVENTION RESOLUTION
               by Kim Byham, based on an Episcopal News 
               Service Release

                    At its governing board's annual meeting, 
               the Episcopal Synod of America (ESA) proposed 
               a to introduce a resolution on ordination at 
               General Convention which it hopes will be 
               defeated.  Meeting April 29-May 1 in a suburb of 
               Philadelphia, the ESA said its members may 
               leave the church if the resolution it's presenting 
               is passed by next year's convention.

                    In an effort to force the Episcopal Church 
               to take a clear stand on the question of 
               ordination of women and perhaps of lesbians 
               and gay men as well, the ESA bishops will 
               present to the 1994 General Convention in 
               Indianapolis a resolution that "no person shall be 
               ordained to any of the three orders -- bishop, 
               priest or deacon -- unless that person accepts as 
               valid the ministry of all persons ordained in this 
               church." 

                    If the resolution passes, the ESA said that 
               it will be regarded as a signal that the church 
               "wishes to exclude those who hold to the 2,000-
               year tradition of ordaining only male 
               candidates."  If the General Convention defeats 
               the resolution, "we understand that all 
               persecution of traditionalists will cease," the ESA 
               said.  If the General Convention refuses to 
               consider the resolution, probably the most likely 
               action for a resolution not supported by its own 
               sponsors, "the ESA could only understand such 
               actions as a clear move to exclude its members" 
               from the Episcopal Church and it would take 
               appropriate action. 

quarterly publication of Integrity, Inc., the lesbian and gay justice 
ministry of the Episcopal Church.  All materials except those 
reproduced from other sources are copyrighted by Integrity, Inc.  You 
may reproduce all original material herein if you state "Reproduced 
from the Summer, 1993 issue of The Voice of Integrity, the quarterly 
publication of Integrity, Inc., the lesbian and gay justice ministry of the 
Episcopal Church."

Material may not appear exactly as published since some changes 
were made after the document was transferred to desk top publishing 
format.

We encourage you to join Integrity.  We encourage non-Episcopalians 
and non-lesgay persons to join.  If you are a lesbian or gay 
Episcopalian and don't belong to Integrity, you're benefitting from all 
our work and we hope you'll strongly consider helping us by joining.  
Individual annual membership $25, Couple's annual membership $40, 
Low income/student/sr. citizen $10.  Please mail check or money 
order to Integrity, Inc., P.O. Box 19561, Washington, DC 20036-0561. 

**********

Summer 1993

*The Voice of Integrity*
Volume 3, Number 3
Published by Integrity, Inc.
PO Box 5255
NYC, NY 10185
Telephone 718-720-3054

Bruce Garner, President
Edgar Kim Byham, Publisher
R. Scott Helsel, Editor

Contributing Editors:
Claudia Windal, Louie Crew, Paul Wooodrum

Blair McFadden, Layout
Dorothy Gunn, Production

Editorial Office:  201-868-2485
PO Box 5202; NYC, NY 10185

Member Episcopal Communicators 
Associate Member Gay & Lesbian Press Association

Copyright 1993

********************

*TABLE OF CONTENTS*
*March on Washington*
  Pilgrim Lutibelle's Report
  An Abiding Place
  Religious Leaders Support March
  Journey Folk
  All Things New
  The Wedding
  Celebrating Life
EURRR's Cannons Flaming Again
Former Integrity Chaplain Elected First Female Diocesan
Judge Dismisses $4 Million Lawsuit in Virginia
I Was in Prison and You Came to Me
*Book Reviews*
  Nothing New:  "New Millennium, New Church"
  New Prayers For Old Occasions: 
  "Daring to Speak Love's Name"
Chapter Updates
Disciples' Candidate Supportive
Claudia's Column
Joshua's Baptism Pushes the Boundaries of the Family of God
*Lesgays in the Military*
  The Beat Goes On
  A Retired Chaplain on Gays in the Military
  The Presiding Bishop Supports an End to the Military Ban
  UCC Leader Testifies for End of Military Ban
  PB Writes to Armed Forces Chaplains
An Exchange of Pleasantries
East Tennessee Symposium to Explore Search for 
  Structural Reform of the Episcopal Church 
Much Fuss Down Under: 
     First "Openly" Gay Ordinand in Australian Church Quits
Topeka Parish Gay Bashed
Commission on AIDS/HIV Surveying Church's Ministries
EURRR Opposes Minnesota Bishop-Elect
New Dallas Bishop Says He's Open, We'll See
Suffragan Bishop-Elect in Virginia Accused of Sexual Misconduct
A Not Very Pastoral Letter
British Bishop Admits Charges, Resigns
Homophobia Doesn't Just Hurt Gay People - Part II:  
  Straight Integrity Member Fired for Supporting Equality
Bishop Plummer Charged With Sexual Misconduct: 
  The Church and the Media React
God's Vulnerability in Our Sexual Choices
Songs for One of Our Unsung Heroes, 
  Helping Ohio Sing a New Song
Should Integrity Change How it Addresses the Clergy?
Integrity Plays A Major role in Colorado 
  Losing 1997 General Convention
Lesbian Prof Dismissed by General Seminary 
President's Column
Should We Support the ESA?

********************

*EPISCOPAL COMMUNICATORS*

This Publication Honored by Episcopal Communicators

At its annual convention, held in New Orleans June 9-12, 1993, "The 
Voice of Integrity" received Polly Bond Awards and honorable 
mention recognition for several articles in 1992.  Integrity's entries 
compete in the Magazine division, Agency Level, a group which 
includes "The Witness" and "The Living Church."

     Reader Response: Award of Excellence
     "Comments on the Bishops' 'Issues in Human Sexuality'"
.LM 16
               Authors: Louie Crew, Guy R. Foster, John M. 
               Gessell, Larkette Lein, David Lochman, Virginia 
               Ramey Mollenkott, Peter C. Moore, Tim Vivian, 
               David White
.LM 11
               Summer 1992 issue

               Headline: Award of Merit
               "Art Imitates Episcopal Life"
               Author: Kim Byham
               Fall 1992 issue

               Editorial: Honorable Mention
               "PB Hopelessly Heterosexist"
               Author: L. Paul Woodrum
               Fall 1992 issue

               News Story: Honorable Mention
               "`France's Troy Perry' Murdered, Police 
          Implicated"
               Author: Kim Byham
               Spring 1992 issue

               Theological Reflection: Honorable Mention
               "Some Instructive Parallels"
               Author: Warner Traynham
               Winter 1992 issue

               Devotional/Inspirational: Honorable Mention
               "Kicking, Screaming, Limping: Being the Church 
          in the World"
               Author: Louie Crew
               Spring 1992 issue

          ********************

          MEMBERSHIP FORM

          *INTEGRITY, INC.*
          PO Box 5255
          NYC, NY 10185
 

          I want to share in Integrity's work for justice for lesbians 
          and gay men.  Please enter my membership as checked 
          below and begin my subscription to "The Voice of 
          Integrity."

          [ ] Individual annual membership           $25
          [ ] Couple annual membership               $40
          [ ] Low income/student/sr. citizen         $10

          Mr./Ms/Miss
          Mrs./Rev./Dr.  
          __________________________________________

          Address 
          _________________________________________________

          City _________________________  State 
          ___________________

          Phone ________________________  Zip 
          _____________________

          Please mail with your check or money order to:  
          INTEGRITY, INC., PO Box 5255 NYC, NY 10185

          All contributions tax-deductible to the 
          extent permitted by law.

          ********************

          *MARCH ON WASHINGTON*

          Pilgrim Lutibelle's Report
          by Louie Crew

               We were early enough Friday evening to park in 
          St. Thomas's small lot, since David Allen White, our 
          host, needed to arrive to multiply the loaves and fishes.  
          Ernest and I walked to Dupont Circle, where I had 
          come so many weekends, 1962-65, for long meditations 
          and droolings that led me to flee to England and 
          embrace my identity.  I always remember Dupont Circle 
          as at least four times larger than it actually is, rather the 
          way I remember neighborhood gullies that I learned to 
          jump when 8 or 9.  "I feel like I'm back in Hong Kong," 
          Ernest said, responding to the thickness of the crowd.  It 
          swelled even more as we walked up Mass. Ave., towards 
          Lambda Rising and the March Office.  Police limited 
          the crowds allowed in Lambda Rising, and 5 or 6 
          separate lines of people, each a block long, waited to 
          enter the book store.  What revolution has ever been 
          this much about the right to read!?

               A small crowd had already gathered outside St. 
          Thomas's when we returned.  A much larger crowd had 
          grown inside.  I gave up waiting in line to sign the guest 
          book, lest I not get a seat in the service.  Ushers brought 
          in more and more chairs.  The small Washington 
          chapter wore itself to a frazzle feasting and libating all 
          the pilgrims afterwards.  

               At 10:30 on Saturday morning we rushed by cab 
          to Mt. St. Alban.  Ernest explored the Cathedral of St. 
          Peter and St. Paul for his first time.  I slipped into the 
          small chapel in the Bishops House, where four of us 
          kept simultaneous vigil with similar small groups in 
          cathedrals all over the United States protesting with 
          prayers the consecration of Bishop Iker occurring at the 
          same time in Fort Worth.  Every chapel window 
          depicted female Christians from all times.  As part of 
          my own meditation, I reMEMBERed every woman who 
          had shaped me in my childhood, writing down long lists 
          of names to make them members of me again, including 
          my blood family, my surrogate black family, my 
          teachers, the women in the neighborhood, Dorothy 
          Potter whom I played dolls with, Emily Cater whom I 
          played "naked" with, until her mother, Irene, came like 
          God into the garden, and we covered ourselves with 
          draperies as we stood in the bay windows, and I was 
          spanked severely and forbidden to go to the puppet 
          show....

               "Justice, Justice, Shalt Thou Pursue" was the 
          theme of the Interfaith Service at the Church of the 
          Epiphany on Saturday afternoon at 3 o'clock. Several 
          hundred pilgrims packed in to hear Rabbi Sharon 
          Kleinbaum and Episcopal priest Ted Karpf preach 
          poignantly to this theme.  [See Father Karpf's sermon 
          on page 7.]  Ted subtly reversed the Sodom story to 
          address the question of our numbers.

               No one at this service -- designed months ago by 
          all the lesbigay religious groups in our capital for all 
          MOW pilgrims -- was able to attend a competing 
          service, beginning at 4, long before this service was 
          over, at the National Cathedral.  Contrary to all its 
          public announcements, the service at the National 
          Cathedral was explicitly gay.  The dean of the cathedral 
          did greet the crowd with specific reference to lesbigay 
          pilgrims.

               By all accounts of those there, the service was 
          absolutely splendid and in the best traditions we all 
          expect of our national cathedral. But why did the 
          National Cathedral organize and publicize an event in 
          direct competition with an ecumenical service of all 
          lesbigay religious groups?  Why did it make not one bit 
          of effort to contact any of those religious groups to 
          invite them to attend?  Why did it get specific about its 
          gay connection only when the audience arrived?

               On Sunday, I had been standing with Integrity in 
          the thick crowd on the mall near the Washington 
          monument for about four hours waiting for a space to 
          clear for our group to enter the narrow stream of 
          marchers going down Pennsylvania Avenue.  The 
          crowds were so large that at our position we could see 
          no movement until long after the first marchers had 
          reached the end of Pennsylvania Avenue and re-entered 
          the mall at the other end.

               I was weary.  My legs were swelling.  I decided to 
          risk lying down.  While there was space enough, I was 
          not sure that anyone moving about would see me, nor 
          that I could get back up, given where Mr. K. Knee Stone 
          had kicked me in the back.  I lay there for half an hour 
          or so, vaguely listening to the loud speakers of the 
          performers and speakers on the platform two of three 
          blocks away. The march, I realized, was not about 
          getting somewhere, but about presence, about being 
          there, about being present together.

               We marched but followed no one.  In fact, we 
          might just as well not have "marched," given the 
          difficulty of movement, but might more expeditiously 
          have just sat on the mall all day long.  We had arrived 
          en mass in our Capital. Any other movement was mere 
          choreography.

               Celebrities dropped in and out occasionally, but 
          never controlled us.  No one completely rapt the 
          throngs.  (T-shirts might dispute that claim!)

               Jesse Jackson preached at one point, and some 
          of us responded to his litany, "Keep hope alive" and "I'm 
          somebody."  I was glad that he was there, glad that he 
          and other national leaders were not deaf to the pain 
          and suffering of those whom our institutions defined as 
          the least of these their sisters and brothers; but for 
          much of even Jackson's speech, my attention rambled, 
          as did that of many others present.

               Earlier Phil Donohue got more response to his 
          litany, "Get over it!"  How ironic that a talk show host 
          has won major moral authority in our time, but why 
          should I be surprised:  the House of Bishop has 
          dialogued itself into irrelevance; Churches can't even 
          decide whether to be churches; arts consumers can't 
          even decide whether the massive death of artists should 
          even be noticed. Why should I be surprised if God uses 
          the very stones to cry out?

               At one point I fetched Bishop Otis Charles 
          (formerly Bishop of Utah, now Dean of Episcopal 
          Divinity School) from the EDS/Harvard Divinity 
          contingent and brought him like a prize to the Integrity 
          area.  Predictably, his episcopal shirt set up a murmur of 
          "Who's that bishop?" and some eased over to meet him.

               For a brief moment when we did begin to move, 
          Bishop Jane Dixon appeared, almost like an apparition, 
          shook about 10 sets of palms, and disappeared. Mainly 
          we pilgrims seemed a leaderless crowd, and that seemed 
          good.  So many hundreds of thousands of persons 
          together, with folks vying to lead us, or merely to get 
          our attention.  It seemed to me we did quite well 
          without a leader.  Perhaps someone needed to be on a 
          platform to feed the media, but for the most part, 
          people about me seemed to feed on our massive 
          presence itself, in all our glorious diversity.

               Several Episcopal Bishops showed up the 1963 
          March on Washington.  Only two showed up for our 
          much larger march in 1993.  That's part of the problem!  
          Thank God for Bishop Jane and for Bishop Otis 
          Charles!  I wish Bishop Ron could have been there with 
          his gay son, whom he affirms, but Mary, his wife, is still 
          trying to get the young man "regenerated" as straight.  
          Pray for them.

               For me, the main moment of the weekend was a 
          personal one.  While I lay on the grass I realized that 
          my spouse had sat down next to me.  I was on my back 
          with my eyes closed, my knees elevated to improve 
          circulation.  He rested himself by leaning on my right 
          leg, for a very long time.  I began to be uncomfortable 
          with the pressure of his weight, and realized I was 
          crying, but I struggled to give no indication whatever of 
          my discomfort, lest he stop resting on my knee, because 
          I realized for for the first time in two decades of 
          married life we were in a space where such simple 
          public affection called no attention to itself, in a space 
          where no one needed to monitor or take note of our 
          simply touching, and quite beyond the discomfort, I 
          wanted the joy of this simple touch to last forever and to 
          be available to everyone in the whole wide world.

          ********************

          *AN ABIDING PLACE*

          A Sermon by the Rt. Rev. Jane Holmes Dixon, 
          Suffragan Bishop of Washington, at the 
          Integrity/Washington Eucharist, April 23, 1993

               It is a privilege for me to be here with you this 
          night.  When Michael Hopkins called me some months 
          ago and invited me to be the celebrant at this Eucharist, 
          I had to do what we do when we think about what is the 
          thing we should do.  

               I'm in a new position, as you well know, with all 
          my fine garb.  Statements that I make and places that I 
          go and pictures that are taken are seen in a different 
          way, and there's a part of that that I hate.  I hate it that I 
          had to think about whether I would come here tonight.  
          I have celebrated for Integrity before, in this very nave, 
          and I thought, what a state to which I have been 
          elevated!

               But I work for a wonderful man -- a man whom I 
          admire more than I can ever tell you, or I would never 
          have let my name be put forward last year when we 
          elected a suffragan.  And I went into him and I said, 
          "Bishop, do you have any problems with my going to 
          celebrate for Integrity the weekend of the Great 
          March?"  He said, "It's a celebration for Integrity, isn't 
          it?"  I said, "Yes."  He said, "Do you celebrate there?"  I 
          said, "Yes."  He said, "Then, what's the question?"  I 
          want you to know that, because there are times that he 
          and I will make you angry and you will feel left out.  
          Whatever you think about me, I want you to think the 
          best of him because he's a brave and courageous man.

               I also was a little stunned when I read the lessons 
          that are appointed for human dignity and rights that had 
          been chosen for tonight's lessons.  When I saw that 
          when Michael sent me the service of liturgy, I thought, 
          well, we're really going to get into justice big-time 
          tonight!  And there was that astonishing letter where 
          John begins with "God is love" and then in Matthew's 
          gospel where those two commandments on which all the 
          law and the prophets rest, and there are only two that 
          our Lord, Jesus Christ says, that we love God and that 
          we love our neighbors as ourselves.

               And so we gather here tonight to talk about what it 
          means to love when we don't feel very loved in this 
          world.

               It was exciting driving down here tonight.  The 
          streets are full of people!  And a rather extraordinary 
          experience took place just before I got here.  I was 
          invited to tea at the Rector's home, the Rectory.  As we 
          were sitting there we thought, was this a new beginning 
          for the church of God?  There we sat in Jim's Holmes' 
          rectory -- a woman bishop and an openly gay priest -- 
          thank God!  And his loving partner was with us and I 
          have to tell you as we walked back to the church and we 
          heard the music over at Dupont Circle, Tim and I were 
          a little tempted to make a stop over there.  But Jim said 
          we had to be here so we came over.

               I want to talk about loving tonight.  Because you 
          and I can go out of this place and we can be so filled 
          with bitterness and so filled with feeling oppressed that 
          we will not do what God would have us to do.  For there 
          are goings-on in the church down in Texas this weekend 
          that break my heart as well.  And I had to struggle as to 
          whether I would be there or not, and I have let women 
          down by not being there.  So I ask you to pray for those 
          in that diocese, and for the men and women who are 
          part of that world, and for the oppression that they feel, 
          and for those who are even more oppressed who will 
          not ordain women.

               You and I are called to tell the world about 
          another way of being and it's very appropriate that this 
          Great March is taking place in Eastertide, because you 
          and I are Easter people.  We always believe that God is 
          doing a new thing and that no matter what humankind 
          can do, God can always overcome it.

               In the epistle for tonight there is a word John 
          uses frequently.  It is the word "abide" and that word 
          comes from the Hebrew word which means "to 
          tabernacle together."  And so as you've gathered here 
          tonight and you have given me the privilege of gathering 
          with you, we've come to make that safe place, that tent 
          of meeting, that place of abiding, where we can come to 
          be refreshed and restored and healed and sent out into 
          the world.  We need gatherings like this because 
          sometimes the world seems overwhelming and it's very 
          appropriate that people have come into this town this 
          weekend to say to the world, there are many of us who 
          care, straight and gay, for the dignity and worth of every 
          human being.  But it is important that we find those 
          places, those abiding places where we can come for 
          strength and solace and courage.

               Because the message, of course, is about loving, 
          it is about loving those that we do not want to love.  For 
          if we go out of here tonight only thinking about 
          ourselves and the things that have been inflicted upon 
          us, we will not be doing what God has commanded us to 
          do.  God has commanded us to love our neighbor as 
          ourself.  And we know, when the lawyer asked Jesus 
          who our neighbor was, we got the story of the 
          Samaritan.  But the neighbor for me is that one I really 
          don't want to love, and there are lots of those out there.  
          But if I hear these words and understand them, as I 
          know God has intended for me to understand, it means 
          that I am to love those who are the least lovable, those 
          who say things to me that are hurtful, because God has 
          called me to show the world another way.  And I need 
          that abiding place, that tabernacling together with 
          people where I feel safe and I feel loved so that I can go 
          into a world that often I feel does not love me.

               I am grateful that these are the lessons for 
          tonight for it would be very easy for us to be here 
          talking about our sorrows and the oppression that you 
          have felt in ways that I will never know.  And there are 
          those among you who are people of color who have felt 
          oppression in ways that those of us who are white will 
          never know.  And it is also important that this 
          Holocaust new museum has been opened here in 
          Washington this week to remind us what hatred can do.  
          People who are oppressed are not free from hatred.  
          And so that is a great reminder to me that hatred 
          withers my soul and makes me bitter and stingy and 
          mean, and we know what happens to people when we 
          become that way.

               So I challenge you tonight as I challenge myself, 
          as we hear the words that were read to us in the lessons 
          from Holy Scripture, to love God and know that God 
          loves you and me.  It is because God loves us and deems 
          us worthy that you and I are to go out in the world and 
          love others.  The passage from Isaiah tells us what we 
          are to be -- a light to enlighten the nations.  And so we 
          have a responsibility, we have a duty as Jim was saying 
          to me before we came tonight.  We have a duty -- we 
          have a duty to show the world another way.

               I pray for you as you are here this weekend, that 
          you connect with those that maybe you've not seen for a 
          long time, and that that abiding place which is begun 
          here will go with you out into the world, and you will 
          feel that kind of love of God and neighbor that will give 
          you the courage to do the things that you were called 
          upon to do, for the struggle is just beginning.  

               Being here with you tonight gives me courage.  I 
          have been in a really bad mood all week.  I have felt 
          oppressed.  Excuse me, gentlemen, I have had men put 
          me down the last three days, and I've had to smile and 
          be nice and keep on going.  And I'm sorta sick of it.

               But I needed to hear those lessons.  I needed to 
          hear that God loves me no matter what I do.  And 
          because God loves me, then it is my privilege to serve 
          my God and to love those who seem most unlovable to 
          me.

               God bless you all.  Thank you once again for the 
          privilege of being the president of this Eucharist, and 
          God be with you as you go out into this world to make a 
          difference in the quality of life for all human beings.

               In the name of God who creates us, liberates us, and 
          who sanctifies us.  Amen.

          ********************

          *RELIGIOUS LEADERS SUPPORT MARCH*

               Representatives of several national religious 
          communities announced their support for the March on 
          Washington for Lesbian, Gay & Bisexual Equal Rights 
          and Liberation.  Endorsement were announced at a 
          March 17 press conference organized by the United 
          Church of Christ, which ended the Interfaith IMPACT 
          Annual Legislative Briefing, a national gathering of 
          people of faith for justice and peace held in 
          Washington, DC.  The Episcopal Church did not 
          endorse the march.

               Rabbi Lynne F. Landsberg of the Union of 
          American Hebrew Congregations discussed the need 
          for religious people everywhere to fight discrimination 
          against lesbians and gays.  "We are here today to say, 
          loudly and clearly, that the real traditional values of 
          American life -- if not always of American history -- are 
          those of freedom, liberty and equality."

               The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America 
          (ELCA) joined in these statements of support, with Kay 
          Dowhower saying, "The ELCA has committed itself to 
          participate in God's mission by 'advocating dignity and 
          justice for all people' ... which commits the church to 
          the civil rights of homosexuals ...  The ELCA continues 
          its support of the Civil Rights Amendments Act for Gay 
          and Lesbian Civil Rights.  We urge swift passage of this 
          legislation.  We look upon the upcoming March on 
          Washington as one way in which those supportive of the 
          civil rights for all persons, regardless of sexual 
          orientation, can join together to support one another in 
          that effort."

               Robert F. Glover of the Christian Church 
          (Disciples of Christ) agreed, saying, "The church stands 
          firm today in its support for civil rights and in its 
          solidarity with those who have too long endured the 
          burden of fear, ignorance, hatred and violence ...  We 
          strongly support the April 25th March on Washington ... 
          in the hope that the day will soon come when all 
          Americans will enjoy equally the rights of their 
          citizenship."

               Robert A. Alpern, director of the Washington 
          office of the Unitarian Universalist Association, spoke 
          of the long history of many religious groups in support 
          of gay and lesbian rights, saying, "After passage of the 
          anti-civil rights initiative in Colorado, the Unitarian 
          Universalist's General Assembly Planning Committee 
          withdrew its reservation for the $3 million 1997 General 
          Assembly in Colorado.  And our Beacon Press mailed 
          copies of a newly published book "Homophobia:  How 
          We All Pay the Price" to 150 public libraries in 
          Colorado.  So it is in this spirit ... that we have for 
          months urged Unitarian Universalists from across the 
          continent to come to Washington and join this historic 
          manifestation to reverse the cruel discrimination 
          practiced against 25 million or more of our relatives, 
          friends and others we do not know."

          ********************

          *JOURNEY FOLK*
          by Donald Snyder

          Ubi sunt gaudia, In any place but there?
          There are angels singing Nova cantica,
          And there the bells are ringing, in Regis curia,
          O that we were there!

               This stanza from "In Dulci Jubio," especially the 
          line, 'O that we were there!' kept flowing through my 
          mind as the various events surrounding the March on 
          Washington for Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Equal 
          Rights and Liberation began to unfold.  I knew the 
          special importance of this event, as did everyone in the 
          gay and lesbian community.  Even so, it soon became 
          apparent that others saw the event's importance as well.  
          The mainstream media, such as The New York Times, 
          NBC, and National Public Radio, did a number of 
          stories on gay and lesbian issues and used the march as 
          a way to introduce them.  I couldn't help but feel some 
          support from these articles and stories, as the 
          momentum in my own mind began to build.

               The significance of the march was in evidence as 
          Allen Lowe, my close friend and traveling companion, 
          and I began our journey toward Washington on Friday 
          morning.  As we drove on I-95 we came upon two 
          women from New Hampshire with the hand-made sign, 
          "Honk If You're Queer," in their back window and four 
          men in a rental car from New York with a large 
          lavender triangle in the rear window.  No guessing was 
          needed as to their destination.  Even the four people 
          from New Jersey with the Rand-McNally Street Map for 
          Washington in their side window subtly stated their 
          weekend location.

               At a well reviewed restaurant in Philadelphia, 
          our sense of anticipation continued.  Our server shared 
          stories about people she knew who were going, and the 
          bartender told of his plans to leave on Saturday.

               Upon arrival in the Dupont Circle area, I had 
          the impression that the nation's capital had been 
          transformed into a gay and lesbian small town.  People 
          walking to their destinations and visiting with strangers 
          proved that given half a chance, we don't have to 
          maintain the icy veneer that is often present in gay and 
          lesbian bars.

               There was a family reunion feeling as Integrity 
          members and friends began to gather at St. Thomas 
          Church.  As the service began and we sang the hymns, 
          the standing-room-only congregation exuded more spirit 
          and verve than the acoustics and architecture of the 
          church could contain.  It was so inspiring to hear the 
          epistle reader for the evening share her heartfelt 
          thoughts about having been alienated by the Southern 
          Baptist Church several years earlier, and how she had 
          found a special sense of reconnection with organized 
          religion through Washington's Integrity chapter.  As a 
          musician, I found a special warmth in hearing "Es flog 
          ein kleine Waldvogelsin," "Noel nouvelet," and "Land of 
          Rest," three of my favorite hymn tunes.  Jane Holmes 
          Dixon, Washington's new Suffragan Bishop, spoke so 
          thoughtfully of the ease with which she happily accepted 
          the invitation to be our preacher and celebrant.  The 
          Washingtonians outdid themselves, providing a 
          sumptuous buffet for all in attendance.  Talk about 
          feeding the five thousand!  As we dined, we had more of 
          an opportunity to greet old friends and make new ones.

               Dupont Circle was presenting its own spring 
          flower show as the last of the cherry blossoms and tulips 
          as large as my cupped hand were in great evidence.  The 
          Circle proved to be an impromptu "meet and greet" for 
          many people, including me.  It was hard to believe that I 
          would have to go to Washington to see friends and 
          associates who were fellow New Yorkers.

               My sense of anticipation was as bright as the 
          early sun as Sunday morning arrived.  Even though an 
          estimated one million of us were in the District of 
          Columbia area, Washington was quiet at the 7 o'clock 
          hour as I drove from the home of our host family in 
          suburban Maryland to downtown for the Integrity 
          gathering at St. John's, Lafayette Square.  Several of us, 
          bleary-eyed, met for the 8:00 Eucharist.  Even though 
          our contingent swelled the number in attendance to 
          nearly one hundred from its usual half dozen or so, no 
          mention of the march or our presence was made during 
          the intercessions or announcements.  Only the slightest, 
          if veiled, referenced could be detected during the brief 
          homily.  My firm disappointment was tempered with a 
          sense of satisfaction in knowing that we, subtly but 
          assuredly, made our presence known.  It seems like a bit 
          of a coup, knowing that we had accomplished this in the 
          "Church of Presidents," and done so in a very positive 
          way.  Music helped redeem the service, as the organist 
          played Vaughan Williams' "Variations on 
          'Rhosymedre,'" another one of my favorites.

               As I moved the car and rode the Metro back to 
          the Mall, I thought of others who weren't going to be in 
          our number that day.  There was a renewed sense of 
          loss and grief for those who had died of AIDS or as a 
          result of anti-gay hate and violence.  There was dismay 
          and even some anger for those who wouldn't have 
          considered coming, since being homosexual is not a real 
          issue or even "discussed in polite company."  I knew, 
          however, I could take a sense of pride in representing 
          those who, because of distance, finances, career, or 
          other legitimate reasons, couldn't be there.

               A sea of humanity was making its way toward the 
          Mall by late morning.  T-shirts seemed to be the 
          uniform of choice for most marchers.  The official 
          march shirts proliferated.  Of the others, my favorite 
          was the one which said, "One Percent is a Fairy Tale."

               Those of us in the Integrity contingent began to 
          gather at the appointed place with the other religious 
          groups.  The only weather worry was that of sunburn.

               There seemed to be a sense of relief more than 
          anything else, when we were finally led to the street to 
          join the march.  We had a good number of chapters 
          represented in our gathering by them, as Bishop Dixon 
          came to greet us at the edge of the Mall.  We had 
          visible support from those in the straight community as 
          well.  Together the one million of us in attendance had 
          the opportunity, even the duty, to sign our names to the 
          petitions provided by the march organizers.  This way 
          we could prove the National Park Service wrong with its 
          woeful under count.

               It was gratifying to be in the majority as we 
          passed in front of the Treasury Building and were 
          confronted by those from the so called "religious right."  
          Their attempts at swaying opinions were easily rebuffed 
          by our refrain, "We're here!  We're queer!  We're 
          Anglican!  Get used to it!"  Militant as it sounded, those 
          statements seemed to sum up the sentiment for all of us.

               With another passenger in the car we departed 
          Washington, spending time recounting various aspects 
          of our weekend as we drove north.  I counted no less 
          than twenty-six autos with fellow "journey folk" on their 
          respective homeward treks.  As I reflected upon the 
          impact of the march and its related events, I found that 
          the words 'O that we were there!' were transformed into 
          the affirmation, 'Oh, yes, we *were* there!'

          ********************

          *ALL THINGS NEW*

          A sermon preached by the Rev. Ted Karpf on April 24, 
          1993 at the Church of the Epiphany for the service 
          organized by the Washington Area Gay and Lesbian 
          Interfaith Alliance in observance of the March on 
          Washington for Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Equal 
          Rights and Liberation.

               We're here!  We're gathered to witness to the 
          hope and fear, the joy and trauma of being lesbian and 
          gay, transgender and bisexual in America.  By these 
          days in the nation's capital we are challenged to take 
          our vision back to our communities to begin or continue 
          and invigorate our movement for equal rights across 
          America.

               As people of faith, we hold the conviction that 
          no change happens apart from the presence of God.  
          The very content of justice is based on a holy vision of 
          God's ultimate victory over all that reduces and destroys 
          life.  Such a vision informs us in the words of Isaiah:  

            Behold I create new heavens and a new earth; and 
          former things shall not be remembered or come to 
          mind.  

          The Prophet continues, 

            Before they call I will answer, while they are yet 
          speaking I will hear.

               This vision is dramatic.  For it suggests a new 
          order built out of the old -- a renewal, if you will, of 
          what has been transformed to what can be.  We gather 
          here with no less dramatic and compelling 
          determination.  And what are some of our visions?   
          They include tragedy and trauma, outrage and 
          revolution, and hope and wholeness.  At the heart of 
          this visioning of what we have endured, what we are 
          demonstrating, and of that for which we yearn is the 
          Shalom -- peace -- envisaged by Isaiah when the whole 
          of creation comes to terms with itself in peace.

               This hope is as old as humanity.  But for bisexual 
          and transgender, gay and lesbian people our peace is 
          found in obtaining basic equal rights that we may join in 
          the struggle for meaning and value with all other human 
          beings.  Gandhi is reputed to have said, "It would be a 
          sin if God were to appear before a hungry man in any 
          other form but a loaf of bread."  For our community -- 
          for we who have settled too often for the half a loaf that 
          wasn't always better than none -- for God to come 
          before us in any form but the full -- and fulfilling -- loaf 
          of equal rights to enter the struggle for wholeness is a 
          sin.

               For us to be at peace requires not only faith, 
          which enables to us to rise above the terror, but the 
          basic human rights to participate in the struggle toward 
          meaning with all humanity.  This expectation -- no, this 
          demand -- of ours is consistent with God's promise that 
          creation will be at peace with itself.

               We have reached a time where our critical mass 
          in society is being felt.  We have reached a time when 
          the powers and principalities of this age can no longer 
          ignore our presence, try though they may.  There are 
          simply too many of us, though some surveys say we are 
          not enough.  To that I say, if there are ten of us and we 
          are deprived of our rights to give and be given in 
          relationships and to enjoy the blessing of children, then 
          there are too many of us to deny.  If there are only five 
          of us, and we are told that we cannot enter the struggle 
          for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, then there 
          are too many of us to ignore.  And if there is just one of 
          us, and even this one cannot be allowed to just be, then 
          there are too many of us who are oppressed.  And for 
          just this one, we -- all of us -- must engage in the 
          struggle for human rights.

               There is an old Sufi legend told by Shams of Tabriz 
          about himself.  It talks about the meaning of being 
          different, which is at the core of our struggle:  how 
          others can live with the differences which our lives 
          present in the arena of the human struggle.  The story 
          goes like this:

            I have been considered a misfit since my childhood.  
          No one seemed to understand me.  My own father once 
          said to me, "You are not mad enough to be put into a 
          madhouse, and not withdrawn enough to be put in a 
          monastery. I don't know what to do with you."

            I replied, "A duck's egg was once put under a hen.  
          When the egg was hatched the duckling walked about 
          with the mother hen until they came to a pond.  The 
          duckling went straight into the water. The hen stayed 
          clucking anxiously on land.  Now, dear father, I have 
          walked into the ocean and find in it my home.  You can 
          hardly blame me if you choose to stay on the shore."

               How many of us have lived through this story?  
          All of us in some way or other, I expect.  This is our 
          reason to celebrate:  we have entered the ocean and 
          have not drowned!  We celebrate the fact that we are 
          here today together.  And what of the times in which we 
          live?  What have they taught us to celebrate?

               We are celebrating the triumph of making the 
          break and entering the ocean.  We are celebrating the 
          triumph of passion become compassion as lesbian 
          sisters and gay brothers demonstrate unremitting love in 
          caring for those of us dying with AIDS.  We are 
          celebrating the witness of our community in making 
          itself felt and heard in politics of the nation.  We are 
          celebrating the commitment in love of bisexual and 
          transgender, lesbian and gay parents who have managed 
          to keep and raise their children and grandchildren in 
          the face of overwhelming and painful opposition. Thus, 
          we are celebrating our determination not to drown, but 
          to swim.  Some wi}l say that we are celebrating the 
          limitations of those who stay on the shore, but that is 
          not true; would that the whole world be ducks!

               But what gift can we ducks give to the world as 
          we celebrate this weekend? What can endure? We 
          come to live as different.  To a large extent as a 
          community we shy from our calling to be different.  
          Years ago, Don Clark, in "Loving Someone Gay," said, 
          If you're going to be gay, you might as well be different!  
          Even in the late seventies, ten years after Stonewall, 
          many gay commentators were beginning to identify an 
          emerging conformity to behavior, style, language, 
          attitudes, and beliefs.  But everything in the gay/lesbian, 
          bi and transgender subculture says no matter how hard 
          we try to look like everybody, we don't.  We can't pass 
          and we shouldn't try.  Remember:  *If it walks like a 
          duck and talks like a duck then no matter how it looks, 
          it must be a duck.*  Or so the story goes.  I see a 
          dangerous desire on the part of many us to be like 
          everyone else.  But if we who exist in the reality of exile 
          must become like our oppressors to get along -- to 
          "pass" -- then we dare not try to be anyone but who we 
          were created to be.

               For the God-given gift is that equal rights 
          include the right to be different.  Isaiah gives us a clue 
          in describing the New Creation:  

            The wolf and the lamb shall feed together, the lion 
          shall eat straw like the ox; and dust shall be the 
          serpent's food.  They shall not hurt or destroy in all my 
          holy mountain.  

               It is not just a matter of differences existing side 
          by side: it is the promise that the predatory nature of 
          creation -- the enmity and the need to consume each 
          other -- will be removed from the order.

               What this vision says is that we shall exist side by 
          side with all people.  Color will be real, but not divisive.  
          Sexual orientation will be real, but not fear inducing.  
          Differences will be celebrated not abhorred.  For 
          central to the spirit of gaiety is the spirit of difference -- 
          of constantly being made new and different.

               How then shall we live?  In this week of the 
          dedication of the Holocaust Museum there is a message 
          for us in the screams, the whispers, the cries of the 
          captives.  Several years ago I was given the horrific gift 
          of visiting two of the concentration camps of the 
          holocaust -- Dachau and Terezin.  Dachau, you may 
          recall, was the place in Germany were those residing in 
          the town -- just outside the camp walls -- denied any 
          knowledge of the thousands upon thousand who were 
          killed and cremated inside the walls.  Orderly, 
          systematic and carefully planned, Dachau was the 
          prototype for the Final Solution.  Strangely, because 
          conformity was demanded and enforced, there was no 
          record of resistance in this systematized, planned, 
          hygienic industrial setting.  Thousands died and 
          thousands more denied.  And in that place there is a 
          prevailing sense of hopelessness and despair.  Dachau is 
          a monument to death and destruction and human 
          cruelty -- systematized, planned, conformist, in every 
          way.

               And then there is Terezin.  There is the medieval 
          fortress and prison, and the village.  This was the village 
          where the children were sent and from which we have 
          the record of their art and letters about the camps.  The 
          prison and concentration camp are eerie in that the 
          original bunks, signs, window covering, bowls and 
          spoons remain on the tables where they were on the day 
          of liberation.  The wind blows softly through the camp, 
          which feels as if its inhabitants had just left.  This camp 
          -- which saw the execution of 35,000 through disease, 
          overwork, and firing squads -- is a monument to the 
          constant resistance of humanity to conform.  For in this 
          camp, uprisings and escapes occurred regularly and 
          often.  The Nazis could not control the prisoners, so 
          prisoners were regularly executed before all of the 
          camp's inmates to reinforce fear and create order.  It 
          failed.  So it had to be repeated often.

               As I stood touching the bullet holes in the wall 
          where these executions took place, I surprisingly felt 
          hope.  The unconquerable will of the human spirit to 
          survive pulsed through me.  Even in a world of limited 
          choices and few options, we still can choose to be 
          different ... to not submit to those who would break us, 
          and beat us, and even kill us.  I have had the same 
          experience again and again when ministering at the 
          bedside of those dying with AIDS; in the life-giving, 
          death-defying pangs of childbirth of lesbian mothers; in 
          counseling adolescents struggling mightily with 
          questions about their sexuality; and at the altar of the 
          church where gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender 
          people have come to offer again their lives to God -- 
          and to each other -- as people of faith.

               How do we live?  We live by faith that the vision 
          of Isaiah will come to pass and that we are part of that 
          vision.  We live by celebrating the differences and 
          embracing the vast array of our choices.  We live by 
          drawing strength from the witness of our compassion, 
          and by the power of our passion.  We live by respecting 
          the dignity -- and the differences -- of every human 
          being.  We live by coming together in peace, to seek 
          peace and wholeness in a world which doesn't really 
          know what that looks like.  We live by trust, by faith, by 
          courage, and by hope.  That's how we live.

               May the God of each of us, of our calling, be 
          with us and upon us all-ways in our search for a new 
          heaven and a new earth. Amen.

          ********************

          *THE WEDDING*
          by Kim Byham

               Scott had a good excuse for not attending "The 
          Wedding" on Saturday morning.  He had arrived on a 
          red-eye train from New York at 8:00 am and was at our 
          motel asleep when several thousand people gathered in 
          front of the IRS building.  We had had the Rev. Troy 
          Perry, founder and moderator of the Universal 
          Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches and 
          chief officiant at the event, for dinner at our home only 
          a couple of weeks before.  We had discussed the 
          ceremony and I decided to let my journalistic curiosity 
          overcome my Anglican disdain.

               It was marvelous.  Despite the name, it made no 
          pretense of being a wedding service or even a blessing 
          of union.  It was, instead, a wonderful rally in support of 
          couple-rights.  That's why it was held in front of the IRS 
          building -- where better to protest the inequality of 
          lesgay and straight couples.

               The highlight was the introduction of America's most 
          famous lesbian couple: Karen Thompson and Sharon 
          Kowalski.  Thompson announced that she was that 
          month taking Kowalski home from the nursing facility 
          where she has been for many years following the car 
          accident that left her paralyzed.  Thompson's successful 
          custody battle with Kowalski's parents is a landmark in 
          lesgay couple rights.

               Introduced as the oldest lesbian couple were a 
          delightful, though anachronistic couple from Florida.  
          Bobby Smith, 69, and her life partner of 33 years, Kay 
          Thompson, also 69, dressed in "masculine" and 
          "feminine" garb, respectively.  The longest-term gay 
          couple had been together 46 years.  Jim Busby and 
          Dusty Keyes of Arlington, VA had been brought 
          together by a federal government roommate service.

               A number of religious "dignitaries" were briefly 
          introduced.  They included the Rev. Karen Murphy, 
          Assistant Rector at Grace Church, Madison, NJ, 
          "representing that part of the Episcopal Church that 
          affirms lesbian and gay unions."

               After a brief exchange of expressions of love and 
          the statement, "We proclaim together our rights as 
          couples,"  Perry said, "Couples, you may kiss."  At that 
          point, the Wedding March was played and rice filled the 
          air.  The schmaltzy ending did not detract from a 
          significant event, the symbolism of which was largely 
          lost on the straight media.

          ********************

          *CELEBRATING LIFE*

          by Bruce Garner

               Well, by now, we have all learned that the 
          National Park Service can't count.  (They give the rest 
          of us federal employees a bad name - if they worked for 
          me, they would either be in a math class or looking for a 
          job!)

               Empowered is the word I think best describes 
          being in Washington along with over a million of us 
          homosexual types.  There is nothing that can ever 
          compare with being among your own people, knowing 
          that it is your time to be, and to be who you were 
          created to be, without shame, without hesitation, 
          without fear.  It was indeed our time, and I hope it was 
          the beginning of the end to our oppression.  (I ain't that 
          naive, children - but I *can* hope, can't I?!)

               The Eucharist on Friday night was incredible.  
          St. Thomas was filled to capacity.  The responses of the 
          congregation shook the building.  The singing almost 
          overpowered the organ.  Bishop Dixon inspired us with 
          a homily about love and with her obvious love and 
          compassion for us.  And as usual, our DC chapter put 
          on an impressive spread during the reception.  It was a 
          welcomed reunion for so many of us, seeing folks we 
          hadn't seen in quite a while.

               Sunday morning at St. John's Lafayette Square 
          was special too.  It was appropriate that we begin the 
          day in the house of God, fed from God's table.  I doubt 
          the 8:00 am service had seen quite so many folks in 
          many a day.  We were acknowledged, though safely and 
          subtly.  A bit of reality was reintroduced to us in the 
          realization that, even in that place, on that particular 
          Sunday, some of us still cannot live our lives as they 
          were created to be lived.  We all must remember that 
          reality.

               The rainbow of our family was quite impressive.  
          We looked just like who we are:  ordinary, average 
          looking, American citizens.  Our folks included the 
          same variations in color, appearance, dress, and attitude 
          that we find in the American public at large, despite 
          how much so many would like to deny that truth.  We 
          really are not all that different - at least in appearance.

               I visited back and forth between our Integrity 
          contingent with the religious organizations and the 
          extremely large (rumor had it to be the third largest) 
          Georgia delegation.  (We had to make up for producing 
          the likes of Sam Nunn!)  If we really are only 1%, there 
          weren't many queers anywhere else but DC that 
          weekend.

               One of the most moving and empowering 
          moments for me was looking up and seeing Integrity's 
          banners with their cross-topped standards, some 
          wrapped in palm branches, processing forward with the 
          movement of the march.  In front of us were other 
          religious symbols such as the orthodox processional 
          crosses.  I saw it all again in a picture and realized how 
          powerful that sight really was.  God was there.  God was 
          marching with us.  The symbols of God's demonstration 
          of love for us all led the way.

               While this was a indeed a civil rights 
          demonstration, it was also a glorious celebration of life.  
          We celebrated who we are and did so in the bright light 
          of day - no hiding in the darkness, no cowering in 
          corners - but out in sight of God and everybody.  

               And there we were.  All over the Mall (and we 
          weren't shopping - well maybe we were at that!).  There 
          was the Quilt - a powerful reminder still of what 
          homophobia can produce when disease is linked to 
          prejudice.  There were the entertainers and speech 
          makers.  There were folks so angry that they made no 
          sense.  There were others who spoke from a peace that 
          comes from making progress, however slowly, and 
          understanding that the road is still rocky and steep, but 
          we must plod along if we are to reach our destination.  
          There were those who touched us with humor - the one 
          salve we have for the pain that sometimes results from 
          our being who we are.  It was good.

               I hope someday we can go to DC for the sole purpose of 
          celebrating who we are, no political agenda's, no need 
          for demonstrations to get our rights, just to celebrate.  
          Until then, we must continue to struggle to obtain our 
          birthright.  With the help and grace of God, I believe we 
          will finally take our place at the table.  I pray I am alive 
          to see it.

          ********************

          *EURRR's Cannons Flaming Again*

          The sexuality dialogues in most parishes are now 
          complete.  The process was extremely biased, and many 
          participants felt that the conclusions were preordained.

          Although less than 1% of our Church's membership 
          participated in the dialogues, their opinions will be 
          proclaimed as representative of the entire Church.

          Now the homosexual lobby is preparing yet another 
          attack.  Please, read this letter carefully ...

                                              April 22, 1993

          Dear Friend,

               The homosexual lobby is on the march against 
          the Episcopal Church ... and the next stop may be a 
          courtroom where "homosexual rights" replace biblical 
          teaching on morality.

               The defendants:  your parish priest and your 
          vestry.

               How can this be happening?  Here's how.

               The homosexual lobby in our Church is copying 
          a strategy that's being used successfully on the national 
          political level.

               Their agenda for the 1994 General Convention 
          calls for:

               1.  Passage of a non-discrimination cannon [sic].
               2.  Access to ordination without regard for sexual 
          orientation.
               3.  An authorized liturgy for the blessing of 
          same-sex unions.

               The path leading to approval of the homosexual 
          agenda has been carefully plotted by both the 
          homosexual lobby, which ironically calls itself 
          "Integrity," and by many within our own Church 
          leadership.  *We need your help now to counter their 
          efforts.*

               We can only stop them if we act now ... and that's 
          why I'm asking for your help today.  *No matter how 
          painful, we must face the truth.  Our Church is feeling 
          the impact of the gay agenda.*
               Bishops and priests violate the expressed position of the 
          Church by performing ordinations of practicing 
          homosexuals and blessing homosexual "unions."  HOW 
          CAN WE BE SILENT?

               This is a battle for the very soul of the Episcopal 
          Church.  If we remain quiet we will lose.  We must 
          speak out!  We must stand together now!  *The ministry 
          of Episcopalians United has never been more vital*.

               Homosexual activists within the Church are 
          encouraged ... and with good reason ...

               They have influenced key leaders within our 
          Church.  On February 5, the Rt. Rev. Edmond L. 
          Browning, our Presiding Bishop, wrote to President 
          Clinton, commending him on his efforts to end the 
          military's ban on homosexuals in the armed forces and 
          expressing his belief that "gay rights" is a justice issue.

               And sadly, there are a large number of lay 
          people within our Church who will be swayed by the 
          arguments of leaders like Bishop Browning ... even 
          though he's dead wrong!

               Within the Church, the ordination of practicing 
          homosexuals to our clergy and the blessing of same-sex 
          unions are not civil rights issues ... and they are *not* 
          justice issues.  They are theological issues, and they 
          must be addressed on sound theological grounds.

               To bless the experience of homosexuality, we are 
          being asked to assent to a process which rewrites 
          Scripture ... nullifies the Word of God ... and disavows 
          2000 years of Christian moral teaching.

            Approval of the homosexual agenda will so warp the 
          doctrine, discipline and worship of our church that 
          within a generation the Episcopal Church will no longer 
          be recognizably Christian.

               And that's why we cannot give in.  We must 
          prepare for battle and we must fight.

               We must prepare sound, convincing Scriptural 
          arguments.  We must mobilize every concerned 
          Episcopalian in every parish ... and we must equip them 
          with the information and understanding they need in 
          order to make a difference.

               We cannot afford to lose.  *Our families, our 
          country ... and the very soul of our Church ... these are 
          all at stake*.

               Some 450 years ago, Martin Luther wrote:

            "If I profess with the loudest voice and the clearest 
          exposition every portion of the truth of God, except 
          precisely that little point which the world and the devil 
          are at the moment attacking, I am not confessing Christ.  
          *Where the battle rages, there the loyalty of the soldier 
          is proved, and to be steady on all the battlefield besides 
          is mere flight and disgrace if he flinches at that point."*

               Please stand with us today.  If you don't take a 
          stand with us, where will you stand?  If you won't stand 
          now, then when?

               We are fighting for the right to teach our 
          children and grandchildren the truth of Scripture when 
          it comes to sexual morality ... and to give them at least 
          one place in our society where they can learn from 
          positive role models.

               *We are fighting to save our Church and country 
          from judgment*.  God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah.  
          He will judge America too.

            Remember, the Scriptures says, "It is time for 
          judgment to begin with the family of God; and if it 
          begins with us, what will the outcome be for those who 
          do not obey the gospel of God" (1 Peter 4:17).

               We must throw aside our lethargy.  For years we 
          thought America's values where [sic] secure -- protected 
          by our President, our Congress and the Supreme Court.

               We also believed that the Church would protect 
          our values -- and it should -- but we were wrong.  Many 
          of the leaders of the Church are unwilling to defend our 
          values.

               *Each one of us must take a stand for what we 
          believe, and we must unite with others who share our 
          convictions.  It is our only hope*.  We can have an 
          impact on the issues of our day, but only if we have 
          courage enough to stand ... and only if we're wise 
          enough to stand together.

               That's why Episcopalians United was founded.  
          It's the reason we continue to work for reform and 
          renewal in the Episcopal Church.

            Our job is to empower you to save the Church we love.  
          We're committed to giving you the weapons to fight the 
          battle ... to fight it well.

               Episcopalians United helps you promote a 
          correct view of sexuality issues ... one that's faithful to 
          Holy Scripture and the long-held tradition of the 
          Church.  We share successful strategies about how to 
          influence decisions ... not just at your local level, but 
          also at the diocesan and national levels.

               So I urge you to become involved today, while 
          there's still time.  The sexuality debate will be a key part 
          of the 1994 General Convention.  *Those who believe 
          in the ordination of homosexuals to the Episcopal clergy 
          and seek the Church's blessing for same-sex unions will 
          be there in force*.
               We must begin our preparations today!  We must match 
          their efforts delegate-for-delegate, argument-for-
          argument, dollar-for-dollar.  No effort can be spared in 
          this critical battle.

               *This is not time for passivity.  If you're not 
          willing to stand now, then our Church is in deep 
          trouble*.

               Perhaps you're tired of fighting -- so am I.  
          Frankly, I'm so sick of this issue that I just want it to go 
          away.  During the past 5 years, the trauma of the 
          debate, dialogue and confrontation we've been though 
          has occasionally led me to despair.

               But despair and discouragement are not from 
          the Lord ... and 2 Timothy 1:7 has been a wonderful 
          encouragement:

            "For God did not give us a spirit of timidity, but a spirit 
          of power, of love and of self-discipline."

               That's why Episcopalians United will keep 
          fighting.  God is our true source of strength ... and as 
          long as we remain faithful we will see His provision.

               *I invite you to be part of that provision*.  Help 
          us redouble our efforts during this critical year for our 
          Church.  Please search your heart today ... ask God to 
          show you the role He wants you to have ... then send the 
          most generous gift you can.

               Your support will make a critical difference as 
          Episcopalians United continues the fight with you to 
          preserve the soul of our Church ... you will be helping to 
          save our godly heritage, not just for ourselves, but for 
          our children and grandchildren.

               And please, don't just send a gift -- as vitally 
          important as that is.  Humble yourself before God in a 
          prayer of repentance for our Church's many sins.  Plead 
          for His mercy and grace.  Ask for His divine 
          intervention.

               Commit yourself to help fight the battle today!

               Together, we can make a difference.  If we 
          persevere, we will see God triumph.

                       Yours by His grace,

                       The Rev. Todd H. Wetzel

          P.S.  May God bless you for your concern for the 
          Episcopal Church.  Please be encouraged.  There are 
          already over 18,000 people who stand with you in 
          support of our ministry.  Many more are with us in their 
          hearts.  But remember, winning this battle will be 
          expensive!  That's why I need to hear from you today.
          [Editor's Note:  Enclosed with this fund raiser was a 
          copy of page 9 of the Spring, 1993 issue of The Voice of 
          Integrity, which was the ad encouraging participation in 
          the March on Washington.  We hope they enjoyed 
          reprinting our material as much as we enjoy reprinting 
          theirs.]

          ********************

          *FORMER INTEGRITY CHAPLAIN ELECTED 
          FIRST FEMALE DIOCESAN*
          based on a release from the Episcopal News Service

               After three short ballots, the clergy and lay 
          delegates to a special June 5, 1993 convention of the 
          Diocese of Vermont elected the Rev. Mary Adelia 
          McLeod of West Virginia to be the first woman to serve 
          as a diocesan bishop in the Episcopal Church.

               McLeod, rector of St. John's Church in 
          Charleston, West Virginia, was co-chaplain, together 
          with her husband, the Rev. Henry M. (Mack) McLeod, 
          of Integrity/Charleston until it disbanded in 1986.  She 
          is strongly supportive of equal rights for lesbians and 
          gay men in the Church.  

               In an interview with the press, McLeod said that 
          the election of women to the episcopate is important.  
          She added, however, that the diocese "in great prayer 
          and consideration and thought were led by the Holy 
          Spirit to elect me" and the fact that "I just happen to be 
          a woman is incidental."

               When she is consecrated in October, pending 
          consents from a majority of standing committees and 
          bishops in the church, McLeod would become the third 
          woman bishop in the Episcopal Church. Bishop Barbara 
          Harris was elected suffragan bishop of Massachusetts in 
          September of 1988 -- and the first woman bishop in the 
          history of the Anglican Communion -- and Bishop Jane 
          Dixon was elected suffragan bishop of Washington 
          (DC) in May of 1992.  Bishop Penelope Jamieson of 
          New Zealand was consecrated in June 1990 as the first 
          woman in the Anglican Communion to head a diocese.

               Women have been candidates in a number of 
          recent elections in the Episcopal Church.  McLeod was 
          among the first women considered for the episcopate 
          and Vermont was the fifth time she had been a final 
          candidate.

               Presiding Bishop Edmond L. Browning offered 
          his prayers for the new bishop and said that "this new 
          chapter in her ministry is a new chapter in the life of our 
          church as well."  Contending that the ministry of the 
          church "is enriched by the gifts of both women and 
          men," the Presiding Bishop added, "We can rejoice as 
          another step is taken toward our episcopal ministry 
          better reflecting this blessing."

               McLeod was born and grew up in Alabama and, 
          after a number of years as a mother (she and her 
          husband have five grown children) and homemaker, she 
          took her seminary degree at the School of Theology at 
          the University of the South in Sewanee, Tennessee.  As 
          archdeacon for the western region of West Virginia, she 
          has helped shape an innovative cluster ministry and has 
          been active in supporting rural deans, clergy 
          deployment and she has served on Diocesan Council, 
          president of the Standing Committee and a deputy to 
          General Convention in 1988 and 1991.

               Ironically, the current bishop of West Virginia, 
          the Rt. Rev. John H. Smith, who has strongly opposed 
          full inclusion of lesgay persons in the Episcopal Church, 
          was a priest in Vermont at the time of his election in 
          West Virginia.

          ********************

          *JUDGE DISMISSES $4 MILLION LAWSUIT IN 
          VIRGINIA*
          based on a release from the Episcopal News Service

                 During a preliminary June 2 hearing in Arlington 
          Circuit Court, Judge Benjamin Kedrick dismissed a $4 
          million lawsuit against the Rev. Bruce Newell, accused 
          of sexual misconduct, the parish where he served, its 
          rector and the bishop of Virginia.  The suit was filed by 
          a woman who said that Newell had sexually abused her 
          for 11 months when he was serving Falls Church.  And it 
          charged that the diocese, Bishop Peter James Lee, the 
          church and its rector shared responsibility for the injury.  
          The judge said that the complaint exceeded the two-
          year statute of limitations on personal injury case and 
          would have required the court to delve into theological 
          issues in violation of the separation of church and state.  
          It would have required "a secular court of law to 
          establish standards of conduct for members of the 
          clergy, which would undermine the First Amendment of 
          the United States Constitution," according to a 
          statement from Bishop Lee.  The bishop said that, after 
          a presentment and an investigation by a church-
          appointed board, the diocese had decided to proceed 
          with an ecclesiastical trial of Newell.

          ********************

          *I WAS IN PRISON AND YOU CAME TO ME*
          by (the Rev.) Barry L. Stopfel

               When I was a young boy growing up in the farm 
          country of Pennsylvania, I spent most of my own time 
          roaming the corn fields, meadows and woods.  Each 
          year I would bargain with my parents to lengthen my 
          tether, and they would reluctantly allow me to explore a 
          little farther.  By the time I was 12, I could be gone for 
          the day lost in the seasons of the earth.

               When I was eight years old, my father took me to 
          an invitation-only open house for the new county prison.  
          I was enthusiastic and a little afraid about being on the 
          inside of such a place.

               More than thirty years later I can close my eyes and 
          hear the sounds, sense the smells, and picture the colors 
          of the floors and cinder block walls, and the pattern of 
          steel, cement and wire.  During the tour I stuck to my 
          father like glue.  I figured they would let me leave with 
          him -- unless of course someone told them that I had 
          stolen some corn out of Mr. Schaeffer's corn crib to 
          throw against people's houses on Halloween.

               One of the guards asked me if I wanted to into a 
          cell.  My curiosity overcame my anxiety and into the 
          terrifying unknown I went.  I walked only a few steps 
          when the cell door crashed shut behind me.  It was an 
          isolation cell with no windows and a solid steel door.  I 
          panicked.  Trapped!  Doomed!  Someone knew of my 
          corn caper!  I'm dead, I thought -- an eternity of 
          captivity is a terrible price to pay for a few ears of corn 
          the pigs would never miss in their trough.

               I started kicking everywhere, hollering as loud as 
          I could.  I vowed that I would never commit even the 
          tiniest infraction of the law because I would die if I 
          ended up in a prison.  In my young boy's way I knew 
          that the source of my life was my freedom to roam.

               The childhood memory made a return visit in 
          technicolor and SenseSurround the night I walked into 
          the Bureau of Correction's Adult Diagnostic and 
          Treatment Center to participate in a Bible study group 
          with gay sex offenders.  I saw the building and the 
          guards through the eyes of a familiar eight-year-old who 
          seemed to have taken over my senses.  And the faint 
          sketches of Jesus' words filtered through my awareness, 
          "I was in prison and you came to me ... as you did it to 
          one of the least of these you did it to me."

               I often say that proclaiming the Gospel and 
          living by the way of Jesus is risky business with a cost 
          attached.  In the first moments at Avenel the cost for 
          me was walking through those sense memories that 
          created fear and dread in me, for I still need to roam 
          the seasons of the woods to stay lodged in my faith and 
          close to my God.  The thought of imprisonment by 
          walls, by ideas, by fear, or by any tyranny strikes fear in 
          my heart.

               I learned very quickly the cost of caring about 
          the spiritual journeys of the men in the Bible study 
          group.  I had been invited into the ministry by my good 
          friend Louie Crew and so we arrived together.  As 
          would be expected the security procedures to enter the 
          prison are rigorous.  One of the corrections officers on 
          duty had heard that a guest had been invited to lead the 
          Bible study.  It was soon obvious that the officer would 
          abuse his ultimate authority through his immunity to the 
          demands of human kindness.  He seemed all too happy 
          to dish out an abusive and deliberately insulting security 
          process on my behalf.  In the face of the hatred of this 
          prison guard's demeaning the humanity of a stranger 
          priest, the little boy and I joined hands waiting for the 
          sound of the slamming door.  I imagine there must be a 
          similar chilling sound when the doors on our lives slam 
          shut when we give words or actions to bigotry and hate.

               The following week we filed a complaint.  A 
          member of the Bible group wrote later, "you will be 
          pleased to know that the officer has been removed from 
          contact with civilians.  The bad news is that he'll have 
          more contract with us inmates.  I think he learned his 
          lesson.  And besides, we're used to him.  Perhaps it's 
          just as well that he works here.  It keeps him off the 
          streets for eight hours a day.  I feel better knowing that 
          the public is safe one shift a day."  In his letter there was 
          no rancor, no malice, just graceful human wisdom 
          destroying the power of human hate.  As I read the 
          letter, the line between who should be on the inside and 
          who should be on the outside of the prison walls grew 
          suddenly thin.

               Each month in the prison, I encounter a group of 
          men who have been willing to suffer shame and abuse 
          in order to hear a gospel of hope, healing, acceptance 
          and forgiveness proclaimed to them.  In their world 
          there is little evidence of a regard for religious 
          experience of the human spirit.  These men are 
          searching for the goodness of God in themselves and in 
          each other amidst the wreckage of their own lives.

               Before I was an authorized volunteer at the 
          prison I submitted to regular humiliation so that they 
          could hear a Gospel of hope, a Gospel that reflected 
          back to them their goodness as a creature of God.  
          After my visits they willingly endured the personal 
          degradation of strip searches for I might be smuggling 
          drugs in my Bible.  I heard the echoes of the soldiers 
          voices as they stripped Jesus and cast lots for his 
          garments when I heard the guard enter the room and 
          bark the command, "clothes off" while he slipped on his 
          latex gloves to do the rectal exams.

               It felt hard bearing the burden of the one whose 
          presence forced these brothers in Christ to undergo a 
          humiliating procedure.  Even so, one of the men with 
          profound and redeeming humor wrote later, "It was 
          always wonderful to have Barry with the group.  Tell 
          him none of us minded taking our clothes off for him."

               His comment may startle all of us with its many 
          layers of human sexual innuendo.  But the truth of his 
          comment is that within this particular context of 
          physical violation and certainly within the context of the 
          community of gay men, innuendo and humor are covers 
          for lifetimes of hurt.  Such humor is a life-giving balm to 
          those who suffer personal and verbal abuse at the hands 
          of other human beings who have the social and 
          institutional power to do so.

               The men were grateful for my being there.  And 
          they were powerfully enlivened by the Gospel.  They 
          proved, in their very spiritual survival, the power of the 
          Word and its healing spirit to overcome the power of 
          death in systems of violence.

               These men are not the demons that we somehow 
          need them to be when we debate crime and 
          punishment.  Like each of us they are formed by God in 
          their Mother's womb.  But the sacred fabric of their 
          selves has been torn by a complex weaving of 
          circumstances early in their lives that was largely 
          beyond their control.  In nearly every instance they have 
          been sexually abused.  They know too well the 
          degradation born by both the abused and the abuser.  
          They understand instinctively the human nature of 
          those who abused Jesus, and they know the suffering 
          that results from such abuse.  Jesus understood the 
          suffering of the abused and the rage of the abuser and 
          was willing to offer forgiveness to both.

               I have come to know that when I hear the doors 
          slam, sense the cold steel and barbed wire, climb the 
          concrete steps to the prison room, I walk the steps that 
          Jesus walked.  When I sit down and open the Bible 
          amidst the brokenness of these men's lives and the 
          broken places of my own, I know that Jesus is there.  I 
          am on sacred ground with gay men who know, like 
          Harvey Milk, that the important thing is not that we can 
          live on hope alone, but that life is not worth living 
          without it.

               Yes, some of my brothers have made damaging 
          choices for which they have come to freely accept 
          responsibility.  Daily in their therapy and study, they 
          take responsibility for their actions and work hard on 
          themselves to grab a measure of psychological and 
          spiritual health.  In their search for healing I see the 
          Christ embracing their need and pain.

               I am touched by their willingness to express their 
          thirst for living water.  With these men I have seen 
          grace and hope emerge over and over, and my faith is 
          fed.

               All of us in that small prison Bible study room 
          become free to roam the endless banks and swim the 
          ever-flowing rivers of our God-given human spirits.  
          There is more than death inside those walls after all.  By 
          the grace of God and the hope of the men in our group, 
          the fear in the little boy within me who shows up each 
          month is both calmed and liberated.  The prisoners 
          have set me free.
          -----
          Barry L. Stopfel was installed on June 19, 1993 as rector 
          of St. George's, Maplewood, New Jersey.  He was 
          ordained as an openly gay man in September, 1991.  
          This article appeared in the May, 1993 issue of "The 
          Voice," the publication of the Diocese of Newark, and 
          was part of their "Journey of the Spirit Series."  It is 
          reprinted with permission.

          ********************

          *CELEBRATING A SEASON OF PRIDE!!*

          The National AIDS Memorial Established in 1985 
          Located in The Cathedral of St. John the Divine, 112th 
          & Amsterdam Ave NYC

          The National AIDS Memorial "honors the dead" 
          through the AIDS Memorial Shrine and the Book of 
          Remembrance in which the names of those who have 
          died of HIV/AIDS related conditions are inscribed.  
          We "serve the living" through the provision of small 
          (primarily start-up or special project) grants to 
          organizations who serve those with HIV.  Over 
          $80,000.00 in grants have been made since 1985, drawn 
          from the contributions which have been sent in with 
          names.  Our Board is all volunteer, and only 5% of 
          donations to the memorial goes for maintenance.  85% 
          of contributions to the Memorial are returned to the 
          community in grants and 10% is reserved for the 
          establishment of a permanent memorial to all who have 
          died in this epidemic.  Contributions are always 
          welcome, but not required for the submission of names 
          for the book.  We have a "master list" of names, and will 
          check for duplications.  To submit names or for more 
          information please fill out the coupon and mail to:

          The National AIDS Memorial,
          P.O. Box 5202,
          NYC, NY 10185-0043
          -----------------------------------------------------------------
          Your 
          name:__________________________________________________
          Address:________________________________ 
          Apt./Box # ________
          City(Boro)____________________State:________Zip:____________

          Please send me additional information
          ___about the memorial ___about the grant process
          ___about making a bequest
          I have enclosed the following donation $______

          -----------------------------------------------------------------

          Please inscribe the following names in the Book of 
          Remembrance:  (Use additional paper if needed)
          Note:  We do have a Master List of the Names already 
          in the Book, and will check for duplications before 
          entering names that are submitted.

                 Name              Dates (if known)         Comments
          1)__________________________________________________________
          2)__________________________________________________________
          3)__________________________________________________________
          4)__________________________________________________________
          5)__________________________________________________________

          ********************

          *BOOK REVIEWS*

          NOTHING NEW
          "New Millennium, New Church:  trends shaping the 
          Episcopal Church for the 21st Century"

          Kew, Richard and Roger J. White.  "New Millennium, 
          New Church:  trends shaping the Episcopal Church for 
          the 21st Century."  Boston, MA:  Cowley Publications, 
          1992.  $12.95.

          Review by (the Rev.) W. Keith McCoy

               Easily the most talked about book in the 
          Episcopal Church in the past few months, "New 
          Millennium, New Church" is offered as a "compass for 
          the 1990s," which will guide local parishes, as well as the 
          national church, away from self-wounding controversy 
          and towards a more Anglican (read:  polite and quiet) 
          existence.  While chock-full of ideas and opinions, it is 
          not so much a compass as a conservative wish book for 
          the near future.  Another book would be needed to 
          comment on the authors' many thoughts, too many of 
          which I found unfinished, but let me tackle a few that 
          may be of interest to readers of this forum.

               One theme that runs under the entire text is that 
          the Episcopal Church is essentially conservative, but 
          good-hearted, but it has been the captive in recent years 
          of a small band of liberal experimenters and social 
          activists.  Somehow, this minority always manages to 
          elect sheep-like delegates to General Convention, and 
          then lead them into temptation with strange resolutions 
          and canons.  Kew and White suggest that the time has 
          come when right-thinking people will start attending 
          these conventions and begin making decisions that will 
          not upset the real majority anymore.

               As an observer of and participant in diocesan 
          politics for almost twenty years, my opinion is that the 
          clergy and laity sent to General Convention are 
          generally among the most caring, thoughtful, and 
          religious people of our church.  As such, they have 
          voted to allow women into the priesthood, revise the 
          BCP, and recommend the tithe because, having weighed 
          all the arguments, they made what they felt was a 
          Christian decision.  It so happens that the liberals have 
          made all of the arguments in favor of those actions.  
          The conservatives, on the other hand, have been against 
          everything, and never for anything.  They say, 
          "Whatever justice (hymnal, program ...) we have today is 
          fine -- I'm satisfied, and so should be the rest of the 
          Episcopal Church."  Faced with a choice of thoughtful 
          progress or mere stand-patism, General Convention has 
          rightly opted for progress.

               The authors stumble over this right at the 
          beginning of their book.  While lamenting our decline in 
          numbers from the boom years of the 1950s, they ignore 
          their own quote from Vance Packard that many people 
          joined our denomination at that time because it was the 
          social thing to do.  Many then chose to leave when 
          issues of faith vs. the world were raised, beginning with 
          the Vietnam War.  The church population has stabilized 
          because almost everyone left believes that we are a 
          religious organization, not a club.

               When they get into their chapter on single-issue 
          organizations, Kew and White again suggest that good 
          people have been chased away by irresponsible actions.  
          I can respect the decision of a person who leaves 
          because their theology no longer meshes with that of 
          the parish or the wider Episcopal Church.  I wonder, 
          however, at how great a loss it is when someone 
          flounces out over the "imagined 'unbelief' of their 
          rector, an ill-considered pronouncement or action by a 
          bishop, or an objection to the policies of the national 
          church."  (p. 124)  Parishioners who leave over imagined 
          issues or statements from regional and national 
          headquarters are more interested in feeling cosseted 
          than in grappling with matters of faith.  Moreover, if we 
          express regret because someone leaves over, say, the 
          ordination of women as priests, aren't we also regretting 
          taking that step and those priests?

               Integrity is only mentioned once specifically, but 
          the reader gets the sense that it is a part of that cabal 
          which has hijacked the true faith.  While credited with 
          media savvy and a sound knowledge of the political 
          process, we are, in the authors' words, "speak[ing] for a 
          relatively small group of activists."  p. 126)  This 
          contrasts with Episcopalians United, with 20,000 
          "members" and a big budget.  Kew and White feel this is 
          evidence of something; might I suggest the hollowness 
          of EU's arguments?

               Using a Gallup survey, a few publications from 
          other denominations, and their own impressions, most 
          of what Kew and White provide as planning fodder for 
          the future of our denomination is only speculation.  
          They have adopted every progressive action in the 
          Episcopal Church over the last thirty years as their own, 
          and then decry the possibility of further change.  They 
          have decided what they want the church to look like in 
          ten years, and then found the material to back up their 
          concept.

               This book has nothing new.  It is just the lament 
          of those people who would never be moved to change 
          one iota of their current existence, but, once moved, 
          find that change acceptable.  Now they ask the church 
          not to make them move forward again.  Come 2000 AD, 
          we will probably find Kew and White again celebrating 
          the current state of the Episcopal Church, and still 
          warning against some further progress.

          NEW PRAYERS FOR OLD OCCASIONS
          "Daring to Speak Love's Name, A Gay and Lesbian 
          Prayer Book."

          Stuart, Elizabeth, Editor.  "Daring to Speak Love's 
          Name, A Gay and Lesbian Prayer Book."  London: 
          Hamish Hamilton, 1992.

          Review by (The Rev.) Paul Woodrum
          
               Editor Elizabeth Stuart's "Daring to Speak Love's 
          Name, A Gay and Lesbian Prayer Book," fulfills three 
          functions.  First, it provides a lot of apologia for gay 
          people liturgically celebrating life's transitions.  Second, 
          it's a resource for gay/lesbian specific public rites.  
          Third, it provides prayers and readings for private 
          meditation.

               It's not quite clear to whom most of the apologia 
          is directed, especially the extensive justification given 
          for celebrating lesbian and gay relationships."  Most of 
          it is pretty familiar stuff to lesbians and gay men who 
          have experienced any sort of consciousness raising what 
          so ever.  All the right people are quoted from John 
          Boswell to John McNeill to Carter Heyward.  It is a 
          helpful summary of the polemics, useful perhaps, for a 
          quick refresher course before trotting off to a meeting 
          of the diocesan commission on human sexuality.

               A straight audience who might benefit most from 
          this part of the book is probably the least likely to read 
          it.  Much of the apologia may be in response to the 
          rather strange publication history of the volume.  
          Initially, it was to be published by the SPCK which, not 
          untypically, developed a case of the jitters about dealing 
          with subjects gay and lesbian.  Unable to get its own 
          auditors to condemn the publication, it finally resorted 
          to an unprecedented appeal to Archbishop of 
          Canterbury and SPCK President George Carey for an 
          opinion.  He disapproved.  The SPCK backed away 
          from publication.  The C of E breathed a sigh of relief 
          at once again being able to avoid sex.

               If the apologia isn't directly in response to all this 
          heterosexist nonsense, the extensive Preface, Foreword 
          and Introduction certainly are.  The Preface and 
          Forward are worth reading for the insights they provide 
          into the fragility and fears of heterosexuals.

               The Introduction by Dr. Stuart counters with a 
          splendid discussion of Blessed Aelred of Rievaulx's 
          theology of Christian friendship and relates his 12th 
          century thought to 20th century feminist and gay and 
          lesbian thought, especially as applied to liturgical 
          understanding and expression, naming and claiming the 
          validity of the lesgay experience of the holy.

               Stuart provides extensive and varied resources 
          for liturgies celebrating relationships, housewarmings, 
          coming out, partings, illness (particularly HIV & AIDS), 
          and death.  Considering the contributions of gay people 
          to liturgy for which they seem to have had a special 
          affinity over the centuries - at least 60% of the official 
          revisers of the American BCP and Hymnal were gay or 
          lesbian - it may seem somewhat ironic that anything 
          more is needed.  Stuart, by the way, is Roman Catholic 
          but, being British, just sounds Anglican and her views 
          are certainly not those in much favor with the Vatican.

               Stuart's contribution is not in replacing the standard, 
          general and common devotions of the church, but in 
          augmenting them with expressions growing from and 
          applicable to the lesbian and gay life of prayer, public 
          and private.  Her audience is ecumenical.  Her 
          resources are diverse.  Her coverage including rites and 
          prayers for coming out, for partings, and for HIV/AIDS 
          is comprehensive.  One would be hardpressed not to 
          find something helpful for either planning public 
          worship or for private devotion.

               "Daring to Speak Love's Name" is not the final 
          word, nor even the penultimate, but it is a valuable 
          addition to a growing body of resources which openly 
          incorporate and informs the lesbian/gay experience of 
          the common prayer of God's holy people.

          ********************

          *Chapter Updates*

          Changes in Integrity Chapters since the Winter 1993 
          issue:

          New:

.LM 16
               Integrity/Boston-Metro
               Christ Church, Episcopal
               12 Quincy Ave.
               Quincy, MA 02169

               Integrity/East Tennessee
               P.O. Box 4956
               Chattanooga, TN 37405

               Integrity/Maine
               P.O. Box 25
               Waldoboro, ME 04572

               Integrity/Toledo
               2272 Collingwood Blvd.
               Toledo, OH 43620

               Integrity/Twin Cities
               c/o University Episcopal Center
               317 17th Ave. S.E.
               Minneapolis, MN 55414

               Integrity/Melbourne
               St. Stephen's Anglican Church
               3 Docker St.
               Richmond, VIC 3121
               AUSTRALIA

.LM 11
          New Name and New Address:

.LM 16
               Integrity/Los Angeles
               7985 Santa Monica Blvd. #109-113
               West Hollywood, CA 90046

.LM 11
          New Addresses:

.LM 16
               Integrity/Central Florida
               P.O. Box 530031
               Orlando, FL 32853-0031

               Dignity-Integrity/Charlottesville
               P.O. Box 3670
               Charlottesville, VA 22903

.LM 11
          No longer meeting:
.LM 16
               Integrity/Central Indiana
               Integrity/Colorado
               Integrity/San Antonio

.LM 11
          ********************

          *The University of South Dakota Press*
          Announces Publication of
           *Don't Hang Up...*
          an anthology of poems about AIDS
          edited by Andrew Miller

               This unique volume of poetry is a collection of 
          works by both professional and amateur writers from 
          across the country, all of whom have lost loved ones to 
          AIDS.  The works are expressions of their pain and 
          confusion, their fears and hopes.  Their voices, too often 
          drowned out by those who would pass judgment, 
          represent the humanness of the suffering caused by this 
          ongoing tragedy.  Their cries of loss transcend the 
          cultural, political and religious barriers that divide us, to 
          reveal the universality of their experience.  The book's 
          title is taken from a poem by Dr. Louie Crew, Integrity's 
          founder.  "Don't Hang Up" has also been made into a 
          short-subject film.

               It is the hope of the editor and the University of 
          South Dakota Press that this volume can bring comfort 
          to those who are still suffering and can bring new 
          understanding and compassion to those who are still 
          trapped by fear and prejudice.  All profits from the 
          volume will be donated to an AIDS research or 
          education program.

          The book sells for *$8.95 postpaid* *

          For more information, contact USD Press at either 
          (605) 677-5401 or (605) 624-8258.  To order, send your 
          check, money order, or credit card information to: The 
          University of South Dakota Press, 301 East Hall, USD, 
          414 East Clark, Vermillion, SD 57069.  
          ISBN 0-929925-20-3

          * South Dakota residents please add 5% sales tax.
          ********************

          *DISCIPLES' CANDIDATE SUPPORTIVE*
          Based on an Episcopal News Service Release

                  Members of the General Board of the Christian 
          Church (Disciples of Christ) endorsed the Rev. Richard 
          Hamm, a 45-year-old Tennessee church executive, for 
          general minister and president of the denomination.  
          Hamm told members of the board that decisions on  the 
          ordination of homosexuals should be left up to local 
          regions and congregations.  "After working through my 
          homophobia, Bible study and much prayer, I came to 
          believe that homosexuality in and ofitself should not be 
          a bar to ordination," he said.  Hamm added that he has 
          no intention, however, of forcing his views upon the 
          denomination.  He said he would speak the truth as one 
          Disciple, while encouraging others whose views are 
          different to speak.  In 1991 the Rev. Michael Kinnamon 
          was not elected president of the denomination because 
          of his support of lesbian and gay Disciples in the 
          ordained ministry.  The election of a new president will 
          take place in the meeting of the church's General 
          Assembly in July.

          ********************

          *CLAUDIA'S COLUMN*

          "Our nettlesome task is to discover how to organize our 
          strength into compelling power so that (the church) 
          cannot elude our demands.  We must develop, from 
          strength, a situation where (the church) finds it wise and 
          prudent to collaborate with us.  It would be the height 
          of naivete to wait passively until (the church) had 
          somehow been infused with such blessings of good will 
          that it implored us for our programs.  The first course is 
          grounded in mature realism; the other, in childish 
          fantasy."
                       (I have replaced "government" with "the 
          church")
                       -- *The Words of Martin Luther King, Jr.*, p. 45

               Several weeks ago the people of the Diocese of 
          Minnesota gathered to meet the three clergypeople who 
          had been chosen as candidates for bishop.  One 
          question, especially, surfaced for each of the candidates, 
          "In this decade of evangelism, how do you see church 
          growth occurring?"  The questioner then proceeded to 
          explain that parishes are interested in techniques to 
          attract new members and that they expect help from the 
          bishop in this area.  Each of the candidates responded 
          similarly in that they emphasized introspection before 
          outreach.  That is, they would encourage individual 
          congregations to ask what it is that they have to offer 
          their members and what is preventing the active 
          participation of those who are on the fringes of parish 
          communities; those who rarely attend service or 
          participate in parish functions yet do just enough to 
          keep their names on the parish register.

               The question of increasing chapter membership 
          surfaces often for those of us involved with Integrity and 
          local chapters.  What, we want to know, can we do to 
          enlarge our membership; to increase growth.  In 
          response to that question, I turn to the reply of the 
          bishop candidates.  We must first look inward asking 
          ourselves what we have to offer our present members 
          and what is preventing active participation of those who 
          continue on our membership rosters while participating 
          only on the fringes.

               Despite the objections of some African-
          Americans, I see many parallels between the civil rights 
          struggles of their community and those of our lesbigay 
          community.  Although racism continues to exist in our 
          church, progress towards its obliteration has been made.  
          In search of answers to what we can learn from our 
          African-American sisters and brothers I have turned in 
          part to the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.  One of Dr. 
          King's most powerful attributes is the immediacy of a 
          well defined and confidently voiced vision and 
          understanding of mission as well as a strategy for its 
          fulfillment.  I believe that it is a vision and strategy that 
          is of utmost importance to members of Integrity 
          chapters yet is often either lacking or poorly presented.  
          If we cannot articulate who we are, what we expect of 
          the church, and how we intend to accomplish our goals, 
          what exactly is it that appeals to our membership?  
          What do we have to offer them?

               I often wonder how many of our members would 
          be able to articulate the vision of their individual 
          chapters.  It seems to me that not only does the vision 
          vary from chapter to chapter, but in many cases it varies 
          dramatically from chapter member to chapter member.  
          "Our nettlesome task is to discover how to organize our 
          strength into compelling power ..."  We will not attain 
          that power, my sisters and brothers, until we define 
          common goals and strategies and I believe that the hope 
          of a compelling power "so that the church cannot elude 
          our demands" is the greatest gift that we have to offer 
          our members and that lack of cohesiveness, vision, and 
          strategy is what keeps many members on the fringes.  
          Had members of the civil rights movement been asked 
          to define their goals, and had the responses varied from 
          goals of socializing with other African-Americans to 
          working for the inclusion of all African-Americans in 
          every aspect of American life and society, I believe 
          there would have been no civil rights movement, no 
          strength organized into compelling power to move white 
          America to welcome our African-American sisters and 
          brothers.  In the same vein, my friends, I believe that if 
          our goals are as divergently defined as providing a safe 
          social environment for Episcopalian lesbigay persons, to 
          working for the inclusion of all lesbigay persons in every 
          aspect of the life and ministry of our church, I fear that 
          there will be no strength to organize into a compelling 
          power to move our church to welcome us to full 
          inclusion.

               It's not uncommon for us to question whether 
          lesbigay persons are included in "The Episcopal Church 
          Welcomes You" signs.  How willing and able are we to 
          say, "This Integrity Chapter Welcomes You"; persons of 
          color, women, feminists, users of inclusive language, 
          differently abled persons, conservative, and bi-sexual 
          persons?  Until we practice the inclusion that we 
          demand from our church, there will be no strength in 
          our chapters and our goals might as well be to provide a 
          safe place to socialize, or for lesbigay persons to meet 
          prospective partners, or to catch up on local gossip.  In 
          each of these activities we can talk about the wish for 
          inclusion for each of us into the full life and ministry of 
          our church, but "it would be the height of naivete to wait 
          passively until the church had somehow been infused 
          with such blessings of good will ..."  There would be no 
          church, my friends, if the early disciples had no common 
          goal; where some saw their mission to proclaim the 
          Christ, and others, to band together solely for strength 
          against the Roman government, and others yet, to set 
          themselves up as better than the Jews who still 
          practiced the old law.  Their strength was their common 
          goal to proclaim Jesus Christ which became the 
          compelling power that brought those to whom they 
          witnessed to Christ and the new law.

               Advertising in local lesbigay papers and diocesan 
          newsletters might attract a few new members and 
          increase your chapter size, my friends.  Your strength, 
          however, lies in the power of a unified goal:  the 
          inclusion of lesbigay persons in the full life and ministry 
          of the Episcopal Church.  When that goal is identified 
          and articulated and when all those who count 
          themselves members of your chapters feel their 
          inclusion in the life of the chapter, the strategies can be 
          defined and others will want to add their commitments 
          and strengthen your power in the church.

          "We are now faced with the fact that tomorrow is today.  
          We are confronted with the fierce urgency of now.  In 
          this unfolding conundrum of life and history there is 
          such a thing as being too late.  Procrastination is still the 
          thief of time.  Life often leaves us standing bare, naked, 
          and dejected with a lost opportunity ... over the 
          bleached bones and jumbled residues of numerous 
          civilizations are written with the pathetic words:  'Too 
          late' ...  This may well be our last chance to choose 
          between chaos and community."
                -- *The Words of Martin Luther King, Jr.*, p. 90

               We can't wait until next June to articulate our 
          goals, define our strategies, and muster our strength just 
          in time for the General Convention.  "Tomorrow is 
          today."  Let us welcome all who have chosen to affiliate 
          with our chapters to discuss and define our goals and to 
          develop strategies so that those goals can and will be 
          met.  When that has been accomplished, we will witness 
          a renewed strength, an inviting organization, chapters so 
          powerful that, in joining forces with all other chapters, 
          the church will no longer be able to exclude us from full 
          life and ministry within her.

          ********************
          *JOSHUA'S BAPTISM PUSHES THE BOUNDARIES 
          OF THE FAMILY OF GOD*
          by Lily DeYoung

               In the early church, the celebration of Easter was 
          preceded by an all-night vigil.  When dawn broke, 
          neophytes were baptized into the Christian family, and 
          the Easter festival began.

               But the baptism of three-month old Joshua 
          Kilian Meneghin on February 14 at the Church of the 
          Redeemer, Morristown, was preceded by a five-year 
          vigil kept by Cindy Meneghin and Maureen Kilian, his 
          parents.

               Cindy and Maureen are a lesbian couple who 
          have been together since 1974, shortly after they met in 
          high school.  Although both were raised as Catholics, 
          they never felt personal anxiety about their sexuality.  
          From the beginning, they have lived openly as a couple 
          hoping that family and church would accept them as 
          other couples were accepted and celebrated.  When 
          acceptance and celebration did not come, they began 
          the long, slow process of helping people to understand.

               "We have always been 'out' and open so that we 
          could be a role model to other lesbians and gays, and 
          for their families ... especially for families because they 
          often fear that being gay means being unhappy," said 
          Cindy.  "As people got to know us, they began to 
          understand that we were a couple, in love and very 
          happy."  She said, "It took many years of struggle to help 
          our parents and siblings to see that a 'couple' was not 
          necessarily a man and a woman, that we were just as 
          much a couple as they were with their spouses."

               One meaningful sign of their acceptance as a 
          couple came when Maureen's parents included a 
          picture of Maureen and Cindy on the wall with the 
          pictures of her six siblings and their spouses, and when 
          the family began sending anniversary cards to them 
          each August 28.

               Like many other couples, they wanted a child.  
          "We started talking about having a baby five years ago," 
          said Cindy.  "But we knew that 'our world' wasn't quite 
          ready yet."  So again, they started the slow process of 
          helping people to understand.

               They told family, friends and co-workers about 
          their desire to start a family.  At first people were 
          surprised.  Gradually, as their notions of "family" grew, 
          friends told the couple, "You'd be good parents!"

               Cindy and Maureen wanted church to be a part 
          of their child's life too.  But unlike the family and 
          friends who had openly accepted them, their church did 
          not.  After years of committed service as parish lectors, 
          eucharistic and youth ministers, Cindy and Maureen 
          were told that they could not participate in couples' 
          programs or start a gay group, and if they had a child, 
          he or she could 'probably' be baptized, but in private.  
          To Cindy and Maureen it seemed that the Catholic 
          Church was the only place where their child and his 
          family would not be welcome.

               To forego church was not an option.  Said 
          Maureen, "We need organized religion.  We want 
          community.  And we decided we would either find it or 
          make it!"

               Their search brought them to a visit one Sunday 
          to Redeemer.  There, they were impressed by the 
          diversity of the congregation and the inclusive liturgical 
          language.  But they wanted to find a church closer to 
          home.  Redeemer was eighteen miles away, and they 
          were used to a neighborhood church.

               They visited many Episcopal churches, and 
          deeply appreciated the welcome they found.  They 
          decided to return to Redeemer when they learned that 
          its inclusiveness was not the personal initiative of a few 
          but rather a parish-wide commitment officially 
          undertaken by the vestry.  Vestry member Ann Johnson 
          assured them that homophobia was not acceptable at 
          Redeemer and that if anyone felt uncomfortable with 
          that, it would be their problem, not Cindy's or 
          Maureen's ... and not Joshua's.

               Said Cindy, "That was a complete reversal for us.  
          For once, we wouldn't have to struggle with others' 
          exclusionary concepts of family and fears about gay 
          relationships."  "And we knew," said Maureen, "that 
          Redeemer was not a gay parish either.  That wasn't 
          what we wanted.  We have always wanted to belong to a 
          community that includes people of different races, ages, 
          ethnic backgrounds and sexual orientations.  It's what 
          we want for Joshua:  to experience the real world within 
          his church community."

               Preaching at Joshua's baptism, rector Philip 
          Wilson said that if teaching today, in place of 'the 
          Kingdom' Jesus might use the image of 'the Family of 
          God.'  "If we accept 'the Family of God' as the 
          definition of Jesus' vision," Wilson said, "then the action 
          of God is to ever enlarge the family, ever to push the 
          circle wider."

               That day, the Redeemer community 
          enthusiastically embraced Josh and his family.  After 
          their vigilant five years of preparation, his parents are 
          happy and confident:  Joshua is a member of the family 
          just as much as anyone else.
          -----
          Lily DeYoung is a member of Church of the Redeemer, 
          Morristown.  This article first appeared in the April, 
          1993 issue of "The Voice", the publication of the 
          Diocese of Newark, and is reprinted with permission.

          ********************

          *Special Section:*

          *LESGAYS IN THE MILITARY  *

          The Beat Goes On
          by Jim Lewis

               As some people waved Bibles over their heads 
          and shouted "amen," one questioner denounced what he 
          said was a lessening of moral standards in American 
          Society.

               "Is being old a sin?' asked the citizen, who did 
          not identify himself.
               "No!" the crowd yelled back.
               "Is being handicapped a sin?" the man asked.
               "No!" the crowd screamed, louder this time.
               "Is being homosexual a sin?" he came back.
               "Yes!" roared the crowd, loudest of all.

            March 25 - "New York Times" article describing a 
          forum held in Jacksonville, N.C.  The subject was gays 
          in the military.

               The matter of lifting the ban on gays in the 
          military is heating up.  Just how hot this struggle really 
          is was driven home to me after reading copies of the 
          "Marine Corps Gazette" (MCG), the professional 
          journal of the U.S. Marine Corps.

               William Lind, Director of the Center for 
          Cultural Conservation of the Free Congress 
          Foundation, writes in the March issue of the MCG:  
          "Allowing homosexuals to serve in the military is part of 
          a larger, hidden agenda, one that is dangerous to the 
          whole of American society and culture."

               The "hidden agenda" for Lind is "the destruction 
          of traditional Western, Judeo-Christian culture, morals, 
          and values." In a November 1992 MCG article, Lind 
          identifies feminism as "an element in the coalition" of 
          forces out to destroy Western, Judeo-Christian culture.

               And just how will Marines react to this battle?  
          "Marines will opt," he says, "for massive passive 
          resistance -- resistance that makes the open homosexual 
          an 'unperson' (the homosexual who remains 'in the 
          closet' is not an issue since nobody knows he is one).  
          The more organized the passive resistance, the more 
          likely it will include too many people to overcome.  
          There is strength in numbers:  No administration can 
          maintain a policy when the vast majority of those 
          affected by it reject it.

               The fact that "passive resistance," on the part of 
          the military, is but one bullet in the chamber of this gun 
          being used to kill Clinton's proposed plan to lift the ban 
          on gays is best seen in the frontal attack being used by 
          the military.

               Marine Corps commandant, General Carl 
          Mundy Jr., has been circulating a 20-minute videotape, 
          "The Gay Agenda" to Marine bases throughout the 
          country to be shown to all the troops. Produced by a 
          fundamentalist church in California, Antelope Valley 
          Springs of Life Ministries, it features nudity, and 
          assertions that homosexuality is unnatural, a sickness 
          and not worthy of legal protection.

               This California church, by the way, uses armed 
          security guards who patrol the aisles during services, 
          along with electronically locked doors.

               In the January issue of the MCG, Major Arthur 
          J. Corbett likens the gay effort to the vandal who took a 
          hammer to the Pieta a few years ago.  His message is 
          simple:  The Marine Corps should disband rather than 
          admit gays.

               For those with eyes to see and ears to hear the 
          mood and terms of this struggle are pretty clear.

          @  There is a concerted campaign to defeat an effort to 
          left the ban on gays in the military.  It is a crusade based 
          in fear, appealing to every stereotype and distorted 
          image associated with gays.

          @  This struggle over the military is the most visible 
          place to observe all the issues surrounding gay 
          liberation in our society.  Gay military folk have come 
          front and center to articulate and personify the issue.  
          Hollywood, despite the liberal image, isn't doing it.  The 
          test:  How many openly gay actors can you identify.  As 
          for the church, supposedly engaging the issue:  Not one 
          bishop in the Episcopal Church has come out of the 
          closet, and very few gay priests and lay people are 
          willing to be out and open.

          @  When all is said and done, these fearful, angry 
          military voices are on to something -- something 
          radically different is going on here.  Keeping in mind 
          that the word radical is defined as "going to the root of 
          the origin," this struggle is one among many that address 
          racial, class, sexual and power issues.  An old way of life 
          is dying and a new way of life is being born and the 
          generals and scout leaders of the world, not to mention 
          some politicians and church people, understand this 
          movement only too well.

          @  The military opposition centers around "the 
          military's ability to fulfill its mission of fighting and 
          winning wars."  In other words, can men and women 
          who love their comrades enough to lay down their lives 
          for one another maintain that intimacy given the 
          possibility of romantic love and sexual attraction?  This 
          is a huge issue and takes all of us to the key matter of 
          spirituality and eroticism, the likes of which good 
          church folks need to discuss and understand as well.

          @  Trying to closet and silence people, gays or anyone 
          else feeling the boot on their neck, just plain won't 
          work.  Stuffing people and issues into boxes just 
          postpones justice.
               From a faith perspective, self knowledge and revelation 
          of self is at the heart of God's revelation in and through 
          human beings.  For a person to turn his or her back on 
          their sexual orientation is to block a deeply spiritual 
          connection.  It is to hide God's very basic gift to us -- 
          our sexual orientation -- under a basket -- in a closet, if 
          you will.

          *    Recently I heard Kathleen Carlin, a feminist 
          (sorry boys), speak to this matter.  She said, "Oppression 
          relies for its continuation upon the silencing of the 
          oppressed.  Silencing works this way.  Part of the 
          dominant's self-identity is *not to hear* the 
          subordinate's reality.  ln other words, part of what it 
          means to be male, or white or heterosexual, is to be 
          able to exclude from dominant reality the experience of 
          those who are oppressed by the social construction of 
          male and white and straight and have that be *right*.

               Once again, from a faith perspective, listening to 
          God, who is present in the lives of those who have been 
          subordinated by the dominant political and cultural 
          interests of a society, is the very posture of faith.  The 
          most important moments for Jesus were those in which 
          he paid attention to people who had been shoved to the 
          fringe of society and beaten down to the bottom of 
          society.  Justice/love became known in those 
          encounters.

               The military, along with a host of other 
          institutions in our society, including the Church and the 
          Boy Scouts, is out of step with justice and it's time to get 
          squared away.
          -----
          The Rev. Jim Lewis has been Director for Christian 
          Social Ministries of the Diocese of North Carolina since 
          1987.  He served as assistant lacrosse coach at the U.S. 
          Naval Academy while serving as curate at St. Anne's, 
          Anapolis.  This appeared in Jim's April 4, 1993 
          newsletter:  "Notes from under the Fig Tree."

          *LETTERS TO PRESIDENT CLINTON*

          A RETIRED CHAPLAIN ON GAYS IN THE 
          MILITARY

             The Rev. Charles Dunlap Brown
             Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
             April 20, 1993

          President Bill Clinton
          The White House

          Dear President Clinton:

               I am writing in support of ending the ban against 
          lesbian and gay people in the military of the United 
          States.  We are one of only three countries in the 
          Western Alliance who ban homosexuals.  The current 
          policy of discrimination denies able bodied men and 
          women the opportunity to serve our country and costs 
          taxpayers millions of dollars each year.  I agree that the 
          cause of discipline and discharge from military-service 
          should be conduct and job performance and not status 
          which judges a person because of what they "might" do.

               I retired from the United States Army Reserve 
          March 31, 1990 after serving almost 42 years in the 
          Army National Guard, the Army Reserve and extended 
          active duty.  At the time of my retirement I was the 
          senior Colonel in the Army Reserve and was the Staff 
          Chaplain for the 77th USARCOM at Ft. Totten, New 
          York which is the largest Reserve Command in the 
          United States.  I was responsible for the recruitment, 
          professional education and assignment of 43 unit 
          chaplains in the State of New York and northern New 
          Jersey.  I was advisor to the Commanding General of 
          the 77th ARCOM in matters of morale, morals and 
          religion.

               During the Korean conflict I was mobilized with 
          the 45th Infantry Division, Oklahoma Army National 
          Guard.  I earned the Combat Medic Badge and Bronze 
          Star for meritorious service and was offered a 
          battlefield commission.  I was a Platoon Sergeant 
          responsible for 75 Medical Corpsmen with an Infantry 
          Battalion.  It was this experience which influenced my 
          going to Seminary instead of Medical School upon 
          being released from active duty.  In all my years as an 
          enlisted man, medical service corps officer and 
          chaplain, I knew and counselled many gay and lesbian 
          soldiers as well as heterosexual soldiers.  The only 
          sexual conduct unbecoming a soldier that occurred in 
          the various units to which I belonged was that of males 
          harassing females.

               I was an enlisted person with an Infantry 
          Battalion in Korea when we were integrated with our 
          first black soldiers.  We had heard the same arguments 
          then against having blacks in the Army as are being 
          used today against gays and lesbians.  With good 
          leadership and teaching the Army made great progress 
          in solving racial discrimination.  The same can be said 
          for the acceptance of female soldiers.  With this same 
          good leadership gay and lesbian soldiers are accepted 
          today in many units.  Gay and lesbian soldiers are not 
          asking for special rights, only those rights and freedoms 
          provided by our Constitution for all citizens.  Witch 
          hunts should be stopped and all people should be 
          judged by their job performance and not their sexual 
          status or orientation.

               In addition to being an Episcopal Priest, I have a 
          Ph.D. from the University of Oklahoma in Counseling 
          Psychology.  My professional education and experience 
          has made me realize that a person can no more change 
          their sexual orientation that they can change the color 
          of their skin.

               When I retired, the Army awarded me the 
          Legion of Merit, which is the highest award that can be 
          given for meritorious service.  Over the years I was also 
          awarded the Bronze Star for meritorious service in a 
          combat setting, the Army Commendation Medal twice, 
          the Army Achievement Medal as well as the Good 
          Conduct Medal.  Had the Army known my sexual 
          orientation I would have been given a dishonorable 
          discharge instead and not have been allowed to do the 
          good job for our country which I did for 41 years and 9 
          months.

          Sincerely yours,
          Charles H.D. Brown
          Chaplain (COL) AUS Retired

          PB SUPPORTS AN END TO THE MILITARY BAN

             The Most Reverend Edmond L. Browning
             Presiding Bishop, The Episcopal Church
             February 5, 1993

          The Honorable William Clinton
          The White House

          Dear Mr. President:

               I write to commend you for your position on the 
          issue of ending discrimination against gay and lesbian 
          members of the Armed Services.  We as a nation are 
          well served by your openness in addressing this difficult 
          issue, which is before all of our churches as well.

               The current situation in our armed forces with 
          regard to gays and lesbians is most unfortunate.  It is my 
          deep sense that we live in a time when we need to 
          honor the contributions of *all* men and women who 
          serve our country, regardless of sexual orientation.  In 
          so doing, we will define in a better way who we are as a 
          nation.

               At my request the Suffragan Bishop of the 
          Armed Forces has developed a means of assisting our 
          military chaplains as a change is contemplated.  I have 
          attached for your information a copy of a letter to our 
          chaplains.  [See page 20 for text of letter.]  It is my hope 
          and expectation that they will be of service in a time of 
          transition.

               In 1991 our General Convention initiated a study 
          on attitudes toward human sexuality that is now 
          underway around our church.  Part of the outcome of 
          the study will be a heightened awareness of the thoughts 
          and opinions of one another, and a deepened 
          commitment to make creative decisions about difficult 
          issues in the midst of these differences.  Also, our 
          General Convention is clearly on record in support of 
          upholding the full civil rights and equal protection 
          under the law of homosexual persons.

               The struggles of our church around issues of 
          homosexuality have given me a pretty clear 
          understanding of some of the complex dynamics.  It is in 
          light of this particular experience that I offer to be [of] 
          assistance to you in any possible way.
               I know that change is difficult in the absence of 
          converted hearts.  At the same time, I do believe this is 
          a justice issue and there is a real need to press on.  I 
          much applaud your way of going forward.  Please be in 
          touch with me if you believe there is merit in exploring 
          a way I might be of assistance.

               I welcome this opportunity to let you know that 
          you, your family and the group of men and women who 
          will be part of your team are in my prayers.  You have 
          been called to a responsibility few can imagine and an 
          opportunity most never have.  In an abiding awareness 
          of both the responsibility and opportunity of your office 
          I will continue to hold you in my prayers.

               I will share with you that I am enormously 
          strengthened knowing of the prayers for me of people 
          all around our church.  You are also prayed for in every 
          service.  I hope you find yourself similarly strengthened.

               This letter comes with my blessings and my warm 
          personal greetings.

            Faithfully yours,
            Edmond L. Browning

          [Presiding Bishop Browning's letter to Armed Forces 
          Chaplains in on page 20.]

          *MORE ON LESGAYS IN THE MILITARY*

          UCC LEADER TESTIFIES FOR END OF 
          MILITARY BAN
          By James Solheim

               Testifying for the church leaders before the 
          House Armed Services Committee in Washington, D.C., 
          Dr. Paul Sherry, president of the United Church of 
          Christ (UCC), said, "While each of us would want to 
          speak out of our distinctive theological traditions, we 
          share a common conviction that the civil rights 
          guaranteed for all citizens should be guaranteed for gay 
          and lesbian persons as well."

               Sherry said that the "moral fiber of our nation is 
          very much at stake" in the current debate.  "Some would 
          argue that our society's very structure is being 
          undermined by gay and lesbian persons declaring their 
          orientation openly and demanding the civil rights 
          guaranteed to all other American citizens," he observed.  
          "We see it quite the opposite," he said in referring to 
          actions taken by the UCC and other churches. 

               The ban against gays and lesbians runs counter 
          to "the basic principles of our nation -- liberty and 
          justice for all," Sherry said.  "To allow the military to 
          discriminate is morally intolerable and contrary to the 
          values that undergird our society."

          MISCONDUCT NOT ORIENTATION

               The sexual misconduct of military personnel, not 
          their sexual orientation, should be the issue, Sherry said.  
          "While the religious community and the nation are still 
          in the midst of a profound and difficult debate about 
          the moral character of various forms of sexual behavior, 
          there is growing conviction that sexual orientation, in 
          and of itself, is not an adequate or appropriate basis for 
          judging others, any more than is one's gender, race or 
          ethnic background."

               Sherry praised military leaders who "have 
          demonstrated the capacity to lead our forces effectively 
          through transitions that have included racial integration 
          and the admission of women."  He said that military 
          leaders "can be responsible for insuring that sexism, 
          racism and homophobia are not supported or condoned 
          in their units."

                In challenging Sherry's testimony, Rep. Herb 
          Bateman (D-VA) said that "specially protected rights" 
          should not be legislated for "people who profess to be 
          homosexuals on the grounds that it is a civil liberty to 
          which they are entitled."

               Sherry responded by arguing that gays and 
          lesbians do not seek special consideration.  "People 
          simply want those rights which every citizen of this land 
          -- by virtue of birthright and by virtue of citizenship -- 
          have a right to expect." 

               Presiding Bishop Edmond L. Browning has 
          joined leaders of other churches in calling for an end to 
          the ban on gays in the military.  Other church leaders 
          endorsing Sherry's Congressional testimony represented 
          the National Council of Churches, the Evangelical 
          Lutheran Church in America, the African Methodist 
          Episcopal Church, the Christian Church (Disciples of 
          Christ), the Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan 
          Community Churches, the Unitarian Universalist 
          Fellowship, the Moravian Church in America, the 
          United Methodist Church, the American Baptist 
          Churches and the Union of American Hebrew 
          Congregations.
          -----
          James Solheim is Director of the Episcopal News 
          Service.

          PB WRITES TO ARMED FORCES CHAPLAINS

             The Most Reverend Edmond L. Browning
             Presiding Bishop, The Episcopal Church
             February 5, 1993

          A letter for all Armed Forces Chaplains

          Dear friends:

               As various governmental agencies spend the next 
          six months studying the subject of the President's lifting 
          of the Department of Defense ban on gay and lesbian 
          persons serving in the Armed Forces, I have conferred 
          with Bishop Keyser as to how best the Episcopal Church 
          might respond to the strong probability of this policy 
          change.  As we discussed the implications of lifting the 
          ban, I was impressed by the fact that many changes may 
          no doubt be taking place in your units.

               With full awareness that it will demand your best 
          efforts I want you to be at the forefront in alleviating all 
          discriminatory practices and to continue to be pastorally 
          sensitive in the care of your people during this 
          particular transition.  This six-month period of study 
          should be a significant time for you to teach those for 
          whom you are responsible.  Please encourage others to 
          study the policy change with an open attitude regarding 
          the priority of carrying out the mission of the Armed 
          Forces in the defense of our nation.  Above all, do all 
          you can to prevent verbally and physically hostile acts 
          from taking place.

               At the recent meeting of the National 
          Conference on Ministry to the Armed Forces a 
          resolution was passed affirming "the right of Chaplains 
          to publicly discuss the position of their faith community 
          concerning the integration of homosexual persons into 
          the Armed Forces."  To assist you in such dialogue I am 
          enclosing pertinent resolutions which have been passed 
          by the Episcopal Church in General Convention.  Share 
          them with your people, and teach them the significance 
          of these resolutions.

               Bishop Keyser has briefed me on the process 
          being developed to facilitate the participation of clergy 
          serving in federal agencies in the church-wide dialogue 
          on human sexuality as directed by the 1991 General 
          Convention's Resolution - A-104sa.  With my full 
          concurrence he intends to insure that an important 
          portion of each dialogue will specifically deal with the 
          complex changes that will take place with the lifting of 
          the ban and your role as a chaplain to all persons in the 
          midst of these changes.  Your role, as always, includes 
          teaching, preaching, counseling, advising, and healing.  
          The regional dialogues Bishop Keyser has planned will 
          help equip you to represent the Episcopal Church well 
          during this critical time.  I commend that opportunity 
          for dialogue to you.

               The world is changing in many ways, and this can 
          be frightening to many.  As ministers of the gospel of 
          Jesus Christ, we can respond with the good news that he 
          is Lord and calls us to work for justice and peace 
          through the power fo the Holy Spirit.  May our wise 
          counsel and Christ-centered pastoral care be an impetus 
          for our people to more fully "seek and serve Christ in all 
          persons, strive for justice and peace among all people, 
          and respect the dignity of every human being."

               I continue to be inspired by your ministry to 
          Episcopalians in uniform and to your people of various 
          denominational affiliations and cultural backgrounds.  
          Please know that you are in my thoughts and prayers.

            Faithfully yours,
            Edmond L. Browning

          ********************

          *AN EXCHANGE OF PLEASANTRIES*

          Letter to the Editor: "The Living Church," March 14, 
          1993

          IDEOLOGICAL TERRORISM

               The board of Integrity dissociates itself from the 
          National Council of Churches' (NCC) vote which 
          refused observer status to the Universal Fellowship of 
          Metropolitan Community Churches, a predominantly 
          homosexual group ["TLC," Jan. 3].

               It also calls for "the immediate replacement of 
          the Rev. William Norgren as ecumenical officer of the 
          Episcopal Church and the replacement of four other 
          members of the Episcopal delegation" who voted 
          against observer status.  This comes from a group which 
          has now begun a new buzzword, "gentle," as a self-
          description.  It is a group which has terrorized 
          everybody, not only to give its members freedom of 
          democratic voice, but also a place to make decisions 
          (even if they offend others) while, at the same time, 
          withdrawing the same freedom from others.

               When will we realize that the ideological 
          terrorism of Integrity, a despotic and ruthless segment 
          who simply want everything their own way and on their 
          own terms, is running the program of this church and 
          the rest of us who are paying the growing costs?

               Fr. Norgren is entitled to opinion and vote, even 
          if it is contrary to Integrity's wishes.

               Frankly, I don't care who goes to the NCC or 
          who observes, since I have never followed the fortunes 
          or misfortunes of the WCC.  Both are too great a pain 
          for the church and have outlived their usefulness.  But I 
          do wonder if, politically and in the church, we have 
          entered an era of despotism under the guise of 
          democracy.  Certainly that is the way Integrity and its 
          friends seem to work.

          (The Rt. Rev.) Terence Kelshaw, Bishop of the Rio 
          Grande


          Letter to the Editor:  "The Living Church," April 11, 
          1993

          CASE OF PROJECTION

               Methinks the bishop doth protest too much.  For 
          Bishop Kelshaw to describe Integrity as "despotic" is a 
          case of projection.  To be a despot implies having power 
          to misuse.  Integrity has never had "power" in the 
          Episcopal Church comparable to that of any bishop.

               Bishop Kelshaw attacks a straw man of his own 
          creation when he says that the church's ecumenical 
          officer has a right to vote contrary to the wishes of 
          Integrity.  No one suggests otherwise.  What our 
          national board protested was Fr. Norgren's voting 
          contrary to the mandate of the 1991 General 
          Convention to promote dialogue with lesbian and gay 
          Christians.  Contrary to Bishop Kelshaw, Integrity 
          thinks the work of the National and World Councils of 
          Churches is important.

               Unfortunately Bishop Kelshaw's letter is replete 
          with other factual inaccuracies.  For example, Integrity 
          has never used "gentle" to describe itself.  The use of 
          such a term to describe oneself would always be suspect.

               Perhaps what is really wrong with the Episcopal 
          Church is the quality of the leadership in some of our 
          dioceses.

          Edgar K. Byham, Director of Communications, 
          Integrity, Inc.


          Letter to the Editor:  "The Living Church," May 2, 1993

          RAW ANGER

               I have never seen such raw anger, such 
          dysfunctional hatefulness, or such naked self-
          righteousness as in Bishop Kelshaw's letter.  Integrity, 
          certainly, is a flawed organization as are the Episcopal 
          Church and the Diocese of the Rio Grande.  However, 
          Integrity is not ACTUP.  Can it be in any way pastoral 
          to call a Christian group despotic, ruthless and terrorist?  
          Why is a bishop saying such things?  What would Jesus 
          say?

          (The Rev.) Thomas W. Philips, Providence, R.I.

          ********************

          *EAST TENNESSEE SYMPOSIUM TO EXPLORE 
          SEARCH FOR STRUCTURAL REFORM OF THE 
          EPISCOPAL CHURCH*
          Based on an Episcopal News Service release

               In recent years, members of the Episcopal 
          Church from the tiniest parishes to bishops and national 
          leaders have asked aloud what kind of structure is 
          needed for the challenges of the 21st century.

               The question has been uttered by Episcopalians 
          of a variety of  viewpoints and theological perspectives.  
          Whether the dialogue includes such terms as "long-
          range planning" or "paradigm shift" or  
          "decentralization," there seems to be a crescendo of 
          voices asking if the Episcopal Church should make 
          some significant changes in its institutional life. 
               Just as the church's Executive Council has embarked on 
          a  churchwide process to gather concerns from the 
          grassroots, a symposium in St. Louis this August may 
          serve to turn up the volume in the conversation about 
          church structure. 

               The August 12-15 symposium, "Shaping Our 
          Future:  A 
          Grassroots Forum on Episcopal Structures," sponsored 
          by the  Diocese of East Tennessee had hoped to bring 
          as many as 2,000 Episcopalians together to talk about 
          structural reform, though it appears the numbers will be 
          far smaller. 

                 Some of the original motivation for the symposium 
          was sparked by two rectors from the Diocese of East 
          Tennessee, the Rev.  Stephen Freeman and the Rev. 
          Peter Keese.  Freeman and Keese offered a resolution 
          at the 1991 diocesan convention that called for 
          significant changes in the structure of the Episcopal 
          Church.  Among other things, Freeman and Keese 
          called for the General Convention to meet once every 
          10 years, and for a diocesan bishop to serve as the 
          presiding bishop.

                 Although the proposal was not adopted by the 
          diocesan convention, it was referred to a committee for 
          further study.  The committee, later known as the "East 
          Tennessee Initiative," initially proposed to convene a 
          small symposium of scholars and church leaders at the 
          University of the South in Sewanee, then suggested a 
          larger meeting in St. Louis.

                 Some skeptics of the upcoming symposium have 
          criticized it as an uncontrollable "shadow General 
          Convention."  One observer said that it could well be a 
          "magnet for the discontented."  Another suggested that 
          cool passions and calm heads would not necessarily 
          prevail in the "heat and humidity of an August in St. 
          Louis."

               Bishop Robert Tharp of East Tennessee in a 
          telephone interview with ENS's Jeffrey Penn dismissed 
          such characterizations.  "This is not an  alternative to 
          General Convention nor a mini-General Convention.  I 
          would disavow the whole thing if it turned into 
          something like that."

               Tharp said that, although there would be some 
          plenary sessions at the meeting, "none of them would 
          resemble the House of Bishops or Deputies.  There 
          will be no opportunity to debate in the  plenary sessions.  
          I don't believe that any resolutions will come out of this 
          meeting." 

               To explore whether opposition to the inclusion 
          of lesgay persons has helped motivate or will play a role 
          in the symposium, Integrity will be represented by Dr. 
          Louie Crew.

          *MUCH FUSS DOWN UNDER*
          *FIRST "OPENLY" GAY ORDINAND IN 
          AUSTRALIAN CHURCH QUITS*

          The first article below appeared in "The Australian 
          Magazine" prior to the Rev. David McAuliffe's decision 
          to leave the Anglican priesthood.  Off-the-record 
          remarks by Archbishop Carnley, while visiting 
          Integrity/New York in May, suggest that parts of the 
          story may be innaccurate.  The second article appeared 
          in "The Australian" (the Perth newpaper in which the 
          Magazine is a Sunday supplement) shortly after the 
          resignation.

          *HONEST TO GOD*

          Still divided over women priests, the Anglican Church is 
          now being urged to confront its other contentious 
          problem -- gay priests.  The case of David McAuliffe 
          epitomises the forces, fears and theories at work.

          By Janine Cohen

               The Reverend David McAuliffe regularly gets 
          hate mail, despite the fact that he has devoted his life to 
          God.  Most of it comes from members of his own 
          Church.  They warn him that he is going to burn in hell 
          and that his soul will perish in the eternal flames.  They 
          ask him to repent and give up his wicked ways.

               McAuliffe believes his only sin is that, unlike 
          many other Anglican clergy, he has refused to lie about 
          his sexuality.  He would rather be hated for something 
          he is than loved for something he is not.  Seven months 
          ago, the tall, urbane 51-year-old was ordained the first 
          self-proclaimed homosexual in the Anglican Church in 
          Australia, an event that has propelled the Anglican 
          Church into yet another controversy -- one that many 
          think the Church is not ready to deal with, particularly 
          with the continuing divisions over the ordination of 
          women priests.  For the moment, the Church has gone 
          to ground on the issue.

               McAuliffe, who was told not to speak to the 
          media, agreed to talk to me only after finding himself in 
          what he considers an impossible position.  His honesty 
          has come at a cost.  He is now a priest without a parish 
          and on the verge of reconsidering his future with the 
          Church.  "I am not going to sit around in limbo for the 
          rest of my life," he says, clearly frustrated.  "I can do 
          other things."  Since news of his ordination became 
          public, he has been shunned by his peers and left 
          jobless.  "What the Church, and I mean the Church in its 
          totality, has to do is to just be honest for once and say 
          there are gay people in the Church, there have always 
          been gay people in the Church, and the Church and the 
          family has not fallen apart."

               Western Australia's Archbishop Peter Carnley, 
          the man who defied many in his Church and ordained 
          the first women priests in Australia, ordained McAuliffe 
          last August, knowing he was homosexual.  After all, he 
          had come from Perth's gay Resurrection Community 
          Church where for three years he had ministered openly 
          to many gays and lesbians.  The church began with 12 
          people meeting in McAuliffe's lounge and grew to 
          about 250 members.

               Many in the Anglican Church were angry that 
          there was no debate on the issue before McAuliffe was 
          ordained.  The Archbishop was accused of not 
          consulting his flock and the fundamentalists were 
          furious.  Liberal theologians argued that there have 
          always been homosexual clergy in the Church.  The only 
          difference here was that the latest recruit had been 
          open about it.

               The violent reaction to McAuliffe's ordination 
          caught even the Archbishop unprepared.  Letters 
          poured in from disgusted Christians.  The clergy was 
          divided.  Some preached from the pulpit about the evils 
          of homosexuality while others said it was God's way.  
          Some simply remained tight-lipped, too confused to 
          counsel their congregation.  Homosexual priests, who 
          had not made their sexuality known to their parish and 
          peers, started deadlocking the closets.

               McAuliffe is pragmatic about the homophobia.  
          "I never take it personally because they don't know me 
          personally.  Really what they are doing is just voicing 
          their own prejudices or their own feelings or their own 
          very consciously held beliefs."  Part of his week is spent 
          replying to the "more rational" letters he receives 
          condemning his ordination.  His critics cite passages 
          from the Bible supporting their stand and he writes 
          back quoting others.  The irony is that when he was 
          considering entering the Anglican Church he took 
          counsel with a number of homosexual Anglican 
          ministers.  They were all encouraging.  Then the story 
          broke in the media and a public storm followed.  "It has 
          been rather fascinating really," says McAuliffe.  "I have 
          had no support at all from the Anglican clergy.  
          Through the whole crisis I had no support at all from 
          any of the gay priests in the Church.  Absolutely 
          nothing.  I am just stunned that these men can be so 
          cowardly."

               McAuliffe is a stately man with heavy dark 
          eyebrows and a calming, well-modulated voice.  
          Extremely well-read, he is a moderate on most things, 
          although a self-confessed socialist on social issues.  
          While working as a Liberal Catholic priest in the mid-
          eighties, his parishioners used to complain that his 
          sermons were too conservative.  Many find him a 
          dichotomy.  He has a striking intellect and a wry, earthy 
          sense of humour.  His vocabulary is peppered with long 
          theological terms, although when the issue of 
          homosexuality is raised he uses some language that is 
          common only to the gay community and seems 
          incongruous coming from such a seemingly 
          conventional minister.

               In a photograph taken at his ordination are his 
          85-year-old mother, his homosexual lover, a gay 
          Christian friend, the Archbishop and several bishops, all 
          of whom knew about the new priest's sexual 
          preferences.  It was a lovely ceremony, he recalls, a 
          pleasant day.  Everyone was hospitable.  They all agreed 
          the new minister had a bright future.  One of the clergy 
          present even invited him to assist him in his parish 
          duties until he was allocated his own.  Then word got 
          out of the gay priest's ordination and the furore 
          erupted.  McAuliffe heard nothing more.  Since then, he 
          has not been invited to a single church to celebrate the 
          Eucharist.  "It is unusual to know there is a priest 
          around on the loose and there are priests who go away 
          on holidays and you go and help out, but nothing.  
          Obviously they are too afraid to broach it."

               McAuliffe estimates that almost 40 per cent of 
          the Anglican clergy in Perth are gay (a figure disputed 
          by some clergy and confirmed by others).  It seems 
          some marry as a front while others live with their 
          partners and are known to the gay community.  
          McAuliffe says traditionally the bishops were aware that 
          they had ordained gay priests, but as the issue was never 
          discussed their sexuality had not been a problem.

               "If I had gone through the training system as 
          most Anglican priests do, and not come in as an 
          ordained priest and having been known as a gay person, 
          then I would have slipped into a parish and become the 
          usual parish priest living a quiet life with a good salary."  
          Instead, he has been jobless for more than six months 
          and has received no financial support from the Church.

               As he sees it, his only sin is that he refuses to lie 
          about being in a long-term monogamous relationship.  
          He believes vast numbers of Anglicans throughout the 
          history of the Church have been ministered to, married 
          by and buried by gay clergy.  "Probably the people who 
          have written to me condemning [me] or condemning the 
          Archbishop for ordaining me, probably their rector is 
          gay," he says nonchalantly.

               Some fundamentalists believe gay people have a 
          choice despite the fact that modern psychiatry disagrees.  
          Born-again Christians believe if gay people repent and 
          throw themselves on the mercy of God, they can cast 
          aside the demons that tempt them into this life.  
          McAuliffe says he knows from experience this is not 
          true.  As a young man, he fought hard to suppress his 
          homosexual feelings.  He led a devoted life and prayed 
          diligently, and when that failed he became engaged to a 
          young woman, but could not continue with the 
          engagement.

               The stir over McAuliffe's ordination presented 
          Perth's Archbishop with a problem.  He needed to find 
          a parish for his latest recruit, but which one?  Last year, 
          he chose the trendy, middle-class Perth parish of 
          Subiaco.  The congregation there had a history of 
          supporting progressive social-justice issues.  They were 
          in the main modern and well-educated.  They had a 
          woman priest on staff.  But their reaction shocked the 
          Archbishop.  The Subiaco flock went into a flap.  What 
          would happen when the rector went away?  Would 
          McAuliffe have to conduct the service.  And what about 
          the altar boys?  (McAuliffe points out that the 
          heterosexual parish priest was never considered a threat 
          to the altar girls.)  After months of heated meetings, 
          which McAuliffe was not allowed to attend, the 
          parishioners decided to give their gay priest a trial.  But 
          in the meantime, another problem had arisen.

               In answer to growing criticism of his decision to 
          ordain a self-proclaimed homosexual, Archbishop 
          Carnley told the media that McAuliffe was celibate.  
          McAuliffe has had a live-in lover for two years.  Until 
          this was cleared up, the new priest felt he could not 
          accept the Subiaco position.  When McAuliffe 
          complained about the celibacy issue, the Archbishop 
          said he was given to understand that he was celibate.  
          "But you didn't ask me, did you?" McAuliffe complained 
          to his superior.  "No, but you didn't tell me either," the 
          Archbishop replied.  McAuliffe says the Church may 
          not have known he had a partner but that should have 
          been a natural assumption.

               What really riles him is that as the controversy 
          over his ordination continued, the Church gave the 
          impression that he had given assurances he was 
          celibate.  "I had not.  I absolutely had not."  His chief 
          concern was that people who knew his true position 
          would think him a hypocrite.  "There has been this 
          perception in the community that I have turned my back 
          on the whole gay issue and walked away from it."

               After the Archbishop's comments about his 
          alleged celibacy, members of the gay community called 
          him wanting to know why the lie.  Suddenly, his 
          credibility was at stake and this was the main reason 
          that moved him to talk publicly.  He wanted to set the 
          record right.  He knows that as a non-celibate priest he 
          poses ethical problems for a Church that condemns sex 
          outside of marriage.  "I think what is happening is the 
          Church is using a heterosexual -- a straight model -- and 
          imposing that on the gay community and you cannot do 
          that.  What the Church has to do -- whether it is the 
          Anglican Church, the Roman Church or any other 
          Church -- is to theologise the thing right through, look 
          at all the scriptures and then come up with a model that 
          suits gay relationships.  The Church is trying to crush 
          gay people into a model that doesn't fit."

               McAuliffe only ever planned to stay three years 
          with the gay Resurrection Community Church.  
          Eventually, he wanted to return to a more orthodox 
          Church.  He approached the Anglican Church which 
          was very responsive.  "The sexuality issue came up but it 
          was basically laughed out of court," he says.

               He has no doubt that Archbishop Carnley is 
          supportive of homosexual clergy in the Church from a 
          justice perspective but he doubts that he would ordain 
          another practising homosexual because of the anger in 
          the community and his own Church.  Archbishop 
          Carnley, in the US until May, was unavailable for 
          comment, but his acting administrator, Bishop Brian 
          Kyme, says he is unaware of any plans the Archbishop 
          may have for McAuliffe and such decisions will have to 
          wait until his return.  "The Church has been very 
          accepting in his [McAuliffe's] case and it is just 
          unfortunate that the planned appointment [to Subiaco] 
          didn't come off."

               Kyme believes the issue of homosexuals and the 
          Church is becoming less contentious.  "Today, the vast 
          majority of Church people accept that there are people 
          that have a homosexual orientation and that they ought 
          to be accepted as persons, and that it is not of their own 
          making.  It is the way they are."  However, he also 
          believes that certain "homosexual acts" are contrary to 
          what the Bible teaches.  "I think the Church recognises 
          that some of the clergy have a homosexual orientation 
          and that is true across the population and we would 
          expect that to be true of the clergy, too.  Now that is one 
          issue and the other issue is that most members of the 
          Church believe that certain sexual acts are prohibited in 
          the scripture so we draw a distinction between the 
          sexual orientation of the person and the things that they 
          do or don't do.  So while we would not be happy to 
          condone certain homosexual acts, at the same time we 
          are ready to accept that some people have a 
          homosexual orientation."

               This is where the issue gets cloudy for the 
          Church.  Does this mean that in order to be accepted by 
          the Church, homosexual clergy should be celibate?  
          "Well certainly they either should be celibate ... but I am 
          sure there are cases where we don't probe into the 
          private behaviour of our clergy leaving it to them as a 
          matter of conscience," Kyme says.  "There may well be 
          homosexual clergy who are not celibate and we are 
          unaware of it.  But we don't make an issue of, aah ... we 
          don't interrogate prospective ordinands about their 
          sexual behaviour.  We have never done that."

               Kyme does "not believe for a moment" 
          McAuliffe's claim that as many as 40 per cent of 
          Anglican clergy are homosexual.  "I am sure there are 
          some and I am sure I know who some of them are, but I 
          am not interested in going around asking the clergy 
          what their sexual orientation is."

               The Anglican view of homosexuality and the 
          Church depends on whom you speak to.  One of the 
          more liberal voices is Rev. Roger Sharr, director of the 
          Wollaston Anglican Theological College in WA, who 
          says there is nothing in the scriptures that says 
          homosexuality is a sin; there are mentions of 
          homosexuality that are not favourable in relationship to 
          promiscuity but the same is so of heterosexuality.  It has 
          to be read on context.  Some people believe the issue 
          means bad publicity for the Church, but his view is that 
          it has nothing to do with publicity.  "It is what the truth 
          is which is far more important.  Therefore the question 
          needs to be addressed."  He says many clergy and 
          parishioners are uninformed about homosexuality.  
          "There is an automatic association with child molesting 
          and other things that really have nothing to do with the 
          debate at all."

               For Rev. Greg Harvey, the chairperson of the Anglican 
          Social Responsibility Commission, the Church has been 
          ambivalent on the issue for centuries, and it is time to 
          develop a more open position on the matter.  "If you get 
          hold of one of these fundamentalist clergy and you 
          speak to them about one of their friends who might be a 
          gay priest, of whom there are a very great number 
          around the place, they would say 'Look we really like 
          that guy, but we can't deal with the fact that he is a 
          homosexual.'"  Harvey says a person's sexuality has not 
          bearing whatever on their ability to be a priest.  "It is 
          clear that God calls homosexual people as well as non-
          homosexual people.  I certainly support the ordination 
          of people who are homosexual, but I do not believe that 
          priest's sexuality is the issue for his or her people."

               Others disagree.  Rev. Peter Brain, a rector of an 
          outlying Perth parish who unsuccessfully tried to put a 
          motion to the last WA synod indirectly condemning 
          homosexuality, was upset when he heard that McAuliffe 
          had been ordained.  He immediately contacted the 
          Archbishop who, he says, assured him that the new 
          minister was celibate.  The only way the Wanneroo 
          minister would accept the new priest was if he was no 
          longer a practising homosexual and did not condone 
          such a lifestyle for others.  He says he knows of people 
          who have left the Church because of McAuliffe's 
          ordination.

               Brain has been surprised at other clergy's claims 
          that there is a considerable number of gay clergy, as he 
          knows of only two.  He believes practising homosexual 
          ministers should be asked to resign from the Church -- 
          because being a practising homosexual and a Christian 
          is a total contradiction.  And he maintains that a 
          homosexual can be "cured" if he or she turns to the 
          gospel.  "My understanding is that there are some 
          [homosexuals] who are cured in the sense that no longer 
          do they practise and no longer do they experience the 
          actual temptation in terms of their orientation.  With 
          good support from a caring congregation and with 
          God's help, although the orientation may well remain, 
          the grip over them gets less and less."

               Last October, an Anglican commission was set 
          up to look at the theology of the human person and 
          incorporated in this will be the issue of homosexuality.  
          It is not expected to report for at least a year.  Some of 
          its members are sympathetic to the issue of gay clergy, 
          others are not.  One is Rev. John Yates, who runs a 
          group called "Genesis," which tries to save Christians 
          who are tempted by homosexual feelings.  It started last 
          year and has five members, all from his congregation in 
          Leederville, an inner Perth suburb.  Yates believes it is 
          possible for people with "homosexual feelings" (he 
          refuses to call any of his flock homosexuals) to be cured 
          by long-term spiritual psychotherapy.  "It is something 
          we believe will happen but it takes time.  There are 
          plenty of people in the Church who have homosexual 
          temptations or orientation and that is their disposition.  
          A disposition is not, in terms of Christian morals 
          theology, a sin.  It is only when you act on it."

               Yates says practising homosexuals cannot be 
          ordained.  "Now according to the Archbishop, the man 
          [McAuliffe] has renounced open homosexual activity 
          and so is living a celibate life.  In that case, there is 
          nothing extraordinary about that because there are 
          plenty of people in the ministry who have had problems 
          with drugs, with alcohol, with adultery ... you name it.  If 
          he was practising, it would be entirely different."

               He intends to submit a paper to the commission 
          detailing his views on how physical sexual intimacy 
          between two people of the same sex is impossible.  He 
          believes poor nurturing is responsible for much of our 
          homosexuality, in particular emotional deprivation in 
          relationship to the same sex parent.  His theory is that 
          men have been characteristically more distant as 
          parents and believes this explains why there are more 
          male homosexuals than lesbians.

               Yates says he knows of a significant number of 
          homosexuals who have been attracted to the priesthood, 
          some of whom have been practising.  He suspects they 
          are attracted to the Church because of the brightly 
          coloured vestments and the drama and colour of 
          sermons.  "It is a hypothesis, but I think it is a hypothesis 
          that fits some of the homosexuals I have know."

               There has never been an official Church position 
          on homosexuality, but Yates believes it will increasingly 
          be on the Church agenda.  Even his colleagues, who do 
          not share his other views, agree with him on this point.
          
          FIRST OPENLY GAY PRIEST QUITS CHURCH*
          By Mark Irving

               The Anglican Church's first self-proclaims 
          homosexual priest, [editor's note:  first openly gay 
          ordinand, if McAuliffe's was that, has incorrectly been 
          transformed into first openly gay priest] the Reverend 
          David McAuliffe, has quit the church after a row with 
          the hierarchy over his sexual orientation.

               Mr. McAuliffe's decision follows his public 
          denial in "The Australian" colour magazine earlier this 
          month of statements by the Archbishop of Perth, the 
          Most Reverend Peter Carnley, that he was celibate.

               Mr. McAuliffe is not celibate.  He has a long-
          time partner  -- something, he says, that many people in 
          the church knew about when he was ordained last 
          August.

               "He (Archbishop Carnley) went out on his own 
          and said I was celibate and then went further and said:  
          'This man has given me assurances that he is celibate.'  
          But that never happened.  I've never been asked to this 
          day ... whether I was celibate.  I had the impression all 
          along the line that they didn't want to ask that 
          question," Mr. McAuliffe said.

               Archbishop Carnley's "off-the-cuff" remarks, as 
          Mr. McAuliffe describes them, had placed him under 
          intolerable pressure -- both personally and from gay 
          friends  who queried whether he had "sold out ... in 
          order to get a nice cosy rectory somewhere."

               He had "hassled" for six months to get the record 
          set straight before he decided to go public in "The 
          Australian."  Now he finds himself a reluctant 
          homosexual cause celebre in the church.

               A former Catholic and leader of a gay church in 
          Perth, Mr. McAuliffe was ordained by Archbishop 
          Carnley (who also ordained the church's first women 
          priests).

               He had been earmarked for a position in a 
          church at Subiaco, an inner suburb of Perth, until his 
          sexual orientation became an issue and church-goers 
          were misinformed about his celibacy.

               "They had been sold the idea I was gay and 
          celibate," Mr. McAuliffe said.  "I said in conscience I 
          couldn't accept the post because it would have been 
          giving the lie to everything I stood for."

               Archbishop Carnley is now overseas lecturing 
          and the matter has been handled by Bishop Brian 
          Kyme, the assistant bishop of the Perth northern region.

               Mr. McAuliffe's decision to quit the church 
          followed a meeting last Friday with Bishop Kyme.  Two 
          days ago, he resigned his licence to officiate as a priest 
          and now faces an uncertain future as a "freelance" 
          priest.

               Yesterday, Bishop Kyme published a statement 
          he had issued to all diocese clergy.

               "Most of your will have seen the article in the 
          magazine supplement to 'The Australian' which raises 
          the whole question of the employment of priests with a 
          homosexual orientation," the statement reads.

               "The bottom line is that parishes are not willing 
          to entertain the nomination of a priest who openly 
          acknowledges he is a sexually active homosexual with a 
          live-in partner."

               Mr. McAuliffe said:  "When I approached the 
          church (to join) I had no wish to rock the boat.  All I 
          wanted to be was a fairly quiet priest with a parish.

               "I realise there is not very much emancipation out there 
          at all, that the battle was hardly joined, let alone won."

               Honesty, he said, had not paid off.  Many other 
          priests in Perth (he claims the figure is as high as 40 per 
          cent) were gay, some living in rectories with their lovers.

          ********************

          *TOPEKA PARISH GAY BASHED*
          by Patricia Wainwright

               On Sunday morning for more than a year, 
          members of St. David's Church, Topeka, Kan., have had 
          to walk by a group of pickets to enter their church.  
          Members of Westboro Baptist Church have stood on 
          the sidewalk outside the front door of St. David's, 
          proclaiming with placards and shouts their opinions of 
          homosexuals, their sympathizers, families, or friends.

               The Rev. Fred Phelps, Sr., is pastor of Westboro 
          Baptist, a small independent church.  According to 
          several sources in Topeka, Mr. Phelps is a disbarred 
          attorney whose activities stay carefully within the law.  
          His congregation consists largely of family members, 
          several of whom are also lawyers.  Mr. Phelps and his 
          followers regularly picket in Gage Park, a popular site 
          of civic events and family gatherings, which they 
          perceive as an area of homosexual activity.  St. David's 
          became a target of pickets after some church members 
          were part of an ecumenical group that countered Mr. 
          Phelps' activities with a "Sunday in the Park Without 
          Fred."  The Rt. Rev. William Smalley, Bishop of 
          Kansas, said it was simply "a day in the park -- just be 
          there to reclaim the park for the community."  The 
          people from St. David's were easily identifiable, wearing 
          "St. David's Deacons" shirts, which are worn at various 
          church activities.

               "St. David's has always been a very active 
          parish ... which sees liturgy and mission as one," said 
          parishioner Winnie Crapson in a telephone 
          conversation. She agreed with the Rev. Robert Layne, 
          rector of St. David's, in feeling that the Westboro 
          activities affected not only St. David's but the entire 
          community.

               Several Topekans interviewed described the 
          group's picketing of civic concerts, plays, and most 
          recently, funerals.  Both Bishop Smalley and an 
          American Baptist pastor told of demonstrations outside 
          funeral homes where services were being held for 
          someone perceived to have died of AIDS.  The group 
          has sent "certificates" to families of recently deceased 
          homosexuals, causing a brief arrest of Mr. Phelps on a 
          charge of defaming the dead.  The AIDS memorial quilt 
          was the target of protest when it was on display at 
          Washburn University.

               Fr. Layne described in a letter a typical Sunday 
          morning:  "We have faced obscene and cruel signs, and 
          on many occasions individual parishioners have 
          received verbal assaults such as elderly female 
          parishioners being called 'sodomites,' or one of our 
          Oriental parishioners being called 'slant-eyed bastard,' 
          as well as my being called 'son of perdition' and 
          'antichrist rector.'"

               People entering the church have not been 
          physically assaulted, but many feel threatened and have 
          begun avoiding the front door.

               On Palm Sunday, St. David's and four other 
          churches held their traditional procession and blessing 
          of the palms. "We obtained a parade permit this year -- 
          something we never did in previous years," said Alan 
          Fries, senior warden.  For the last 25 years, the 
          procession has used the sidewalks which the Westboro 
          group now occupies. "They stayed out of the way," said 
          St. David's youth leader, Rita Hernault.  "The protesters 
          were on three corners [of the intersection].  They 
          stepped off the sidewalk to let us pass.  It was a 
          wonderful procession!"

               Fr. Fries said the vestry supports Fr. Layne's 
          decision to stand up to the Westboro group.  "There is 
          something wrong about having to scurry into your own 
          back door," he said.  "The vast majority supported 
          taking a stand against hatred, vile language, and the 
          misuse of God's word."  Members of the church have 
          been meeting to develop appropriate non-violent 
          responses.  Fr. Layne's letter to TLC ["The Living 
          Church"] said, "We want our response to be Christian -- 
          purposeful, powerful, peaceful, with perseverance.  We 
          don't want to return hate for hate, or allow evil to 
          provoke us to violence."

               The First Southern Baptist Church in Topeka 
          was picketed by members of Westboro Baptist for four 
          or five weeks. The Rev. Clark Johnson, pastor of First 
          Baptist, said one reason the picketers chose plays and 
          concerts, as well as his church was "that's where the 
          audience is.  If you can't generate an audience, you go 
          where it is."

               Neither Mr. Johnson nor the American Baptist 
          pastor supported Mr. Phelps' activities.

               "He's a poor representation of the church ... 
          quick to jump on anyone in opposition," said the 
          American Baptist minister, who asked not to be 
          identified.  He quoted a member of his congregation 
          who complained.  "He *would* have to be a Baptist."  
          Mr. Johnson expressed regret that small group of 
          people preaching hate attract a large amount of 
          attention.  "There are some 260-some churches in 
          Topeka who preach the gospel and love," he said.  "They 
          don't get headlines."

               Several people expressed the fear that the 
          community was becoming polarized around the issues of 
          Mr. Phelps and his targets.  Awareness and compassion 
          for homosexuals may have increased as a result of the 
          verbal attacks seen as vicious and obscene.

          FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT

               Mr. Phelps has "caused people to hate -- him -- 
          who otherwise wouldn't," said Joe Sullivan, executive 
          editor of the Topeka "Capital-Journal" and a deacon at 
          St. David's.  Even so, his newspaper has opposed 
          censorship of Mr. Phelps' message because "he has his 
          First Amendment right to do his thing."  Deacon 
          Sullivan predicted violence as the situation becomes 
          more tense.  While he admires Fr. Layne's courage and 
          agrees that "it's time somebody said Christians have a 
          responsibility to resist hate," he was somewhat worried 
          about the Palm Sunday plans.  "Why risk 
          confrontation?" he said.  "These are not benign 
          picketers.  [There verbal abuse] wouldn't add to the 
          Palm Sunday experience."

               The pickets carried their signs on Palm Sunday, 
          and "sang songs; they weren't shouting," said Ms. 
          Hernault. "We had one TV station, our own video 
          camera, and the police.  They were pretty quiet."  She 
          offered an explanation:  "The protesters have always 
          claimed that others shouted hateful things at them.  The 
          cameras would prove that's not true."

               Deacon Sullivan also played devil's advocate in a 
          telephone conversation:  "Fred Phelps has his 
          interpretation of the Bible.  He sees his role as prophet; 
          his intent is to drive homosexuals out of the city.  Who 
          are we to say he is not called by God to do what he's 
          doing?  How many of the Old Testament prophets were 
          poster children?"
          -----
          This article first appeared in "The Living Church," April 
          25, 1993 and is reprinted with permission.
           
          ********************

          *COMMISSION ON AIDS/HIV SURVEYING 
          CHURCH'S MINISTRIES* 
          Based on a report by the Episcopal News Service

               The Episcopal Church's Joint Commission on 
          AIDS/HIV is sending out about 800 letters in an 
          attempt to assess the church's ministries in the first 
          decade of the epidemic.  In preparation for its report to 
          the 1994 General Convention, "we want to know what 
          the people of the Episcopal Church want to see done....  
          We want to learn from your experiences with 
          HIV/AIDS.  We want to know of your hopes and fears.  
          We want the larger view, the view that dares to dream 
          dreams and seek visions," said the letter, signed by 
          Bishop Douglas Theuner of New Hampshire, chair of 
          the commission.  "As we live with people who know 
          suffering and for whom death is not a matter of 
          contemplation about a far-off time and place, but an 
          everyday reality, we have a sense of urgency about the 
          Gospel response to that.  We need to know how the 
          membership of the Episcopal Church shares that 
          urgency and can help us to translate it into our lives," 
          the letter said.  The commission is seeking an answer to 
          one big question:  "Through your work with others and 
          your own prayer life, what do you believe God is calling 
          the Episcopal Church to do in response to HIV and 
          AIDS by 1997?  By 2001?"  Responses can be sent to the 
          AIDS ministry office at the Episcopal Church Center in 
          New York. 

          ********************

          *EURRR OPPOSES MINNESOTA BISHOP-ELECT*
          based in part on a release from the Episcopal News 
          Service

               Episcopalians United for Revelation, Renewal 
          and Reformation (EURRR) is challenging the election 
          of the Rev. James Jelinek as Bishop of Minnesota 
          because of his support for equal access to the ordination 
          process for lesbians and gay men.  John Winslow, 
          convener of the EURRR in Minnesota, said that his 
          organization has sent letters to 110 standing committees 
          in dioceses throughout the Church asking them to vote 
          against the ratification of Jelinek's election.  A majority 
          standing committees must ratify the election in order 
          for Jelinek to be consecrated as a bishop.  "This diocese 
          [Minnesota] is controlled by a very liberal element," 
          Winslow said.  "That's what I've been fighting.  Here 
          you have a bishop who will violate a church resolution.  
          It makes a mockery of the church."  Jelinek said that he 
          believes church laws do not prohibit the ordination of 
          noncelibate homosexuals.  He maintains that "if a 
          person is going through the entire discernment process 
          and they appear to be a healthy, whole person, the 
          decision should not be made on the basis of their 
          sexuality alone.  Bishop Robert Anderson of Minnesota 
          said he was "confident that the will of the lay people and 
          clergy of the Episcopal Church in Minnesota would be 
          upheld by the bishops and lay leaders of other dioceses 
          around the country.  The larger church will not easily 
          set aside the will of the people of a diocese expressed in 
          a fair and open election," he said in a statement.

               Jelinek, who is Rector of St. Aidan's Church in 
          San Francisco, said during the election process that as a 
          priest he has presided at several blessings of lesgay 
          relationships, but that he would not do so as a bishop 
          since that would be a "political" rather than a "pastoral" 
          act.

          ********************

          *NEW DALLAS BISHOP SAYS HE'S OPEN, WE'LL 
          SEE*

          from "The Dallas Morning News" March 6,  1993
          by Daniel Cattau

             When James M. Stanton officially becomes bishop of 
          the 36,000-member Episcopal Diocese of Dallas on 
          March 6, two bishops from opposite sides of the 
          theological spectrum will serve among five co-
          consecrators.  Bishop John-David Schofield of San 
          Joaquin, Calif., a member of the traditionalist Episcopal 
          Synod of America, opposes the ordination of women.  
          Bishop Frederick H. Borsch of Los Angeles, by contrast, 
          is known as one of the more liberal Episcopal bishops.
          ...
             [Stanton] said he hasn't met yet with members of the 
          Episcopal Synod or with Integrity,  a group of gay and 
          lesbian Episcopalians.  "I have not met with people who 
          are part of any affiliated group," he said.  "But my door 
          is open to all Episcopalians."

          ********************

          *SUFFRAGAN BISHOP-ELECT IN VIRGINIA 
          ACCUSED OF SEXUAL MISCONDUCT*
          BY James Solheim

               A month after he was elected suffragan bishop of 
          the Diocese of Virginia, the Rev. Canon Antoine 
          (Tony) Lamont Campbell has been accused of sexual 
          misconduct and the consent process has been put on 
          hold pending an investigation into the charges.

               Campbell, who is canon missioner in the Diocese 
          of South Carolina in Charleston, would be the first 
          African American bishop in the 207-year-old Diocese of 
          Virginia and youngest member of the church's House of 
          Bishops.

               Presiding Bishop Edmond L. Browning said in a 
          June 7 statement that he learned of the accusations 
          "made by an adult woman" in late May.  "Canon 
          Campbell denies the truth of the accusations," Browning 
          said.  "Canon Campbell agrees that the investigation 
          proceed and a prompt resolution be reached," he added.

               In a letter to the diocese, Bishop Peter James 
          Lee of Virginia express his "great sorrow" and asked for 
          prayers for Campbell and his family "in these difficult 
          days."  Campbell was one of two suffragan bishops 
          elected at a special convention on May 1.  "Our diocese 
          exhibited great strength and energy in the election of 
          our two suffragan bishops-elect and that energy and 
          unity are still realities for which we can be thankful.  As 
          the weeks unfold, we must trust these events will be 
          used for God's purposes," Lee concluded.  

               Campbell is former rector of Baskervill 
          Ministries in Pawleys Island, South Carolina.  He is a 
          graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy and served in the 
          U.S. Marine Corps before entering Yale Divinity 
          School, graduating in 1985.  He and his wife Julia have 
          three children.

          ********************

          * A NOT VERY PASTORAL LETTER*

          [Editor's Note:  This "Pastoral Letter" by the Bishop of 
          Georgia is important not because it recommends 
          excommunication for all sexually active lesbians and gay 
          men, but because the Rt. Rev. Harry W. Shipps is a 
          member of the committee charged with writing a 
          pastoral teaching for the entire Church on human 
          sexuality pursuant to resolution A-104sa of the 1991 
          General Convention.  This letter was issued in March, 
          1993 and was read in all parishes in the Diocese of 
          Georgia.]

               I write to define my position, and what I believe 
          to be that of the House of Bishops generally, concerning 
          human sexuality, with special attention regarding sexual 
          conduct of persons seeking ordination.

               The Church includes persons of all sexual 
          persuasions amongst its members.  It asks that 
          unmarried persons, heterosexual and homosexual, be 
          and remain celibate.  It asks of married persons chastity.  
          There can be no marriage of same-sex persons or 
          blessing of their relationship.

               Single heterosexual persons who are fornicators, 
          and married heterosexual persons who are adulterers 
          may not be ordained.  Non-celibate homosexual persons 
          may not be ordained.  (The fact that some bishops have 
          broken this rule of the Church, and the attendant 
          notoriety, demonstrates the explicitness of the rule.)

               There is no disparity between heterosexual 
          misbehavior and homosexual misbehavior.  There is no 
          more stringent behavioral check made of homosexual 
          persons than of heterosexual persons.

               *Open and notorious sexual misbehavior by 
          either heterosexual persons or homosexual persons 
          should disallow reception of Holy Communion* (pg. 
          409 of the Book of Common Prayer).  Heterosexual 
          persons living together before intended marriage fall 
          under this principle.  This statement should answer the 
          question concerning the inclusivity of the Church and 
          also the naming of unacceptable conduct, particularly 
          for those persons seeking ordination, who would be 
          required to be "wholesome examples."

               In pastoral terms, I explain it this way to either 
          heterosexual or homosexual persons:  *Precept* (or 
          principle):  The precept of the Church is outlined 
          above, and is a given.   *Practice:*  All mortals fall and 
          transgress.  This does not alter the precept.  *Pastoral:*  
          The pastor always counsels the sinner in the most 
          helpful and sensitive way possible, dealing with the 
          practice that is at variance with the principle and calling 
          for repentance and amendment of life.

          ********************

          *BRITISH BISHOP ADMITS CHARGES, RESIGNS*
          by Kim Byham

               The Bishop of Gloucester, the Rt. Rev. Peter Ball, has 
          resigned after admitting gross indecency with a 17-year-
          old man apparently interested in joining a monastic 
          order that the bishop had founded.  [See "The Voice," 
          Spring, 1993.]

               The bishop decided to resign immediately after 
          police formally cautioned him, a legal step that is taken 
          only after a clear admission of guilt.  Police did not file 
          charges.

               "I regret, with great penitence and sorrow, the 
          circumstances that have led to this police caution," Ball, 
          61, said in a statement.  Ball remains a bishop although 
          he has resigned his position as Bishop of Gloucester.

               Under British law when a suspect is released 
          without charges, police can warn him that if he is later 
          investigated for another offense, the circumstances 
          relating to his first offense can be taken into account.

               Gloucester police said Ball was cautioned for an 
          offense of "gross indecency," which means a sexual 
          offense that falls short of intercourse.  Any homosexual 
          act involving a male under the age of 21 is illegal in 
          Britain.

               Canon Andy Radford, the diocesan press 
          spokesman, said:  "He decided, having admitted guilt, 
          that it would be inappropriate both for the church in 
          Gloucester and for the wider church if he were to 
          continue.  The fact that he admitted guilt has been a 
          severe shock to the diocese and people are taking it 
          hard.  But we must keep this in proportion.  This is one 
          incident and should not be enough to negate 30 or 40 
          years of devoted pastoral work."

               The Archbishop of Canterbury said:  "Bishop 
          Peter is a highly gifted and original man who has 
          inspired many people to deepen their faith in Jesus 
          Christ.  He has been much loved, both in his diocese 
          and in the wider church, including the House of 
          Bishops.  His resignation is therefore a cause of great 
          sorrow."

          ********************

          *HOMOPHOBIA DOESN'T JUST HURT GAY 
          PEOPLE - PART II*

          STRAIGHT INTEGRITY MEMBER FIRED FOR 
          SUPPORTING EQUALITY

               When Prof. June Stefensen Hagen wore a one 
          inch square "Support Gay Rights" button on her book 
          bag at Nyack College last fall she had little idea that it 
          would lead to the end of her job at the conservative, 
          evangelical school up the Hudson River from New York 
          City.

               Most of the college's 560 undergraduates live in 
          dormitories on the wooded campus and have little to do 
          with the nearby town.  They take a pledge not to smoke, 
          drink or dance.

               But in the last five years, under its president, Rexford A. 
          Boda, Nyack College had become more diverse.  It 
          began to attract more students from inner-city 
          neighborhoods, increasing its minority enrollment to 40 
          percent in the current academic year.  In 1991, for the 
          first time, the campus radio station was allowed to play 
          nonreligious music.

               In December, a student complained to the 
          president that Hagen was advocating tolerance of 
          homosexuality by wearing a button in support of gay 
          rights.  After interviewing Professor Hagen and students 
          in her classes, Mr. Boda defended her at a chapel 
          service, saying she was trying only to make students 
          aware of attacks on homosexuals and of legal 
          discrimination against them.

               Boda said that he had hired Hagen knowing that 
          she was a feminist and was likely to lead discussions on 
          current events in her classes.  Before last year's 
          elections, Hagen found her students quarreling about 
          how the issue of civil rights for gays and lesbians was 
          being handled during the presidential campaign.  She 
          said she wore the button to stimulate that discussion but 
          that she also made it clear she personally supported 
          civil rights for everyone, including gays and lesbians.

               Hagen is filing a complaint with the American 
          Association of University Professors.  Prof. David Turk, 
          head of the  college's English department, called Hagen 
          "a very fine teacher and a person of great integrity" and 
          was surprised when the contract was not renewed.

               The case has attracted widespread media 
          attention, including articles in "The New York Times."  
          Dr. Hagen, who is an Integrity member, was anxious to 
          share some of her reaction to the events with us:

               "Anyone's motivations for such action/speech as 
          mine are complicated.  My motivations come from my 
          Christian commitment.  In fact, one of my reasons for 
          speaking is that I am fed up with the religious right's 
          assumption that only they are moved by the Gospel.

               "Every time the congregation reaffirms its own 
          Baptismal Covenant, the two last questions are: 'Will 
          you seek and serve Christ in all persons, loving your 
          neighbor as yourself?  Will you strive for justice and 
          peace among all people, and respect the dignity of every 
          human being?'

               "When I answer each time, 'I will, with God's 
          help,' I do mean that.  And it seems to me that the 
          struggle for equal rights for lesbians and gay men is a 
          part of my working out of this Covenant.

               "Another part of my motivation comes from this: 
          During the last three years my husband, the Rev. James 
          B. Hagen, Rector of the Church of the Redeemer, 
          Astoria, New York, has been an official nominee for 
          Bishop in three dioceses in this country: Los Angeles, 
          Chicago, and San Diego.  From our visits nationwide we 
          realized that gay rights even within the Church are in 
          need of the support of those who might define 
          themselves as 'straight but not narrow!'  We both speak 
          out on this issue.

               "Finally, through the ministry to me of several 
          good friends who are lesbian, I have learned firsthand 
          of the constant threat of physical violence just because 
          of who one is -- or who one is presumed to be -- and the 
          subtle threats to one's vocation and free pursuit of the 
          usual happiness of an American citizen: housing, job, 
          free association, etc.

               "Second only to my Christian commitment is my 
          commitment to the liberal arts education.  I ma a 51-
          year-old Ph.D., I've been teaching for 26 years, 17 of 
          those years in evangelical Christian liberal arts colleges.  
          Colleges give lip-service to the basic principles of free 
          discussion, 'the free play of the mind,' etc.  I believe it is 
          my duty as an educator to help the institutions I serve to 
          grapple with ideas, including controversial ideas."

          ********************

          *BISHOP PLUMMER CHARGED WITH SEXUAL 
          MISCONDUCT:  THE CHURCH AND THE MEDIA 
          REACT*

          THE PRESIDING BISHOP'S LETTER

          May 26, 1993

          To the members of the House of Bishops

          Dear Brothers and Sisters:

               I write to share with you a painful matter in the 
          life of our House and our church.  I also want to ask 
          your prayers that we may approach these difficult 
          realities as God would have us do, and that healing will 
          proceed for all concerned.

               More than two years ago the Rt. Rev. Steven T. 
          Plummer, bishop of Navajoland Area Mission since 
          March 1990, contacted me to tell me that he had 
          engaged in sexual activity with a male minor in a breach 
          of a trust relationship over a period of time ending 
          approximately four years ago.

               I requested a thorough medical and 
          psychological evaluation of Bishop Plummer at a highly 
          respected medical institution.  The evaluation indicated 
          that he was not "at risk" for repeating the behavior.  He 
          has been undergoing therapy since that time and I have 
          continued to monitor the situation and to keep in touch 
          with Steven and Cathy.

               At the time Bishop Plummer brought this matter to me 
          the young man was no longer a minor and unwilling to 
          pursue this any further.  As is always the case in 
          instances of sexual misconduct, the protection of the 
          right to privacy of a victim is a primary consideration.  
          The healing of the young man continues to be of grave 
          concern to me.

               This situation was discussed at a meeting on May 
          8, 1993 in Farmington, New Mexico of the Council, 
          Standing Committee and Staff of the Episcopal Church 
          in Navajoland.  At the meeting, the Rev. Gary Sosa, a 
          deacon of Navajoland, made a statement that included 
          a report that some two years ago Bishop Plummer had 
          told him in confidence of the relationship with the 
          young man.  Bishop Plummer made a brief response 
          and asked for prayers.  He indicated that he is taking 
          responsibility for his healing, and that he believes God 
          has forgiven him.

               After a two-week period for prayerful 
          consideration, the Council reconvened for a special 
          meeting at my request on May 22.  The purpose of the 
          meeting was to review all of the information and to 
          discuss their recommendation to me concerning the 
          ministry of Bishop Plummer amongst the Navajo 
          people.  Enclosed is a copy of a resolution they passed 
          unanimously.  I commend the Council for moving to 
          consensus around a painful issue.  The spirit of their 
          resolution and the compassion they have shown 
          indicates to me that a process of healing is beginning.

               The recommendation of the Council has been 
          helpful to me as I have made some decisions concerning 
          the next steps.  I note that in addition to my pastoral 
          concern for Steven and Cathy Plummer, their families, 
          the victim, and others most closely involved, also of 
          tremendous concern is our Indian ministry, and 
          specifically the ongoing ministry of the Episcopal 
          Church in Navajoland.

               At my request Bishop Plummer has commenced 
          a one-year leave of absence during which time he has 
          agreed not to perform any priestly or episcopal 
          functions without my permission.  He will continue in 
          closely monitored program of therapy.  In addition, I 
          have asked the Rt. Rev. Stewart Zabriskie, who as 
          Bishop of Nevada is in a neighboring area, to serve as a 
          mentor for Steven and his family.

               In the meantime, I have appointed the Rt. Rev. 
          William Wantland, Bishop of Eau Claire, who is the 
          senior active Native American bishop, as the Interim 
          Bishop of the Navajoland Area Mission.  Bill has 
          graciously accepted this responsibility.  I have also 
          conferred and will continue to be in consultation with 
          the Native American leadership of the church about the 
          ministry of Navajoland.  Specifically, I have been in 
          consultation with the Episcopal Council of Indian 
          Ministries and asked their help in the evaluation both 
          long and short range of the mission and ministry of 
          Navajoland.

               Prior to the end of the one-year period the situation will 
          be reviewed to determine most appropriate next steps 
          for Steven and his ministry, and for the ministry of 
          Navajoland.  As the House of Bishops has ultimate 
          responsibility for the program and oversight of the 
          Navajoland Area Mission, I will then communicate with 
          the House concerning any actions that might be needed 
          as the 1994 General Convention.

               In closing I again ask for your prayers.  Let us 
          pray that the healing love of Christ will transform the 
          pain of this situation and that redemption can be found.

          Faithfully yours,
          The Most Rev. Edmond L. Browning
          Presiding Bishop

          RESOLUTION OF THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH OF 
          NAVAJOLAND

          Whereas:

               1)  Our Bishop, Steven T. Plummer, has 
          acknowledged before this Council that he has been 
          guilty of certain misconduct in the past; and

               2) We are all concerned about the victim and do 
          not approve of legal or illegal sexual misconduct; and 

               3) He has sought and received help in this matter 
          through Christian prayer, modern psychology and 
          traditional Navajo ways; and

               4) We are convinced that his behavior is truly in 
          the past, that he has confessed his sin to the appropriate 
          people, and has done all in his power to make amends; 
          and

               5) In the Navajo tradition, the past is left behind, 
          and our concern is with the present and the future; and 

               6) In the Christian tradition, we are called to be 
          a redeeming community; and 

               7) Steven T. Plummer is one of our own, called 
          by God and chosen by the Episcopal Church in 
          Navajoland to be our Bishop.

          Now Therefore Be It Resolved That:

               1) It is our desire that Steven T. Plummer 
          continue to be our Bishop.

               2) Steven T. Plummer should be given an 
          indefinite leave of absence at the discretion of the 
          Presiding Bishop, beginning May 8, 1993, with full pay 
          and benefits and that during this leave of absence he 
          continue in therapy and do all other things reasonable 
          and necessary to care for his physical, mental and 
          spiritual health.

               3) After the leave of absence and treatment, 
          Bishop Plummer consult with the Presiding Bishop to 
          determine if he should continue his duties as Bishop of 
          Navajoland.

               4) This resolution should be sent to the Presiding 
          Bishop as our recommendation with the hope and 
          prayer that it be favorably considered by the Presiding 
          Bishop and the House of Bishops.

          *Approved 20-0 at a meeting May 22, 1993 of the 
          Council, Standing Committee and Staff of the Episcopal 
          Church in Navajoland.*


          THE PRESS REACTION

          All of the articles below are highly edited to avoid 
          repetition.

          "The Dallas Morning News," May 29, 1993
          HEADLINE:  *BISHOP PUT ON LEAVE AFTER 
          AFFAIR WITH BOY - EPISCOPAL CHURCH 
          LEARNED OF MATTER TWO YEARS AGO*
          Religious News Service

               The Rev. Gary Sosa, the deacon who went public 
          with the matter at a meeting in Farmington, N.M., 
          charged church officials with trying to cover up Bishop 
          Plummer's sexual affair to protect the church's 
          reputation.  Father (sic) Sosa has also accused Bishop 
          Plummer of harassing him sexually by making abusive 
          remarks.

               Bishop Harold Hopkins, director of the church's 
          Office of Pastoral Development in Maine and a key 
          player in the matter, said the bishop has "on a number 
          of occasions" denied "categorically and emphatically" 
          that he made any inappropriate comments to Father 
          (sic) Sosa.

          "Los Angeles Times," May 29, 1993
          HEADLINE:  *BISHOP PUT ON LEAVE AFTER 
          SEX REVELATION; EPISCOPAL LEADER ACTS 
          AGAINST THE PRELATE TWO YEARS AFTER 
          LEARNING OF THE MISCONDUCT WITH A 
          TEEN-AGE BOY.  THE ISSUE IS FORCED BY AN 
          ANGRY DEACON'S ACTION*.
          By LARRY B. STAMMER

               The deacon, Gary Sosa, said the disciplinary 
          action was far overdue.  "My feeling is that they buried 
          this," Sosa said Friday in a telephone interview from 
          Bluff, Utah.  "If Steven had been a social service worker 
          or counselor or school teacher and engaged in this kind 
          of behavior he would not be working with people who 
          were at risk for his kind of behavior," Sosa said.  In a 
          further twist to the story, Sosa has been suspended by 
          Plummer for breaking conditions of a self-imposed 
          leave.

               Although Browning has acknowledged that he kept 
          Plummer's disclosure secret and allowed him to 
          continue functioning as a bishop, Browning said he 
          promptly requested a thorough medical and 
          psychological evaluation.  The five-day evaluation 
          indicated, Browning said, that Plummer was not "at risk" 
          for repeating the behavior.  Plummer has remained in 
          therapy since then.

               Versions of how the church first learned of 
          Plummer's misconduct differ.  Browning and Bishop 
          Harold Hopkins, director of the Office of Pastoral 
          Development, said Plummer reported the activity 
          himself.  But Sosa said that Plummer went to Browning 
          two years ago only after Sosa first informed national 
          church authorities in March, 1991.  The local church 
          council, however, was not informed until this month 
          when Sosa went to them directly.

               Sosa said Plummer disclosed his sexual 
          encounters with the teen-age boy in November, 1990, 
          while they drove to a meeting.  Later, Sosa said,  
          Plummer used "sexually loaded" language with him that 
          rekindled disturbing memories of Sosa's own sexual 
          victimization as a child.

               Hopkins said Plummer categorically denied 
          Sosa's charge.  Sosa, who is married, said he is on 
          voluntary leave of absence and re-evaluating whether to 
          seek ordination to the priesthood.

               Sosa said he was later suspended from duties as 
          a deacon by Plummer, reportedly on grounds that Sosa 
          broke conditions of a his leave by reading the Gospel in 
          a church service without the bishop's permission.

               Plummer, 49, was ordained a deacon in 1975 
          after graduating from the Church Divinity School of the 
          Pacific.  The following year he was made a priest.  He 
          was elevated to the episcopacy in March, 1990.  He is 
          married and has four children.

          "The Arizona Republic," June 4, 1993
          HEADLINE:  *NAVAJOS' EPISCOPAL SEX 
          SCANDAL; BISHOP'S AFFAIR CONTINUES TO 
          HAUNT INDIANS, CHURCH*
          by Kim Sue Lia Perkes

               Their pride was shattered May 26, when the 
          1,500 Episcopalians who make up the Navajoland Area 
          Mission, encompassing parts of Arizona, New Mexico 
          and Utah, learned that their beloved Bishop Steven 
          Plummer had a two-year affair with a teen-age boy.

               Navajos dealing with the shock of the affair also 
          would come to find out that the national church 
          headquarters had known about the charges for two 
          years but had failed to take any ecclesiastical action 
          until Plummer's deacon, the Rev. Gary Sosa, went 
          public and forced the church's hand.

               Sosa, who implied that Plummer also made passes at 
          him, said the bishop confided in him about the affair.  
          Sosa said he reported it to church officials immediately.

               Church officials say they do not believe Plummer 
          made inappropriate remarks to Sosa.  "Gary was injured 
          by Steven's remark, but we would not agree with him" 
          that they were suggestive, said Bishop Harold Hopkins.

               "There are a lot of things in Gary's charge 
          (against  Plummer) that we don't agree with," Hopkins 
          added.  He declined to elaborate.

               However, Sosa says that church officials advised 
          him to keep the affair a secret, and that the two years he 
          spent in silence devastated him spiritually and 
          emotionally.  "At every point along the line, I was asked 
          to keep it a secret," Sosa said.  "Plummer asked me to 
          keep it a secret, and then the national church asked me 
          to keep it a secret.  It wasn't possible for me to work 
          with him (Plummer) after that."

               Church officials admitted they saw no need to 
          make the affair public.  They responded by sending 
          Plummer to Minnesota for an intensive psychological 
          evaluation that concluded he was not "at risk" of being a 
          repeat offender.

               Sosa took a leave of absence from the church 
          and now says he probably will not pursue his 
          ecclesiastical calling to become an  Episcopal priest - a 
          position he used to consider sacred.  "Before, I had a 
          great deal of faith in the church," Sosa said.  "I thought 
          they would do the right thing."

               Plummer, who lives in Bluff, Utah, declined to 
          be interviewed beyond making the statement Thursday 
          that "the Navajo people and the church are all 
          supportive of me."

               Hopkins, meanwhile, said it is difficult to decide 
          the right thing to do in cases of sexual-abuse allegations 
          involving clergy.  "The problem was we really felt we 
          had no way of making the matter public without 
          violating the privacy wishes of the person involved," he 
          said.  "We did not want to additionally victimize the 
          person injured.  I can't tell you how many times we're 
          caught in that bind.  When Gary Sosa, for his own 
          needs, decided to make it public, we had to shift gears 
          and make another form of attack."

               The publicity has taken its toll on Plummer's 
          health.  The week before his suspension, Plummer was 
          hospitalized for diabetic complications.  After 
          addressing the council [on May 8] Plummer suffered 
          what he thought was a mild heart attack and was 
          hospitalized for observation and tests, Wantland said.

               Sosa said he turned the matter over to police 
          authorities and family-service agencies, as well as the 
          church.  However, the young man, who now is in his 
          early 20s, has not filed charges, Sosa said.

          "The Phoenix Gazette," June 5, 1993
          HEADLINE:  *A SECRET ON THE 
          RESERVATION:  AFTER ADMITTING TO THE 
          HEAD OF THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH THAT HE 
          HAD MOLESTED A TEENAGE BOY FOR 
          NEARLY TWO YEARS, NAVAJO BISHOP 
          STEVEN PLUMMER WAS GIVEN A 
          PSYCHOLOGICAL EVALUATION AND, 
          EVENTUALLY, MINIMAL TREATMENT.  NOT A 
          WORD WAS SAID PUBLICLY, AND PLUMMER 
          KEPT HIS POST.  IT WOULD BE TWO YEARS 
          BEFORE THE SECRET WAS SPILLED BY A 
          CHURCH DEACON*.
          by Ben Winton

               When treatment did begin for Bishop Steven 
          Plummer, it consisted of twice-monthly visits with a 
          psychiatrist - far less treatment than what several 
          professionals said they would recommend initially for 
          child molesters.

               Plummer had confided several years ago to Sosa 
          that he had engaged in sex with a teenage boy over a 1 
          1/2 to two-year period that ended in 1989.  That 
          confession surfaced after Plummer learned that he had 
          something in common with Sosa - both had been victims 
          of sexual abuse as children.

               But early this year, Sosa said he had become 
          concerned because he said Plummer had made 
          intimidating remarks of a sexual nature to him, that he 
          seemed to show no remorse for the molestations and 
          that the church had engaged in a cover-up.

               "He's very compassionate, a strong leader for the 
          Navajo church," said Bishop Joseph Heistand, who led 
          the Diocese of Arizona until retiring last year.  "It just 
          shows that all of us have feet of clay and we're all 
          sinners at some point in our lives.  Nobody's immune."

               Bishop Harold Hopkins said the church had 
          difficulty finding a psychiatrist who understood the 
          Navajo culture well enough to adequately assess and 
          treat Plummer.  When it did find one, in Minnesota, the 
          psychiatrist recommended twice-monthly therapy 
          sessions.

          ********************

          *GOD'S VULNERABILITY IN OUR SEXUAL 
          CHOICES*
          by (the Rev. Canon) Gene Robinson

               Think for a moment about your growing up and 
          the messages you received about sexuality.  For most of 
          us, it will come as no surprise that we have a difficult 
          time with sexuality.  At best, we were confused about it; 
          at worst, we were downright frightened.  And indeed, I 
          believe that fear is precisely the message we were 
          meant to get:  NOT that sexuality is a wonderful, 
          wonderful gift from God, meant for our joy and 
          pleasure, and a means of communication with a beloved 
          -- but, rather, that sexuality is a horrifying Pandora's box 
          that must be kept sealed up, lest the demons of desire 
          and passion come rushing out, like so many 
          uncontrollable banshees, to devour our hearts and souls.

               My favorite of these crazy-making messages we 
          are given (first articulated for me by James Nelson) is 
          this:  "Sex is dirty; save it for someone you love."  We're 
          told that sex is this horrifying threat that must be tamed 
          and controlled.  Indeed, we're taught, sometimes 
          explicitly, but mostly through dirty jokes and innuendo, 
          that sex is sinful and dirty and disgusting.  Then, 
          somehow, in some magical and mysterious way, on our 
          wedding night, it is supposed to become this wonderful, 
          easy thing.  How can this fact of life, this force inside us, 
          that has produced more guilt than anything else in our 
          growing up, suddenly become the joyful gift of God in 
          marriage?  That kind of turnaround is crazy-making.

               Now, in defense of parents everywhere -- 
          including me, now faced with a 14-year-old daughter 
          who speaks and looks and acts about 22! -- I must say 
          that such a characterization of sexuality as a 
          beast-to-be-tamed, rather than a gift to be cherished 
          and enjoyed, comes from fear.  I love both my daughters 
          very, very much.  I don't want them to be hurt.  I fear 
          that they will make themselves vulnerable to deep and 
          lasting pain.  And because the potential for hurt is so 
          great in matters sexual, it is tempting to paint sexuality 
          with a frightening brush -- in hopes of scaring them off.

               There is hardly a more vulnerable place to be 
          than in a sexual relationship.  There is hardly a better 
          place to experience both the joys and dangers of 
          vulnerability.  In few places is "love of self and love of 
          neighbor" more important.  When I do AIDS education 
          and people ask whether or not I believe in abstinence 
          before or outside of marriage or a committed 
          relationship, I can say "you bet I do."

               We need to talk to kids and 30-year-old singles 
          and 40- and 50-year-old divorcees about how vulnerable 
          lovemaking makes you.  Not just vulnerable to 
          pregnancy and AIDS, but to damage to one's self-
          esteem, disappointment, and feelings of incredible 
          loneliness in the midst of the most intimate physical 
          connection two people can have.

               It seems to me that the vulnerability inherent in 
          God's own creation of the world and in God's 
          vulnerability in becoming flesh in Jesus Christ is a 
          central key in unlocking the power and meaning of 
          human sexuality.  The spiritual and physical union 
          between two people mirrors the relationship God 
          desires with humankind.  The longing of a husband for a 
          wife, a lover for the beloved, who has been away for a 
          few days or a few weeks, mirrors God's longing for us.  
          A lover's sheer delight in the body of the beloved 
          reflects God's sheer delight in us when we give our 
          attention and our love and our hearts back to God.

               When one fully gives oneself to another in lovemaking, 
          it's a participation in the kind of self-giving love that 
          God IS.

               If vulnerability is at the heart of the nature of 
          God, and if one of the ways we come close to God is 
          through the vulnerability we share in our intimate 
          sexual relations, what can we say about those 
          interactions?  Are there standards by which we can 
          judge our intimate sexual relationships?  Let me offer 
          three criteria:  equality, authenticity and appropriate 
          vulnerability.

               First, I believe that any healthy, moral 
          relationship which is sexually intimate requires equality 
          of the lovers.  For me, sexual partners need to be on the 
          same footing for their sexual acts to be moral.  Virtually 
          every sexual problem that has been brought to me as a 
          priest, most of the pain and discomfort and disease in 
          the sexual relationships I've counseled inside and 
          outside of marriage, has been related to this inequality.  
          Someone feels pushed too far, unable to say no; 
          someone feels powerless in the face of the partner; 
          someone feels like the entire responsibility for the 
          sexual relationship is on his/her shoulders.

               At its worst, this inequality actually defines the 
          abuse and sexual misconduct we hear so much about.  
          At its root, child abuse is wrong because of the unequal 
          power held by virtually any adult over any child -- an 
          inequality of power, experience, perspective.  Sexual 
          misconduct by clergy or professional counselors is 
          misconduct precisely because it is an inappropriate and 
          immoral use of the inherent inequality of the 
          counselor/counselee relationship.  Rape is by definition 
          a circumstance of inequality.  Incest is the manipulation 
          of someone through fear of physical or emotional 
          violence or the fear of the loss of an important family 
          relationship.  The inequality of these settings indeed 
          defines the immorality.

               Let me point out that while most of us are not 
          guilty of such gross immoralities of inequality, we 
          should not congratulate ourselves too quickly.  The 
          overt and covert inequalities between men and women 
          in this society carry over into our relationships and 
          marriages, and until we are willing to look at that, we'll 
          never get very far in our discussions about wholesome 
          sexual relationships between equals.

               I would maintain that authenticity is another way 
          of judging those relationships.  By authenticity, I mean 
          that what we exhibit on the "outside" with our bodies is 
          reflective of what is going on "inside" with our spirits.  
          For Christian moral relationships of sexual intimacy, 
          there must be an integrating of one's life, so that the 
          "outward and physical" actions of sexuality become the 
          sacramental signs of an "inward and spiritual grace."

               Finally, I would propose as a third criterion 
          Karen Lebacqz's notion of "appropriate vulnerability" 
          [in "Appropriate Vulnerability:  A Sexual Ethic for 
          Singles," *The Christian Century*, 5/6/87].  This notion 
          builds upon the earlier standard of equality, and gives 
          us some direction with respect to specific levels of depth 
          in our sexual relationships.  For a sexual relationship to 
          be healthy and moral, there must be a shared and equal 
          vulnerability.  Each partner must be a willing 
          participant in the level of vulnerability that is chosen -- 
          unmanipulated and unthreatened.  In addition, Lebacqz 
          maintains that in order to be proper, "the level of sexual 
          expression should be commensurate with the level of 
          commitment in the relationship."  In other words, you 
          don't have intercourse on the first date -- even if you are 
          equally vulnerable.  It is simply crazy and dangerous to 
          make oneself so vulnerable to hurt in a relationship in 
          which no trustworthiness is present.  "Appropriate 
          vulnerability" is a criteria by which to question intimate 
          sexual relations between very young people, between 
          casual acquaintances or for anyone *not* in a 
          relationship that includes a mutual commitment to love, 
          honor and trust the other and, in turn, to BE 
          trustworthy.
          -----
          Gene Robinson is Canon to the Ordinary for the 
          Diocese of New Hampshire and Executive Secretary of 
          Province I.  He serves as a consultant to the committee 
          on the A104sa resolution of the 1991 General 
          Convention, which called the church "to work to 
          reconcile the discontinuity between this teaching [that 
          physical sexual expression is appropriate only within the 
          life-long monogamous union of husband and wife] and 
          the experience of many members of this body."  This 
          article first appeared in the May 1993 issue of THE 
          WITNESS and is reprinted with permission.

          ********************

          *SONGS FOR ONE OF OUR UNSUNG HEROES, 
          HELPING OHIO SING A NEW SONG*

               The Rev. Ted Blumenstein, Rector of St. Paul's, 
          Marion, Ohio and a long-time Integrity member, was 
          named Citizen of the Year in Marion.  During his 12 
          years in Marion, he has helped spearhead an 
          ecumenical feeding program, an emergency shelter for 
          the homeless, a job counseling center for the 
          unemployed, and an AIDS task force.  Most recently he 
          helped start the Free Medical Clinic of Marion, in 
          response to the deep cuts in the state's General 
          Assistance program.

               Ted is also chairing the Gay & Lesbian Clergy 
          Caucus in the Diocese of Ohio.  Ohio has begun the 
          task of electing a new bishop and the caucus sent the 
          following to the Profile Committee
          on March 23, 1993:

               As Gay and Lesbian clergy in the diocese, this is 
          what we want from our next bishop:

          1.  Our bishop is a person who understands or is willing 
          to understand homophobia and can act pastorally and 
          politically based on that understanding.
          a.  Our homosexuality is not a cause for us to have 
          special pastoral needs.  We have the same pastoral 
          needs as others and for the same reasons.
          b.  We have special problems because we live in a 
          homophobic society and church, and we must constantly 
          accommodate to it.
          c.  Internalized homophobia in gay and lesbian people is 
          widespread and can be very destructive.  It is a factor in 
          much alcoholism and suicide.
          d.  Special pastoral concern is appropriate to those who 
          exhibit homophobia, just as it is to those with any 
          irrational fear.  (To say it plainly:  the hate mongers are 
          sick, not the homosexuals.)

          2.  Our bishop is a person who proclaims and teaches a 
          traditional Anglican view of Holy Scripture boldly and 
          fearlessly.
          a.  We are not literalists.
          b.  We do not apply ancient codes of behavior in present 
          day life.
          c.  We recognize that the sex negative attitudes of our 
          society are not found in either Hebrew or Greek 
          scripture unless we read them in.
          d.  Same sex loving relationships are affirmed in 
          scripture.

          3.  Our bishop recognizes and acknowledges our lives 
          and relationships.
          a.  The Blessing of Holy Union and the Burial of the 
          Dead have the same significance in our relationships as 
          they do with heterosexual life partners.
          b.  Events that include spouses can also include our life 
          partners.

          4.  Our bishop recognizes the responsibility of our 
          church to be an intelligent counter voice to the hysteria 
          and ignorance that emanates from churches and so-
          called Christian leaders. 

          ********************

          *SHOULD INTEGRITY CHANGE HOW IT 
          ADDRESSES THE CLERGY?*

               If you're a clerical member of Integrity, we'll 
          address you any way you want.  Just let us know.  Our 
          default, however, if you don't state a preference is 
          "Mother" and "Father."  The Committee on the Status of 
          Women of the Executive Council of the Episcopal 
          Church has some very different suggestions.  They are 
          charged with monitoring, investigating, advocating, and 
          recommending measures to promote the full 
          participation of women in the life of the Church and 
          their corollary well-being in society.

               The Committee recommends eliminating 
          "Father" as a form of address for male priests, in order 
          to decrease the distinctions made between men and 
          women in ordained ministry.

               The Committee notes that the most common terms 
          used for ordained women in places where ordained men 
          are called "Father" have been "Ms." and "Mother." "Ms." 
          is obviously not a parallel term, and the Committee 
          believes that "Mother" is not an appropriate equivalent 
          to "Father" because of the very different values and 
          roles assigned to male and female parents in our 
          culture.

               The Committee also questions the 
          appropriateness of parental terms for ordained persons, 
          which imply that lay persons should assume a 
          dependent or childish role vis-a-vis clergy.

               If the secular Mr./Ms. form of address is deemed 
          inadequate, the Committee recommends use of "the 
          Rev." (or the full "Reverend" when speaking) or 
          "Pastor," noting that grammatical objections to 
          "Reverend" reflect an upper class bias that is 
          denigrating to many of our Protestant sisters and 
          brothers.

               The Committee recommends the following forms 
          of title and address:

.TB 6 35 61 86 101 
          Full title:

          The Rev. John Doe       The Rev. Jane Doe
          The Rev. Mr. John Doe   The Rev. Ms. Jane Doe

          When speaking:

          Hello, Mr. Doe          Hello, Ms. Doe
          Hello, Reverend Doe     Hello, Reverend Doe
          Hello, Pastor Doe       Hello, Pastor Doe
          Hello, John             Hello, Jane

          Salutation:

          Dear Mr. Doe            Dear Ms. Doe
          Dear Rev. Doe           Dear Rev. Doe
          Dear Pastor Doe         Dear Pastor Doe

          Let us know whether you think Integrity should adopt 
          these proposals.

          ********************

.TB 6 16 21 26 31 36 41 46 51 56 61 66 71 76 
          *MEET AELRED OF RIEVAULX*

          Challwood Studio has a new mascot.  He's a Bichon 
          Frise and named Aelred.  Aelred spends brief periods 
          in his dog house, which Paul and Victor have named 
          Rievaulx.

          ********************

          *INTEGRITY PLAYS A MAJOR ROLE IN 
          COLORADO LOSING 1997 GENERAL 
          CONVENTION* 
               The General Convention of the Episcopal Church in 
          1997 will be in Philadelphia.  Up until June, it appeared 
          that despite the controversial constitutional 
          Amendment 2 adopted by Colorado  prohibiting civil 
          rights protection for lesbians and gay men in Colorado, 
          planners of the 1997 General Convention could not rule 
          it out of the list of possible sites for the meeting.

               Denver, Orlando and Philadelphia were the 
          three cities approved for consideration at the 1991 
          General Convention in Phoenix.  During a March 
          meeting of the church's Joint Standing Committee on 
          Planning and Arrangements (JSCPA), members of the 
          committee grappled with the issues surrounding 
          Denver.  Some members of JSCPA expressed concern 
          that lesbian and gay Episcopalians might be subject to 
          discrimination if the convention were held in Denver.  
          The committee concluded that Denver should be 
          removed from consideration in 1997, but that the 
          church should be in dialogue with Colorado 
          Episcopalians about the issues involved in Amendment 
          2, and Denver might be considered for the convention 
          in 2000.

               Almost as soon as the JSCPA had decided to 
          drop Denver from consideration, a series of new 
          developments emerged that lead the committee to 
          reconsider its decision.

               In response to a lawsuit filed by a group of 
          Colorado residents and the cities of Denver, Aspen and 
          Boulder, a Denver district judge has placed an 
          injunction on Amendment 2, preventing state officials 
          from enacting it into law until after a full legal review -- 
          expected by the end of 1993.  In addition, attempts to 
          repeal the amendment are under way, leading some 
          observers to conclude that it may never become law. 

               "Because of this and other new developments, we 
          felt that we  should at least look at Denver again," said 
          Pamela Chinnis, president of the Episcopal Church's 
          House of Deputies.  "We are not under the same kind of 
          time pressure that we had with Phoenix." 

               In a March 24 memo to members of the JSCPA, 
          Chinnis and Presiding Bishop Edmond L. Browning 
          wrote that "a number of extenuating circumstances have 
          developed which might suggest that  the committee 
          rethink its decision."  They reported that practical 
          problems with two other sites have developed -- in 
          Philadelphia a snag has developed regarding available 
          hotel space, and in Orlando there is difficulty with 
          proposed dates for the convention.

               Members of the JSCPA visited Denver in early 
          May.  In large part because of the clear message of 
          Integrity, however, Denver remained "unacceptable."  
          The national board of Integrity adopted a resolution on 
          April 13 calling on "our national church and the 
          agencies and institutions which report to it to refrain 
          from scheduling  General Convention, other meetings 
          or official activities in the State of Colorado until such 
          time as Amendment 2 is repealed or overturned."

          BISHOP WAS OPPOSED TO AMENDMENT 2 BUT 
          CONVENTION WAS AMBIGUOUS

               Prior to the vote on Amendment 2, Colorado 
          Bishop William Winterrowd publicly opposed its 
          adoption.  In the October-November issue of the 
          Colorado Episcopalian, Winterrowd wrote that it was 
          "inappropriate to ban local ordinances that protect the 
          basic civil  rights of any minority, including the rights of 
          the gay community."  Citing the baptismal covenant and 
          resolutions of General Conventions, Winterrowd said 
          that his opposition to Amendment 2 was "founded on 
          my understanding of the Gospel of Jesus Christ that all 
          people are children of God."

               Winterrowd still rejects an argument by 
          supporters of Amendment 2 that it upholds equal rights 
          for homosexuals but prevents the state from recognizing 
          "special rights" for them.  "Our understanding of justice 
          as Christians is to say that we feel compelled  to protect 
          the human rights of all people -- especially of minority 
          persons," he said.

               At its recent 106th annual convention, the 
          Diocese of Colorado adopted a resolution affirming 
          prior General Convention statements on the civil rights 
          of homosexuals.  However, a call for a repeal of 
          Amendment 2 was withdrawn and the diocesan 
          convention passed a compromise resolution that 
          condemns "all discrimination in matters of civil rights 
          based upon whether persons are gay men, lesbians, or 
          bisexuals, and calls for such persons to be guaranteed 
          the full protection of the civil laws, urging Colorado 
          Episcopalians to make every effort in public and private 
          to insure that such equal protection in provided in 
          actuality."

               Kim Byham, director of communication for 
          Integrity described the action by the Colorado diocesan 
          convention as "lukewarm."  Byham noted that other 
          denominations in Colorado specifically opposed 
          Amendment 2 or have called for its repeal.  He denied 
          the suggestion that there was a parallel between the 
          si