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, 1994 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 1994
*The Voice of Integrity*
Volume 4, 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 Woodrum
Book Review Editor: Keith McCoy
Dorothy Gunn, Production
Editorial Office: 201-868-2485
PO Box 5202; NYC, NY 10185
Member Episcopal Communicators
Associate Member Gay & Lesbian Press Association
copyright 1994
********************
TABLE OF CONTENTS*
The Case of the Purloined Pastoral
Witnessing for Bisexuality to the Church
Letters
Still More Dioceses Leave the Anglican Communion?
A Hymn Honoring Those With HIV/AIDS
More Good News for General Convention
More Awards: This Publication Honored Again
Continuum of Pride
My Own Private Stonewall
A Time to Flaunt
Buy This CD! Memento Bittersweet
Meet Your New Board
Episcopal Caring Response to AIDS Pins
Methodists Define Homosexuality: Sound Familiar?
Kudos to LA
Claudia's Column
A Brilliant Idea From Washington: Something Every Chapter
Can Do to Make a Difference
Good News from the National Church: Blue Book Report
of the Commission on Human Affairs
A Life of Servant Ministry Now Recognized as Deacon:
Sister Brooke Ordained
From the Diocese of Western North Carolina's
Review: In the Courts of the Lord - A Gay Priest's Story
cc'd: Unitarians 2, Episcopalians -2
Proposal of Marriage and the Like: A Utopian View
of Love, Sex, Home, and Church
Scenes from Hands Around the God Box
Sartorial Integrity Members in the News:
Activists Lobby State Senate for Gay Rights
Deadly Disease Spreads from US to Canada: Canadian
Anglicans Face Divisions over Gays in the Church
Oregon Ordination
Dog Bites Man: Things Haven't Changed in Sydney
President's Column
Glass House Shattered
********************
Join Integrity!
*MEMBERSHIP FORM*
INTEGRITY, INC.
P.O. Box 19561, Washington, DC 20036-0561
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 19561, Washington, DC 20036-0561. All contributions tax-deductible to the extent permitted by law.
********************
*THE CASE OF THE PURLOINED PASTORAL*
by Kim Byham
By now, most Episcopalians know that the 4th Draft of the House of Bishops' Pastoral Teaching on Sexuality, which had been under an embargo, was first leaked to the press by person or persons unknown, and then widely distributed by Episcopalians United for Revelation, Renewal and Reformation ("EURRR"). After an extensive investigation, this journal is able to reveal the story behind the story.
At the 1991 General Convention, Resolution A104sa affirmed the church's teaching that sexual expression was appropriate only within the context of heterosexual marriage, but also recognized the 'discontinuity' that exists between the church's teaching and the experience of many of its members. The resolution called for "all congregations ... [to] enter into dialogue and deepen their understanding of these complex issues." More than 30,000 persons have participated in the dialogue. The resolution also called on the House of Bishops to develop a pastoral teaching on the subject of sexuality informed by the churchwide dialogue, as well as from "insight as is necessary from theologians, theological ethicists, social scientists, and gay and lesbian persons." During the past three years a 15-member committee that included nine bishops, three clergy deputies and three lay deputies submitted four drafts of a pastoral teaching to the House of Bishops for refinement.
Since the convention in Phoenix, the bishops have met twice a year in closed meetings with most discussion limited to small table groups of about ten bishops each. The stated purpose was to develop consensus on pastorals regarding racism and sexuality. Bishops agreed not to publish either statement, not comment on the content of either, until they had built consensus. [The Racism Pastoral was a "Letter," which meant that unlike the Sexuality "Teaching," it was required to be read in all congregations -- which it was in June.]
The first press account of the leak came June 1, when conservative Scripps Howard columnist Terry Mattingly fired a broadside at the pastoral. Mattingly has written fairly extensively for "The United Voice," the EURRR newsletter, but he claims he "didn't get [the draft pastoral] from EU[RRR] or any other logical place." In his column he stated:
"The complete 42-page text has not been officially released, but many of its critics and defenders are circulating detailed commentaries that dissect the early drafts. It is impossible to keep church debates behind closed doors in the age of photocopy and fax machines, not to mention electronic mail."
Mr. Mattingly, of course, was being disingenuous because it was only the "critics," not the "defenders," who circulated copies. Indeed, Mattingly confirmed in his June 1 article that he had spoken with "a number of bishops" who were "moderate and conservative critics" of the document. These were chiefly bishops in Province 7, all of whom with the exception of Bishop Sam Hulsey of Northwest Texas, had written a strong statement condemning the 4th draft.
Mattingly's points of criticism were, of course, in the eyes of the beholder:
"It's hard to discuss what the Bible says about sex without mentioning marriage. Nevertheless, the Episcopal House of Bishops is studying eight guidelines for sexual morality that call for lifelong relationships between 'mature adults' without making a single reference to marriages between husbands and wives. This latest modernized sex creed also embraces same-sex unions.
"The sixth guideline proclaims: 'We believe sexual relationships reach their fullest potential as healthy relationships and minimize their capacity for ill when in the context of chaste, faithful, and committed lifelong union between mature adults. We believe that this is as true for homosexual as for heterosexual relationships and that such relationships need and should receive the pastoral care of the Church.'"
A review of the document [which was sent to this reporter and all deputies and alternates by EURRR shortly before we went to press in July] indicates that pointing to this guideline gives a distorted view of the document.
But as of June 1, no one in the leadership of Integrity had seen Draft 4 of the pastoral. Louie Crew immediately posted his concerns about the breach of confidentiality. Mattingly responded electronically on June 3:
"Quite frankly, there are so many copies of the 4th draft floating around that you can get it all over the place. A question for you: Honestly, you DON'T have the 4th draft? I will be stunned if you don't have it."
When Crew did not answer his query by June 6, Mattingly wrote:
"So I will assume ('Man For All Seasons' is one of my favorite movies) that your silence is the same as an affirmative answer to my question: Do you have a copy of the 4th draft? The follow-up question, of course, might be: What role did you plan in helping with the research of the 4th draft?"
This time Crew responded:
"How dare you bully me by sending me unsolicited material and then presuming all manner of things by my silence! How do you expect anyone to trust you? I have not seen the 4th draft. I have had no role in helping with the research for any of the pastoral.
"Both of my bishops have much too much integrity to share with me any material they are not supposed to share, and I would never violate material shared with me in the manner that you have done. You have taken it upon yourself to tell the whole world only those parts that you want the world to see. As a deputy I am appalled that you have so little concern for the processes set in place by General Convention. I would have preferred a more open discussion myself, but that is not what we as a church chose to put in place."
Mattingly apologized to Crew that day, but said:
"My point was that I have had trouble finding many people in the Episcopal Church who have not seen all or various chunks of the pastoral dialogue, or whatever the document is called at the moment. I'm amazed that many writers and columnists in the press haven't already aired this thing out. It's probably hard to justify making much of an effort to probe the views of such a small denomination."
The final installment of this dialogue came from Dr. Crew:
"If you genuinely want to find Episcopalians who have not seen a single one of the drafts, I can point to 99.99+ percent of the Episcopal Diocese of Newark.
"Far be it from me as a writer myself to applaud excessive secrecy, especially in a House that has abused secrecy on numerous occasions in the past. But it was your conservative bishops who fought so hard to force secrecy. Why are you -- a reporter as clearly identified as 'conservative' as I am identified as 'liberal' -- now leaking the report in chunks of your own choosing to the press?
"Are your sources leaking the material through you because they have lost confidence that they can win in any other way besides whipping up the homophobes?"
Mattingly never responded, but the next day, June 10, another even more conservative syndicated Episcopal columnist, Mike McManus, also wrote a column condemning the pastoral by grossly distorting its contents:
"In a still secret fourth draft of a Pastoral Teaching on 'Human Sexuality,' America's Episcopal bishops have abandoned marriage as the norm for sexual behavior, endorsed homosexuality and said they would 'respond pastorally to those persons whose sexual behavior does not conform to the traditional standards and norms of the Church.'"
McManus, undoubtedly unknowingly, makes an interesting observation about the weakness of the conservative position:
"How do the bishops view homosexuality biblically? Who knows? The First Interpretation citing Romans 1:26-7, is traditional: 'Scripture forbids homosexual behavior.' But a Second Interpretation written by Los Angeles Bishop Frederick Borsch says: 'The complete lack of reference to homosexuality in Jesus' words and in the Gospels ... may mean that it was not considered particularly threatening.' Conservative bishops fought to have the traditional point of view included, and it was, but placed next to Borsch's more polished advocacy that 'homosexual orientation was unknown to biblical authors.' Thus, the conservatives have been co-opted -- and even misled. For the document's guidelines have gotten more libertarian."
McManus then quotes the only bishop to speak publicly about the document before its release by EURRR:
"It's horrendous" says Rio Grande Bishop Terence Kelshaw. "It's a minority report for the affirmation of the homosexual lifestyle that 80% of church members don't want. We give no guidance to young people who are not homosexual for their personal development."
Even before McManus' article appeared, Kelshaw was widely viewed as the most likely source for the "leak" of the document. Before being elected bishop, Kelshaw was a member of the faculty of Trinity Episcopal School for Ministry, the conservative seminary in Ambridge, Penn., and has been rabidly anti-lesgay in his pronouncements in the House of Bishops.
McManus' article also was the first public acknowledgement by EURRR that they had copies of the draft.
"The Rev. Todd Wetzel, director of Episcopalians United, a conservative coalition, sights: 'It undercuts the authority of Scripture. ... It substitutes in its place the paramount value of human experience.'"
A few other newspapers picked up the story in the next few days, but usually in only summary fashion. Just as the story seemed to be dying down, EURRR announced on June 23 that it was making copies available to anyone who wanted them. The July issue of "The United Voice," issued on that day, included very selective excerpts and the entire pastoral guidelines section. EURRR justified this, in a lead editorial, entitled "Breaking the Silence."
"The 15-member committee charged with preparing a Pastoral Teaching on sexuality for the House of Bishops has declared its work embargoed since the first draft. The committee's *unilateral* decision has made the process needlessly furtive and anything but a true dialogue about the Church's teachings on sexual morality."
The justification continued in Todd Wetzel's signed editorial, "Publish Sad Tidings: The Fourth Draft is a Disaster."
"EU has chosen to publish the fourth draft for several reasons:
"- The mass media began reporting on the Pastoral Guidelines in early June. It's time somebody in the Church offered a comprehensive picture of the Pastoral Teaching.
"- *The embargo on all drafts was an arbitrary decision of the A104sa Committee.* Resolution A104sa neither required nor recommended a secretive process for preparing the Pastoral Teaching.
"- This secretive process has been unhealthy in the life of the Church, leading to distrust and gossip, and excluding nearly all lay people and clergy from a crucial discussion.
"- The fourth draft of 'Continuing the Dialogue' is every bit the theological travesty as suggested by rumors circulating throughout the Church.
Of course, as with all EURRR reporting, there was considerable untruth and half-truth in this justification. While A104sa did not call for secrecy, the embargo was a decision of the House of Bishops, not the A104sa Committee. This was confirmed in an interview with the Rt. Rev. Sam Hulsey who heads the Kanuga Planning Team for the House of Bishops, whose committee recommended the embargo. Moreover, EURRR may have been using its own selective release of the draft and the subsequent coverage to justify its broadscale release. EURRR's admitted purpose is to derail the pastoral:
"'Continuing the Dialogue' attempts to codify the local option, in which bishops are free to ordain noncelibate homosexuals and priests are free -- in the name of pastoral care -- to bless same-sex unions. The revisionist theology reflected in 'Continuing the Dialogue,' and the false peace offered by the local option, merely increases the pressure to reject the Church's traditional teachings on sexual morality.
"The committee, however, has shown a repeated willingness to ignore the concerns of orthodox bishops and to move the document further into heterodoxy.
"... Finally, we encourage you to let your bishop know what you think about 'Continuing the Dialogue.' The future of the Episcopal Church is far too important to be shaped by a purported dialogue held behind closed doors and resulting in heterodoxy by pronouncement."
One of the articles in "The United Voice" is by Stephen F. Noll, Professor of Biblical Studies and Academic Dean of Trinity Episcopal School for Ministry, who apparent has had access to all of the drafts:
"I have followed the drafts of the House of Bishops' pastoral teaching on sexuality since Fall 1993. The committee appointed by the House of Bishops to produce this new teaching has maintained a consistency of purpose throughout -- to legitimate homosexual practice -- muddled only enough in its wording of earlier versions to appear 'inclusive' of all views.
"... In conclusion, it seems clear from reading the drafts sequentially that the drafting committee is intent on advocating a sea change in the moral teaching of the Christian faith. We may be thankful the latest draft is even more clear-cut than the earlier ones, as it becomes obvious that conservative objections cannot be incorporated into this document without leading to theological chaos."
Apparently the drafts of this pastoral were confidential only from Integrity and the lesgay community, while they were widely available in Ambridge.
In another low blow, and a foretaste of tactics to come in Indianapolis, EURRR also condemned the composition of the A104sa Committee, particularly the Rev. Jane Garrett, who is openly lesbian. This, they suggest, automatically invalidates the document, while the presence of Bishop Harry Shipps, who recently called for the excommunication of all "open" lesbians and gay men ["Voice," Summer, 1993], is necessary to represent the true feelings of the Church.
By now, the 4th draft was widely available, and on June 23, Associated Press writer David Briggs did an extensive article. He interviewed numerous people:
"The document doesn't take a stand one way or the other, basically," said the Rev. Jane N. Garrett, a member of the drafting committee. "It leaves everything open for a continuation of the dialogue.
"But Bishop William Frey, dean of Trinity Episcopal School for Ministry, said presenting different points of view is not pastoral teaching, but a reflection of the chaos in the church on these issues today. 'The nicest thing I can say is that parts of it remind me of theology by Oprah and Donahue,' he said. 'In its present form, it would be the most embarrassing document the bishops have every produced.'
"Committee members would not comment on the contents of the final draft, but said it would not shake up the church. 'It's not going to be a particularly radical document,' said Bishop Frank Allan of Atlanta. 'if people want to get titillated by it, they can get titillated by something else.'
"Garrett said given the tensions in the church the drafting committee deliberately avoided taking a stand on issues such as the ordination of homosexuals. 'There's no way at this moment to reconcile those differences,' she said.
"Wetzel disagrees. He said the document is a sophisticated attempt to place homosexual relations on a par with heterosexual relations. 'I think the real intent of the document is pretty clear: to legitimate homosexual practice,' he said.
"But a leader of an Episcopal gay rights group said that is already happening -- with or without a statement from the bishops. E. Kim Byham, publisher of 'the Voice of Integrity,' said blessings of same-sex unions have occurred in churches throughout the country, and homosexuals have been ordained in some 35 dioceses. 'It's really a done deal,' he said."
PRESIDING BISHOP CONDEMNS EURRR
The following day, the Most Rev. Edmond L. Browning broke his silence on the purloined draft in a letter to all bishops:
Dear Sisters and Brothers:
I write to make you aware that, in defiance of the careful process established by the House of Bishops, Episcopalians United has released draft four of the pastoral teaching on human sexuality. They have issued a press release urging Episcopalians to request a copy of the report from Episcopalians United headquarters.
Further, the pre-Convention issue of their publication, under the guise of "critiquing" the report, is devoted to discrediting the report, the House of Bishops process, and the committee. I find this action utterly reprehensible and unworthy behavior for those who declare themselves to be part of our household of faith.
Careful reading of their newspaper and press reports, as well as exposure to their disgraceful fund-raising materials over the years, seems to indicate that they assume they hold the truth on all of the difficult issues before us, based on their unambiguous interpretation of scripture, which they categorize as "orthodox." They have determined that the fourth draft does not adhere to their position, and apparently believe they are therefore justified in using whatever means to derail the process the bishops have established.
They have characterized the House of Bishops process as "clandestine" and erroneously stated that it was the "unilateral" decision of the committee which made the process "needlessly furtive." As you are aware, the process reflects the House of Bishops efforts to respond to General Convention resolution A104sa.
Episcopalians United charged that there has not been a dialogue. In actual fact, we know that the teaching was not meant to be a dialogue but rather the work of the bishops in consultation with ethicists and biblical scholars. In addition, the teaching was informed by churchwide dialogue involving an estimated 30,000 persons, as reported on by Bishop O'Kelley Whitaker's committee.
Contrary to the substance and spirit of the Episcopalians United coverage, we know that the report reflects the faithful effort of the bishops to help the church continue together in dialogue as we seek to discover God's will. We know that our report will not be an end, but a beginning.
What I find the most difficult about the Episcopalians United action is that their organization has supporters in most of our dioceses, many of whom are unaware of the decidedly un-Christian tactics of Episcopalians United, and of its highly one-sided point of view. These supporters give credence to Episcopalians United claims, regardless of how misleading, incorrect, or totally disingenuous they might be.
It is very important that you know that I spoke yesterday in a conference call to all of the members of the A104sa committee who could be reached, including Bishops Frank Allan, Steven Charleston, Mark Dyer, Rogers Harris, Richard Shimpfky and Vincent Warner and also the Rev. Barnum McCarty and Mary Meader. They are extremely pleased with their efforts on the fifth draft, which is significantly different from the fourth, based on the comments of the House. I regret that the debate around the church provoked by the Episcopalians United action will be about a document that is no longer relevant. I hope that energy will be maintained for a good discussion about the actual report itself.
I believe the most appropriate response to the action of Episcopalians United is first to be aware of it, which is the purpose of this letter, and then be prepared to provide, and to help your clergy provide, accurate information. More important, I believe we, the House of Bishops, must stay on the course we have been following over these last years, and continue to be guided by the Covenant that informs our life together. We must honor our process, which has been open and consultative, and we must honor our sense of what it means to serve as bishops.
Edmond L. Browning, Presiding Bishop and Primate
EURRR'S RESPONSE
In response to Bishop Browning, Todd Wetzel wrote a letter defending himself to the House of Bishops, closing with, "[P]lease know that we are deeply saddened by and take exception to both the tone and inaccuracies of the Presiding Bishop's recent comments regarding Episcopalians United and the progress of the dialogue." Nowhere, however, does Wetzel indicate what the inaccuracies are.
Not one to miss an opportunity, Bishop John Howe of Central Florida, also wrote to the Presiding Bishop giving a unique defense of EURRR, in a letter which was circulated by them.
"First, your accusation that EU[RRR] has done something 'in defiance of the careful process established by the House of Bishops' is itself disingenuous. Episcopalians United never agreed to the process by which this 'Pastoral Teaching' has been prepared. ... It is true that the House agreed to the Committee's decision, but obviously one or more of our members broke faith with that agreement. That is not the fault of EU[RRR]. ... I am saddened to say that your letter seems strangely shrill, defensive and antagonistic toward a constituency within this Church that is simply trying to bear allegiance to the 'faith once delivered to the saints' -- at least as they understand it."
This journal is going to press before "The Living Church" has commented on the "leak," but it is safe to assume that that magazine will consider the distribution of an embargoed paper by EURRR to be much less troubling than Integrity's fully authorized reception at the House of Bishops' meeting in Panama.
********************
*WITNESSING FOR BISEXUALITY TO THE CHURCH*
by Albert Lunde
I went to hear Dr. Bruce Hilton speak as a prelude to a seminar series on heterosexism. He spoke very well about how heterosexism (and sexism and racism) have led the church astray -- about how we have become "conformed to the world." Afterwards there was a question and answer session.
Bruce Hilton served on the United Methodist Committee to Study Homosexuality, commissioned by the 1988 General Conference, which reported to the 1992 General Conference. Three or four years ago there was a "listening post" held in my area, by a subgroup of the committee (not including Bruce Hilton), and I testified before it as an out bisexual. I was fairly new to bi politics, especially in the church, and I was asked a question which flustered me at the time, because I didn't understand it at first: "If the church accepted homosexuals, could the church accept 'self-avowed practicing bisexuals'?" My immediate reaction was, "Of course, why not?" because I failed for several minutes to understand their difficulty. (The phrase "self-avowed practicing homosexual" appears in the Methodist Book of Discipline.)
I came to the lecture thinking I should speak for bi issues, but the whole question and answer period went without the subject being raised. At the close, however, one last person was selected to ask a question -- the man next to me. He asked Bruce "You say that the church is becoming more accepting of homosexuals, but there is something we've heard of lately -- what about bisexuals -- what does that say about covenant relationships?"
I spoke up and said, "I think I should answer this, I'm a bisexual." I went on to explain that bisexuality and monogamy were two different issues, that it was a myth that bisexuals *had* to have two relationships at the same time, that I knew bisexual persons in long-term monogamous relationships, and so the issues of covenants were the same for bisexuals as for homosexuals or heterosexuals.
Someone else spoke up and said "But what do we do about *practicing* bisexuals?" (!!)
I replied: "Being a 'practicing bisexual' means I'm having sex with *someone*, not that I'm having sex with two people at once."
I had some more conversations with people afterwards. It is not an incredible coincidence that this happened, yet I felt like I had God's eye on me as it was happening. This was nearly the same question I'd been asked years before (and had trouble answering) and now I was sitting right next to the man asking it, wearing a button that read "*You're* confused; *I'm* bisexual."
********************
*LETTERS TO "THE VOICE OF INTEGRITY"*
R. Scott Helsel, Editor
Dear Mr. Helsel,
After reviewing the Integrity Prayer Calendar in the Spring 1994 issue, we would like to suggest an addition.
As well as prayers for Integrity, its chapters & related personnel, and for groups & organizations that share common cause, prayers are requested for more general categories of lesgay people, such as:
Lesbian and Gay religious
Lesbian and Gay musicians
Lesbian and Gay seminarians
Lesbian and Gay bishops, priests and deacons
Lesbians and Gay Men of all nations
All who have died from AIDS or as a result of homophobia
Lesbians and Gays in the Military and Lesgay Veterans
Gay Veterans
We proposed that prayers for *Lesbians and Gay Men in Committed Relationships* be added to the calendar. In this time when the church's blessing of our committed relationships is undergoing serious discussion, prayers for couples already so pledged are particularly important and appropriate.
Yours truly,
Douglas Johnson & William Weaver
Atlanta, GA
P.S.In November 1993, we celebrated our fortieth anniversary together.
THE EDITOR RESPONDS
An excellent idea and we hope others will send suggestions for additions to the prayer calendar.
Mr. Kim Byham, Publisher
Dear Kim,
Today I received my Spring 94 "Voice...," the first I have received since the winter of 1993! Even though I have dutifully notified Integrity of my address changes in the past year, I have only received the notice to pay my dues and the ballot to vote for the national slate of officers.
This is the third request I have made to receive my publications in a timely manner. The first was following General Convention in 1991; it was handled fairly promptly. The second was directed through Tim Caison earlier this year. I know he sent in a request that I receive my back copies but none have been sent.
Please! I enjoy reading "The Voice..." and I feel it is important that it be delivered in a timely manner. As I look forward to 6 or 8 weeks vacation before beginning a new job, I would love to catch up on all my back reading and I would appreciate you or your office mailing me all those missed publications. Thanks.
Sincerely,
Sandy Horton +
Atlanta
THE PUBLISHER RESPONDS:
Sorry about your not getting "The Voice." I'm sure Tim passed along your earlier request but we must have overlooked it. Enclosed are the past issues you missed. Please note that "The Voice" is not forwarded to anyone unless they request the post office to forward magazines. We don't get them back, either, as the cost would be astronomical. We rely on members to promptly let us know about changed addresses. By notifying us, you are in a distinct minority -- only about 5% of our members who move write to us. The rest put considerably more faith in the post office than I have. If one moves twice in a fairly short period, for example, it is almost impossible to find the new address from the post office -- the post office just doesn't do double forwarding or double address corrections.
It is possible that the problem actually lies with your post office. We have one member who has never moved and for whom we have the correct address but he has never gotten a copy of "The Voice"! It must simply fall into a bulk mail sink-hole in his local post office.
It is also possible that while you notified us promptly, your address changes fell at a time when "The Voice" was already in the mail. Scott makes a concerted effort to see that every address correction he has received is entered in the system before each mailing of "The Voice." Thanks for using the New York address -- writing directly to us or to the Treasurer can save months. In June we received mail sent to the Washington box in March.
Editor's Note
The copies of "The Voice" which were sent via Priority Mail to The Rev. Sandy Horton were returned. The Post Office stamped the envelope: *Addressee unknown!*
Dear Mr. Helsel:
I much appreciated your reprint of Victor Furnish's fine article on Scripture and homosexuality. The only thing that bothered me was his statement (which I've heard before from others) that biblical scholars "rarely" support the idea that there might have been a sexual component in the friendship of David and Jonathan, and his assertion that "there is no evidence to support" such a claim.
I don't question the truth of the first statement. Most biblical scholars do seem unable to see anything sexual in David and Jonathan's story. I cannot support the second claim, however. On the contrary, the sexual element in the Saul-David-Jonathan story can be demonstrated by standard scholarly means. What is lacking in critical publications is any clear demonstration that there isn't a sexual component. I attribute this to a blend of paradigm paralysis or unintentional failure to consider evidence that does not fit the standard theory. Gould and Kuhn have documented this phenomenon in the physical and biological sciences, and theology and exegesis are no strangers to this tendency: the church has a long tradition of playing "gnats and camels." So too the church has asserted absolute certainty on points about which it later found itself to be completely mistaken.
The church has long downplayed what many see as an obvious love story. This goes back at least to the Vulgate. I've not had opportunity to consult a critical edition, but St. Jerome made a concerted effort to minimize the homoerotic element in David's lament over Jonathan. The translator bowdlerizes the climactic verse rendering the Hebrew for love as "amabilis" when referring to Jonathan and "amorem" when referring to women. Thus, what should read as "I am distressed for you, my brother Jonathan. Greatly beloved were you to me; your love to me was wonderful, passing the love of women" (NRSV) becomes (In the Douay, based on the Vulgate), "I grieve for thee, my brother Jonathan: exceeding beautiful, and amiable to me above the love of women." Moreover, Jerome (or some other editor with the uncanny chutzbah to rewrite the Bible) went even further: he added a half-verse that exists (as far as I can find) in neither the Hebrew nor the Greek version: "Sicut mater unicum amat filium suum, ita ego te diligebarn." ("As a mother loves her only son so I loved you")! I've not seen this particular embolism in the Vulgate referred to in critical examinations of the issue, but I suggest it offers conclusive evidence that the translator was aware enough of the sexual overtones in this story to go to great lengths to minimize or eliminate them.
There are many "scholarly" reasons to see an erotic element in the complex relationship between these two young men (to say nothing of Saul). This is hardly the place for an extended analysis (which I hope to pursue elsewhere), but I'd like to note a few I've not seen discussed in scholarship circles.
Consider the most obvious: if one took the Saul-David-Jonathan dynastic/romantic epic and changed the venue to ancient Greece, no classical scholar would have trouble acknowledging the likelihood of a sexual element in the tale. In the original setting, one might note that the Law would forbid such behavior; however, the Law was not in effect at the period in question. Israel was emerging from the era of the Judges, in which "all the people did what was right in their own eyes." Toleration even of household idolatry seems to have been common, for example (1 Samuel 19).
When Jonathan first meets with David -- when Saul "takes" him -- he experiences "love-at-first-sight" (is there such a thing as friendship-at-first-sight?). Jonathan strips off his robe to cover David, and plights a covenant with him (1 Sam 18:1-4). This finds a striking parallel -- in clearly sexual imagery -- in Ezekiel 16:8, when God covers Israel with his robe and makes a covenant with her. Scholars normally describe the latter as "nuptial" but don't think of applying that term to the former.
Furnish notes the absence of biblical language to describe homosexuality (in any case a modern concept). The standard words even for sex in biblical Hebrew are ambiguous, or cover a wide range of meanings: know, lie down with, love, take, etc. This renders biblical discussion of sex, and homosexuality in particular, paraphrastic or metaphorical. Given these limitations, I contend that climax of David's lament over Jonathan represents the clearest way to express, in the Hebrew language and culture, a loving same-sex relationship. The phrasing and structure exactly parallel that used in the Levitical commandment against male same-sex acts. Compare literal translations of Leviticus 18:22, "With a man do not lie down x the lying down of a woman," with 2 Samuel 1:26, "More wonderful your love to me x than the love of women." In both cases the parallel presence of woman or women serves to clarify that the ambiguous words on both sides of the parallelism (lie down and love) refer to sexual relations.
Still, many biblical scholars reject out of hand (and without further explanation) the possibility that David and Jonathan may have been more than friends. I say "more" intentionally. Some say that introducing a sexual element into the David and Jonathan story is an attack upon -- or at least a diminution of -- friendship. I would say that these people reveal a subtle antipathy toward sex. Why should the introduction of sex lessen the quality of a relationship? Would they apply this concept to marriage, in which a healthy sexual element is not only necessary (per canon law!) but positive? I doubt it. (I know some people say men and women can't be friends because of sex, but that's hardly Christian teaching.)
I would welcome hearing the *scholarly* reasons for rejecting an erotic element in David and Jonathan's story. Until then, appears to me that the evidence *for* far outweighs the evidence *against*.
Sincerely,
Tobias S. Haller, BSG
Bronx, New York
********************
*STILL MORE DIOCESES LEAVE THE ANGLICAN COMMUNION?*
Six other dioceses have now announced their intention to join the Diocese of Florida severing the principal of intercommuinion within the Episcopal Church. The bishops of San Joaquin, Central Florida, Florida, Quincy, Dallas, West Missouri and the Rio Grande joined 43 other Episcopalians in forming a new organization aimed at pressuring the church to adopt ultra-conservative positions or face decreased financial support. In a covenant adopted at the initial meeting of Episcopalians in Apostolic Mission (EAM) in Atlanta, signatories critized "tendencies within the wider Episcopal Church today contrary to official Anglican ethical standards," even if they are authorized by General Convention. The members further agreed that "we will not conform ourselves to [such actions], we will not directly financially support them, "nor will we permit those who engage in them to minister regularly within our congregational and/or diocesan life*." Members of EAM called for protection of life "from conception to natural death" and the limitation o "sexual intimacy and intercourse" to "heterosexual, nomogamous, life-long marriage." The covenant describes divorce as "always sinful and rarely appropriate."
********************
*A HYMN HONORING THOSE WITH HIV/AIDS*
Words written by the Rev. Evan U Ardley, 1994
To be sung to "Picardy" (Let all mortal flesh keep silence, Hymnal 1982 #324)
Joining hands around love infected
We have learned of love engaged
In the things that really matter
Knowing Christ in tears, enraged.
Daring God to give us healing
Christ our God, O hear our pain.
Chronic is our living in questions.
Dancing in and out of truth;
Finding life is never simple,
Virus, void and much untruth.
Lead us on in quick endeavor,
Christ our God, O share our pain.
Light and healing are Your blessings
Body, mind and spirit one.
In this union we are wholeness
And a new life is begun
Lover, friend and all, become for me
Christ our God, O love our pain.
Join then, with a world in crisis
Pleading for the end of this day
Come Lord Jesus, be our healing
Of the shadows of today
Be our song of joy and stinging love
Christ our God, O lift our pain.
Still to us we sing Alleluia
Alleluia, God is Love.
Ever searching in our vessels
Light and peace from above.
Alleluia, Alleluia,
Christ our God, O hear our pain.
-----
Fr. Ardley is Rector of the Church of the Incarnation in Santa Rosa, California, and has given permission for widespread use of this hymn.
********************
*MORE GOOD NEWS FOR GENERAL CONVENTION*
The following is an excerpt from the Report of the Joint Commission on AIDS/HIV to the 1994 General Convention, "Blue Book," p. 5:
This Church must make a statement of the intrinsic worth of gay, lesbian and bisexual people. We must also support and value covenanted, significant relationships between persons of the same gender. We must take a stand that says love between two persons can and should be rooted in the love of God and be a reflection of that love and that such relationships are blessed by God. The Church should become openly and lovingly involved in affirming, supporting and helping such relationships. We must redouble our efforts to respect the dignity of every human being.
********************
*MORE AWARDS*
This Publication Again Honored
At the Episcopal Communicators' annual convention, held at the Kanuga Conference Center in Hendersonville, North Carolina, Memorial Day Weekend, "The Voice of Integrity" again received two Polly Bond Awards for articles which appeared in 1993. Integrity's entries compete in the Magazine division, Agency Level, a group which includes "The Witness." The Episcopal Communicators, made up primarily of the editors of diocesan publications, but including a wide variety of others involved in print and electronic media in the Episcopal Church, held a joint convention with Associated Church Press, an interdenominational group that includes the national publications of various denominations. "The Voice's" winning entries were:
*Headline: Award of Excellence*
"Pussycats in the Lions' Den"
Headline Writer: Kim Byham; Authors of Article: Ann Carlson and Louie Crew
Fall 1993 issue
This article described the authors' visit to a meeting of so-called "ex-gays" in Maryland.
"Editorial: Award of Merit"
"Who Will Mourn?"
Author: Kim Byham
Fall 1993 issue
This editorial discussed the sentencing of the murderer of the Rev. Thomas Davidson in Yakima, Washington.
Adding unintended levity to the awards ceremony was one presented to "The United Voice," the publication of the Episcopalians United for Revelation, Renewal and Reformation. EURRR had not previously won a Polly Bond but this year they won three awards in the newspaper category, two of which were for the article "Integrity Pours Drinks at Bishops' Meeting" (one for the headline and one for the content as a news story). The award, however, was labeled as going to "The United Voice of Integrity"! Contrary to this suggestion, EURRR and Integrity are not contemplating a merger, but the humor was appreciated by the editors of both publications who have established a cordial working relationship.
********************
*CONTINUUM OF PRIDE*
1900
1920
Society for Individual Freedom
1950
Mattachine/Daughters of Blitis
1969-STONEWALL
Gay Liberation Front
Integrity
1980
Triangle Community Center
1994
STONEWALL 25
???
2006
???
2017
???
2031
???
2061
???
2080
???
2100
by Jeffri Harre
Twenty-five years ago this month the patrons of a dingy bar in Greenwich Village fought back during a police raid. Their actions sparked three days of riots and heralded the modern lesbian/gay rights movement. At nine, I was more concerned with G.I. Joes and Hot Wheels than with emerging political movements. Local newspapers didn't cover the riots. We rarely watched the evening news -- the films from Vietnam gave me nightmares -- so I missed any coverage the television might have carried. It was a decade before I learned abut the Stonewall Riots.
Over 20 years ago gay and lesbian activists around the country began the first attempts to pass civil rights bills in state legislatures. Repeated defeats did not deter the efforts. Slowly, "gay rights" bills became regular items on legislative agendas in many state capitals. Finally, in 1981, the Wisconsin legislature passed the first lesbian/gay civil rights bill in the country.
The riots and the gay/lesbian rights groups of the '70's were not the first people to fight for our rights. The Society for Individual Rights came into being (and ceased to exist) in Chicago almost 70 years ago. Forty years ago or so, the Mattachine Society and the Daughters of Blitis were founded. These organizations were on the verge of forming the first national coalition of lesbian/gay rights groups when the Gay Liberation Front and the Gay Activists Alliance were born in the wake of the Stonewall Riots.
Twenty years ago, a handful of lesbian and gay Episcopalians founded Integrity. Less than five years later, the first open lesbian was ordained among the first women publicly ordained in the Episcopal Church.
Could any of these people have known how their actions would affect the life of a young boy growing up in Darien, Connecticut? Could they foresee that their struggles -- both successes and failures -- would nurture a sense of pride in that boy?
Eleven years ago I sat behind a small table in the Memorial Union at the University of Wisconsin. We were collecting signatures on petitions to repeal the state's sodomy statutes. The sign on the table clearly identified us as members of the campus lesbian and gay student organization. Not only was it the first "Out" activity I participated in, it was the beginning of more than a decade of involvement in local, state and federal politics.
I helped found the Connecticut Coalition for Lesbian and Gay Civil Rights in 1984. For seven years we lobbied, educated, petitioned and protested for passage of civil rights legislation in Connecticut. Governor Weicker signed the bill in May 1991.
Five years ago I became involved with a group of people with a vision. Out of that vision came the Triangle Community Center. I served on the first Board of Directors and continue to volunteer time in the Center. In many ways, being involved with the Center has broadened my horizons. I learned -- and continue to learn -- how to be a whole gay person.
Last Fall I came out to my parish. Even though I'd been Out for over ten years, and out to a few members of the parish, I found it nerve wracking. I've had my picture on the front page of newspapers because of my involvement with the Coalition and the Center, but I'd never come out in person to so many people at the same time before. Even as I finished speaking that Sunday, I thought, "What have I done?" I don't think any of us in the parish really know the full answer to that yet.
I can say with certainty that I will face more challenges in the future. Some will be met successfully, others will not. However, none of them will be total failures. Somewhere, there is a nine-year-old more interested in Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles and Barbies than evolving political and social movements. She or he might be the child of someone in my parish. In a decade or less, she or he will learn about Stonewall, Wisconsin, the Triangle Community Center and ...
-----
Jeffri Harre is editor of "Grapevine," the newsletter of Integrity/Westchester. This article appeared in the June 1994 issue.
********************
*MY OWN PRIVATE STONEWALL*
by Donald L. Snyder
Describing 1969 as eventful is an understatement at best. The loss of Martin and Bobby during the previous year still left us with a huge void. The Jets won the Super Bowl, helping to make "Broadway Joe" Nameth a household name. Richard Nixon was inaugurated. We lost Judy late in June. During a weekend in July the name Chappaquiddick became firmly etched in our minds. The whole world watched with wonder and anticipation as Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin made the first footsteps on the lunar surface. An August rock concert in upstate New York created the defining moment and the identifying moniker for the Woodstock generation. The "Amazin' Mets" did the unthinkable and won the World Series.
Media images were omnipresent. "Rowan and Martin's Laugh In" became a cultural icon as well as a staple of our television viewing diets on Monday nights. Marvin Gaye "Heard it through the Grapevine" and Blood, Sweat, and Tears were "So Very Happy." The carnage of Northern Ireland and southeast Asia was brought into our homes via the nightly television news. "Midnight Cowboy" catapulted Dustin Hoffman and Jon Voigt into super stardom.
For an awkward thirteen year old in an Indiana suburb, the melee outside the Stonewall Inn could easily have taken place on another planet. Puberty for me had descended with a vengeance. It became a real challenge to fight blemishes and bad hair. Growing half an inch a month, my new school clothes were soon too small. My new transistor radio could transport me from a town named New Haven to more cosmopolitan locales such as Detroit and Chicago. Even New York seemed like an inviting place, thanks to "That Girl," Marlo Thomas, and her cute boyfriend, Don. My first year in junior high brought new and expanded experiences, along with some powerful feelings for a boy named Jack.
I hardly noticed him at first. I knew that his sister and mine, both high school seniors, had been friends for several years. Since he was two grades ahead of me, we had only one class together. It was choir, of course.
Jack returned from Christmas vacation with a Florida tan which embellished his azure eyes and sandy blond waves. Jack seemed to have everything going for him. He was from a good family who lived in a desirable part of town. He was in advanced academic classes at school. I found his quirky sense of humor particularly appealing. It seemed that any girl could have fallen for him in a big way. I knew that had happened for me.
I could feel my heart leaping into my throat whenever I saw him. Conversation was even more of a challenge as my voice jumped an octave, and my knees became weak. More than anything else, I longed for the chance just to spend time with him. I imagined the two of us just sitting and talking on the terrace in front of my family's home. Certainly we would never run out of things to say and do. The whole scenario seemed so simple.
A veritable lifetime of events has occurred in the last twenty-five years. After Stonewall we became a propelling political force. A sizable number of us have served on city councils, in state legislatures, and in the U.S. House. In many cities and towns we've established a real sense of community. Our special community events range from drag shows to wrestling team matches. Thousands of us have died of AIDS in the last fifteen years, while countless others of us have been injured or killed due to anti-gay violence. Perseverance has brought about anti-discrimination legislation in many cities and several states. Over one million of us and our supporters marched and celebrated in Washington during late April, 1993. We're even the main characters in a television ad for IKEA furniture.
My own private Stonewall took a depressing turn when I learned that Jack and his family had moved to Florida in early 1970. Nevertheless, he has crept into my conscious and subconscious thoughts, complete with recurring dreams. One day seven years ago I was sure I saw Jack on the subway here in New York.
In some ways the events of 1969 have come full circle. The man now in my life is a lot like Jack. Both were born in the same year, less than four months apart. The blond and blue eyed looks are there, along with the same great wit, intelligence, and more.
In 1994 I can't help but wonder about thirteen year old boys and girls who are dealing with their own sexuality and affections. I hope the lives they lead as upstanding lesbian and gay citizens will be a little easier. I hope their work and ours can make for a happier and more just world for gays and lesbians in the next quarter century.
-----
Donald Snyder is a member of Integrity/New York.
********************
*A TIME TO FLAUNT*
By Dan Wall
Easter brings us celebration of new life, new energy breathed into that which was dead. The spring of spirit commingles with the awareness of nature's free rebirthing from its cold dormant cell. Easter's parade on the avenue yields to summer on "the rocks," incarnating yet another appreciation of that which God has created.
It is a time to flaunt ‑‑ "...to exhibit ostentatiously; show off ...to wave proudly." Tired of closet tombs, we no longer cower in fear that someone might discover our secrets, and tell our stories, and take away our jobs, our homes, our security. With pride, we take a stand ‑‑ we have a wonderful gift of sexual identity in God's created order.
But our pride is discomforting to many, particularly in the church. A member of Integrity/Chicago's Board of Directors recently moved and is searching for a church to call home. Interviewing the priest in a parish compatible with his preferred worship style, my friend acknowledged that he lives in a six-year committed relationship with another man.
Obviously uncomfortable, the rector conceded that there were other homosexual persons in the congregation, and he allowed that another one or two would be all right. Then came those stinging words: "...but please don't flaunt it." I am not so sure any more that I know what the word "flaunt" means when thrown our way. Does it mean, "Don't act like a stereotype"?
My fear is that the real message being conveyed to us is, "Do not dare to claim a positive self-image or to act like you believe yourself to be normal." We can go to the wedding banquet as long as we refrain from a gentle touch, a hand caressed, a cheek bussed with a sign of genuine affection, of loving relationship entered without sanction.
In the meantime, we experience the flaunting of superiority in the sacramentalizing of heterosexual union. We watch as special privileges of insurance benefits and inheritance rights are flaunted by those who protect their own preferences in the codes of law. But we should not flaunt, be seen, celebrate that which God has given to us ‑‑ the ability to love another human being who happens to be of the same gender.
We no longer seek approval from those who differ, but affirmation. If there is a time and place for everything, there is a time to flaunt. With pride, we advertise in both gay and mainstream press the gatherings of Integrity/Chicago. We do not seek to be separate, but to empower men and women ‑‑ straight, lesbian, gay, bisexual ‑‑ to have the pride to flaunt, to be themselves, in their parishes and in our world.
The Lord is risen, and shall never be controlled by a tomb again. Our new life will never be suffocated by a closet again. And we will flaunt it, and shout it, and be seen in marches and parades until new life is freely available to all.
Be gentle, be loving. In the resurrected life with Christ, be yourself ‑‑ the self that God made. The stone is rolled away from the tomb as the closet door is open. I pray that we can be the instruments by which the Church comes out of her closet, too.
-----
Dan Wall is the Convener of Integrity/Chicago. This article appeared in the chapter newsletter, "News Notes."
********************
*BUY THIS CD!*
by Kim Byham
I would have been tempted to tell you to buy "Memento Bittersweet," a new Catalyst CD (and available in the fall on cassette), simply because one of the five composers is Lee Gannon, a member of Integrity/Middle Tennessee. That plus the fact that part of the proceeds will go to Classical Action, a leading non-profit organization dedicated to fighting the HIV virus. Of course, truth in reviewing compels me to report that Catalyst is BMG's Classics' label for new music and Scott works for BMG (parent also to RCA and Arista). But all of these justifications are unnecessary because this is an extraordinary recording. Don't take my word, here is what "Stereo Review," May 1994, said:
"'Memento Bittersweet' presents five attractive, accessible works by contemporary composers with two things in common: an audible joy at the ability to create music, and HIV disease (three have already died of AIDS). Not all of the works are fully formed, but there is a conspicuous lack of sentimentality.
"The biggest piece in the 66 minute collection is the Piano Concerto by Kevin Oldham (1966-1993), which is gleefully derivative of those by Ravel, Gershwin, Rachmaninoff, and others.
"'Tango Bittersweet' by Fred Hersch (b. 1955) is a Latin flavored song without words for piano and cello. Chris DeBlasio (1959-1993) is represented by the tuneful 'God Is Our Righteousness' for the unlikely combination of acoustic guitar and organ. Much more fully realized is the Variations on 'Amazing Grace' for English horn and organ by Calvin Hampton (1938-1984), a surprise-filled work with some incredible sounds drawn out of the horn by Thomas Stacy.
"The most substantial piece is 'Triad-O-Rama' by Lee Gannon (b. 1960), performed by the Aspen Wind Quintet. That's appropriate since it seems to have been composed under the spell of Darius Milhaud, a frequent Aspen visitor, but Gannon's own distinctively playful voice comes through."
The late Calvin Hampton was organist at Calvary Church, New York, and had five compositions in "The Hymnal 1982."
Integrity will be selling "Memento Bittersweet" at our booth at General Convention. Ask for it at your local record store or you may order a copy on the form below.
********************
*MEMENTO BITTERSWEET*
Please send me ____ copies of Memento Bittersweet. I enclose a check or money order for $12.00 made out to "Integrity" for each CD ordered. Send my CD('s) to:
Name: _____________________________________
Street: ___________________________________
City, State, Zip: _________________________
Mail to Order to: Integrity - CD; PO Box 5202; New York, NY 10185-5202
********************
*MEET YOUR NEW BOARD*
The 1994 Integrity elections have resulted in the largest turnover in the composition of the board in the last ten years. There are also substantial changes in demographics. The previous board had five men and four women; the new board will be 8 to 1 male, with one vacancy. [This happened even though the nominating committee was 3 to 1 female.] On the old board, five members were from the south, two from the northeast and one each from the west and midwest. Despite the division of the southern region into the South Central and Southeast, there will be only three members from the old southern region, but there will now be three from the west. The numbers from the midwest and the northeast are unchanged. The number of ordained members of the board has doubled to two with the addition of David Norgard as Secretary. Three of the board members have served as dean of an Integrity national convention: Robert Heylmun in 1993, Rob Rynearson in 1992, and Kim Byham in 1984.
Officers and Regional Vice Presidents were elected for two year terms commencing October 1, 1994. This date was changed from the last Sunday in June by an amendment to the bylaws last year to provide continuity through General Convention. Kim Byham remains as Director of Communication through the end of his one year term at the fall board meeting in Atlanta, Columbus Day Weekend. The office of Director of Development, currently held by Fred Ellis, will become vacant with his becoming president. It is anticipated that the two directorships will be filled at the fall meeting and anyone interested in serving should contact Ellis.
Although the bylaws were amended to make the immediate past president a member of the board, Bruce Garner is undecided about whether he will continue in that role. Thus he is not included in the computations above.
*The new President is Fred H. Ellis, III, of Nashville*. He was a founder of Integrity/Middle Tennessee and served as Co-Convener since the founding. He represented Integrity both in the diocese and with other lesbian/gay organizations in the area. Ellis noted, "We have seen our chapter grow from 5 people to 40 members, and over 80 people on our mailing list. As Co-Convener, I have been involved in presentations to numerous parishes in our diocese, and to the School of Theology at the University of The South."
Ellis represented Integrity Inc. at The Witness Forum, held at Trinity School of Ministry, and at the House of Bishops Meeting in Panama. He currently serves on the Board of Directors, in the position of Director of Development.
Ellis has been a member of Christ Church, Nashville, for eleven years, serving in a wide variety of capacities. He also served on the Diocese of Tennessee Working Group for Human Sexuality. In addition, he served on the organizing committee for the 1992 and 1993 Gay Pride Celebrations in Nashville.
Ellis is a supervisor in the reservations department of a major airline, which will allow him to do considerable chapter visitation. He looks forward to getting invitations from all chapters to visit.
Asked about his goals for the organization, Ellis said, "We need to empower our local chapters to be a greater presence in their diocese and communities. We must work together on the national level, to insure that we are presenting a united front. We need to continue our educational efforts throughout the Episcopal Church, both locally and nationally, to insure we achieve our goals."
*The Rev. David L. Norgard has served as Secretary since April 22*, when he was elected by the Board to fill the vacancy left by the resignation of Sue Thompson. He ran without opposition in the May election. Norgard recently moved to San Francisco and has just been elected Rector of the Church of St. John the Evangelist there. He is a member of Integrity/New York.
Norgard served through April as Missioner and Executive Director of The Oasis, a ministry of the Diocese of Newark with the lesbian/gay community and as a member of the Diocesan Council and the Diocesan Commission on Ministry. In addition, he is a member of the National Church's Standing Commission on Evangelism.
A ten year Integrity member (originally of Integrity/Twin Cities), Norgard was also a founder of the Yale Lesbian/Gay Cooperative, and served on the boards of both chapters. Norgard was openly gay and in a relationship when he was ordained in 1984. It was his partner's transfer which led to his relocation to San Francisco.
Norgard has suggested advocacy training on the local level, which could go hand-in-hand with chapter development, especially in more conservative areas of the Church. "Through its ministry of advocacy, Integrity has helped countless Episcopalians see the issue of sexuality in terms of justice. By continuing to strengthen the witness of local chapters as well as the network which exists between them, Integrity will make further great strides in bringing this understanding to the Church."
*J. Mark Crouse, a member of Integrity/San Diego, is the new Treasurer*. He is eminently qualified to fill the position, but he must meet the very high standards established by Tim Caison. Among other parish activities, Crouse has served as Clerk of Vestry and Church Treasurer. He has been Finance Chair of Names Project San Diego County and a board member of Creative Response (arts organizations' employees raising money for HIV-care giving organizations). He served as Treasurer of Integrity/San Diego and as Treasurer for Integrity '93 National Convention.
Crouse is currently Event Accountant at the San Diego Convention Center, City Concourse and Civic Theatre. He hopes Integrity will continue to expand its role in the Episcopal Church "as a non-violent, though non-passive instrument for inclusion with full guarantee of participation for all gay, lesbian and bi-sexual peoples."
*Succeeding Gil Grady as Western Regional Vice President is Robert Heylmun, who is co-convener of Integrity/San Diego*. He has been chapter newsletter editor since 1986 and, as noted above, was Dean of the 1993 Integrity National Convention. He serves on the Cathedral Chapter and in numerous other roles at the cathedral.
Prior to his retirement, Heylmun was an openly gay instructor of English composition at University of California. He suggests that "Integrity needs more heterosexual Christians among its membership, and it ought to pursue the enlistment of accepting Christians as helpers in our struggle for "a place at the table." We ought to sponsor and keep track of the results of sexuality dialogues in our parishes, helping heterosexual Christians understand who we are."
*The first Southeast Regional Vice President will be Warren A. Carlson, who is convener of Integrity/Central Florida*. He and his partner live near Orlando in Altamente Springs, FL. He is a Lay Eucharistic Minister and Sub-deacon at Cathedral Church of St. Luke, Orlando.
Carlson is a financial consultant, licensed in insurance and securities. He wants to help chapters by using his experience as a resource person, communicator, enervator, and "mollifier" in accommodating sometimes diverging interests of chapter members into a forward direction. He also wants to use his "experience and status gained as a battle scarred, but respected cathedral communicant, advocate, and spokesperson, along with clerical contacts and knowledge of the national church."
*Phil Nicholson, the new Northeast Regional Vice President, and his partner, are described elsewhere in this issue*. Nicholson was the Integrity founder of Dignity-Integrity/Mid Hudson. He will be the first national board member from a joint chapter since 1985. He lives in a sylvan setting in Poughquag, New York, near Poughkeepsie.
He served two years doing missionary work in Africa as a Companion, Order of the Holy Cross. He has served as vestry member and warden of his parish, and in various other positions including parish delegate to diocesan convention. For the national church in 1993, he served as technical manager of a major data collection operation. In the Diocese of New York, he is a member of the Diocesan Episcopal AIDS Committee and the Diocesan Committee on Human Sexuality.
Nicholson recently retired as a senior programmer for a major computer corporation. He served as a member of his County Committee for Human Rights. He was vice-president of the Poughkeepsie Gay and Lesbian Association and served six years as AIDS Hotline and Buddy volunteer. He served as an Integrity volunteer at the 1991 General Convention and will do so again in 1994.
Asked why he wants to serve, Nicholson said, "I believe I have a calling to ministry. This calling has been rejected by the church; I believe the Holy Spirit is pointing me in the right direction."
*The Rev. (and newly) Dr. Claudia Windal will continue as Midwest Regional Vice President, a post she has held since October, 1993*. She says, "I am openly a lesbian/priest in the diocese and the National Church. Eight years ago, I lost my parish based upon my sexual orientation." She was ordained in the Diocese of Chicago in 1982.
Windal served as Integrity's chaplain at General Convention in Phoenix and will do so again in Indianapolis. She is a columnist and contributing editor of this journal. She is a member of Integrity/Twin Cities and lives with her partner in Minneapolis.
She has been involved in HIV/AIDS work for 12 years - primarily in the gay community. Presently, she is HIV/AIDS Case Manager in the Indian Community. She is also a registered nurse.
Windal commented, "I believe there needs to be a strengthening of vision: beyond that of individual chapters *to* concern and outreach to the *whole* organization. There has been a sort of tunnel vision to date; an attitude that if all is well in our diocese, it must be so in all dioceses."
*Rob Rynearson, incumbent Southern Regional Vice President, will become the first South Central Regional Vice President*. It was largely due to Rynearson's contention that the previous Southern Region was too large that the split was made by the Board last year, effective October 1.
Rynearson has served three terms as convener of Integrity/Houston and was Dean of the National Convention there in 1992. He is extremely active at Palmer Memorial Episcopal Church. He is the owner of a city-wide floral delivery service. He hopes "to continue to make the Church focus on its Baptismal Covenant to respect the dignity of every human being with no exceptions."
*Kim Byham, Director of Communications, is now the longest serving board member in Integrity history*. His service since 1984 surpasses that of the second longest incumbent, the Rev. L. Paul Woodrum, who served from 1982 to 1991. Byham was National President from 1987 to 1990 and since then has published this journal and served as Integrity's media liaison. He has also chaired Integrity's efforts at General Convention since 1988.
Byham and his partner, Scott Helsel, live in Guttenberg, New Jersey, across from Manhattan where they both work. Byham is an attorney. He also serves as Senior Warden of the Church of the Good Shepherd, Fort Lee, and numerous other functions there. He is First Alternate Deputy to General Convention from the Diocese of Newark and serves on the diocesan committee on constitution and canons and on the editorial board of the diocesan newspaper, also called "The Voice."
The Directors of Communication and Development are elected by the Board for one-year terms at the fall meeting.
********************
*EPISCOPAL CARING RESPONSE TO AIDS PINS*
The Episcopal Caring Response to AIDS, the unified HIV/AIDS ministry of parishes in the Diocese of Washington and Integrity/Washington, has designed a beautiful new logo. This logo is now available as a lapel pin for a $10.00 contribution to the Episcopal Caring Response to AIDS, as well as on T-shirts and sweat shirts, for $13.50 and $25 donations, respectively. Donations can be sent to ECRA at 733 15th St., Suite 315, Washington, DC 20005-2112. Their phone number is 202-678-0817.
********************
*METHODISTS DEFINE HOMOSEXUALITY*
Sound Familiar?
by Kim Byham
In one of the more unusual moves by a religious body, the nearly 1,000 voting members of the United Methodist Church's California-Pacific Annual Conference (equivalent to our diocese) decided on June 18 what constitutes a "self-avowed practicing homosexual." In the process, they arrived at a "compromise" not unlike the Clinton administration's "Don't ask, don't tell."
The stated reason for taking the action was to stave off "witch hunts," as well as to adhere to a denominational ban on lesgay clergy. The agreed-upon definition was that a "self-avowed practicing homosexual" is "one who affirms publicly and intends it to be known that she/he engages in or intends to engage in physical sexual behavior with a person of the same gender." The practice of homosexuality is defined as "active involvement, with behavior that has a sexual-romantic focus." The document also specifies that self-avowal is not implied by "a private conversation" or by "a statement under duress or in response to a direct question." Further, practicing does not mean "behavior such as friendship or two persons' living together as roommates; socializing or meeting with homosexuals; speaking in support or in agreement with homosexuality."
The statement was presented by a committee appointed at the conference's 1993 session after members had reached an impasse on the issue. Developers of the statement said they purposely focused on public declarations and behavior in consideration of the church's stated prohibition of "self-avowed, practicing homosexuals" as clergy.
The Rev. Lynne Hundley, co-convener of the developing group, said it was offered "with heavy hearts for the pain and suffering this issue has caused and will continue to cause the church and persons we care about." Hundley said the committee tried to represent a myriad of opinion in the conference and across the church on the issue of homosexuality, and to respect church law.
"It was not our job to decide the rightness or wrongness of homosexuality," she said. "Like it or not, the General Conference (the church's highest law-making body) has already done that." The United Methodist Book of Discipline (church law) first included an assertion that homosexual behavior runs contrary to "Christian teaching" in 1972. Later, laws relating to ordination were amended to exclude lesbians and gay men.
Several attempts to pass a churchwide definition of "self-avowed practicing" have failed. Last year, the denomination's "supreme court," the Judicial Council, ruled that General Conference (equivalent to our General Convention) and each adjudicatory or conference must define those terms for their own use.
The California-Pacific Annual Conference includes United Methodist churches in southern California, Hawaii and Guam. The denomination has 68 annual (regional) conferences in the United States, and 20 others in Europe, the Philippines and Africa. -----
This article is based on a United Methodist News Service Report by Edna Steinman.
********************
*KUDOS TO LA*
In running the obituary of noted organist David John Falconer (organist at St. James', Los Angeles, since 1983) who was killed during the robbery of a convenience store, "The Episcopal News" of the Diocese of Los Angeles may have established a first for a diocesan publication. Listed as his survivor was "his life partner, the Rev. David Walker of Los Angeles." To our knowledge, there has not been a previous instance of a lesgay clergy spouse being listed as a survivor in such a publication, though it has happened in numerous instances when the surviving partner was a lay person.
********************
*CLAUDIA'S COLUMN*
It's morning, Jesus. It's morning, and here's that light and sound all over again. I've got to move fast ... get into the bathroom, wash up, grab a bite to eat, and run some more.
I just don't feel like it. What I really want to do is get back into bed, pull up the covers, and sleep. All I seem to want today is the big sleep, and here I've got to run all over again.
Where am I running? You know these things I can't understand. It's not that I need to have you to tell me. What counts most is just that somebody knows, and it's you. That helps a lot.
So, I'll follow along, OK? But lead, please. Now I've got to run. Are you running with me, Jesus?
The Rev. Malcolm Boyd, "Are You Running With Me, Jesus," p. 13.
This sounds much like the prayer of many of Integrity's General Convention volunteers. Although it seems like only yesterday that we completed our work in Phoenix, several dozen of us are preparing to run in Indianapolis at yet another General Convention.
To what end are we running? For what purpose? Aren't we experiencing a less hostile environment for lesbigay Episcopalians? As I prepared for our April Board meeting, I heard from one chapter that their diocese is lesbigay sensitive to the extent that there "is not an enemy or a local cause to rally us ... to keep the chapter alive." Another convener shared with me that the parish church where the chapter meets, is "totally inclusive" and that there were 40 lesbian or gay people in church one recent Sunday. "Most Integrity chapters flourish through adversity, and we don't have any." To what end are your Integrity volunteers running at this General Convention? We are running/working to make it possible for every Integrity chapter to find themselves in dioceses which are lesbigay sensitive to the extent that there are no enemies of the lesbigay Episcopal community. And until that end is attained, my sisters and brothers, our community needs each and every Integrity member and chapter to work for that end. You and I do not live in isolation, my friends; the attitudes of homophobia, alienation, humiliation, and rejection that exist today within our church, affect each of us (even if we don't directly and personally experience them) because we are members of the entire body. And as members of the whole, we are obligated to reach out, support, work with and for our sisters and brothers still in need.
We must call our church to task; not only those who rally against us, but perhaps more importantly, those who exclaim, "isn't it awful, your exclusion and oppression" while doing little or nothing to change attitudes and policies. As we prepare for this task, I am reminded of Jesus on his way to Calvary, and his meeting the women of Jerusalem. I offer for our work during this next General Convention a meditation of that meeting.
JESUS MEETS THE WOMEN OF JERUSALEM
How our church is filled with mourners:
"We support you."
"We care about each of you lesbigay Episcopalians."
"Isn't it awful, the oppression, the hatred, the alienation, the condemnation, of lesbigay persons?"
"How dare they?"
"They?" we respond.
"They?"
"Weep not for us ... weep for yourselves and for those who come after you."
Do no grieve for our present conditions nor our past experiences.
Rather, Do something to prevent others from experiencing what we have.
Speak up at vestry meetings in support of a parish statement of inclusion.
Become delegates to diocesan conventions.
Work to become deputies to General Convention.
Make your disgust for exclusion of lesbigay persons known to your rector, your bishop, the Presiding Bishop.
Attend meetings of your diocesan council and ask about the inclusion of lesbigay persons in the life of the diocese.
Love your lesbigay
parishioners and
Welcome us in your dioceses, your parishes,
your lives.
Walk along side of us.
Do not simply weep for us.
Do not cease to exist as an Integrity chapter because
you feel safe and secure.
Thank you for your concern.
Now, act on that concern
so that those who follow us
Will experience the love and embrace of Christ
within the Episcopal Church.
********************
*A BRILLIANT IDEA FROM WASHINGTON*
Something Every Chapter Can Do to Make a Difference
by John C. Bradley
Integrity/Washington has donated copies of "A Book of Revelations," Integrity's own publication, to all Fairfax County, Virginia, public libraries. The purpose of the donation is to counter the libraries' purchase of anti-gay titles, which was forced by radical fundamentalists.
The chapter, in a press release, explained:
"Religious extremists spread the myth that it is impossible to be both a dedicated Christian and gay or lesbian. But the truth is that there are millions of gay and lesbian people who faithfully worship Christ and serve the church. Sadly, many gay and lesbian Christians have been forced by homophobes to make a choice between their spirituality and sexuality. This has caused incredible anguish. We want all lesbian and gay Christians who are struggling to integrate these two parts of themselves, especially young people, to know that they can joyfully love God and someone of the same sex. We were born gay by the grace of God and we are unconditionally loved by the One who made us."
"A Book of Revelations" is a collection of 52 autobiographies of gay and lesbian Anglicans, edited by Integrity's founder, Dr. Louie Crew, and published in 1991. Copies are available for individuals and in quantity discounts from the editorial office. The donation by Integrity/Washington is part of a book drive sponsored by the Fairfax Lesbian and Gay Citizens Association. For more information, including how you might undertake a similar effort in your community, contact Tracey L. Kennedy, the coordinator of the book drive, at 703-941-9429.
-----
John C. Bradley is Co-Convener of Integrity/Washington.
********************
*GOOD NEWS FROM THE NATIONAL CHURCH*
The Rt. Rev. Walter Dennis, Suffragan Bishop of New York, said in "A Personal Preview of the Seventy-First General Convention of the Episcopal Church" in the Pentecost 1994 issue of the "Sewanee Theological Review," that he considers the Standing Commission on Human Affairs' Report in the 1994 Blue Book "a splendid piece of work." Indeed it is. Thanks are owed to all the members of the Commission and especially to Bruce Garner. It is easy to see from the greater sensitivity expressed to lesgay issues that having an openly gay member has made a difference.
We regret that space does not permit us to reprint the entire document, particularly the complete section on youth, of which only small excerpts directly related to homosexuality appear here. We will be glad to send you a copy of the complete document if you write or call the Editorial office.
MEMBERSHIP
The Rt. Rev. Frederick Borsch, Diocese of Los Angeles (1994)
The Rt. Rev. Edward L. Salmon, Jr., Vice-Chair, Diocese of South Carolina (1997)
The Rev. Reynolds S. Cheney II, Diocese of West Tennessee (1997)
The Rev. Gay C. Jennings, Secretary, Diocese of Ohio
Dr. Howard R. Anderson, Chair, Diocese of Minnesota (1994) resigned, replaced by Ms. Dawn Conley, Diocese of Chicago ( 1994)
Mr. Bruce Garner, Diocese of Atlanta (1997)
Dr. Germaine A. Hoston, Diocese of Maryland (1997)
Mr. Mel Matteson, Diocese of Olympia (1994)
REPORT OF THE COMMISSION WITH RESOLUTIONS
The Promises
"Will you strive for justice and peace among all people, and respect the dignity of every human being?" *I will, with God's help*. "Will you seek and serve Christ in all persons, loving your neighbor as yourself?" *I will, with God's help*.
These two promises from the Baptismal Covenant are at the heart of the work of the Standing Commission on Human Affairs. In response to God's gracious and boundless love for us, we have promised to live lives of respect for and service to others. Those two promises would be difficult enough to fulfill if they required respect and dignity for people merely like ourselves; but in fact, they require it toward all persons.
During the last triennium, this Standing Commission on Human Affairs has struggled with the Episcopal Church's continuing failure to live up to those promises -- a struggle we want to share with the Church in this report. To be sure, no individual and no institution can perfectly fulfill God's purposes for them; and yet, we have become convinced that there are two glaring examples of our inability to do so. At best, they are the result of inattention and blindness; at worst, they are examples of our prejudice and misplaced priorities which allow us to "write off" certain fellow human beings in our midst. In either case, it is time to acknowledge our sin and to recommit ourselves to the respect and service we pledge in the Baptismal Covenant.
The Focus
During the 1992-1994 Triennium, this Standing Commission on Human Affairs has focused on two groups of people who desperately need ‑‑ but are not receiving ‑‑ the attention, respect, resources and loving concern of this Church. One group is as near as our own families; the other is nearer than most of us probably realize. The first is as valued as "motherhood and apple pie" ‑‑ at least in theory; the second is often hated and feared. The first runs the risk of losing our attention; the second is often the victim of scapegoating and the target of our anger and derision. Both have been marginalized.
The first are our children ‑‑ all of our children, and particularly those at risk. The second are our sisters and brothers in Christ who find themselves ‑‑ among other things ‑‑ to be lesbian and gay.
The Goals
In our report on civil and human rights for gay men and lesbians, we will contrast the theory and the reality of the Church's relationships with its lesbian and gay members. We will raise some questions which trouble us about our actions (and inactions) as Episcopalians and as Christian citizens with respect to lesbian and gay people.
The Question
Finally, we hope to leave the General Convention and the members of this Church with one important question: Does baptism confer full membership in the Body of Christ or not?
"An Outline of the Faith commonly called the Catechism" says that "Holy Baptism is the sacrament by which God adopts us as his children and makes us members of Christ's Body, the Church, and inheritors of the kingdom of God." Indeed, each newly baptized member is greeted by the full congregation with: "We receive you into the household of God ... share with us in his eternal priesthood." The troubling question with which this report deals is whether or not the Body of Christ has first and second class membership.
*Part I-A: Children and Youth at Risk*
*Homosexuality*. Although seldom acknowledged and rarely discussed, teenagers who ne to know themselves to be gay or lesbian face special pressures. Positive self-esteem is difficult enough for a teenager to achieve, without having to do so as a person whose sexual orientation is the object of ridicule, prejudice, and hatred. "Homo" and "queer" are epithets of the meanest order on any playground or in any school cafeteria ‑‑ beginning at a frighteningly early age. Not only must lesbian and gay youth withstand ridicule and, often, violence from their peers, they risk outright rejection from their parents should they decide "come out." The combination of the culture's condemnation of homosexuality and the a nation from one's home and parents (supposedly a haven of security and support) causes an unusually high rate of attempted suicide. "Gay youth are two to three times more likely to attempt suicide than heterosexual young people. It is estimated that up to 30% of the completed youth suicides are committed by lesbian and gay youth annually ... . Twenty-six percent of gay youth are forced to leave home because of conflicts with their families over their sexual identities. Up to half engage in prostitution to support themselves, greatly increasing their risk for HIV infection."(2)
*How might a commitment to kids look in a congregation?*
If the Episcopal Church were to take seriously its commitment to our children, what might we see happening in our parishes and communities? What might a children's advocacy "wish list" look like for the Episcopal Church?
...
3. We, the Church, might make all kinds of families feel more welcome if we were to use another, more inclusive term for families, *i.e.*, households. We must make it abundantly and frequently clear that the term "parish family" refers to the entire parish community, and is meant to include everyone, no matter what the configuration of the household.
...
9. Members of a parish, at the time of the every member canvass, might be asked what they will pledge to do in the coming year for the young people of the parish and/or the community. One's lay ministry in the world might include being a Big Brother/Sister, offering respite care to parents of severely disabled children, tutoring a student in a local school, helping to organize a local chapter of P-Flag (a support group for Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays) or working with a school board to get effective and complete AIDS education into the school curriculum. Then the parish could celebrate and lift up those ministries before the whole congregation using "A Form of Commitment to Christian Service" from The Book of Common Prayer.
*Part II: Dignity and Full Membership for All*
In the 1992-1994 triennium, this Standing Commission on Human Affairs has struggled with our‑‑the Episcopal Church's‑‑treatment of and attitude toward lesbian and gay people, within and beyond the Church.(17) It is clear from the baptismal promises we make, to "respect the dignity of every human being" and to "seek and serve Christ in all persons," that everyone is to be respected and served.
*What does the Church say it believes?*
Former General Conventions have passed a number of resolutions related to people whose sexual orientation is toward people of the same sex: The 1976 General Convention (Minneapolis) passed Resolution A-69: "It is the sense of this General Convention that homosexual persons are children of God who have a full and equal claim with all other persons upon the love acceptance, and pastoral concern and care of the Church." It is interesting to note in the "Journal of the Convention" that two amendments were proposed to this resolution ‑‑ one to substitute the word "all" for "homosexual," the other to add the word "forgiveness" after acceptance. Both amendments were defeated. The "Journal," with a touch of understatement no doubt, adds the comment "There was considerable discussion."
One must be careful not to interpret or read into something more than is there, but it does seem clear that this 1976 Convention intended (1) to say something positive, (2) to say it about homosexual persons specifically, and (3) not to imply that homosexual people *per se* have any more or any less to be forgiven for than anyone else.
At the same 1976 General Convention, Resolution A-71 was passed: "This General Convention expresses its conviction that homosexual persons are entitled to equal protection of the laws with all other citizens, and calls upon our society to see that such protect n is provided in actuality." This resolution seems to acknowledge that there is a gap between the equal protection provided in the law, and the equal enforcement of those laws.
This same 1976 General Convention put off the question of ordination of homosexuals until the Joint Commission on the Church in Human Affairs could study the matter and report back.
The 1979 General Convention (Denver) received the report of the Human Affairs Commission, and in response to the ordination question, passed a resolution, "That this General Convention recommend to Bishops, Pastors, Vestries, Commissions on Ministry and Standing Committees, the following considerations as they continue to exercise their proper canonical functions in the selection and approval of persons for ordination." The resolution goes on to say, "There should be no barrier to the ordination of qualified persons of either heterosexual or homosexual orientation whose behavior the Church considers wholesome," and, "We believe it is not appropriate for this Church to ordain a practicing homosexual, or any person who is engaged in heterosexual relations outside of marriage." Later in the Convention, 21 bishops signed and entered into the minutes a statement expressing their inability to associate with the resolution and its implications, the position of the bishops being that implementation of the resolutions would make lesbian and gay lay persons second-class citizens of the Church. They noted further that, as "this action of the House is recommendatory and not prescriptive, we give notice as we are answerable before Almighty God that we cannot accept these recommendations or implement them in our Dioceses ... ."
The 1982 General Convention (New Orleans) resolved, "That the 67th General Convention reaffirms the actions taken by the General Conventions of 1976 and 1979 affirming that homosexual persons are children of God and are entitled to full civil rights." (Resolution B-6 1 A.)
The 1985 General Convention (Anaheim) resolved, "That the 68th General Convention urge each diocese of this Church to find an effective way to foster a better understanding of homosexual persons, to dispel myths and prejudices about homosexuality, to provide pastoral support, and to give life to the claim of homosexual persons 'upon the love, acceptance, and pastoral care and concern of the Church' as recognized by the General Convention resolution in 1976."
The 1988 General Convention (Detroit) resolved, "That this 69th General Convention decries the increase of violence against homosexual persons and calls upon law enforcement officials across the land to be sensitive to this peril and to prosecute the perpetrators of these acts to the fullest extent of the law; and be it further Resolved, that the Executive Council be directed to communicate with the Attorney General of the United States, and the Attorneys General of the several States the expressed wishes of this General Convention that such violence be decreased markedly; and be it further Resolved, that all Bishops, and especially the Presiding Bishop, be encouraged to speak openly and publicly to repudiate the misconception that the Church encourages such violence, and to counter the public declarations of those who claim that AIDS is the punishment of God upon homosexual persons; and be it further Resolved, that the actions of the 65th General Convention, which declared that " homosexual persons are children of God who have a full and equal claim with all others upon the love, acceptance, and pastoral concern and care of the Church" be re-emphasized to all members of this Church.
The 1991 General Convention finally acknowledged in Resolution A104sa a "discontinuity" between the traditional teachings of the Church and the experience of some of its members, acknowledging also the Church's failure to resolve these matters legislatively.
*How well is the Church practicing what it preaches?*
This Standing Commission had originally intended to deal only with the civil and human rights of homosexual persons in the world, but once again it seems imperative that we get our own house in order first. These resolutions are recorded in the "Journals of the General Conventions" ‑‑ but how well are they being lived out across the Church?
We have heard some good news across the Church. During the summer of 1992, at the national convention of Integrity, members of the Standing Commission on Human Affairs held a hearing and offered lesbian and gay Episcopalians (full members through baptism in the Body of Christ) an opportunity to offer testimony about what life is like for them in the Episcopal Church:
‑‑ In one diocese, over 50 congregations have asked to be listed in a brochure making it clear that lesbians and gay men are welcome in their faith communities.
‑‑ A lay man reported that his retired bishop, who had always been opposed to the gay community in his diocese, did an about face as the result of getting to know several lesbians and gay men one-on-one, and came to believe that their full inclusion in the Church was, among other things, an issue of justice.
‑‑ A lay woman said she had never been treated poorly in her parish, was asked to read a lesson at her diocesan convention, and appreciated her bishop's celebration of the eucharist at an Integrity meeting.
‑‑ A lay man spoke with pride about his bishop and diocese, and their support of lesbian and gay people, lay and ordained.
Mostly, however, the news was not good:
‑‑ A lay woman and her partner of 27 years told of being asked by the rector of a parish to which they had moved to confess as sin their personal relationship, and they were denied communion.
‑‑ A lay man was told by his rector, to whom he had gone for counseling, that if he became a practicing homosexual, he would have his "blessings withdrawn by the Lord." He was devastated when the rector went on in sermons and articles to publicly denounce gays as people with emotional problems.
‑‑ A lay man told us that although he and his partner of many years are well accepted in their parish, the rector did not have the courage to include their names on the regular anniversary list in the intercessions. The man also wryly noted that the parish has not, on the other hand, had any problems accepting their financial pledge.
‑‑ A lay man spoke of the dangerous double message he experiences from the Church: on the one hand, he hears, "We love you," while on the other hand, he sees that "some people get squashed, wounded, rejected," and feels that "God is very distant." He also spoke of having been encouraged to undergo an exorcism to drive out the demons of homosexuality.
-‑ A lay man told of a heterosexual woman who made a statement to the newspaper in support of gay rights. Her rector told her that she was a scandal to the Church, revoked her lay reader's license, and told her she was no longer welcome in the parish.
A gay man and member of Integrity received the same treatment from the same rector, but was reinstated on the condition that he never again speak about his sexuality or in support of gay rights.
*What does the testimony mean?*
It is clear to us on the Standing Commission for Human Affairs, and it comes as no real surprise, that the legislation of the past General Conventions has not changed all attitudes and behaviors. It does seem odd to us, however, that the very people who appeal to the 1979 General Convention resolution against the ordination of "practicing" homosexuals as if it were canon law, are sometimes the same people who ignore the resolutions upholding full civil rights for lesbians and gay men and which proclaim that "homosexual persons are children of God who have a full and equal claim with all other persons upon the love, acceptance, and pastoral concern and care of the Church." The recommendatory nature of the 1979 resolution on ordination must once again be pointed out: "That this General Convention recommend to Bishops, Pastors, Vestries, Commissions on Ministry and Standing Committees, the following considerations as they continue to exercise their proper canonical functions in the selection and approval of persons for ordination: ... ."
*More discontinuity*
What is clear is that we are not living up to the legislative stands we have already taken with respect to supporting full civil and human rights for homosexual persons. We must point out to the Episcopal Church, of which we are a part, that we are not "walking our talk."
There are other evidences of the discontinuity between what we say and what we do in the Episcopal Church today:
Virtually every congregation in his Church has a red, white and blue sign hanging nearby which proclaims, "The Episcopal Church Welcomes You." The truth of the matter is that if one is lesbian or gay, and especially if one is open and honest about it, many Episcopal churches do not welcome you. In fact, some Episcopal churches will not even tolerate you. Some will forbid you to be a lay reader; some believe you should be "healed"; a few will deny you communion or even exorcise you. It's time we seriously asked ourselves whether or not we are willing to live up to the welcome promised by our signs.
It is ironic that in this Decade of Evangelism, we seem intent on alienating and keeping out one of the few identifiable groups of people who want to be welcomed in.
*A Troubling Image*
For many lesbian and gay people, the Church has been like an abusive parent. Like many abusive parents, the Church sincerely professes love for all its children and is quick to deny wrongdoing. But in fact, the Church often heaps abuse on the heads of some of its children ‑‑ sometimes denying them bread at the table, tearing away at their self-esteem with shouts of "abomination," and denying them the solace and comfort promised in the word "family." It is time for the Church to admit that it is not an innocent bystander in this abuse, but too often a perpetrator.
In an abusive situation, we usually counsel people to get out, to remove themselves from harm's way. Many have already left the Church ‑‑ the Episcopal Church and others. But many have stayed in our midst. Presiding Bishop Browning recently paid tribute to them for their perseverance in the struggle for acceptance in the church: "I thought about your origins. I thought about what it has cost you to be honest about who you are. I thought about how accustomed you must have become to having people, who have never met you, form judgments about you based upon what you are rather than who you are ... . And I wish with all my heart that you had never had to get used to that ... . Is it possible to know the pain of what you have known and still find it within yourself to remain in the body where so much of that pain has occurred?" Along with the Presiding Bishop, we on this Standing Commission sincerely hope so.
*Our children are listening*
Some of our sons are gay, some of our daughters are lesbian. And they are listening to our debates and dialogues and pronouncements. But mostly they are watching ‑‑ watching to see whether they are an abomination or a child of God in the eyes of their parents and their Church and their God.
What many of them are hearing from us, the Church and the culture, is hatred. For our lesbian and gay kids, who internalize this hatred, they learn that it is an awful thing to be who they are. Fear of discovery, rejection and violence becomes a part of their everyday lives. Our "straight" kids, on the other hand, often learn that it's okay to hate, ridicule, reject and bash their lesbian and gay peers. There is an even greater burden on lesbian and gay young people in communities of color, where homosexuality often carries an even greater stigma.
What kids see and hear from us will have an incalculable impact. If lesbian and gay youth hear hatred and condemnation, many will consider and some will attempt suicide. According to a U.S. Health and Human Services report, "gay adolescents were two to three times more likely than peers to attempt suicide, accounting for as many as 30% of completed youth suicides each year."(18) If they hear that their future is a disgusting lifestyle, many will end up in heterosexual marriages desperately trying to be someone they are not, often bringing untold pain to themselves and others. If they have no positive role models for how to put one's lesbian/gay sexuality together with one's Christianity, then they will assume it cannot be done.
As we learn to respect the dignity of every human being and seek to serve the Christ in all our children, we may save one gay boy from being thrown out of his home, forced to sell his body to provide for himself. We may save one lesbian girl from running away to drugs to ease the pain. We might even save some parents and their relationships with their lesbian and gay children, if we helped them understand rather than reject their children. We might save one girl or boy from suicide, another from AIDS. These lesbian and gay kids are our children too, and it's time we tried.
Whether the numbers of lesbian and gay people are ten percent or one percent or something in between, the same God who knows the number of hairs on our head does not want to lose one of God's children. There are no throwaways in God's kingdom ‑‑ not one.
*Full membership in the Body of Christ*
This Standing Commission believes we would be taking a giant, positive step forward if we were to live up to the "full and equal claim ... upon the love, acceptance and pastoral concern and care of the Church" promised in the 1976 resolution. Inevitably though, the question of full membership in the Church also leads us to the questions of the ordination of lesbian and gay people and the blessing of their monogamous, committed, life-long-intentioned relationships.
This issue of full membership is at the heart of the question about ordination. "No Christian has a right to be ordained; but any Christian has, or ought to have, a right to be considered for ordination ... . Baptism does not merely confer church membership. Rather, it makes a statement about one's basic humanity. It speaks of one's relation to the Christ in and for whom one is created. However one is regarded by the standards of society, baptism is a gracious affirmation of worth and dignity. It grants the freedom of the City of God ... . These two things, ordination and baptism, are linked. What is said about redeemed humanity in baptism and in ordination should be congruent ... . To put the matter in terms of moral discipline, if lesbian or gay sexual orientation represents a flaw in one's humanity so basic as to prevent one from being considered for ordination, should it not also prevent one from being baptized?"(19) A similar thought was expressed in the debate over women's ordination: "If the Church is not ready to ordain women, then it should not baptize them."
The fifty bishops who have signed the 1979 minority view statement (the original 21 who signed in 1979, plus an additional 29 who added their signatures in 1988) recognized this issue when they wrote, "This action [of the majority] also speaks a word of condemning judgment against countless laypersons of homosexual orientation who are rendered by its implications second-class citizens in the Church of their baptism, fit to receive all other sacraments but the grace of Holy Order ‑‑ unless, in a sacrifice not asked of heterosexual persons generally, they abandon all hope of finding human fulfillment, under God, in a sexual and supportive relationship. This action, thus, makes a mockery of the vow and commitment which the Church has made to them in that same sacrament of baptism, to 'do all in [its] power to support these persons in their life in Christ' ‑‑ all of these persons, without exception ‑‑ and calls into question the vows of us all to 'strive for justice and peace among all people, and respect the dignity of every human being.'" What can we as a church do to facilitate a dialogue about how to widen the circle of Episcopalians who are supported in their committed relationships without devaluing the traditional teaching of the Church?
Those bishops who have permitted the blessing of same sex unions, and those priests who have performed them with the knowledge of their bishops, seem to have done so in an effort to respond to the "full and equal claim" resolution, and as an expression of full membership for those lesbian and gay members.
It is important, and perhaps instructive, to remind ourselves that the discussion about full membership and inclusion for lesbians and gay men is not only going on in the Episcopal Church. The question of full incorporation ‑‑ involving such issues as ordination and the blessing of lesbians and gay men committed to mutual, life-long love and support ‑‑ is being asked in virtually every denomination ‑‑ from mainline Presbyterians,
Methodists and Lutherans to the Southern Baptist Convention.
*What can be done?*
The Standing Commission on Human Affairs wants to suggest a hope-and-prayer list for how the Episcopal Church might proceed:
1. We hope the human sexuality dialogue begun in this triennium will continue. We hope that those who have not yet participated in that dialogue will join in. Even congregations with large lesbian and gay populations need to talk. There is a difference between acceptance as full members and mere tolerance. We need to keep listening and talking to one another, not with the goal of winning, but with the goal of learning from and understanding one another. In this manner, we hope the Church will use the upcoming Bishop's Pastoral Teaching as a resource in its continuing, serious, thoughtful dialogue.
2. We hope lesbians and gay men, single and partnered, will be increasingly welcomed into all levels of our Church's life. We hope that those in authority, both clergy, and laity, will use their moral and personal authority to help ensure that the Church is a safe place for everyone, and especially the vulnerable. And if it is that same lay or ordained leadership who is making it unsafe, then we hope that others ‑‑ not unlike the prophets of old, who told the kings what they didn't want to hear ‑‑ will call them to task and hold them accountable.
3. We hope lesbian and gay members of this Church will continue to seek the courage to take appropriate risks "coming out" to the rest of us. Without your faces and lives before us, we can still treat you as an issue, rather than as human beings. Many of us will value you for being you. We also want to acknowledge the painful reality that it is not safe, appropriate or prudent for some to take such a risk.
4. We hope more members of this Church will consider taking public stands against local initiatives that would deprive lesbians and gay men of their civil rights. We encourage our membership to be skeptical of those who claim that homosexuals want extra, rather than equal, rights.
5. We hope all of us, no matter what our other positions, can at least agree to speak out and deplore the increasing violence against lesbians and gay men and those "thought to be" gay.
6. Finally, we hope the members of the Episcopal Church will continue to pray ‑‑ for the Church, for God's guidance, for understanding, and for an end to the walls that separate us.
*Part III: A Vision of Unity*
We have raised difficult and complex issues for the culture and for the Church. They will not be resolved easily or quickly. But we must continue to address them, and we must "hang in there" with one another while we are discerning where our journey is taking us.
For Christians, how we treat each other is not a matter of opinion. Christ reveals to us the truth about all relationships. While we were yet sinners, Christ died for us ‑‑ an act of sacrificial love. Jesus mounted the cross in obedience to the Father's will. The Gospel of John declares this act as one which glorifies the Father. Empowered by the Holy Spirit, when we are enabled, however imperfectly, to live with each other in sacrificial love, we glorify both the Father and the Son. We see here a glimpse of the living reality of the Trinity, the three persons in perfect relationship which is the vision of all relationships.
The Baptismal Covenant offers us a glorious vision of what the Christian life can and should be. These promises call us to ministry with all of God's people, within and beyond the Church. The verbs in the baptismal promises are full of forward movement and longing for completion: continue, persevere, proclaim, seek, serve, strive. Like Abraham, we long for the "city that has foundations, whose architect and builder is God." We will not enter that city until we are reunited with God in heaven. Until then, we live with the vision.
"Will you strive for justice and peace among all people, and respect the dignity of every human being?"
*I will with God's help.*
"Will you seek and serve Christ in all persons, loving your neighbor as yourself?"
*I will with God's help.*
"Will you proclaim by word and example the Good News of God in Christ?"
*I will with God's help.*
*RESOLUTIONS*
*Resolution #A061*
Resolved, the House of __________ concurring, *That Canon 1.17.5 be amended to read as follows*:
No one shall be denied [rights or status in this Church because of race, color, or ethnic origin] *a place in the life, worship, and governance of this Church except as otherwise specified by Canon*.
EXPLANATION
This resolution is the result of the findings and report of the Standing Commission on Human Affairs for the 1992-1994 triennium.
ENDNOTES:
2. "FACTFILE," Hetrick-Martin Institute, New York, 1992, pp. 1-2.
17. The Standing Commission is very aware that there is a wide diversity of sexualities expressed across the human spectrum-even among heterosexuals. It is beyond the scope of his report and the work of this Commission to attempt to cover them all. There is much about sexuality that we are still learning. In this report we will limit ourselves to responding to the same issue addressed by several previous General Convention resolutions: homosexuality.
18. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Report of the Secretary's Task Force on Youth Suicide, Volume 3: Prevention and Interventions in Youth Suicide, Rockville, MD, 1989, as reported in "PEDIATRICS," a publication of the American Academy of Pediatrics. The official suppression of this report by the Executive Branch of the Federal Government and some members of Congress, is testimony to the denial which goes on related to these issues.
19. "Ordaining and Baptizing: The Case for Gays and Lesbians," a paper by Daniel B. Stevick, Swarthmore, Pennsylvania.
********************
*A LIFE OF SERVANT MINISTRY NOW RECOGNIZED AS DEACON*
Sister Brooke Bushong Ordained
by Patti O'Kane
With the lifting of Bishop Richard Grein's hand and the words promising a life that is guided by and points others to the gospel, Ann Brooke Bushong (1993 Louie Crew Award winner) became a vocational deacon, class of 1994, Diocese of New York. While Brooke anticipated solemnity, the ordination and all that came before it frayed nerves. The stole she had hoped to wear, a beautiful creation by Challwood, was not ready. I rushed over the eve of the ordination by car service to pick up a borrowed stole at Paul and Victor's.
On the way to the rehearsal at historic St. John's Getty Square, Yonkers, the electric window of the rented car that was supposed to make our lives easier malfunctioned and misfired out the side of the car on the parkway. Once at the church we learned that a stranger's name was listed in the program as Brooke's lay presenter, not me. Brooke's mother would ask "who is George?" The day of the ceremony coffee was spilled on the dress (the alb was miraculously spared) and I developed a recurrent attack of vertigo. The vertigo prevented me from taking indoor pictures and once outside I forgot to turn on the camera's light meter. The picture of Brooke's happiness at her new life is, however, etched in my memory.
The ordination was glorious -- but the bad luck wasn't over yet. When Bishop Grein reached out to hand the first deacon a Bible, his hand was empty. Senior deacons scrambled to supply the bishop an obviously worn Bible for Brooke. Her Bible actually belonged to her Integrity friend/mentor Justus Van Houten SSF, who served as Brooke's deacon presenter. Brooke never did get the ordination certificate that day. We heard that at the transitional deacon service a week later, the Bibles were no where to be found and the calligrapher had inscribed "St. Barabbas Day" instead of St. Barnabas Day on the certificates. Oops.
The following day, St. Clement's, our church family, along with our Integrity friends had a magnificent Celebration of A New Ministry Eucharist followed by a grand party. During the service we sang a song recorded by Amy Grant whose refrain is "Thy Word is a lamp unto my feet and light unto my path." Brooke had requested it since the psalm text had been the very words her beloved grandfather, an Episcopal priest, wrote in the Prayer Book he gave her at her confirmation.
Brooke was just recovering from a long bout of unemployment so I had worried how would we afford a party. But in classic Brooke style she proceeded with the trust of the sparrow and said, "Don't worry, St. Clement's will do a pot luck and we'll have a great party." St. Clement's is a parish where many have known outcast status because of sexual orientation, ethnic/racial discrimination, rejection by another church or addiction/mental illness. Blessed are the poor in spirit for they throw great parties out of deep, sincere generosity.
We watched our interim pastor Jim Bell and his wife Jill lug a keyboard in a city cab and then perform together. Jill wrote and dedicated a song for Brooke. The entertainment included a Russian violinist who played "Ave Maria," then gently put his violin down, proceeded to the keyboard and sang out "Hello Dolly" in Russian. Boris (what other name would you expect?) was discovered by our organist playing in the subways. The music was Latino, Broadway and even Hymnal. St. Clement's is the UN of Times Square and the whole congregation came out to lift up one of their own. The teens from the peer AIDS education program that Brooke founded were there -- cross dressers and all. Parents from the After School program and students of our recent English as a Second Language class joined in the festivities. The party reflected the years of Brooke's life that preceded her diaconate; the ordination was only the recognition.
For a brief moment when we sang "Lean on Me" led by a young Hispanic women the place looked like the kingdom of God ... dancing, swaying with passion, inclusive, loving, sometimes broken but always bouncing back in the diverse images of the Creator. Brooke and I were moved beyond gratitude by the affection, generosity (food exceeded even the miracle of loaves and fishes!) and thanksgiving for her ministry. It should come as no surprise that in our parish bulletin "Ministers" is followed by "Congregation."
********************
*FROM: THE DIOCESE OF WESTERN NORTH CAROLINA'S
Task Force on Gay and Lesbian Ministries to Bishop Robert Johnson and the Western North Carolina Deputies to the General Convention*
It is the belief, opinion and position of the Task Force on Gay and Lesbian Ministries of the Diocese of Western North Carolina that homosexuality is a natural, wholesome and healthy orientation; not a choice or a lifestyle. It is a gift from God Almighty that should be freely expressed and celebrated. The Task Force believes that the Episcopal Church's teaching on sexuality must be broadened to reflect this position.
As a consequence, we believe that the Episcopal Church should bless loving, committed, monogamous, relationships of same gender couples. We believe such blessing is consistent with the Church's understanding of the sacramental nature of marriage and does in no way harm either the moral or dogmatic theology of the Episcopal Church. In so recognizing the validity and legitimacy of same gender relationships, the Church would acknowledge the sacred character of the same and extend to persons involved in these relationships full pastoral, liturgical, and sacramental support.
In addition, we believe that homosexual orientation is not an impediment to ordination to the deaconate, presbyteriate, episcopate, or any other ministry offered by the Church to the People of God. Therefore, individuals who sincerely feel called to a specific ministerial vocation in the Body of Christ should not be denied the opportunity to pursue and exercise such a ministry because of his or her sexual orientation.
Lastly, the Task Force believes that our position is faithful to the witness of the Gospel and the Revelation of God in Christ Jesus His Son. The scriptural passages cited by those who differ from our position must be understood in the context of the original language, history, and human sexuality of that culture. With such an understanding, it is clear to the Task Force that there is no Biblical or Apostolic condemnation of Homosexuality.
We urge the General Convention to hear the conviction of your sisters and brothers in the Lord; to come over into Macedonia and help us. Therefore, allowing all God's children to participate in the Holy Fellowship of Christ Jesus our Savior.
********************
*BOOK REVIEW*
*In the courts of the Lord: a gay priest's story*
by James Ferry, Crossroads, 1994. 231 pages, $22.95.
Review by W. Keith McCoy
Publishers' lists are littered with books written, or ghost-written, by fifteen-minute celebrities. A flash in the news, an appearance on the talk shows, a quick book, and then oblivion. With luck (good for them, bad for us), their story may even be made into a TV movie. The Tonya Hardings and John Bobbitts of America impose their sorry tales on our senses with regularity, with each one fading in time to be replaced by another.
At first glance, this story would appear to be of the same ilk. The promo might scream: "Wouldn't Give Up Gay Lover, Priest Fired." The inattentive might think, "Oh yeah, that's the guy from Newark who dissed Mother Teresa -- I've already seen that." But Jim Ferry's story is none of this. Rather, it is the story of a dedicated and faithful priest who tried to have a life that would support his ministry, but had it whipped out from under him by church bureaucrats.
Raised in the United Church of Canada, young Jim Ferry early on was attracted to the safety and comfort of the church. He also early on felt the differentness that many eventually-gay people feel. With adolescence, he seesawed back and forth between curiosity and denial. He converted to the Baptists in college, and married immediately after graduation a daughter of a fundamentalist family. From there he attended Bible college. The attractions to women and the Baptists were weak, however, and soon both were gone. Ferry then began studies at an Anglican theological school, and despite the usual pre-ordination machinations, he was a deacon in the Anglican Church of Canada by Spring 1980.
The talented young curate rose quickly. He worked for a cardinal rector, then took over an ailing mission and revived it, and after that moved on to a growing suburban parish. The church is never far from petty politicking, however, and Ferry interweaves several instances on the diocesan and parish level where God's will became secondary to power plays. At his new congregation, Ferry ran afoul of a parishioner with an axe to grind -- she detested homosexuals. She got the pot boiling, and events finally reached the point where a small group demanded Ferry's resignation. So, he went to his bishop to talk.
That bishop had been publicly supportive of gay rights. Ferry thought he had good reason to expect support. He presented the facts of the situation, including the fact that he was gay. A week later, the bishop accepted his resignation. Further, he did not provide Ferry with any transition assistance or compensatory position. When Ferry balked, the bishop suspended him from the ministry and brought him up on charges before the Bishop's Court. The case went to trial, and the book ends with the court's recommendation and the bishop's official reaction.
Given the legal aspects of this case, if any of the facts were wrong, there would have been injunctions against the publishing and/or distribution of "In the courts of the Lord." Hearing none, we must assume that Ferry's presentation, while personal, is basically accurate. In that case, justice in the courts of the Lord in Toronto is of the Alice in Wonderland variety, where sentences are pronounced, and then arguments are developed to back them up. It is clear from the book that Ferry was snookered by a seemingly sympathetic bishop, one who was more interested in punishment than resolving the situation, and whose public support of gays and lesbians was not backed up by action.
Every gay and lesbian person fears what happened to Jim Ferry: betrayal by a nominal supporter. "In the courts of the Lord" shows the legal workings of a diocese threatened by the unusual, the lack of compassion from a chief pastor, and the inability of another part of the church to see ministry beyond sexuality. This is a sad story, and a cautionary tale.
********************
*CC'D*
*Unitarians: 2 Episcopalians: -2*
Dear Mr. Caison,
Gee! How long have I been an Integrity member? Ten years I guess! (maybe 12?) *No, 15!* Well, it's over. Please allow me to explain.
I am very grateful to Integrity. When I "came out" 15 years ago, the first person I called was by best friend from my high school days. (He turned out to be gay too!) The second person I called was the local gay hot line. And the third person I called was the president of Integrity-Washington (John Fortunato-Schwant). He invited me to the next Integrity service. I had never met any gay people before and I was very fearful of them. (I was an attractive "twink" in my early 20's and "they" of course were all "predators.") But then I figured that if they were *proper Episcopalians* -- as I was -- then they would refrain from having sex on the altar. So I decided I'd be "safe" if I went to an Integrity meeting and off I went. The service was respectable, the people friendly. They invited me to join them at a gay bar after the evening service -- a first for me. It was like I had entered heaven. Dozens of gay men having fun being gay men! Over the years, Integrity helped me to feel good about being gay and I learned that the "fag-haters" were the ones who had the moral problems, not gay people who were happy being gay. But this created a dilemma for me. I belonged to a family-oriented parish and I grew tired of the fact that I was merely "tolerated" by the congregation. They liked me when I volunteered but I did not feel safe enough to "come out" to more than a few there. I decided to seek out another parish which was closer to my home (Arlington, VA). Though I visited a dozen Episcopal churches, *none* of them felt affirming of my sexuality.
I finally gave up looking at Episcopal churches and I found the Unitarian Church of Arlington. Within 2 years of my joining, the Church voted to become the first "Welcoming Congregation" in the mid-Atlantic Region, that is, welcoming of gays, lesbians, and bisexuals. I now head our "Welcoming Congregation Task Force" and I am routinely invited to participate in other leadership positions as well. The national UU church is very supported -- It co-sponsored the 1993 March on Washington. (Imagine the Episcopal Church doing something like that!!!) My point is this: though the Episcopal Church is better than most mainline churches in regards to support gays, I have become dissatisfied with the crumbs they have given to people like me. Integrity's valiant efforts in this regard are to be applauded, but I have grown too impatient with their rate of progress.
Therefore I will let my membership lapse.
Ted Heath
Dear Kim,
I will not be attending the General Convention. I resigned my seat on February 17th and my position as chair of the diocesan legislation and resolutions committee. It was also the day my term on diocesan council expired. As I explained to [Bishop Jelineck], I had made a decision to leave the church and had already become a member of 1st Universalist, Minneapolis, a large and growing Unitarian/Universalists congregation (also the oldest church in the Twin Cities). Frankly, it's a relief to be out of the Episcopal Church.
I haven't given up church politics completely, however. I attended the North American conference of Interweave in Edmonton February 18-21, and I will be a delegate from my parish to the General Assembly of the UUA in Ft. Worth June 23-28.
I do wish you all well in Indianapolis and will be following the news of what I hope will be a successful presence. Give my best to everyone.
Sincerely,
Rex Gaskill, Bloomington, Minnesota
-----
Rex, in addition to being a several-time Alternate Deputy to General Convention also served as Integrity's Midwest Vice-President in the late 1980s.
*********************
*PROPOSALS OF MARRIAGE AND THE LIKE:
A Utopian View of Love, Sex, Home, and Church*
by Martha Blacklock
Where do practicing, church‑going Christians go for answers? Three possibilities:
To authority. People ask, "What does the church say?" meaning such things as, "Is there anything on record that speaks clearly to the question?" "What does the Bible say?" "Is there canon law on the subject?" "Do well‑accepted theologians throughout the church's 2000 years say anything?"
Lay Christians often ask clergy about what "the church" says, and are not well satisfied to hear "Nothing!" or "We don't know yet!" for an answer. People expect the church to be a source of authority even if, in practice, they base their actions on something other than the church's answers. (Think of American Roman Catholics and birth control.)
Another possibility, cryptically put, is that people look for answers with good questions. Some people (perhaps at a different stage of faith development from those above) look for a process of discernment in open discussion, in study, possibly in action and reflection on the action. One hopes that there are lots of Episcopalians in this group; "study it" has been the first line answer to almost every question whose answer might require change in the Episcopal Church. These people may not expect, or want, the church to lay down answers, but they do look for the church to be a place where moral direction can be sought; if the questions aren't being asked, part of the church's job isn't being done.
And people look for answers to imagination. Myth, cosmology, fiction ‑‑ all are ways we make worlds into which we can enter to ask "What if?" "Suppose?" "Is this how it works?" Constructive, speculative theology relies on imagination. Some work we might not label theology has enormous influence in religious thought ‑‑ Alice Walker's "Color Purple," for example. And though it might not head the list of Thomas More's contribution to Anglican church thought and practice his "Utopia," published in Latin in 1516, named the genre.
This essay of the imagination will attempt to develop a very small utopia, a scenario of how a Christian community might understand, and regulate, and celebrate the ways people live as human, sexual beings. My hope is that readers will imagine your ways through this scheme, and even imagine your church community trying it out.
QUESTIONS OF FOCUS
I once had a simple, useful little camera with three settings for distance; you turned the pointer to small drawings of one person, two people, or mountains, which represented 'close,' 'a few yards off,' and 'infinity.' Suppose we look at the question of marriage between people of the same sex from three similar vantage points.
Set at infinity, we see that the big picture shows some questions which need to be asked about the church itself, before we start focusing on marriages. The Prayer Book's Catechism says that the church's mission, its purpose, is "to restore all people to unity with God and each other in Christ." (p.855)
How? We have glimpsed, heard, even tasted life in that state where spears are already pruning hooks, where justice does roll down like a river, and the knowledge of God fills the earth like waters filling the sea. We can imagine a time where "they shall not teach one another or say to each other, 'Know the Lord,' for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest." (Hebrews 8:11) But in our mortal meantime it's up to us, the church, to demonstrate the restoration of unity we believe God has accomplished for all people in Christ.
The Catechism says that this mission is carried out "through the ministry of all its members" as the church "prays and worships, proclaims the Gospel, and promotes justice, peace, and love." If we are not just a social group but a community of purpose how can we best be organized for our work? We need all our resources, and we need to know what they are. We need to know our people, all of us, and what we have to offer. Recognizing the configurations of relationship that actually exist within church communities is beneficial, even necessary, for the church, not just desirable for the individuals and couples involved. Can we expect people to serve the church's mission with "gladness and singleness of heart" if we require them to keep significant parts of their life hidden?
Focusing closer, we see questions of marriage and family being raised most directly in the Episcopal Church in the context of gay and lesbian relationships. It's important here, I believe, to recognize that these questions concern not only gay and lesbian christians, but unmarried heterosexual couples and their families as well. And it's not just North Americans who are seeking answers. The March 1993 issue of the Canadian "Anglican Journal," reported the following from the January 1993 meeting of Anglican Primates and the Anglican Consultative Council in South Africa:
"The issue of cohabitation was raised by Archbishop French Chang‑Him of the Province of the Indian Ocean, who appealed to the joint meeting for guidance on what to do about the growing number of unmarried people who live together. 'It raises the whole issue of what is marriage,' Archbishop Chang‑Him said. 'It becomes a very theological issue.' Canon Monty Morris, rural dean of Thailand and the Mekong, noted that in his country, more than 400,000 refugees are forbidden by law to marry. 'Tens of thousands of couples are cohabiting,' he said. The primates and the ACC took no action on the issue, other than suggesting it receive further study. (p.10)"
How many parents of college age children ask themselves where to put their child's visiting lover? "I know they live together at school, but I don't want to know it, and I'm not allowing it in my house." The Episcopal Church has, by and large, taken a similar approach: we simply don't talk about what people do if we don't want to know about it.
Clergy find that most couples they marry already live together. Is that a problem? Not usually. Although the 1979 General Convention resolution (A‑535) concerning ordination says, "it is inappropriate for this Church to ordain a practicing homosexual, or any person who is engaged in heterosexual relations outside of marriage," there is none of the intensity of interest about the last half of that sentence that the first half raises. The same double standard holds around recognizing the relationships in which people live.
The father of three adult sons told me about meeting a young woman, for the first time, in his kitchen at 6 am; they had each come down to fix an early breakfast. She turned out to be the guest of his youngest son. What interested him was the response of the two older brothers, each of whom lives in long‑term, unmarried relationship with a woman; they were outraged, and expected their father to chew out the younger sibling. Glenn said,
"My first reaction was 'What's the difference?' but there is a difference, I recognize it. But the relationships the older two have are very different from the marriage their mother and I had at their ages. For one thing, they all keep their money separate. They know exactly who owns what in the household. I think it will be different when they have children. If they have children ..."
Here's a man trying to figure out what's going on, morally speaking, in the life he lives with his family. It didn't occur to him to take this thinking, and his contribution to it, to church. It's the sort of thing we don't talk about. And that's, I believe, a mistake. If the church refuses to be a place where moral discourse takes place we shirk our ministry of moral leadership, our effective proclamation of the Gospel, our work of promoting justice, peace, and love.
The question for individuals is similar. Can I come to church with my real life, trusting the church to recognize me as one of God's reconciled people, someone with a part in our common purpose? I write this with a computer in my lap, outdoors on a pleasant Cambridge spring morning, deciding whether or not to mention that I am a lesbian Episcopal priest. (If I had mentioned the lesbian part to the Commission on Ministry 20 years ago of course I would not be an Episcopal priest. I doubt that I would still be an Episcopalian at all.) I decide this question many times each week, knowing I have more to give in ministry than the church, at this point, wants to hear about. Today I decide yes, because this Seminary, this "Ecclesial Decision Making" class calls me (and leads the church) to truth and wholeness of ministry.
BACKGROUND
In "Theological Issues Concerning the Blessing of Gay and Lesbian Marriages in St. John's Chapel," an address to the February 1993 meeting of the Board of Trustees of Episcopal Divinity School, Charles Bennison mentions three purposes by which traditionally since the time of the English Reformation opposite‑sex marriage has edified society,
"1) the procreation of children; 2) the prevention of fornication; and 3) the provision of companionship. The reformers, moreover, understood the third purpose, that of providing a remedy for human loneliness, to be the primary one ... (p.6)"
If we lay out a grid with those purposes along one axis and the possible pairings of people on the other, we notice that while all three combinations can fulfill the second and third purposes, only the male+female pairing can produce children.
f+m f+f m+m ________________________________________________
procreation X
________________________________________________
prevention of
fornication X X X
________________________________________________
provision of
companionship X X X
________________________________________________
The Episcopal Church no longer considers the procreation of children a necessary purpose of marriage: we approve of birth control; we marry people who are too old to have children, as well as those who do not intend to even though they could. We don't consider a marriage to be necessarily incomplete if the couple does not produce a child (that is, the church doesn't, though some couples may). The utopian scenario coming up will give some pride of place to the male+female ability to be the agency through which new human beings are born, while not making that ability a requirement for marriage, as indeed our current practice does not.
The second traditional purpose, prevention of fornication, sounds as though it could be traced to St. Paul's admonition that marriage is better than burning, but it actually has to do with the stability of society and transmission of property. The Prayer Book liturgy for The Celebration and Blessing of a Marriage retains traces of this history; the Declaration of Consent (p.414) is a vestige of betrothal ceremonies, which, according to "The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church," "date back, both in their Jewish and Roman counterparts, to the custom of 'wife purchase.'" (p.165) Legitimacy of offspring was a central concern; fathers wanted to be sure they were leaving their property to their own sons, and regulating sexual activity (especially women's) by marriage was a way of enforcing that hope.
In our day marriage in the Episcopal Church still involves property. The officiant at a marriage ceremony acts as an agent of the municipal authority; he or she not only registers the wedding in the parish record, but signs the marriage license and returns it to City Hall, or its local equivalent. The bride and groom become, among other things, legal partners. It takes legal action ‑‑ divorce ‑‑ to end the partnership. One objection to considering any life partnership of gay men or lesbians the equivalent of heterosexual marriage is that at this point there is no equivalent legal commitment possible. Partners may draw up a legal partnership, but none of the laws that automatically govern marital relationships now apply to them. Frankly put, no matter what gay partners do in church, their marriages are easier to get out of than straight couples' are. Until gay marriages are as legally binding as straight marriages I don't guess they will be taken as seriously, and attempts to regard them as parallel will be resisted and resented.
IMAGINE
Let's say there's a parish ‑‑ or some other stable church community with an identifiable membership, such as a theological seminary, or college chaplaincy ‑‑ that decides to address some of the questions raised above by adopting a whole new way of dealing with its people's sexuality. That is, rather than the usual "well of course sexuality is part of human nature but talking about it is a violation of privacy, and embarrassing besides" attitude, this congregation, in various ways, puts this aspect of life pretty much out in the open. Of course, St. Utopia's is already thought of as a radical sort of place because of their stewardship program. They're the parish that says that where you get your money matters to the church, not just what proportion of your income you pledge. They don't say arms manufacturers or advertising executives can't pledge, or anything like that, but that your work, what you do with your life to produce your livelihood, is part of stewardship, and part of your spiritual well‑being. And not only yours, but the spiritual health of the congregation, so it's something to talk about with your spiritual support group, or the pastor. That kind of talk is even part of the every member canvass training.
You see why some people call St. Utopia's the *Is‑Nothing‑Sacred?* parish.
According to the Rev. Nancy Fanne, associate rector at St. Utopia's, their more open approach to talking about sexuality came about when, "We couldn't avoid it. One of our best loved teenagers killed himself the night he came out to his parents and they threw him out of the house. That same year the rector was sued by two women from his last parish for sexual misconduct in a pastoral relationship, and the junior warden was arrested in the City for soliciting a prostitute. We have about as many second marriages as firsts. Then when Liz and Phoebe came to church asking about getting their baby baptized ‑‑ well, it was pretty obvious that not acknowledging sexuality wasn't helping anybody."
They started with a study group, of course. Or, actually, first there was a sermon. Charles Chuck, one of the clergy associates, preached on What the Bible Says about Sex. The point was that the Bible says plenty about sex (though almost nothing specifically about homosexuality), and that communities of faith need to deal with this dimension of life rather than ignoring it. The study group got together in response to the sermon.
First they listened to everything everybody had to say on the subject. Then Miriam Ali organized and emceed some Donahue style coffee hours to hear what everybody else had to say. Which turned out to be mostly what they were worried about ‑‑ the culture has gone too far; there's no guidance for our children; you can't pick up a newspaper without seeing somebody in their underwear, or less; AIDS; there's no stability, no trust ... the person you've been married to for 20 years can suddenly be gay, or your daughter says her brother molested her for ten years and how come you didn't protect me, Mom. Lots of scary, painful stuff. And some tender, wonderful testimony, too, like the grandparents who talked about how precious their faithful married life was to them in their old age. Their gay grandson talked about how he'd like to say the same thing in 50 years. And he talked about wanting the kind of community support they'd had for himself (and the someone he hasn't found yet).
After a year of work, the group came up with a three tiered arrangement they asked us to try for one year. They pointed out that the church is already familiar with similar arrangements of vowed life, for example holy orders of deacon, priest and bishop, or religious orders' sequence of postulant, novice, annual vows, life vows.
They stressed that what they proposed was an invitation to a way of living as community; no member of the parish would have to participate who didn't want to. Except they asked everyone to read the plan and make their responses known to the study group, the vestry, and the clergy. (The diocesan Bishop, as Ordinary, was asked to approve the liturgies for the year's trial use. She did.)
Each "level" involves a period of preparation, a public liturgical event, and a process of continued support from the congregation.
1. *The first "order" is for single people to take on certain responsibilities of adulthood within the community of faith.* It's a kind of covenant with the community, in some ways similar to Confirmation. Anyone past puberty is eligible to participate in the preparation group, and in the liturgy ‑‑ which is scheduled as part of the family eucharist four times a year on the Sundays nearest the quarter days (Feb. 1, May 1 etc.) ‑‑ and then in the support process.
The liturgical event follows the Prayer Book Form of Commitment to Christian Service (p.420), the rubrics of which direct that,
"It is essential that the person seeking to make or renew a commitment prepare in advance, in consultation with the celebrant, the Act of Commitment, which may be in the form either of a statement of intention or of a series of questions and answers, but which should include a reaffirmation of baptismal vows. Before the Offertory of the Eucharist, the person comes forward at the invitation of the celebrant, and, standing before the congregation, makes the Act of Commitment."
In the first group to undertake this step there were four teenagers, two single young adults (early 20s), a divorced 40‑year old man, and a woman who had left a religious order after 15 years (who, in the part of the liturgy where people may speak individually) identified herself as a lesbian.
2. *The second order is for making the terms of committed relationships clear to the community (and often to the involved people themselves, as they work at articulating their intentions).* It can't be overstressed that this is an "in house" matter; the community of faith recognizes, blesses, supports, and sometimes witnesses the ending of these covenants. Legal contracts are neither required, or prohibited; they are immaterial to this order of commitment.
Couples of every gender configuration have used this means to put their relationships into the caring context of parish life. It has been used for a personal vow of celibacy. Greg, the divorced man who participated in the first order commitment, is a "part‑time" father. This second order enabled him to be recognized with his two children as a family. Anne usually looks single, because her partner is away at school much of the time; this service enabled the parish to acknowledge, and lend support, to their relationship. Think of the parish photo directory with all the invisible people showing, all the relationships that actually exist recognized.
3. *Pairs of people who intend a lifelong, monogamous partnership may participate in this order's preparation, liturgical ceremony, and ongoing support.* Couples who undertake the rearing of children are expected to do it within this kind of relationship. A legally binding partnership will be established, either by civil marriage for heterosexuals, or the privately contracted equivalent for gay men and lesbians. (Domestic partnership law may, in some places, provide the equivalent to marriage. It is not as comprehensive in St. Utopia's municipality, so gay couples are required to make private legal contracts around property, inheritance, medical power of attorney, etc.)
IMPLICATIONS, OBJECTIONS
It is possible for parishioners to choose not to have anything to do with this scheme, although as more people become involved the choice increasingly is being seen as one between, What I do with my body is none of the church's business, and What I do with my body is part of my commitment to ministry with this community and I want their help and support. When the granddaughter of long‑time members wanted "to get just plain married, without all the complications," there was spontaneous discussion of whether people who weren't active members themselves ought to "use the place for a wedding chapel." That question is sure to be part of the discussion about extending the trial period, or adopting this practice for regular use.
What to call the three levels/tiers/orders[?] has still not been decided satisfactorily. Some people object that 1, 2 and 3 suggest a hierarchy ‑‑ that being on level three is better than level one, not just different. In fact there is a sort of hierarchy of complexity. The study group started with 1 because chronologically one is a single adult before entering into any sexual relationship, but that doesn't allow for someone who might want to be recognized by the community as a single adult after a divorce. Inasmuch as it's possible to be in more than one category simultaneously it's not a very accurate hierarchy for classification.
The most popular solution at this point is to name the liturgical celebration proper to each order and derive more general reference from it: 3 ‑‑ The Celebration and Blessing of a Marriage; 2 ‑‑ The Celebration and Blessing of a Covenant of Partnership; 1 ‑‑ The Celebration and Blessing of Commitment to Adult Life. Thus, some couples say, We are married; this is my spouse, while others say, This is my covenanted partner. This seems to be satisfactory to everyone. Gay people can be just as married as straight people within the community, while couples who are not ready for a lifetime commitment do not have to hide the ties that exist.
Plenty of compromise has gone into this plan. For some people it seems breathtakingly radical, while others think it leaves them out. One bisexual member of the planning group, for instance, whose household includes both his wife and his male lover, wanted the Covenant of Partnership to allow for more than couples. The group's decision against this possibility took place with, again, much discussion and thought, with reasons given, and personal experiences shared in trust; the process included everyone with respect, even though the eventual consensus set limits some people didn't like.
The long, and continuing, process of discussion has given the people of St. Utopia's the opportunity to work out their functional moral expectations with one another in a community of accountability. What they have arrived at seems to most people to be norms that promote justice, peace, love, and the likelihood of people's actually being able to live and love one another with gladness and singleness of heart.
-----
The Rev. Martha Blacklock, former Archdeacon for Communications and Women's Ministry of the Diocese of Newark, did this paper while working on an advanced degree at Episcopal Divinity School in 1993.
********************
Scenes From:
*Hands Around The GOD BOX*
New York, NY - June 24, 1994. Joining Hands around The GOD BOX (The Interchurch Center - headquarters building of many religious agencies). This peaceful demonstration condemned the continuing exclusion of lesbian and gay people from full participation in the life of the nation's churches. Sponsored by the Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches (UFMCC) and 9 denominational lesbian and gay organizations, the gathering began with a short worship service, after which demonstrators joined hands and were linked by a rainbow ribbon which completely encircled the building.
photo captions:
The Rev. Kit Cherry, UFMCC Field Director of Ecumenical Witness and Ministry and the Rev. Elder Troy Perry, Moderator of UFMCC.
The Rev. Elder Nancy Wilson, Pastor, UFMCC Los Angeles addressing the crowd in an emotional plea for justice.
********************
*SARTORIAL INTEGRITY MEMBERS IN THE NEWS*
Activists lobby state Senate for gay rights
By Jane Gottlieb
It was nothing new Tuesday when observers questioned Hansheinrich Franzen and Phil Nicholson on the particular message behind their fashion statement. Nothing flashy -- their look featured plaid jackets, paisley ties, light dress shirts and dark trousers -- but the pair was noteworthy outside the state Senate. They dress alike every day, in fact, drawing inquiries in the supermarket and in church.
"People all the time ask us if we're brothers," said Franzen, 65, who had come from their home in Poughquag, Dutchess County. "If they seem interested, we say we're partners."
The idea -- one part whimsy, one part social commentary -- is for the couple, virtually married for the past seven years, to have a chance to tell people that they are gay. On Tuesday, they hoped to convince state senators that a gay rights law is needed.
"The thing is, so many people argue they don't know any gay people," said Nicholson, 58, who, like Franzen, is balding, sports gold-framed spectacles and a soft gray goatee and is a devoted Episcopalian trying to broaden acceptance of homosexuals in the church. "There is no one meeting us who can say, `I don't know any Episcopalians who are gay,'" he said.
About 70 people -- predominantly parents and friends of homosexuals -- camped outside the office of Majority Leader Ralph Marino and then outside the chamber of the Republican-controlled Senate to press for a bill that would add sexual orientation to civil rights protections. The [Democratic-controlled] Assembly, for the second consecutive year, recently passed the measure, which has support from Gov. Mario M. Cuomo. Gay rights is strongly opposed by the state Conservative Party and the Catholic Coalition.
And last year, it never even got a hearing in the Senate. Marino, who is believed to be a supporter, declined to let the bill see the light of day because of the reluctance of many in his party to state a view. The parents who cornered senators said they didn't think ducking the matter was good policy.
Eileen Larkin said she was not pleased with the way her party was handling this issue. "It's not fair we can't get this bill out of conference," said Larkin, a GOP member of the Orangetown Town Board in Rockland County, and mother of a gay son. "This is a human rights issue."
-----
This article appeared in the Albany, NY "Times Union," May 11, 1994. Phil will take office as Northeast Regional Vice President of Integrity on October 1.
********************
*DEADLY DISEASE SPREADS FROM US TO CANADA
CANADIAN ANGLICANS FACE DIVISIONS OVER GAYS IN CHURCH*
by Michael McAteer
This article appeared in "The Toronto Star," May 28, 1994
The debate in the Anglican Diocese of Toronto over homosexuality is to expected to intensify with the formation of Fidelity and its position paper supporting the traditional church's stand on sexuality.
Fidelity identifies itself as a group of Anglicans who have heeded the call of the diocese's synod, or parliament, and the bishops to study the church's pastoral guidance with respect to human sexuality and, in particular, the guidance which the church gives on the subject of homosexuality.
The 10-page position paper, "Human Sexuality: a traditional Christian perspective," was enclosed in the regular mailing to Toronto diocesan clergy early in Lent, It was signed by Trent-Durham Bishop Douglas Blackwell and eight other male clerics.
In early 1992, Blackwell made known his views on homosexual activity when he testified at a bishop's court trial of the Rev. James Ferry, a homosexual priest ousted from the active ministry by Toronto Bishop Terence Finlay for refusing to end a relationship with his lover.
Until the Anglican Church changes its mind, Blackwell told the court, he would continue to consider homosexual activity sinful even in the context of a loving relationship.
Blackwell's name on Fidelity's position paper, and Fidelity's current stance that it sees no reason for the church to "move it's moral counsel and pastoral discipline from the 1979 House of Bishops' statement," will, no doubt, boost the morale of those who fear the church's active and vocal pro-gay lobby could convince enough Anglicans that their church should change its current stand.
The 1979 House of Bishops statement on the ordination of homosexuals says that, while the church accepts all persons, regardless of sexual orientation, as equal before God, acceptance of people with homosexual orientation is not an acceptance of homosexual activity. The bishops said they rejected the blessing of homosexual unions. They also said they would not question the ordination of a candidate who has told the bishop about his or her homosexual orientation if the candidate has promised the bishop to abstain from sexual acts with persons of the same sex as a part of the requirement for ordination.
"It is our judgment that, on the matter of sexuality, the Bible has set a norm for chaste living: fidelity within marriage and continence outside it," Fidelity's position paper says. "Homosexual activity, together with all extra-marital activities, are inherent departures from God's order."
While "it is the continual duty of biblical scholars to re-examine the sense of scripture for possible new light to come forth, at present, however, the burden of proof lies with those who would challenge the traditional interpretation on this matter."
Fidelity says it is in sympathy with Bishop Finlay's call for "bridge-building, dialogue and mutual understanding." However, Fidelity expresses concern that, at critical points in the controversy, the "church's classical wisdom on the subject of sexuality has been relegated to a minor role.
"Furthermore, it is our view that, where the traditional Anglican standards of scripture, tradition and reason have been presented, in too many cases the scriptures have been misused, tradition has been caricatured and the role of reason and personal experience has been overstated. "We believe that, so long as the debate continues in this fashion, critical voices are missing and the study is seriously impoverished."
On homosexuality, Fidelity says that nowhere in the Bible is homosexual activity referred to in a favorable light. In fact, traditional exposition of scripture identifies several texts which "mention homosexual activity, all of which describe it negatively, variously as an abomination, against nature, and among a list of sins that, if consistently practised, bars one from entering God's kingdom."
Chris Ambidge is a member of Integrity/Toronto, a support group for "gay and lesbian Anglicans and friends," and edits its newsletter "Integrator." He says he wasn't overjoyed at the formation of Fidelity and the publication of its position paper. But, on reflection, he sees the positive sides. "If our efforts were being completely unnoticed, this would not have happened," he says,
Writing in the April issue of "Integrator," Ambidge recalls someone telling him the Ferry trial was a "healthy" event. "At first, I thought he was out of his mind, praising a Star Chamber procedure which resulted in one man's personal life being splattered across front pages across the country.
"Then I realized that the trial was forcing a public debate; the papering over the cracks, that traditional Anglican way of dealing with conflict, was now impossible. It makes about as much sense - and is about as profitable - as arguing with an announcer on the radio. Fidelity enters this debate as an identifiable party representing the traditional side. That is a positive sign.
"The appearance of Fidelity," Ambidge writes, "with a bishop as one of its signatories, has provided a focus for those conservative or traditional viewpoints within the diocese. They join Bishop Finlay in calling for bridge-building, dialogue and mutual understanding. Integrity has been singing that song for a long time. We look forward to the dance."
Ambidge told "The Star" that since the emergence of the "very conservative" Episcopalians United in the U.S., the formation of Fidelity was not unexpected. "It happened in the Episcopalian Church, why should Canada be any different," he said.
Ambidge acknowledges the "opposition camp" is significant but points out that the Trent-Durham diocese headed by Blackwell is generally "very small-c conservative. It's rural Ontario and people tend not to change their opinions." In general, Ambidge says, the body of church opinion is not generally pro-gay.
"They need to be persuaded that gays and lesbians can be Christians, are Christians, and full members of the body of Christ."
********************
*OREGON ORDINATION*
The Rev. Rod Thompson, an openly gay man, was ordained a priest in the Diocese of Oregon on June 25, 1994. People opposed to the ordination claimed they would hold a large protest with pickets outside the church, but nothing so dramatic happened. There were about two pews full of people in opposition to the Ordination. At the point in the service where the bishop states, "If there is anyone who knows any crime or impediment because of which we should not proceed, come forward and make it known," a single person rose. The Rt. Rev. William G. Burrill, Bishop of Rochester, who was presiding, asked everyone to listen respectfully and without making any noises suggesting approval or disapproval, and to remember that all belong to one church and we have strong feelings on both sides.
The man who spoke in opposition said only that the ordination was against various resolutions passed by the church. Then Bishop Burrill said that his parish in Rochester and the Standing Committee in his diocese had approved him unanimously and all necessary procedures had been followed. Then the Rt. Rev. Robert Ladehoff, Bishop of Oregon, rose and said this was not an ordination of the Diocese of Oregon, but he was allowing the Diocese of Rochester to do an ordination in his diocese since Thompson is serving a parish in Oregon and, since Thompson had not committed a crime, there was no reason to stop the proceedings. The opposing people stayed through the sermon and then got up and left. About 14 clergy, half women, put hands on him during the blessing.
********************
*DOG BITES MAN*
Things Haven't Changed in Sydney
by Kim Byham
The Diocese of Sydney, nominally part of the Anglican Church of Australia, has the distinction of being the only Anglican body in the world which has by synod issued a blanket order of excommunication of all sexually active lesbians and gay men. Since 1985, nearly all of the self-respecting lesgay Anglicans have left the church either through formal excommunication or out of anticipation thereof. There has been virtually no opposition to this modern inquisition from any parts of the Anglican Communion, though (ironically, considering his later action toward Jim Ferry) Bishop Terence Finlay of Toronto did raise the issue with then Sydney Archbishop Donald W.B. Robinson at the Lambeth Conference in 1988. Through the action of Bishop Peter Lee of Virginia and the inaction of many other bishops, the Episcopal Church has remained silent about this blatant inhospitality within our communion.
Robinson's successor, the Most Rev. Harry Goodhew, has followed in his footsteps by opposing the opportunity for gay and lesbian couples to adopt children. The Archbishop commented in May on the recommendations in the New South Wales Law Reform Commission Discussion Paper, stating, "We must continue to state that there are some family structures which are, by their very nature, dishonouring to God. Homosexual families are a case in point ... . It is clear from scripture that this is not God's plan for families," he added.
In a much more controversial move, the Diocese of Sydney has also become the first diocese in the worldwide Anglican Communion to order legislation allowing lay people and deacons to preside at the Holy Eucharist.
A diocesan synod motion requesting the synod's standing committee to bring legislation for lay presidency to its October 1994 session was passed on March 8 with little opposition. The question of lay presidency has been discussed in the diocese for a long time. The synod in 1985 endorsed the principle of lay presidency. In 1987 it received a report accepting that there were no doctrinal objections or legal impediments to lay presidency and the 1993 synod said that there were significant doctrinal reasons for going ahead.
It will be interesting to see the relative reaction to this latest Sydney action in comparison with the almost deafening silence on the issue of excommunication of lesgay members.
********************
*PRESIDENT'S COLUMN*
Sometimes when I am writing these columns I am not sure who my readership should be: Those who are part of Integrity, or those who are not. I suppose this particular column is really addressed to anyone and everyone who is struggling to remain a part of this church. So, I'll just leave it up to the reader to sort things out.
There are some folks who do not want lesbian and gay Episcopalians to remain in the Episcopal Church. (Others don't seem to mind as long as they don't see or know about us, or don't think they see or know us -- *i.e.*, it's sort of OK as long as we remain hidden in our closets.) There are also some folks who have stated that they will leave the Episcopal Church if those of us who are lesbian or gay remain in the church. And there is even some legislation for General Convention that is designed to provide an excuse for those who want to leave to do so. The wording is deceptively simple. It essentially says that if you are in, then I have to be out.
My response to those who wish to leave the church because of the presence of lesbians and gays (or women, or people of color, or whomever) can only be: Don't go. Don't leave. Stay and let us share with each other the grace of God we experience through this church.
The table set by our church is large enough to serve us all. If any one leaves, we are all the worse for it. If someone leaves, we are all deprived -- deprived of dialogue, deprived of getting to know that person as another child of God, deprived of the company of another sojourner on the same journey as we, deprived of a part of God's great diversity of creation.
We can never be the whole Body of Christ until we realize that we share more in common than we have in differences. We are all more alike than we are willing to admit. When we finally sit down and talk *to* each other -- not at or about each other, but *to* each other -- we soon come to the startling realization that we are not all that different.
If we work hard at it -- which we are wont to do -- we *can* find differences. But they are not about the basics. We love God. We at least understand that we are supposed to love our neighbors as ourselves. We come to a common table to share in the eucharistic feast: This is my body. This is my blood. We share one Lord, one faith, one baptism. So if we agree on the basics -- and I believe the majority of us do -- why can we not concentrate our energies *there* instead of worrying about what divides us?
I think the answer to the question of what divides us is simple: fear. The issue is not sin. It's not interpretation of the Holy Scriptures. It is fear. We fear that which is unknown to us. We fear that which we do not understand. We fear anything different from that with which we are accustomed and familiar. And our fears are compounded by the fact that we are confronting a vast wasteland of ignorance about human sexuality. Sex is not a topic we are comfortable discussing. And when we are forced to face a sexuality different from our own, the discomfort level goes off the scale! And don't let any of us try to fool the others. Most lesbians and gays are just about as ignorant and uncomfortable about heterosexuality as straight folks are about homosexuality. Face it -- the subject of sex just drives us all a little crazy!
Let's be honest. We have not taken other parts of scripture very literally. Why should we attempt to do so with portions supposedly dealing with sexuality? Most of us have no clue what the original Hebrew or Greek said. We depend on the interpretations of others to guide us. Are some of us really planning to leave on the basis of something so uncertain, so subject to interpretation, so ambiguous? The basics I mentioned earlier are more certain in their meaning, a lot more concrete. That is yet another reason to focus on those issues on which we can agree.
The issue remains however, that we will not be able to learn about each other, we will not be able to resolve any of our differences, we will not gain anything if any of us leaves the church. We can't learn about each other if we are not in each other's presence. We can't share our fears if we can't witness each other's tears. We can't have a dialogue with empty chairs.
To whom must we turn to insure this dialogue? Prayerfully, we must turn *to each other*. We must all insist that we keep open hearts and minds and keep on talking to each other. We must make the effort to continue to learn about each other.
We do not seem to be able to depend on our bishops. The fear of breaking collegiality appears to have so paralyzed them that they can no longer act or speak with the prophetic voice their consecration vows require of them (third question, page 518, Book of Common Prayer). If collegiality is to be primary, where is there room for the work of the Holy Spirit?
Is the purpose of the bishops simply to be or to uphold the perceived law of the land (diocese)? I do not believe that to be so. Their purpose is to be prophetic in insuring that the liberating and inclusive message of the Gospel of Jesus Christ is heard by all. Their purpose is to foster an atmosphere that permits the in-breaking of the Holy Spirit so that we can more fully witness the face of Jesus Christ in each others faces.
Creating that atmosphere requires prophetic action! That requires *not* maintaining a status quo if the status quo is maintained simply to avoid disagreement. The Gospel of Jesus Christ does not uphold the status quo. It upholds justice and mercy and love. And if the status quo is not in accord with those concepts, it must give way. If the attitude of our bishops, as the House of Bishops, is not in accord with those concepts, it must also change. Surely we can't justify discontinuity between the House of Bishops and the Gospel! Would there be so much concern for collegiality and unity if the issue was race? Would there be such a fear of acting prophetically if the issue was gender?
So where are we left in all of this? We are left, as the children of God, to turn to each other as sisters and brothers. We are left to take action as the Holy Spirit guides us. We can no longer wait on our bishops or anyone else. There isn't time. We are left with a mandate to continue in prayer and meditation and dialogue. We are left with a call to see the face of Christ in each other, regardless of sexual orientation.
We are left to implore our leaders to be as prophetic on issues of sexuality as they have tried to be on issues of race, gender and class. And finally, we are left with the call to remain together in this church, to struggle together in this church, to seek and serve Christ in all persons in this church and in the world -- even those with whom we may disagree. If we cannot at least try -- we have no business calling ourselves the Body of Jesus Christ.
I implore you: No matter what any of us may think of each other, as lesbians and gays, or as non-lesbians/gays, don't leave. Stay. Let us reason and learn together. Let us struggle together. Let us find Christ in each other. For then we will have begun to see the Gospel at work. And, God willing, someday our church will live out that Gospel, to the glory of Jesus Christ.
********************
*GLASS HOUSE SHATTERED!*
In still another instance of chickens coming home to roost in the intensely homophobic Anglican Catholic Church, the following Associated Press release appeared on May 27, 1994:
PERU, Ind. -- A pastor of Peru's Holy Trinity Anglican Catholic Church was one of 25 men arrested on charges of public indecency at state parks during the last two weeks.
The Rev. Thomas B. Wirth was arrested Monday, at a Mississinewa recreational area as part of an ongoing undercover operation by the Indiana Department of Natural Resources, the "Peru Daily Tribune" reported Thursday.
Wirth refused to comment on his arrest. He has been released on bond. Wirth's superior, Bishop Joseph Deyman, also would not comment on the arrest.
********************
*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
Festal cope in gold silk and wool blend with silk and organza applique design.
********************
"I must confess that over the last few years I've been gravely disappointed with the white moderate ... who is more devoted to `order' than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice."
Martin Luther King, Jr (1963)