2 20 2500 https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/dfcb9251ef49c8b55068ee7aee10bdb0.jpg 08d720c157bd701014cc2d735d0b3352 https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/cc4164369ed02ceaef5bca991d73cb5f.jpg 6aac3fe48b932bef77de731d48910aa0 https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/f424ca71a50438b06113eae57f179f4a.jpg 2650e699b3788c94112ad7d8c9b6eab2 https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/ac1aa38b1989e091fcefebc9d146198b.jpg 0b3103e385d236f7bcc4d167a26718d7 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Shower of Stoles Description An account of the resource Items (stoles) for the Shower of Stoles exhibit Stole A stole in the Shower of Stoles exhibit Honoree The person honored by the creation of thestole. Jocelyn Hasty Rachel Jennings Stole Text This stole is displayed to the Glory of God in memory of Jocelyn Hasty and Rachel Jennings life-long friends, housemates, Churchwomen and Deacons in the Presbyterian Church Jo was a life-long member of a small Presbyterian church in Minnesota when she died. In preparing her funeral, I learned she had never married and had no children and very few relatives. At her burial I was told Jo was being buried next to her parents and Rachel, her longtime friend and companion, with whom she had lived and served the church for over 40 years. -- her pastor Denomination Presbyterian Church (USA) Contribution Date 1998 Contribution Story "Jocelyn Hasty" and "Rachel Jennings" are chosen pseudonyms for two life-long companions who had served as ordained Deacons in the Presbyterian Church for many years. The pastor came to know "Jo" before she died. Born in an era when two women would have referred to themselves as "companions" rather than "partners," certainly wouldn't have labeled themselves as lesbian, and wouldn't have talked openly about it one way or another, this pastor was savvy enough to create a safe space in which the nature of their relationship could be made clear. Martha Juillerat Founder, Shower of Stoles Project 2006 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 430 Title A name given to the resource "Jocelyn Hasty" Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Minnesota (USA) Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Their Pastor Ally Minnesota Presbyterian Presbyterian Church (USA) Women and Religion https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/cde668f3fd69370037408bead58b4b06.pdf bc2fa92f07cd6555e8ee7cfa4885ce71 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource The Historical Development of BIPOC Trans-spiritual Leadership Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource "We Also Have A Religion" The American Indian Religious Freedom Act and the Religious Freedom Project of the Native American Rights Fund Subject The topic of the resource Discusses developments in Native American hunting and fishing rights. And describes the establishment of the Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Announcements of the Native American Rights Fund, Winter 1979 https://www.narf.org/nill/documents/nlr/nlr5-1.pdf Description An account of the resource Discusses developments in Native American hunting and fishing rights. And describes the establishment of the <a href="https://www.narf.org/nill/documents/nlr/nlr5-1.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">https://www.narf.org/nill/documents/nlr/nlr5-1.pdf</a> Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource The Historical Development of BIPOC Trans-spiritual Leadership Website A resource comprising of a web page or web pages and all related assets ( such as images, sound and video files, etc. ). URL https://encyclopediavirginia.org/entries/an-act-for-suppressing-outlying-slaves-1691/ Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource “An act for suppressing outlying slaves” (1691) Subject The topic of the resource Primary documents with text Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived William Waller Hening, ed., The Statutes at Large: Being a Collection of All Laws of Virginia, from the First Session of the Legislature, in the Year 1619 (Philadelphia: R. & W. & G. Bartow, 1823), 3:86–88. Description An account of the resource If a runaway was killed, the public would owe the owner 4,000 pounds of tobacco. And if white person married a runaway or an Indian, they "shall within three months after such marriage be banished and removed from this dominion forever..." https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/7bb87d0dca1e4298410214035028c387.pdf b24cc6f64d8167b99237421d87f8547d Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource The Upstairs Lounge Fire Still Image A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource “Thieves, Queers and Fruit Jars: The Community and Media Responses to the Fire at the Upstairs Lounge” by Clayton Delery Description An account of the resource Dr. Clayton Delery, a Louisiana native and professor at The Louisiana School for Math, Science and the Arts, has recently written this essay comparing the response of New Orleans city and religious leaders to the Rault Center fire in November 1972 with the response to the Upstairs Lounge fire. He unabashedly points out the disdain with which homosexual persons were treated at the time. Delery is working on a book on the Upstairs Lounge fire. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Used by permission of Clayton Delery. https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/05c55018e23d6f8723075cb82ce6de4e.png 5bed3d4f3c9a2f71cec9a2fd31959125 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource The Historical Development of BIPOC Trans-spiritual Leadership Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource (Trans)Gender in Kabbalah Subject The topic of the resource Bereishit Rabbah 8:1 (1) R' Yirmiyah ben Elazar said, when Hashem created Adam HaRishon, he was created as both genders... Maggid Meisharim 8:3 You should know that this woman was in the past, a proper Torah scholar. However, he was stingy with his money and would not give charity. He was also stingy with his wisdom and would not teach others. He was therefore punished that his soul migrated into a woman, measure for measure… ...this is known according to the Sod (Secret/Mysticism) of reincarnation - that at times, a female would be in a male body, because in the reasons of gilgal (reincarnation) the soul of a female would come to be in a male. ... That is why it says by Issac that Hashem answered to Him and not to Her (Rebecca), because he needed divine help to be able to have kids. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Abby Stein, Eshel Retreat 2016 - Isabella Freedman Jewish Retreat Center https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/24596?lang=bi https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/af8086e13a3c80f0762c956b04362267.png 248b119d7d06b74c20e8af3b45eaddfc Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource The Historical Development of BIPOC Trans-spiritual Leadership Still Image A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource [Asian and Pacific Islander Queer Women and Transgendered Coalition at Pride Parade] Subject The topic of the resource A coalition of Queer women and transgenders of Asian and Pacific Islander descent Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Permission to use this image must be obtained from the San Francisco History Center, San Francisco Public Library. https://digitalsf.org/islandora/object/islandora%3A157705?solr_nav%5Bid%5D=4e4cf9557339434c1ea2&solr_nav%5Bpage%5D=0&solr_nav%5Boffset%5D=16 Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Shades of LGBTQI, Shades of San Francisco Donor description: Asian and Pacific Islander Queer Women and Transgendered Coalition. Pride Parade 1999. https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/0a6915f8efb06ea818ce71d48868ac28.png b3d63c6d3b0583e253ae41d82e4f936a Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource The Historical Development of BIPOC Trans-spiritual Leadership Still Image A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource [During Gay Pride Day, marching with Gay Asian Pacific Alliance] Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Shades of LGBTQI, Shades of San Francisco Donor description: Marching with GAPA, 1990's San Francisco Gay Pride with tropical theme. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Permission to use this image must be obtained from the San Francisco History Center, San Francisco Public Library. https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/566af3eaf5349c0b74b101dbb17b11f3.jpg 7e51bbf7383efebe3b289a1fd538d83d https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/94dcf1de33198855573f5de52ca3c369.jpg 0453217b8f6ff80169c8f660299b4b0c https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/8f35aeba25a2de8e6f0db559e73fc5d6.jpg 350eef961650141125ef0630aee3efe9 https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/c4dc74a08165dda300d3468279d3ac8f.jpg 7c798b835daca0a0bf9fd83463e9ecb2 https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/f30540ab2eb289bf8cc44349bd9a5a86.jpg ff2988b560e8f97b8dacdc1d59cb8d93 https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/dcfd8405dd24828263a6b1672a662c79.jpg 00285b8227e806e86c3d8b802730be9a Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Shower of Stoles Description An account of the resource Items (stoles) for the Shower of Stoles exhibit Stole A stole in the Shower of Stoles exhibit Honoree The person honored by the creation of thestole. #AJustFaith Stole Text #AJustFaith Multi-Faith #AJustFaith is a black LGBTQ multi-faith, multi-ethnic, and multi-generational coalition of people who speak, teach and organize to create a just world for all. We are members of African, Arab, Asian, Indigenous and Latinx communities presenting visionary narratives of a world free of all forms of violence, domination, and oppression. We are inspired by our faiths’ most positive values to promote love for all humankind and responsible stewardship of our home, Earth. Signed by those attending the first convening in Salt Lake City, UT on October 19, 2015. Contribution Date 2015 Contribution Story This founding gathering took place on the day before the Faith & Family LGBTQ Power Summit, hosted by the National LGBTQ Task Force in Salt Lake City, UT, October 20-23, 2015. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 1230 Title A name given to the resource #AJustFaith Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant Salt Lake City, Utah (USA) Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource #AJustFaith African American American Indian Asian Latinx Salt Lake City Theology Utah https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/2055033c93fcd34aae66a539b43d732f.jpg 619a019842aa5abadc8581a7499faeec Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource The Upstairs Lounge Fire Book An external reference to a published book. URL <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Dont-Afraid-Anymore-Metropolitan-Community/dp/0312069545" target="_blank">http://www.amazon.com/Dont-Afraid-Anymore-Metropolitan-Community/dp/0312069545</a> Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Don’t Be Afraid Anymore by Troy Perry Description An account of the resource This book by UFMCC founder and long-time moderator Troy Perry includes his recollections of being in New Orleans following the fire. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived St. Martin’s Press: 1990; pp. 76-101 https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/d412319c54c9666a7d0ad711b1af7479.jpg 034590506867364b89822f7865f02689 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource The Upstairs Lounge Fire Book An external reference to a published book. URL <a href="http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2145976,00.html" target="_blank">http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2145976,00.html</a> Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource The Horror Upstairs by Elizabeth Dias with Jim Downs Description An account of the resource TIME magazine published a major story on the 40th anniversary (July 1, 2013 issue). https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/d8c92138bba0452a42a409ff9266d203.jpg 68f99c7c082462f400c7e5da47ebb749 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource The Upstairs Lounge Fire Book An external reference to a published book. URL <a href="https://www.facebook.com/upstairsloungefire" target="_blank">https://www.facebook.com/upstairsloungefire</a> Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource The Upstairs Lounge Fire by Royd Anderson Description An account of the resource Filmmaker Royd Anderson produced a documentary film that examines the tragedy of the Upstairs Lounge Fire (2013). https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/dac443b93c96e3242960d876de90a3d6.pdf 1f5fed4ccbad9ade2d180c8547588b33 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document Page 1: to implement the challenge of change... A Brief of Injustices an indictment of our society in its treatment of the homosexual Presented by The Council on Religion and the Homosexual, Inc. 330 Ellis Street San Francisco, California 94102 Page 2: to implement the challenge of change... A Brief of Injustices an indictment of our society in its treatment of the homosexual Presented by The Council on Religion and the Homosexual, Inc. 330 Ellis Street San Francisco, California 94102 Page 3: Index 1. Homosexuals are being prosecuted under laws which cannot be enforced equitably - Page 3 2. Homosexuals are being socially ostracized to the extent that they are often unable to avail themselves of effective legal counsel and unwilling to risk fighting for their legitimate rights in courts. - Page 4 3. Individuals who publicly assist persons/perceived by others as homosexuals face attempted intimidation by police as well as other negative sanctions. -Page 4 4. Enforcement officers use methods of enticement and entrapment to develop grounds for arrest and conviction of persons presumed to be homosexuals. -Page 5 5. Persons perceived to be homosexuals are subjected to unreasonable and unfair discriminatory practices in employment based on the unfounded belief of employers that homosexuals are unstable or are untrustworthy. - Page 5 6. Persons presumed to be homosexuals, on suspicion alone, are being willfully, publicly and illegally harassed by police in injurious ways. -Page 6 7. Criminals who attack citizens often go free because too much police manpower is used to harass, entice and entrap suspected homosexuals. - Page 7 8. Licensed public premises, such as bars, are subject to prosecution because they provide services to homosexuals or persons presumed to be homosexuals. Conversely, homosexuals and persons presumed to be homosexuals are deprived of access to such licensed public premises which are available to other people. - Page 7 9. In order to make a case against a licensed public place believed to serve homosexuals or persons presumed to be homosexuals, plainclothes investigators employ methods of enticement and entrapment to secure "evidence" which is often proved false or irrelevant. -Page 9 10. Private acts of unsuspecting persons which result from the deceitful enticement of undercover agents are used to suspend or revoke the license of public places, even though neither the enticement nor the private acts have ever been reported to the licensee. Page 9 Cover: The Wall of the Jefferson Memorial, Washington D.C. Page 4: Police harassment and denials of civil rights in San Francisco to persons presumed to be homosexual have raised issues of concern to all citizens. To bring this situation to the attention of the public, the Board of Trustees of The Council on Religion and the Homosexual, Inc., has prepared this Brief of Injustices. As a result of their involvement with the Council, many clergymen became aware of injustices which, until now, have been largely ignored by society. The clergy members of the Council's Board made their own investigation, and upon hearing their conclusions the Board of Trustees concurred. Consequently, this Brief is presented as the consensus of the Board. To place this Brief in proper perspective, we list the purposes of The Council on Religion and the Homosexual, which has as its objective the promotion of a "continuing dialogue between the religious community and homosexuals." 1. To orient members of religious communities (both lay persons and clergy) on aspects of homosexuality (i.e., physical, economic, legal, emotional, etc.) in accordance with homosexual testimony and available scientific data. 2. To encourage members of the religious communities to provide opportunities for homosexuals of both sexes to present their views of homosexuality to various religious organizations. 3. To open up channels of communication so that members of the religious communities may engage in dialogue with homosexuals in order to bring about new and deeper understandings of sexuality, morality, ethical behavior, and the life of religious faith. 4. To study systematically the deeper dynamics of authentic human relationships from biblical, theological and social science perspectives. 5. To engage in research which will further understanding of homosexuality within the larger framework of the present sexual revolution. 6. To enlist the aid of religious publications and other media in working toward a broadened editorial policy including more accurate and objective articles on homosexuality. 7. To provide an effective voice throughout the nation in matters of laws, policies and penal reforms governing adult sexual behavior. 8. To help professional people (clergymen, social workers, etc.) working in mental health and counseling fields to understand better their role in dealing with problems of human sexuality in our society with special reference to young people. 9. To encourage the formation of similar councils on religion and the homosexual in other areas of the nation and the world. We feel that these objectives can only be obtained through a thorough and objective consideration of human sexual behavior from all points of view and with a deep concern for the human beings and values involved in such sensitive, personal matters. The Council had its beginnings with a series of small group meetings which included homosexuals, members of the religious community, leaders of the homophile organizations, and other interested persons. After considering pertinent scientific and professional literature, we began a series of discussions with lawyers, doctors, psychiatrists, social workers,. and others knowledgeable in the field. With this background we held a consultation involving thirty people interested in the project. From this consultation there developed the idea of The Council on Religion and the Homosexual. Goals were established; the Council was formed, and later incorporated, and the major work began. Up to this point the results of our investigations were neither conclusive nor consistent. Therefore in order to understand better the ramifications of homosexual behavior, we began direct observation of the homosexual's relationships. The clergy started visiting so-called "gay bars," dances, discussion groups and other Page 5: social functions. Many of us spent time examining the little-publicized problem areas in the homosexual's existence: male prostitution, the aging homosexual, and the behavior which police and society consider undesirable. In the process we met homosexuals of every type, from every social and ethnic group, with every sort of religious and political outlook. From these investigations we derived a new sense of the difficulties we were to face. As time brought greater knowledge we discovered that a majority of homosexuals are productive members of society, doing excellent work in many fields of art, business, industry and the professions. Contrary to the conflicting theories of psychiatrists and other behavioral scientists, many of whom hold that homosexuals are abnormal, neurotic, dangerous people, we found that most of the persons we met and talked to were normal in appearance and fully capable of deep, lasting and moral relationships. Also contrary to popular misconceptions, we learned that homosexuals were not inherently more criminal either in intent or actions than their heterosexual counterparts. As with any group of people, we discovered elements which constitute social or legal problems. But by and large this group in the homosexual community, as in the larger community, seems to be small. In short, homosexuals turned out to be no better or worse than their heterosexual counterparts, differing from them primarily in the choice of a sexual partner. With this knowledge we were ready to act. The homophile organizations related to the Council volunteered to raise funds by sponsoring a benefit costume ball to be held January 1, 196 5. It was through this event that we experienced first hand the harassing tactics of the police. We had apprised the polic.e of the ball and the reasons for holding it, and had been led to believe the police would riot interfere- - but they did. Floodlights illuminated the entrance to the hall and police photographers took still and moving pictures of all persons entering and leaving. Police both plainclothes and uniformed, attempted to enter the hall--and did--following the arrest of three attorneys representing the Council and one woman member who was on duty at the door. Subsequently all four of those arrested pleaded not guilty to "interfering with police in the performance of their duty, " and at their jury trial were found not guilty. Now we are confronted with new and more serious problems. Can we continue what we have begun? Can we do anything constructive without provoking further hostile reactions from the police and perhaps even from the general community? Our answer: We know that we cannot accept quietly the unexpected pressures to which persons of homosexual orientation are being subjected. I During many discussions with lawyers, including those involved in the court cases which followed the dance, we have discovered that there is very little justice for the homosexual. The reasons for this are disturbing. For instance, we were surprised to discover that while it is not against the law to be homosexual, the law forbids specific sexual acts which are illegal whether performed by homosexuals, heterosexuals, or presumably even by children. We question whether such laws are either just or reasonable. Sexual acts are among the most private areas of human expression. As private acts, they should not be the subject of law. We also believe that law should sustain the right of each individual to engage in private sexual activity. Most sex laws are unjust, vague, unenforceable or unrealistic. Such laws serve best to open up avenues for blackmail, police brutality, and the violation of civil rights. The fact that the adult homosexual bears the brunt of a sporadic and prejudicial enforcement of such laws seems to be the choice of the law enforcement agencies themselves. In recent years there has been an increase in arrests for violations of these laws, but the enforcement has been directed almost exclusively against male homosexuals. If capricious enforcement of unjust laws continues, the day will Page 6: soon arrive when irritated or overzealous police officers may, at their own discretion, impose their own prejudices on some of the most intimate and private concerns of human life. This, then, is the first great injustice: Homosexuals are being prosecuted under laws which cannot be enforced equitably. II When we consider the effect of the moral standards of the community, we find that there are even greater inequities. In the Bay Area a sixteen year old boy attempted suicide arid subsequently it was discovered that. he was driven to this extreme by the brutal abuse of his schoolmates who found him to be bookish, a bit different, and therefore implicitly "queer." We have observed situations where parents have disowned their children when they discovered they were homosexuals. When a homosexual's sexual orientation is exposed the result usually is instant and overwhelming social condemnation, public shame and ridicule, the loss of employment, friends and church affiliation. As a result, dread of exposure has made many homosexuals fearful, guilt-ridden and secretive. Such citizens are easily intimidated by the public, the police, the courts and the unscrupulous lawyers to whom they sometimes have to turn. Lawyers who have represented homosexuals have told us that most homosexuals, even if not guilty, will not fight their cases through the courts. They decide it is better to plead guilty and hope for the court's mercy. They are so suspicious and fearful of exposure and publicity they usually prefer to forego trial by jury, feeling certain other citizens will consider them guilty despite all contrary evidence. While still in the hands of the police many homosexuals seem to be intimidated into making damaging admissions, often untrue, which are so incriminating that a merited defense becomes almost impossible. Hence, police statistics indicating the number of convictions may be more indicative of the fear and false guilt felt by the homosexual than of his actual guilt or innocence. Published police statistics which seek to prove that most homosexuals are criminals cannot withstand careful scrutiny from a scientific perspective. Basic prejudices and methods of enforcement preclude the scientific accuracy and importance of such data, This, then, is the second great injustice: Homosexuals are being socially ostracized to the extent that they are often unable to avail themselves of effective legal counsel and unwilling to risk fighting for their legitimate rights in courts. III We have learned much from our confrontations with the police. Before the dance some of us had two long meetings with members of the sex crimes detail of the San Francisco Police Department. What we heard astounded us. We had come to discuss the ball and the possibility of opening up avenues of communication. They were determined to examine our theological beliefs and why we had chosen to concern ourselves with people who committed what were to them sinful acts. During one discussion, we were informed that even masturbation was a crime against "God's Law." They seemed sure they were involved in enforcing "God's Law." It has become apparent that the police feel justified in doing whatever they want to do regardless of whether it is merited or not, wise, or even legal. We have also discovered that the word of some persons representing the police department is undependable; their attitudes tend to be rather big brotherish, and their actions tend to Page 7: be oppressive if not unjust. We fear this may set unparalleled precedents for, establishing a police state; where private fanaticism becomes public dogma, where eccentricity makes a man a felon, where suspicion invariably convicts, and where statutes come to mean whatever the police want them to mean. We were told; "Leave morals and law enforcement to us." In effect, they said return to the temple and pray. For us, however, God's action is not only in the temple but in the world confronting human need. This, then, is the third great injustice: Individuals who publicly assist persons perceived by others as homosexuals face attempted intimidation by police as well as other negative sanctions. IV As we have noted, the choice of the persons against whom the penalties of law are enforced seems to rest with the police department. As a result, some homosexuals suffer from the inequitable enforcement of law. But we have found our greatest source of concern in the specific police tactics used to make arrests and obtain convictions. We are convinced that the police use entrapment or enticement in order to make arrests, although they vehemently deny resorting to such practices. It is our understanding that such methods are illegal. For instance, we wonder about the legality and justice of having attractive young police officers in civilian clothes making themselves receptive targets for approach and solicitation. Can such officers be expected invariably to resist the temptation to lead the conversation into areas where an arrest is assured? The courts seem to believe the word of the police. But we wonder if the police always tell the truth. There may be many cases in which policemen color the truth or distort facts to get a conviction. And we suspect that there may be officers who spend time peeking through little holes into men's rooms or stationed behind vent screens. Others may stand at urinals inviting approach. As ministers, we have investigated many of the so-called "set-ups" used to make such arrests, and we can only wonder with what sort of men we are dealing. It has been suggested that the frequency of arrests and their nature could indicate the existence of a quota system based on the principle that minimum police efficiency demands at least so many arrests of a certain type by certain officers over a period of time. A more basic question is: Is solicitation with the intent to commit a sexual act of any kind justification for arrest and conviction? Is the discussion of possible sexual acts an adequate ground for considering that a person manifests sexual behavior presently against the law? If conversations about illegal matters are made equivalent to actual violation of law then we would have to incarcerate almost everyone. This, then, is the fourth great injustice: Enforcement officers use methods of enticement and entrapment to develop grounds for arrest and conviction of persons presumed to be homosexual. V It does not end here. We have learned that when a person is arrested he is fingerprinted, photographed, and a record is made of the charges against him. Even if the courts dismiss the case or find him not guilty, this record of arrest is retained by the police department. It can follow the person throughout his lifetime and be used much later to ruin him, particularly if the charges involve, homosexual acts, which many employers consider a risky credit for an employee. It is unfair for employers to subject such persons to severe penalties on the basis of a police record of arrests--especially as arrests are made as a means of intimidation when the arresting officers know they cannot make a case in court. It is especially unjust when prolonged unemployment results from less than legal arrests and less than just Page 8: court proceedings. But the police do not always stop at reporting the record. In many cases they tell the person's employer of the charges against him, or release this information to the press for publication, which has the same effect. The lawyers arrested at the ball were the victims of such practices by the police department which sent the San Francisco Bar Association a report that these attorneys had been arrested defending homosexuals. Fortunately, the ethics of the Bar Association are quite different from those of the police. The same might be said, but in another way in reference to the discriminatory policies adhered to by the military and governmental sectors of our society. Suspected homosexuals are ferreted out and discharged as quickly as possible. For instance, a majority of homosexuals have served honorably in the military services without being detected or demoralizing their companions. The unfortunates who are discovered are discharged on "other than honorable grounds." This becomes all the more lamentable since the younger ones often do not manifest behavior associated with homosexuality until they are in the armed services. Government employees often are pre-emptorily discharged after expensive investigations disclose grounds for "suspicion of homosexual behavior." Yet it has never been scientifically established that homosexuals are undesirable in public or military service because of their susceptibility to being blackmailed or because of innate characteristics which affect job performance. Returning to the private sector, many private employers discharge homosexual employees on grounds justified by little more than custom, prejudice and taboo. These attitudes encourage mass personnel inquisitions consuming thousands of dollars and countless man hours, and often result in irreparable loss of talent and productivity which our society cannot afford. This, then, is the fifth great injustice: Persons perceived to be homosexuals are subjected to unreasonable and unfair discriminatory practices in employment based on the unfounded belief of employers that homosexuals are unstable or untrustworthy. VI It is common knowledge that the police engage in other forms of harassment. Harassment of persons in bars, on streets, or in other public places seems predicated on the theory that although most people, even highly trained ones, cannot detect the average homosexual, the police are fully capable of making such fine distinctions. Persons are subjected to questioning based on suspicion alone without there being any proof that illegal sexual acts have been or ever will be performed by that individual. Because of dress, manner, place of assembly, choice of associates, or just because the officers detect a seeming difference from the norm, persons may be detained for questioning, have makeup cards filed on them, and in other ways be publicly embarrassed and forced to endure verbal abuse. Members of the Council and their wives have experienced such verbal abuse. In our encounter with the police, one said: "I never thought I'd see the day when ministers helped queers." One of the ministers was asked by a policeman in a condemning tone, "Would you want your son to be a homosexual?" Another question was asked, "What does your wife think of your helping homosexuals?" This, then, is the sixth great injustice: Persons presumed to be homosexuals, on suspicion alone, are being willfully, publicly, and illegally harassed by police in injurous ways. Page 9: Because homosexuals are subjected to the contempt of the public and the police, they become fair game for all forms of criminality. Fearful and distrustful of the police, the courts, and indeed of the public in general, homosexuals choose to submit to beatings, extortion and robbery by professional criminals. Many of the major crimes committed in San Francisco, such as murder, assault and battery, extortion and robbery, are perpetrated on homosexuals. Few of the perpetrators of these crimes ever seem to be caught. A whole underworld of traffic in male flesh is reported to flourish in San Francisco, yet it often seems that persons most subjected to harassment are the homosexuals who, for one reason or another, find it necessary to be clients of male prostitutes. We seriously question the advisability of the amount of police time and public money used to harass suspected homosexuals while many actual malefactors escape apprehension. We think members of the sex crimes detail now spending their time in latrines, in plainclothes standing on the street corners, or in gay bars seeking to entrap unsuspecting citizens, could better protect our community by concentrating on major areas of crime. It appears to us that disorganized and prejudicial law enforcement is almost as much of a problem as organized crime. This, then, is the seventh great injustice: Criminals who attack citizens often go free because too much police manpower is used to harass, entice and entrap suspected homosexuals. VIII Our investigation into the homosexual's behavior and his relationships to his society led us to consider the so-called "gay bars." For the harassed homosexual there hardly seems to be any place other then the gay bar in which he may freely associate without baleful scrutiny and the need to wear a mask. We investigated heterosexual bars and gay bars impartially, and at no time did we observe in gay bars any actions we might deem shocking or immoral. In most cases our arrival was not particularly noticed. We doubt that the patrons in the bars could have known that we were ministers. It can be said that in appearance, atmosphere, deportment of clientele, and the nature of any sexuality which might inadvertently find expression, the average gay bar is forced to be well above its heterosexual counterpart. After a thorough investigation of bars we met with various bartenders, managers and others who were, familiar with the problems faced by the bar owner and his patrons. This led to a confrontation with the Alcoholic Beverage Control in a meeting we held with its regional director. Unsatisfied with what we had been told there, we examined court records of such famous litigation as "Stoumen vs. Reilly," or what is popularly known as "The Black Cat Case;" "Mary's First and Last Chance," a bar which was located in Oakland; and some more recent closures affecting "Jack's Waterfront," "The D'Oak Room" and "The Jumpin' Frog" bars which we had inspected prior to their closing. Legal matters were reviewed with several lawyers, and in some cases we talked with some of the patrons who had been arrested by ABC agents or city police in attempts to gather sufficient evidence to justify closing the bars. At first we did not realize the full implications of our investigations. Basically what we found was that an agency of government, in this case the ABC, was using prejudicial enforcement of a questionable law to justify the closing of homosexual bars under legal provisions it used much less frequently in cases involving heterosexual bars. Since the average life span of a gay bar seems to be something short of two years, while heterosexual bars usually remain open almost indefinitely, it Page 10: appears that the degree of scrutiny which homosexual bars receive may greatly exceed that accorded heterosexual bars. Apparently they are usually closed on several grounds which may be summed up in this way: the licensee is running a dis.orderly house injurious to the public decency or morals, because within the premises and with his full knowledge he permitted lewd or lascivious acts, a public display or manifestation of aberrant sexual urges or desires, verbal solicitations. indicating the intent to perform such acts, or that he allowed his bar to become a resort for dope pushers or addicts, prostitutes, pimps, panderers or sexual perverts. It is very misleading to consider sexual pervert and homosexual as synonymous. For instance, some authorities consider the use of contraceptives as a practice of sexual perversion- -the perverting of sexual intimacies from the intended purpose of procreation. The disagreements which exist between scientists, sociologists, physicians, lawyers and even the clergy about the etiology of homosexuality, its nature and manifestations, preclude such a. connection between homosexuality and sexual perversion. In addition, persons with homosexual inclinations have not been scientifically proven to be ipso facto criminals, intrinsically detrimental to civilization or infected with disease. Neither do they comprise a small element in the population which can be isolated, incarcerated or eradicated by repressive measures. Therefore, to close bars just because they are patronized by homosexuals, on the basis of the incorrect belief that homosexuals are sexual perverts, is incoherent reasoning. In fact, we are told by people knowledgeable in the field that even if this spurious contention were valid there is no way to determine with any certainty what persons or groups of persons in a bar are homosexual. Therefore, as written, justice and equity in applying this law are almost impossible. There are more basic issues. Charges drawn up against gay bars are an itemization either of verbal solicitations or of acts tending to the public display or manifestation of aberrant sexual urges or desires, which are directed to, or seen by, specific ABC undercover agents whose entry into and departure from the bar are unknown to its owner. In such a sense, the act of a man placing his arm loosely around the waist of another man, in a gay bar, within the view of such an agent, indicates that the man is a homosexual publicly expressing sexual urges or desires, or the intent thereto, which are clearly against the present statutes. This sort of evidence is used to establish that the bar owner is keeping a disorderly house. To establish that a disorderly house exists does not require that a person named in a charge must actually commit an illegal sex act, so any interpretation of intent to commit such acts on the basis that a person is presumed to be a homosexual is unjustified and irrational. Most intelligent people would never sanction branding citizens as homosexuals solely on the basis that their thoughts, speech, mannerisms, conversations, attitudes, tendencies or psychological responses are in some manner or to some degree, unconventional. Neither would they expect lay authorities such as the police, the ABC, or even the courts to be able to determine from simple aspects of non-sexual behavior whether persons were homosexual. Because there is a difference between the acts themselves and the mere intent to perform them, there is no substantial connection between gestures or conversations and the specific sexual acts which are against the law. Therefore, justice itself would preclude confounding intent to perform with performance when the actual performance itself is substantially lacking. Clearly, the manner of application and enforcement of these statutes depends upon the personal opinions and prejudices of the ABC and its agents, a type of enforcement which fosters oppression, blackmail and discrimination. We hardly think it prudent to invest the ABC with the exclusive, unlimited and unrestrained authority to suppress or regulate the behavior of bar patrons through its right to suspend or revoke licenses. Thus ABC becomes what it should not become, the keeper of morals for bar patrons in general and for homosexuals in particular. Page 11: This, then, is the eighth great injustice: Licensed public premises, such as bars are subject to prosecution because they provide services to homosexuals or persons presumed to be homosexuals. Conversely, homosexuals and persons presumed to be homosexuals are deprived of access to such licensed public premises which are available to other people. IX The methods used by the ABC to gather evidence against bars are not unlike those used by the plainclothes agents of the police department. Through deceit and inducement, lure and suggestion, both police and ABC undercover agents encourage solicitations for sexual acts. Such solicitations are not reported to the licensee until months or years later when they are published in the charges used to suspend or revoke the license. In reading the charges filed against several of the bars, we concluded that almost any act or conversation in a gay bar is sufficient for arrest and for use as data in revoking the license. There is also the question of the strict legality of ruses and ploys employed by these agents in their efforts to make a case against the gay bar. We ask: In playing their part in an endless crusade to enforce the so-called moral code of society, are these agents free from disposition toward prejudice or a tendency to deliberately distort and alter the facts just to get sufficient evidence to close the bar? This, then, is the ninth great ,injustice: In order to make a case against a licensed public place believed to serve homosexuals or persons presumed to be homosexuals, plainclothes investigators employ methods of enticement and entrapment to secure "evidence" which is often proved false or irrelevant. X Although the ABC has repeatedly denied that it keeps files of charges on gay bars, or that such charges are being gathered against all the gay bars in San Francisco, logic indicates that the entire truth is not being told. Somewhere a closed file, or its equivalent, unavailable for public or legal scrutiny, must be in the process of being assembled, for in many cases the dates of actual incidents used as evidence to suspend a license date far back into the bar's history. As we have stated, from our observation the standards of behavior in gay bars are equal to, if not higher than, those in most heterosexual bars; therefore unless we assume that carefully assembled files of charges are kept on such bars we are at a loss to explain the fact that almost all gay bars are eventually closed. Since the files remain secret, since the undercover agents never report arrests to the bar owner, and since the ABC never publishes the charges until action is taken to suspend or revoke the license, the owner of the bar is required to defend himself against accusations concerning acts which may have occurred months or even years earlier. Proper defense against such charges is then almost impossible. Indeed, in criminal court the charges against the person arrested and named in the ABC action are often dismissed for lack of evidence, but the arrest is still held against the bar. Such accusations, traditionally of dubious merit, are used at a cut-and-dried proforma hearing where, almost without exception, they form the basis for the suspension of the license pending appeal. Appeals through the ABC almost always fail, and since actions on the constitutional issues in the civil courts are prohibitively expensive, most bars whose licenses are suspended are financially unable to fight for justice. Therefore they have no alternative but to go out of business. The whole idea of suspending a license pending appeal seems to be a denial of due process. Unable to properly defend himself against vague and often uncorroborated charges of which he is unaware until his license is suspended, the licensee is found sufficiently guilty by the ABC to justify suspending the license, leaving him the Page 12: almost impossible task of proving that he is innocent when in effect he has already been convicted. When we examined the actual court cases, the hearings and the appeals, we noticed that gay bars never seem to win reversals of any sort. As we have seen in the Black Ca.t case, those few that do fight their cases through the courts only achieve a temporary stay of execution. ABC pressure continues until something is found which will justify a revocation of the license. We feel the ABC is well aware that without funds the licensee cannot afford the great cost of taking the case into the courts where reversal might be possible. We suspect that both the hearing and the appeal boards of the ABC are inclined to follow the basic dictum of the entire agency; that all homosexual bars must be closed. This arrangement is a prime example of the vicious circle in exercising unlimited power to try to convict. The ABC is the investigator through its undercover agents, the accuser through its list of secret and vague charges, the prosecutor through its published charges, the judge through its boards of hearing and appeal, and the punisher through its right to suspend a license pending appeal. Such policies and actions lead us to believe that a highly prejudiced concern with a moral function exists which does not properly fall within the purview of the ABC. If they are disorderly, bars should be closed. But such treatment should be equitable, and should be based on investigations and charges which apply uniformly and which do not violate due process. Gay bars per se are not hotbeds of unspeakable acts, or the scenes of wild orgies. Just because homosexuals gather together there is no automatic offense to public morals and decency. We ministers have been in and out of all these bars often enough to reach this conclusion. This, then, is the tenth great injustice: Private acts of unsuspecting persons which result from the deceitful enticement of undercover agents are used to suspend or revoke the license of public places; even though neither the enticement nor the private acts have ever been reported to the licensee. Our police department, ever alert in rooting out crime in our community, does its small part to intimidate the patrons of gay bars. Besides the use of entrapment and enticement inside the bars they also harass people as they enter or leave. Indeed, as we have discovered, in the last ten years arrests in and out of bars has increased sharply. We wonder if these statistics do not suggest that in many cases arrests of homosexuals are like parking tickets, an effective and socially acceptable way of showing that the police are doing the job of enforcing "God's Law." Such indications provide little comfort when we read about murders and robbery on streets and in parks, or in one case, at the benefit ball, we observed over 35 policemen standing on the sidewalks. As ministers, we are discouraged when we realize that some of these social problems stem in part from misconceptions about theology and the interpretation of the Bible. The churches cannot escape their own participation in the perpetuation of these injustices. Selection of scriptural references, for instance, contribute to the attitudes of parishioners. One may read the Ten Commandments, wherein homosexuality is not mentioned at all, or one may use the oft-quoted Sodom and Gomorrah passage to justify the extermination of all homosexual behavior. We as churchmen cannot separate ourselves from our participation in the society which now perpetrates the injustices which we have described. At the same time we want to align ourselves with the causes which uphold the rights of persons, and against institutions which treat any person as less than a human and a child of God. In drawing up this Brief of Injustices we feel we are helping to expose a pattern of social, legal and economic oppression of a minority group, based not on fact and scientific analysis but rather on taboo and fear. No amount of condemnation, intimidation or incarceration in penal or mental institutions can alter the fact that a large minority of American citizens has, according to existing laws, at least upon occasion been guilty of committing homosexual acts. Further, the unreasonable Page 13: discrimination against homosexuals is demonstrated by the existence of a vast schism between the actual sexual activities of the entire population and those theoretically ideal standards which legal codes seek to uphold. Thus that a few are caught and punished is even more reprehensible. In sexual matters the law should be concerned with the protection of youth and the guarding of the public against force or predatory conduct. Other sexual behavior should be rooted in personal liberty and should be legally protected. Closely related, the right to peacefully meet in places open to the public is no more than the right of assembly granted to all citizens and should not be denied to the homosexual. It seems to us the first duty of the police is to prevent crime, not to provoke it for the sole purpose of its prosecution and punishment. Surely the utilization of plainclothesmen to try to induce citizens to perform homosexual acts for the purpose of arresting them is neither the best use of our police force nor an act of public justice. We also believe that Americans should reject any custom or law which would make any public authority the judge of private, personal moral convictions. Certainly such an authority should not permit a civil right to be whittled away indirectly any more than it should be allowed to be destroyed directly. We feel that the test of a democratic society is in the extent to which it suppresses individual thought and action. For some time there has been a demand for regulation of every aspect of human behavior and the repression of more and more conduct that is supposedly different from the so-called norm. This in itself is an expression of a growing tendency to employ broad standards and vaguely worded laws which seem to equate sin with crime, and which are used by the police to scoop up possible violators as they see fit. The excessive concern of some Americans over what are essentially areas of personal expression in sexual behavior, exercised between adults in private, can result in our becoming a nation of professional snoopers and privacy invaders, a society of voyeurs seeking to expose the scandals and defects in others which we refuse to recognize in ourselves. Laws based on such whims are a step backward. Such tendencies are. diametrically opposed to the principles of equality we profess to maintain, reducing suspected homosexuals to the status of second grade citizens and inferior human beings. In addition, it is our firm belief that any law which is unenforceable is worse than no law at all. Besides the violations of civil and human rights which these injustices imply, there are issues which reflect concern for human tragedy and waste of potential contributions to the growth of our society. The expenditures of public monies on witch hunts is only the smallest part of such waste. Greater losses occur in the reduced capacity of the individual to produce either for himself or his society. The dispersal of energies in countless small, yet terrible tragedies, seems unnecessary. We feel the chief goal in dealing with homosexuals should not be to try to reorient their sexual propensities through punishment and intimidation but rather to help them attain a satisfactory self-image and a meaningful relationship to society. Indeed, no one should be forced to suffer in silence or live in fear. We believe that only sensible criteria for judging human relationships is the maturity, necessity and justice inherent in•each relationship. Social and legal justice is essential. Society must not suffer from cheap harassment perpetrated in the name of virtue when, in fact, it is the terrible vice. Reacting to these pressures, the persecuted minority is forced into ghetto-like in-groupisms and secrecies which lead the homosexual to perpetrate on himself insults and degradations far beyond those imposed by the oppressive and hostile society in which he lives. So the homosexual is forced to perpetrate the last great injustice upon himself, that of failing to realize the best in himself and his part in cultivating the best in his society. There is an old Chinese proverb which says, "It is better to light a candle than curse the darkness." This is what we have tried to do. We are convinced that to change these constantly reinforced patterns of injustice, existing barriers to the ex- Page 14: change of knowledge must be destroyed. We of The Council on Religion and the Homosexual must find ways to establish communication between the homosexual and his society. Our work.is not aided by police who harass us, by politicians who are fearful of talking with us, by segments of the press which prefer either sensationalism or silence, by portions of the religious community which prefer to condemn rather than to understand, and by homosexuals who reject any effort to approach them. Fear will never set man free, and fear itself is perhaps the greatest obstacle which man must overcome. In our efforts to become free men we must be guided by the central ethical command of our Judeo-Christian tradition: "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and your neighbor as yourself." Signed by the Board of Trustees of The Council on Religion and the Homosexual, Inc., June, 1965 The Rev. Ted Mcllvenna, President Mr. Donald S. Lucas, Vice-President Mrs. Del Martin, Secretary Mr. Robert Walker, Treasurer Mr. William Beardemphl Mr. Harold L. Call The Rev. Dr. Clarence A. Colwell The Rev. Canon Robert W. Cromey Mr. Mark Forrester Mr. Darryl Glied Miss Phyllis Leon The Rev. Charles Lewis The Rev. Jan Marinissen Mr. Guy Strait The Rev. A. Cecil Williams Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Brief of Injustices Published by CRH in September, 1965 (14 pages) Description An account of the resource Phyllis Lyon & Del Martin Papers. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Repository: <a href="http://www.glbthistory.org" target="_blank" rel="noopener">GLBT Historical Society</a> https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/8ec5fd256eb6375740053c1c08495371.pdf d4f91fe607386c2fa128203e5ed71e6d Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document California Hall A Night to Remember At its January 21st meeting, the San Francisco Bay Area Gay and Lesbian Historical Society will be remembering the infamous 1965 California Hall confrontation between the San Francisco Police Department and the gay community. For a generation of lesbian and gay San Franciscans, this incident marked a watershed in the City's gay history. In their book Lesbian/Woman, long-time gay activists Del Martin and Phyllis Lyon proclaim that California Hall ''will long be remembered in the history of the homophile movement.'' What happened at California Hall on the night of January 1st, 1965? Why is it so important? For the majority of lesbian and gay men, San Francisco gay life in the early 1960's was far from easy. Gay bars like the Black Cat and the Jumping Frog were frequently raided. Police harassment on the streets was common. Many gay bars were forced to make payoffs to the Vice Squad to avoid persecution. Early homophile groups like the Mattachine Society and the Daughters of Bilitis lacked the political power to fight this oppression. It was often scary and dangerous to be gay. In 1962 Ted McIlvenna, a young minister and social worker from Kansas City, arrived at Glide Memorial Methodist Church. From talking with gay members of his Tenderloin congregation, McIlvenna developed an understanding of the problems facing San Francisco's gay community. He began to organize meetings between local church leaders and members of the homophile movement. As a result, in December 1964 the Council on Religion and the Homosexual was formed. The initial fundraising event for the new organization was to be a New Year's Eve dance. Scheduled for the California Hall on Polk Street, the dance was sponsored by six San Francisco gay organizations. The entire gay community was invited, as well as interested clergy and their families. The San Francisco Police Department viewed these plans as deliberate provocation. On the evening of the dance over fifty police officers descended on California Hall. They harassed and intimidated the guests, photographing all who entered. They eventually arrested four people: three attorneys and a ticket-taker. Yet over five hundred lesbians and gay men braved harassment and arrest, and crossed the police line to enter. The Police Department had won a victory that evening but it was short-lived. Shocked at the incident they had witnessed, concerned clergy from the Council on Religion and the Homosexual called a press conference the next day at Glide to publicly protest. The ACLU took up the cases of the four arrested, and all were eventually found not guilty. The well-publicized court cases gave the gay community its first taste of power and radically redefined its relationship with the police. No longer would it tolerate police harassment. We owe a great deal to the lesbians and gay men who passed the police cameras and risked arrest to demand their civil rights. They were our community's early freedom fighters. Please join the Historical Society in honoring these San Francisco heroes on January 21st. Eric Garber Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource California Hall: A Night to Remember by Eric Garber Description An account of the resource Published in San Francisco Bay Area Gay & Lesbian Historical Society Newsletter, volume 1, number 2, December 1985. From research papers of James Waller. https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/0c92a23f257146bd8009b32cbca1e946.pdf c228142da864c802573dbac8a551174e Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document ACLU Joins Homosexual Dance Case The American Civil Liberties Union announced here yesterday it will defend three lawyers arrested at a homosexual benefit ball when they objected to the police moving in. Flanked by the attorneys involved, ACLU lawyer Marshall Krause told a press conference the three were victims of "police harassment." Charged with obstructing police officers at California Hall the night of January 1 were attorneys Evander Smith, Herbert Donaldson and Elliot Leighton. The police made the arrests, Krause said, in an effort "to intimidate attorneys who represent unpopular groups." The three lawyers said they were hustled away by uniformed police on the instructions of plainclothes inspectors when they said police needed either a warrant or information that a crime was being committed to enter the premises. The benefit ball was organized by the Council for Religion and Homosexuality, a group established by Episcopal, Methodist, Lutheran and United Church of Christ leaders to try to integrate homosexuals into the community. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Chronicle Reports ACLU Press Conference with Arrested Lawyers Description An account of the resource San Francisco Chronicle, January 6, 1965, page 7. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Repository: <a href="http://www.glbthistory.org" target="_blank" rel="noopener">GLBT Historical Society</a> https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/f6de02f9c75f632a1021ecb6cbd86604.pdf 969af664dfdbbdd3f412637f5890150f Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document Homosexual Dance Trial Halted on Technicality Municipal Judge Leo Friedman directed a jury of eight men and four women yesterday to return a not guilty verdict against three lawyers and a woman ticket taker, charged with blocking the entry of police at a homosexual ball New Year's eve. Complaining officers sat with mouths agape as Judge Friedman halted the trial at conclusion of the State's case and snapped: "It's useless to waste everybody's time following this to its finale." The judge ordered the not guilty verdict, he said later, because police had claimed they were halted when they sought to enter California Hall, scene of the function. "You can't charge people with one thing and prove another," Judge Friedman said. "All the officers—and there were 15 of them—entered the hall without anyone's trying to stop them." The interference came later, when police sought to enter the ballroom where the party was under way, but this was not charged in the complaint. Judge Friedman said police had a legal right to inspect the hall for proper permits for the hall, but interference with their function in this regard was not charged, either. The technical victory for Attorneys Herbert Donaldson, 37, Evander Smith, 42, and Eliot Leighton, 34, and for ticket taker Nancy May, 28, was won by Marshall Krause of the American Civil Liberties Union. The New Year's function was sponsored by the Council for Religion and the Homosexual. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Chronicle Reports Not Guilty Verdict in Trial Description An account of the resource San Francisco Chronicle, February 12, 1965, page 3. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Repository: <a href="http://sfpl.org/librarylocations/sfhistory/sfhistory.htm" target="_blank" rel="noopener">San Francisco Public Library</a> https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/c559035d390b1894a22ae6177e438589.pdf 79b3eb2e03bee890cbf07566e97f2cb6 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document Witness Breaks Up a Courtroom Inspector Rudy Nieto of the Police Sex Detail got a big laugh yesterday at the trial of three lawyers and a ticket-taker who are charged with interfering with police at a January 1 homosexual benefit ball. He said 14 officers, one policewoman and two police photographers accompanied him to the scene of the ball at California Hall, Polk street and Golden Gate. Curious. Municipal Judge Leo Friedman asked why it took so many. "We went," said the officer, "just to inspect the premises." The audience, including half a dozen ministers and their wives from the Council for Religion and the Homosexual—which sponsored the ball—thought that was hilarious. Nieto denied that police went to the ball to harass homosexuals, but dropped one other mysterious comment. Asked why police photographers took pictures of the arriving guests, Nieto said the department "wanted pictures of these people because some of them might be connected to national security..." Defense attorney Marshall Krause of the American Civil Liberties Union, did not pursue the point. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Chronicle Reports Police Inspector’s Testimony During Trial Description An account of the resource San Francisco Chronicle, February 11, 1965, page 2. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Repository: <a href="http://sfpl.org/librarylocations/sfhistory/sfhistory.htm" target="_blank" rel="noopener">San Francisco Public Library</a> https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/5c2dde05ecf7c0eda7eb55eee5d1f5ce.pdf dac792ca510a6f9e6edf24d38ba1bfb1 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document Page 1: The Ball & After The Council on Religion and the Homosexual held a costume ball at California Hall in San Francisco on the 1st of January. The CRH is an organization dedicated, in part, to the establishment of a continuing dialogue between the clergy and the homosexuals. The reason for giving this ball was to obtain funds for the necessary expenses of this organization. Since it is involved in an unpopular cause, there are no municipal or other non-profit foundation organizations willing to be associated. The ball was cleared with all the proper authorities before the event and a very large crowd was expected. Unfortunately the ball was so heavily harassed by the San Francisco Police Department that only a portion of those who arranged for invitations crossed the picket line posted by the Police Department. About 550 of the homosexuals and their friends were brave enough to come into the place. This assured that the ball would not be a financial failure, but it was not a financial success. However socially the ball was enjoyed by those 500 who did get into the building. There was dancing on two levels with the twist, swim, jerk, etc. being the mode in the basement and the fox-trot prevailing on the upper-level. Some of the costumes were comparable with the finest to be seen on Bourbon Street on Shrove Tuesday. There was Erick and the Countess as "Marie Antoinette and Louis"; There was B. Billings as "The New Year"; There was Michelle in one of his most fabulous costumes yet; There was The Franklin with balloons; There was J. Deare as "The Golden Girl"; There was an untold number of police posing as law-abiding citizens; There was no-one posing as a law-breaking policeman; There was Zelda as the most sparkling personality on the dance floor; There was an overflow of good costumery. The food was furnished by the Coits, the bar was manned by The Tavern Guild, S.I.R. arranged for the decorations of the hall; Advertising was by Strait and Associates and the Mattachine Society of San Francisco. Except for the unwarranted and obnoxious presence of the delegation from the Hall of Justice, the ball proceeded without a hitch and everyone had a good time. There were two floor shows, one performed by Franklin, who had to combat the cops-and-robbers show that filled the hall, with lots of cops and not a criminal in the house. Altho the party broke up early (about 1AM) there was no one who could not say they had not had a more unusual, if not enjoyable, experience. There is considerable pressure on the CRH to repeat the ball at the first opportunity but the leaders of CRH insist that it is not in this field of endeavor that they want to be considered. (Continued on page 2) Page 2: Police Action at the Ball The Law, the Action and the Reaction Prior to the holding of the Mardi Gras Ball at the California Hall in San Francisco, two ministers arranged a call on the Chief of Police. As is usual, the Chief was busy and could not see them and they were referred to the sex detail of the SFPD. The Sex Detail was surprized that anyone would want to have anything to do with such undesirable people as homosexuals and were vitally interested in the theology of anyone so interested, One of the ministers who attended the 'conference' felt he was being subjected to a discourse on theology rather than being briefed on police policy. After this 'conference', a call was received by the ministers from the SFPD, saying that "No masks and NO costumes would be permitted to be worn at the ball. Since this was an obvious violation (on the part of the police department) of the California Penal Code, the ministers called a hasty meeting of the various homophile organizations. (The California Penal Code reads as follows: 650a-WEARING OF MASKS PROHIBITED- It is a misdemeanor for any person, either alone or in company with others, to appear on any street or highway, or in other public places or any place open to view by the general public, with his face partially or completely concealed by means of a mask or other regalia or paraphernalia, with intent thereby to conceal his identity. This section does not prohibit the wearing of such means of concealment in good faith for the 'purposes of amusement, entertaining or in compliance with any public health order."(Emphasis supplied) Regarding costume: (The law here is so vague that it is beyond description) 650 1/2 - Injuries to persons, property, Public peace, Health or decency; false personation for lewd purpose; -A person who willfully and wrongfully commits any act which ... openly outrages public decency or ... who with intent of accomplishing any lewd or licentious purpose ... is guilty of a misdemeanor.") The meeting called by the ministers had already decided to go ahead with the ball since it was only hours away when two men from the sex detail happened to drop in. A compromise was worked out with the police whereby the sponsors of the affair would see to it that the costumes were not paraded on the streets and that they would alight at the front door and immediately go into the hall. This appeared to satisfy the police and they said then that there would be no harassment of the affair so long as there was no other law violations. Upon arrival at the Hall the ministers and others were amazed to find three police photographers, dozens of police officers (in and out of uniform) and an aggregation of police cars. The photographers (both movie and still) photographed everyone entering and leaving the hall. At first this caused consternation, but after one straight woman said, "Send me 30 copies", the rest of the people relaxed, POLICE ACTION AT THE BALL Persons arriving at the Mardi Gras Ball were greeted with such a display of police power as to scare away all but the most determined, At one time there was an estimate of 35 uniformed officers and 15 plainclothesmen present. Each person arriving was given a barrage of flood lights and cameramen. They were police officers. One of the ministers, in assisting a person to depart, positioned himself in front of the photographer. He was warned that if he did this again he would be arrested. At another time the editor of the Citizens News, Guy Strait, questioned the photographer as to his status. The photographer was reluctant to reveal his identity. When Mr. Strait approached another officer and made the statement, "This guy says he is a police officer but refuses to show me his badge and I will not refrain from blocking his camera until he does" the other officer said that he could vouch for the fact that the photographer was, in fact, a police officer. Later the photographer did show his badge to Mr. Strait. After the harassment in front of the Hall had died down, due to the arrival of most of the guests, some police officers attempted to enter the building, At this time two attorneys, hired by the CRH, protested their entry into a private party. They were promptly arrested for interfering with an officer in the performance of his duty, Then another attorney came to the rescue, and he was also arrested. A very slightly built woman was at the entry checking invitations. An officer in plainclothes came into the building. He was asked for his invitation by this young lady. He said, "I am a police officer." When she asked to see his badge, she was also arrested. Until this time, altho the police had long ago forced their entry into the hall, it was strange to see how little interest they had in the persons in the hall. About an hour after the entry had been forced, two plainclothesmen arrested two men for lewd conduct. They accused them of kissing in public. However witnesses in the vicinity do not agree with the statement of the police in this matter, This was the last arrest made on the premises. The departure from the hall was quiet, orderly and except for the police officer's photography (which is said to be poor) no further incidents were reported. THE PICTURES ON PAGE THREE #1-Inspector Toomey in white trenchcoat outside hall. The women in background were in the police party. #2- Two plainclothesmen in-side the hall #3-Police photographer outside the hall. Movie cameraman in background. #4- Movie Cameraman spots another customer. Page 3: What Shall We Do Next? (Regarding the police action at the New Year's Mardi Gras Ball) (Excerpts from an address to the Council on Religion and the Homosexual.) We have all taken a courageous and public stand. We have ascribed to the belief that "This is a beginning and not an end to our determination to achieve full citizenship for homosexuals and all minorities, without discrimination and intimidation." It is our belief that the best way to realize this goal is to continue the confrontation which we have initiated on positive and effective levels of action. Therefore, it is essential that the Council on Religion and the Homosexual and all of the cooperating organizations consider the following general program and this need for action. Since the police and the political structure in general will continue these tactics, using the age-old and irrelevant moral arguments as a basis for the justice of what they are doing, when in fact the real object is to keep concerned organizations without a ready source of funds, and concerned individuals in a state of constant and paralysing fear, we must make this a civil rights issue which merits front page consideration and positive legal action. Therefore, we must have another dance as soon as possible, using these guidelines for our action: 1) Prior publicity must be utilized to the fullest extent including delegations to see the Mayor and other important people, a deluge mailing campaign using all available mailing lists and a general form letter giving the facts and urging the recipient to write a personal letter to indicated public officials, press conferences, and the coordinated and effective use of other pressure and public relations tactics. We must clearly demonstrate that the police have illegally and deliberately interfered with a fund-raising social event held to benefit a program and organization dealing with meaningful social religious problems. 2) The dance itself must make use of the following clear realities; a. Its date, location and purpose must be made a matter of public and police knowledge b. Its set-up must be legal and so arranged that it is automatically a test of illegal police harassment. c. Provisions must be made for bail and legal defense of all persons arrested. d. The Homosexual Community must be induced to attend this event through a widespread campaign to convince them that this is their fight also. Invitation: should include a propaganda sheet explaining the issues, the safeguards we will provide and an indication that if they can't afford to attend, they can at least afford to contribute. e. Important people must be invited and induced to attend the affair including prominent lawyers, newspaper people, religious leaders and others. f. Whatever the outcome, we must be able to use public relations techniques to assure that we come "smelling like roses." 4) ... This is the first time an act of public courage of this sort has ever been attempted by homosexuals anywhere in this country. We can hardly afford to do less ourselves, despite the fact that a new hall may be difficult to obtain, and despite the fact catering license could be contested, and despite the fact that the police will find ways to try to intimidate us. The good Mayor's statement made over television and filled with the usual phony-sacro-sanctimonious is what we can expect, but this is a fight we surely must win if we really believe we are right. M. F,-San Francisco Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Citizens News Reports the California Hall Incidents Including Photos of Attendees and Police Action Description An account of the resource Citizen News, vol. 4, no. 7, published by Strait and Associates. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Repository: <a href="http://www.glbthistory.org" target="_blank" rel="noopener">GLBT Historical Society</a> https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/8ccf453636f3b64b15e2fe860009918f.pdf b8a5f4b7ad6f055d8348b9421e63bdc5 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document Page 1: Essays on Homosexuality Essay Number 3 CRH: 1964/1968 Council on Religion and the Homosexual Prepared and Published by: Council on Religion and the Homosexual 330 Ellis Street - San Francisco, California 94102 Page 2: Many books and articles have been written on the subject of homosexuality. Some of them are very good, but many of them are of little value. Not much of a serious nature has yet been written from the point of view of the homosexual; and little of that has received wide circulation. The homophile organizations of San Francisco have undertaken to publish and distribute a series of "Essays on Homosexuality" which will discuss subjects of interest and importance to the general public as well as the homophile community in a serious, informative, and constructive manner. Prepared and Published by: COUNCIL ON RELIGION AND THE HOMOSEXUAL 330 Ellis Street-San Francisco, California 94102 fifty cents per copy (organizational rates upon request) CRH: 1964/1968 Council on Religion and the Homosexual TABLE OF CONTENTS SOCIAL ATTITUDES AND THE HOMOPHILE MOVEMENT .... 2 THE FORMATION OF CRH ......... 3 EARLY HISTORY OF CRH . . . . 4 THE PROGRAMS AND GOALS OF CRH .......... 6 THE WORK OF CRH ............. 7 REACHING THE RELIGIOUS COMMUNITY .......... 7 REACHING THE HOMOPHILE COMMUNITY .......... 9 REACHING THE PROFESSIONAL COMMUNITIES . . . . . . 10 REACHING PUBLIC OFFICIALS AND COMMUNITY LEADERS ....... 10 REACHING THE PUBLIC AT LARGE ........ 11 THE IMPACT OF CRH ........ 14 THE FUTURE OF CRH ........... 15 OTHER CRH PUBLICATIONS ....... 16 Page 3: SOCIAL ATTITUDES AND THE HOMOPHILE MOVEMENT The homosexual has always been with us, but for the most part he has been considered an outsider, a fit subject for ridicule, denunciation, ostracism, and punishment. Among Christians the Old Testament injunction of death to the offender no longer prevails, but the Pauline strictures against the "sin" of homosexuality still receive wide acceptance. In the last century, humanitarians and others have argued that homosexuality is a sickness-a questionable view-rather than a sin or crime, but without noticeable change in the social status or treatment of the homosexual. At best, both society and the religious community have preferred to treat homosexuality as an embarrassing problem to be passed over in silence or to be viewed with paternalistic concern. In the last two decades, however, a number of pastoral clergy, some theologians, and numerous workers in the fields of science, law, and mental health, as well as many of the younger and more educated members of the general public, have concluded that homosexual acts are but one of several forms of sexual expression, that such acts are in themselves neither sick nor immoral, and that the "problem" facing us is not the existence of the homosexual but an insecure sexual identity within our Judeo-Christian tradition. Voices are now being raised in protest against such established practices as (1) exclusion of known homosexuals from civil service work, the armed forces, teaching positions, corporate management, and a host of other jobs, (2) issuance of undesirable discharges to homosexuals in the military services followed by denial of veterans' benefits, (3) deportation of homosexual aliens, ( 4) harassment, enticement, entrapment, arrest, conviction, and punishment of homosexuals by law enforcement agencies, with consequent registration of consenting adults as sex offenders in many cases, (5) exploitation of homosexuals by those who resort to blackmail, robbery, physical attacks, and the like, and (6) the arbitrary classification of all homosexuals as sexual psychopaths. These same voices are calling for (I) acceptance of the homosexual as a person possessing the same dignity and human rights as others, (2) repeal of present laws forbidding private sexual acts between consenting adults when no harm is involved, (3) employment of homosexuals on the basis of job qualification and retention on the basis of job performance, and (4) criminal prosecution of persons who prey on homosexuals. In England, the homosexual has recently won legal acceptance and some degree of social tolerance. This change, which has resulted from the recommendations and efforts of the Church of England's Moral Welfare Council, Cardinal Griffin's Catholic Advisory Committee, the Wolfenden Commission, the Quaker Report, the Albany Trust, and the Homosexual Law Reform Society, is the end product of over a decade of public discussion. In the United States it has been homosexuals themselves more than religious, medical, or legal groups who have called the attention of the public to the need for change. In the early l 950s-though there were earlier groups—homosexuals began to organize into societies dedicated to programs of education, community action, and social activity. Today some forty homophile organizations are working for an alteration of social and legal attitudes and for an improvement of the status of the homosexual in his own eyes as well as those of the general public. In addition, a number of religious leaders and a few professional groups-most notably the American Law Institute, the Kinsey Institute, and the Playboy Foundation-have publicly urged changes of the type recently made in England. THE FORMATION OF CRH It was in San Francisco in the spring of 1964 that the religious community was directly confronted with the reality and variety of man's sexuality. Already existing in the city were four homophile organizations-the Mattachine Society, the Daughters of Bilitis, the League for Civil Education, and the Tavern Guild. Later that year a fifth organization, the Society for Individual Rights, was formed. Although essentially isolated from each other and the rest of the community as well, and somewhat competitive in their interpersonal relationships, they nevertheless were providing the only demonstrated form of acceptance, education, and stability in the lives of many homosexuals who were confused by their analysts, persecuted by society, and rejected by their churches. In his work at the Glide Urban Center, a private Methodist foundation, the Reverend Ted McIlvenna discovered how significant a role homosexuality played in the lives of many of San Francisco's young adults and how little attention homosexuals received from church groups. In order to improve the situation, he approached leaders of the homophile organizations mentioned above and a number of Methodist, Protestant Episcopal, United Church of Christ, and Lutheran ministers. The result was the Mill Valley Conference at the White Memorial Retreat Center, across the Golden Gate Bridge from San Francisco. For three days (May 31 - June 2, 1964) sixteen ministers and thirteen homosexuals met in a face to face confrontation. Laying aside previously conceived notions of the religious community and stereotypes of the Page 4: homosexual, the participants discovered their common humanity in, with, and under their predisposed sexuality. To be sure, this action was not without pain, but it fostered the growth of the human personalities involved to the extent that they evolved as a community of concerned individuals given to the common purpose of continuing the dialogue which had begun. Thus it was that in December, 1964, the Council on Religion and the Homosexual was incorporated under the laws of the State of California. Today CRH includes clergy and laymen from all major Christian faiths. It is governed by a board of twenty-one directors elected by the membership at an annual meeting. Board members serve for three year terms, with one-third of them being elected each year, and choose CRH's officers who serve for one year. Present board members include clergymen from the United Church of Christ, Roman Catholic, Methodist, and Lutheran denominations, several leaders from the homophile movement, and a number of professional persons from such fields as psychiatry, education, and the law. EARLY HISTORY OF CRH An initial effort on the part of the San Francisco homophile organizations to provide funds for the newly incorporated Council resulted in a dramatic confrontation with the establishment, and more particularly with the San Francisco Police Department. On the evening of New Year's Day, 1965, a CRH Ministers' Press Conference after the New Year's Ball. private benefit ball was held at a downtown hall. Despite prior assurances that there would be no interference with the dance, severe harassment by the San Francisco Police Department did take place. In addition to paddy wagons parked directly across from the entrance to the hall and squad cars at each end of the block, every person entering or leaving the hall was photographed by plainclothes officers using both still and movie cameras. After being allowed several times to inspect the premises for possible violations of health, liquor, and fire regulations, the police were denied further entrance to the hall by CRH attorneys on the grounds that the dance was a private function and not open to the public. In the ensuing half hour, four arrests were made: three attorneys and a married woman who was responsible for checking identifications at the door. The charge was "interfering with an officer in the line of duty." What happened was this: three attorneys verbally challenged the right and authority of law enforcement officers to invade a private dance without a search warrant or without suspicion that a felony was being committed on the premises. After the arrests were made, many police officers entered the hall without further challenge. Later that evening two men were arrested for disorderly conduct when they held on to each other as they fell from a chair which collapsed under them as they were watching the floor show. The following day, shocked by such a naked display of force and antagonism, as well as by a violation of trust, the clergymen of the Board of CRH called a press conference at which they charged the police with having broken faith with the Council. in addition, they protested police intimidation, harassment, and interference with an unpopular minority group, a direct violation of the civil rights afforded to every citizen under the Fourteenth Amendment to the American Constitution. Having been witness to the action of the police, the ministers were able to assess the damage to human lives which uniformed, uninformed, prejudiced men with power can perpetrate. For the first time the homophile community and a segment of the religious community stood as one, formed out of the matrix of unjustified harassment and bound together by their common humanity. In the court trials which followed, the three attorneys and the married woman were acquitted by the jury upon instruction from the judge that the prosecution had made no case, but the two men were found guilty. In still another way, therefore, the newly elected Board of CRH was reminded of the power structure which is designed to prevent the kind of education, dialogue, and change so badly needed in our understanding of human sexuality. As a result, the Board entered the Council on Religion and the Homosexual as a plaintiff in a civil suit of more than a million dollars filed against the city of San Francisco, the police department, certain named officers, and a number of John Doe policemen. The matter is still in the courts. The effect of this event and the actions taken pertaining to it have been beneficial although some of the issues remain unresolved. Thorough coverage of the event by the news media brought out into the open society's unsatisfactory treatment of the homosexual. In the last three years police relations with the homophile community in San Francisco have improved markedly. On the national scene, voices were raised in defense of the homosexual, and Page 5: the basis for an intelligent and constructive discussion of homosexuality has been laid. THE PROGRAM AND GOALS OF CRH The Council on Religion and the Homosexual has addressed itself to two major problems confronting homosexuals as a group and society as a whole; the first, isolation; and the second, education. Accordingly, we have considered it our task to develop a program which will break down the isolation of the homosexual from the rest of society through the long and difficult process of educating the community. The first step has been to initiate a dialogue between the religious community and the homosexual. On this matter significant progress has been made. The second step is to work for a more inclusive understanding of human sexuality. Success here will occur as we encourage both laity and clergy to participate in a theological discussion leading to a rethinking of traditional Christian positions which have been outmoded by recent discoveries in other disciplines, The third step involves convincing society to accept the homosexual as a human being who should be judged on his own merits rather than on his sexual orientation or practices. This means attacking the homosexual stereotype which has led to discrimination and rejection. Steps two and three, on which progress is being made, must be undertaken simultaneously since they impinge upon and inform one another. As social isolation recedes and education progresses, all groups in society will have to direct attention to the correction of present official discriminatory policies and practices directed against homosexuals wholly because of their sexual orientation. To aid in the accomplishment of its tasks, the Council: 1 seeks to acquaint the religious community with the reality of homosexuality not only as it is conceptualized by research specialists and theorists but also as it is known and practiced by homosexuals. 2 suggests the study of all human relationships, of which the sexual is only one, from both theological and scientific points of view. 3 urges research on homosexuality within the framework of human sexuality rather than as a separate entity. 4 requests more accurate, comprehensive, and objective coverage of homosexuality by all communications media. 5 favors more rational laws and policies on the matter of adult sexual behavior in general and of adult homosexual behavior in particular. 6 encourages counselors and others working in the field of mental health to deal frankly and realistically with all facets of human sexuality. 7 supports educators, both public and religious, in their efforts to communicate the whole realm of sexual response, including the homosexual, through audio-visual, written, and other instructional methods. 8 offers help to any group interested in forming organizations similar to CRH in their own communities. THE WORK OF CRH To accomplish these goals, CRH seeks to contact and influence the religious community, the homophile community, the professional communities, public officials and community leaders, and the public at large. Reaching the Religious Community In the past three years CRH has seriously attempted to confront the religious community at every level with the variety of human sexual experience, particularly in reference to the homosexual aspect, as the following examples show. Members of the board, as well as others from the general membership of CRH, have met with influential denomination personnel and decision-making bodies of the United Church of Christ, the Protestant Episcopal Church, the Lutheran Church in America, and the Methodist Church. As a result, the United Church of Christ was the first denomination to officially, publicly, and financially announce its commitment to CRH. CRH was instrumental in influencing Bishop James Pike of the Protestant Episcopal Church to appoint in March of 1965 a Joint Committee on Homosexuality for the Episcopal Diocese of California. Members of the committee included individuals from the homophile community, Episcopal priests, and professional persons associated directly with CRH, as well as other clergymen and professional persons from the San Francisco area. After discussing the legal, medical, and moral issues of homosexuality, the committee recommended: 1 that present state laws should be changed so that any sex behavior between consenting adults in private is free of state control and criminal sanctions. 2 that police departments and public officials should do all in their power to bring an end to procedures leading to entrapment, such as suggestive dress and remarks on the part of plainclothes officers. 3 that the facts in the matter of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Department [regarding discrimination against homosexual bars] should be established and the procedure changed if they bear out the suspicions of the committee. 4 that frank discussions should be initiated and maintained with law enforcement officers and agencies to ensure fair and equitable treatment of homosexuals when they are arrested or held in custody. 5 that a broad sex education program, including the area of homosexuality, should be initiated in the Diocese of California (and hopefully in other dioceses as well) for both clergy and laity. Page 6: 6 - that theological seminaries should be urged to include in their curriculum courses of study of human sexuality, including homosexuality, taking into account homosexual testimony and scientific data. These recommendations were officially adopted by the Diocesan Council on February 24, 1967. In addition, the Diocesan Council has promised financial support to CRH. In August, 1966, in association with the Second National Planning Conference of Homophile Organizations held in San Francisco, CRH and the Glide Urban Center co-sponsored a three day theological conference devoted exclusively to homosexuality. Some forty clergy and laity, both professional and non-professional, from as far away as Missouri, Nebraska, Illinois, Connecticut, and Massachusetts, participated in the consultation. Continued efforts on the part of CRH to reach the religious and intellectual community have resulted in numerous panel discussions, conferences, retreats, and seminars with both youth and adult groups in congregations of the United Presbyterian Church, the Protestant Episcopal Church, the Methodist Church, the United Church of Christ, and the Lutheran Church in America. Useful discussions have been held with Roman Catholic priests and lay leaders. In addition, speakers from CRH have discussed homosexuality and the problems of homosexuals with denominationally connected student groups and seminary student bodies. CRH considers its program of orientation and confrontation among its most effective activities. The CRH Board participated directly in the formation of the Southern California Council on Religion and the Homophile. Representatives of CRH repeatedly went to Los Angeles to confer at length with interested ministers and homophile leaders. Today the Southern California Council stands in its own right as a highly productive body in the homophile movement while the two councils remain in close and friendly contact. As a result of the consultation of a group of Dallas clergymen with the Board of CRH, the Dallas Council on Religion and the Homosexual was established. The clergy, upon their return to Texas, contacted homosexuals in Dallas, encouraged them to form their own organization, and convinced them to join in setting up a local CRH. In August, 1966, two members of the Board of CRH traveled to London to participate and speak at "The Consultation on the Church, Society, and the Homosexual." This international conference was attended by representatives from all major Christian denominations of the United States and Great Britain, and also by a number of research specialists and several members of Parliament. Last summer three members of CRH testified at a criminal trial in the Minneapolis Federal District Court which resulted in the acquittal of a firm which had been charged with violating obscenity statutes by sending through the mail magazines containing material allegedly appealing to the "prurient" interest of homosexuals. After the trial, a Council on Religion and the New Morality was established by interested ministers and laymen. Because of its varied activities in the religious community, CRH has become the subject of numerous articles and editorials in religious publications. Significant references to CRH and its work can be found in CHRISTIANITY TODAY, CHRISTIAN CENTURY, AVE MARIA, THE LIVING CHURCH, THE LUTHERAN, SOCIAL ACTION, and SOCIAL PROGRESS. Further, H. Kimball Jones in his book TOWARD A CHRISTIAN UNDERSTANDING OF THE HOMOSEXUAL commends CRH's program and suggests it as a model for churches in other cities to follow. Reaching the Homophile Community From the beginning, leaders of such homophile organizations as the Daughters of Bilitis, the Tavern Guild, the Mattachine Society, and the Society for Individual Rights have served on the Board of Directors of CRH. Additional leadership has also been provided by the California Motor Club and the Coits. Furthermore, many homosexual individuals have joined CRH and attend its open meetings. CRH has maintained ties with Vanguard, a San Francisco organization of street youths, many of whom are homosexual or engage extensively in homosexual activity, has contributed financially to Hospitality House which seeks to provide a comfortable and friendly meeting place for these youths, and has offered its counseling services for those who wish to talk about their problems. CRH has also contributed to the National Legal Defense Fund, a permanent, national, non-profit, non-partisan corporation devoted primarily to protecting and defending the homosexual's right to privacy and freedom of choice in his private life and related constitutionally protected rights. This organization's work has been discussed in our NEWSLETTER, and members of CRH have been alerted to watch for cases of particular concern to NLDF so that proper referral can be made. CRH is a member of the National (now North American) Homophile Clearing House. Through this media it receives copies of publications distributed by the homophile organizations and keeps in contact with what is happening in the homophile movement. In the past two years, CRH has participated in three national homophile planning conferences-at Kansas City, February 1966; San Francisco, August 1966; Washington D.C., July 1967. At the first two conferences the President of CRH was elected conference chairman, while the third meeting was chaired by one of the original board members of CRH. Delegates have also been sent to Western Regional Homophile Planning Conferences held in Los Angeles in April, 1967, and in Seattle in December, 1967. Page 7: Reaching the Professional Communities Contacts with various professional groups in San Francisco have been initiated. CRH belongs to the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California and the American Friends Service Committee. A member of the CRH Board is a physician and former director of the San Francisco Center for Special Problems (a unit of the Department of Mental Health) which, among other services, provides specialized counseling of homosexuals. Several other board members are lawyers and educators. In 1965 CRH sent delegates to participate in the ACLU meetings in Los Angeles which resulted in a statement of policy by the Southern California Civil Liberties Union that private sexual acts between consenting adults should be of no concern to the law. This statement was adopted in August, 1967, as the national policy of ACLU. More and more faculty members and graduate students in the fields of medicine, sociology, anthropology, theology, psychology, psychiatry, and law are doing research on homosexuality. CRH has cooperated with these researchers by distributing information concerning their studies and by helping find homosexuals willing to serve as subjects. Contacts have also been made with the Kinsey Institute at Indiana University. CRH has been happy to cooperate with their researchers and looks forward to further work with them. Reaching Public Officials And Community Leaders Reaching public officials and community leaders has proved to be our most difficult task. Although a few officials express some sympathy and interest privately in homosexuality and the plight of the homosexual in a hostile society, most of them consider the subject so inflammable or distasteful that they resort to evasive actions and comments. Attempted contacts with chaplains in the armed services have been totally unproductive. Contacts with local naval authorities have led to an expression of some interest in the condition of homosexuals awaiting discharge, especially in matters of legal, religious, psychiatric, and vocational counseling. Letters to the United States Civil Service Commission and the Defense Department have been invariably answered with the assurance that homosexuals are not eligible for federal employment without evidence of rehabilitation and are not permitted in the armed forces. Reasons to justify present policy are sometimes given, and statements are usually added that no change in policy is contemplated. Attempts to suggest that the time has come for a reconsideration of federal policies which call for undesirable discharge of homosexuals and denial of employment have so far failed completely. In order to dramatize disapproval of these policies, especially as they apply to the armed services, members of CRH and its Board of Directors participated in the National Protest Day demonstration held in front of the Federal Building in San Francisco in May, 1966. Visits with members of Congress have evinced some concern and resulted in many requests to be kept informed. But for the most part visitors are reminded that the legal aspects of homosexuality fall under the jurisdiction of the individual states. Members of Congress do not yet seem concerned about present discriminatory policies of the federal government as they apply to homosexuals. Officials of the San Francisco office of the Veterans Administration have met with a delegation from CRH and have spoken at one of CRH's public meetings. They have said that, although "in general" persons who have received undesirable discharge because of homosexuality are not eligible for veterans' benefits, each application for benefits will be carefully considered. CRH intends to pursue the issue of veterans' benefits further. On the state and local level, CRH has explained its purpose and program to elected and appointed officials and has discussed problems and issues with the police department and agents of the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control. CRH will make known its views to the California Legislature when that body considers the penal law reforms which are now being prepared by a special state commission. For three years, CRH has held a "candidates' night" at which aspirants for public office may present their views and be asked questions. Active support has also been given to voter registration drives. The result of these activities has been that public officials are expressing an awareness of the voting power of the homophile community, an interest in its problems, and support for law reform. In order to promote greater justice for all, CRH supports the efforts of Citizens Alert, a non-profit corporation consisting of concerned citizens organized to investigate reported cases of police harassment and brutality, and urges its members to participate in police-community relations activities. In its regard for the well-being of the inhabitants of the central city area of San Francisco, many of whom are homosexual and some of whom are involved in drug addiction and prostitution, CRH supported the creation of a special program relating to these matters which has been funded by the Office for Economic Opportunity under the federal poverty program. To encourage the employment of homosexuals on the basis of job qualifications and job performance, the Board of CRH has passed a resolution endorsing the efforts of the Glide Methodist Church Task Force for Fair Employment Practices for Homosexuals. Reaching the Public at Large The work of CRH has helped to make homosexuality an increasingly acceptable part of American society and has aided in promoting more open Page 8: discussion of the subject by the various mass media. Articles containing significant references to CRH and its work have appeared in NEWSWEEK, TIME, LOOK, SEXOLOGY, NATION, the WALL STREET JOURNAL, the SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE, the SAN FRANCISCO EXAMINER, and the LOS ANGELES TIMES, as well as in the religious journals mentioned above. Officials of CRH have frequently appeared on radio and television programs, have been interviewed by reporters for feature articles on homosexuality, and have spoken before such varied audiences as high school and college classes, university seminars, Y.M.C.A. and Y.W.C.A. groups, a Junior Chamber of Commerce, and several women's clubs. The Council's work has been extensively covered in local newspapers which gave headline coverage to the New Year's ball incident, the National Planning Conference of August, 1966, and the theology consultation which preceded it. Additional coverage was granted during the summer of 1966 after the California State Fair Committee turned down the application of CRH and various homophile organizations for a booth at the fair from which they might distribute informational literature. CRH's lawyers sought unsuccessfully to have the decision overturned by the courts. The matter has not yet been resolved, however. Meetings open to the public sponsored by CRH have included speeches by Father Eugene Schallert, sociologist from the University of San Francisco; Rabbi Elliot Grafman, panel member on radio station KGO's "Clergy on the Line;" Mr. Anson Mount of the Playboy Foundation; Dr. John Gagnon of the Institute for Sex Research; and Mr. Anthony Grey of the Albany Trust and Homosexual Law Reform Society of London: Discussion sessions have dealt with the homosexual and family relations, the report of the President's Crime Commission, the international conference on homosexuality held in London in the summer of 1966, and the homosexual and veterans' benefits. CRH considers its publications program an especially effective way to reach and influence the general public. So far pamphlets have been written and distributed on such subjects as the consultation which led to the formation of CRH, society's unfair treatment of the homosexual, theology and the homosexual, and homosexual law reform. Additional essays on employment and the views of doctors and social scientists are in preparation. (Publications currently available are listed on page 16 of this pamphlet.) Page 9: THE IMPACT OF CRH In its three and one-half years of operation, CRH may not have effected a revolution in the attitudes and action patterns of American society or the American religious community on the subject of homosexuality, but it has been a pioneer. It saw a problem that needed to be faced and dared to face it. It began the construction of bridges between the homosexual and the socio-religious body politic-bridges which must be completed in the years ahead. Through its educational program the Council has helped to focus public attention on homosexuality in a responsible way. By its openness and support it has given much needed encouragement to the homophile community. With its deep concern for justice, it has brought to the surface, especially in religious circles, an interest in a subject too long ignored. Members of the Council have found in their travels across the country, in their correspondence with people of all professions, and in their conversations with visitors to the Council's office that CRH has become a symbol of something which is basically good and worthwhile and that it is looked to for leadership in its field. Many people consider CRH a model for others to emulate, if not in its structure and program, at least in its concern. And even at this youthful stage it has begun to gain the confidence of the religious community as well as the homophile community as being a key agent for change, making the world just a little more human. Thus do we attempt to fulfill the will of God and to make his love known. Significant results have been realized, most important of which have been: 1 - the part played by CRH in bringing about the appointment of the Episcopal Diocese of California's committee on homosexuality whose recommendations in favor of homosexual law reform, etc. were officially adopted by the diocese and will serve as a model for other denominations. 2 - the role played by CRH in bringing into being similar councils in Los Angeles and Dallas. 3 - the confrontations CRH entered into with the religious community and with the police and liquor authorities which have improved the state of the homosexual in San Francisco Bay area. What CRH has done could never have been realized without the financial support and unqualified confidence which have come from a variety of sources. CRH is especially grateful to the United Church of Christ's Board of Homeland Ministry, the Northern California Conference of the United Church of Christ, the California Board of Christian Social Concerns of the Methodist Church, the Glide Urban Center, the Episcopal Diocese of California, and the leaders and members of the various homophile organizations of San Francisco. Additional thanks are warranted for the moral support and interest in our work expressed by numerous religious and professional groups, including the National Council of Churches, and for political endorsement of our program by the Young Democrats of San Francisco. THE FUTURE OF CRH The work of CRH has only begun. In each area to which CRH has directed its attention, its program must be continued and expanded. Specifically: (I) CRH must step up its program of counseling, orientation, and publication; (2) CRH must involve additional ministers and church groups, and especially chaplains in the armed forces, in concern for the well being of the homosexual; (3) CRH must call the attention of the public and responsible government officials to such unjust practices as: a - discrimination against homosexuals in employment, especially by federal agencies, b - exclusion of homosexuals from military service under present draft and defense policies, c separation of overt homosexuals from the armed forces with undesirable discharge and denial of veterans' benefits, d - harassment of homosexuals by the police and exploitation of them by unscrupulous persons, e - arrest procedures which rely on the use of such unsavory tactics as clandestine observation or enticement and entrapment by vice squad decoys and liquor agents and which result in registration of consenting adult homosexuals as sex offenders, f - labelling homosexuals sex psychopaths solely on the basis of their homosexuality, and g - using homosexuality as a political weapon or as the basis for witchhunts; (4) CRH must make the public aware of criminal law reform, an issue which will come before the legislatures of many states in the next several years as they consider the redesign of penal codes; and (5) CRH must appeal to professional groups in such fields as medicine, the law, education, and the social sciences to deal scientifically with the study of homosexuality and to offer the contributions of their disciplines so that constructive, practical, and fair solutions may be found to the problems facing society and the homosexual. The challenge is here and now. The crucial issue is how we respond. Page 10: CRH PUBLICATIONS CURRENTLY AVAILABLE A Brief of Injustices-An Indictment of our Society in its Treatment of the Homosexual $1.00 The Challenge and Progress of Homosexual Law Reform $1.00 The Church and the Homosexual by the Rev. Donald Kuhn $1.00 Churchmen Speak Out on Homosexual Law Reform .25 Homosexuality: A Contemporary View of the Biblical Perspective by the Rev. Dr. Robert L. Treese .60 (Organizational rates upon request.) Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource CRH: 1964/1968 (10 pages) Description An account of the resource Published by the Council on Religion and the Homosexual, 1968. Phyllis Lyon & Del Martin Papers. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Repository: <a href="http://www.glbthistory.org" target="_blank" rel="noopener">GLBT Historical Society</a> https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/21f8a06055282d38929c1c243955426e.pdf 50046b5b128a0d242009055e98200e31 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document Arrested Lawyers To Fight Protest Police Action at Ball Three attorneys retained to advise the Council for Religion and the Homosexual yesterday protested their arrest during the council's fund-raising ball last Friday night in California Hall. Attorneys Herbert Donaldson, Evander Smith, and Elliot Leighton, appearing at a conference called by the American Civil Liberties Union, reiterated their intention to fight charges of interfering with a police officer. The council is a new organization formed by seven Protestant ministers in The City, for the purpose of orienting the clergy on aspects of homosexuality and opening channels of communication between the community and homosexuals. Not Abusive "There was no physical contact after the officers appeared," explained Leighton. "We were not abusive in our language. The facts are that we were retained by the ministerial committee to advise them on moves against possible police harassment. We were present to advise them on their legal rights. No unlawful act was being committed at the time of our arrest." The three attorneys, it was announced, will be defended by Attorney Marshal Kruase, representing the Civil Liberties Union. The ministerial group earlier had accused police of "deliberate harassment." Private Affair Leighton insisted that "this was a private affair. There were no ticket sellers at the door, as police have asserted. Those at the door were checking a list of invited guests." Referring to Mayor John F. Shelley's criticism of the event, Leighton said "they Mayor is overlooking the fact that this was a church-sponsored function, to assist in the integration of homosexuals and thus avert a homosexual problem in San Francisco. "Police cameramen took photographs of everybody coming out of the hall that night," Leighton added. "We feel this was an intimidation. Donaldson and I were whisked away and not told why we were under arrest." Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Examiner Reports ACLU Press Conference with Arrested Lawyers Description An account of the resource San Francisco Examiner, January 6, 1965, page 12. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Repository: <a href="http://www.glbthistory.org" target="_blank" rel="noopener">GLBT Historical Society</a> https://exhibits.lgbtran.org/files/original/2e8fecc52deccb83569adc3ef64691e9.pdf a6bd5793a6519cd33b016f3db1b8725e Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Text Any textual data included in the document Page 1: Homosexuality: A Contemporary View of the Biblical Perspective by The Rev. Dr. Robert L. Treese Prepared for the Consultation on Theology and the Homosexual, sponsored by Glide Urban Center and The Council on Religion and the Homosexual in San Francisco, August 22-24, 1966. Page 2: I. INTRODUCTION What is God trying to tell us about homosexuality? About sexuality? About creativity and the redemptive community today? This is the proper focus of the question this paper attempts to face; a focus into which our sight and insight are being forced by events of which we are all aware. The pioneering work of the Moral Welfare Council of the Church of England in the early 1950's, bringing into existence the official Committee on Homosexual Offenses and Prostitution in 1954, marks the end of a long ecclesiastical silence about homosexuality as a recognized condition of a segment of humanity. Not only did the Wolfenden Reportl challenge the basic presuppositions of the laws regarding homosexual practices (so that on the third attempt before Parliament the law assigning criminality to homosexual acts between consenting adults was repealed) but it also raised inescapable theological questions which must now be faced. The evolution of the Council on Religion and the Homosexual out of faithful and persistent attempts of a few pastors and a few members of the homophile co~munities to communicate mutually in search of the common human bases for understanding and fellowship marks the second reason we must ask the question of what God may be trying to tell us. The C.R.H. has made it possible for "straight" and "gay" persons to meet one another in mutual trust in search of mutual acceptance. It has helped us to begin to sense the dimensions of depth and integrity which exist, actually or potentially, within and among groups of people who have traditionally written each other off as "pious frauds" or as "perverts" and "sinners." Page 3: Theological wrestlings in these years of an affluent but relatively ineffectual church have focused on attempts to view contemporary human experience through a renewed Biblical understanding of God's purposes for the Church as well as for all of the world . These struggles have exposed us to a new awareness of how God has acted and continues to act in and through His creation to bring it to fulfillment. No longer can we think heretically of the Church as the redeemed portion of humanity who have been rescued from the God-forsaken world and whose work now consists of waiting faithfully and in purity for death and heaven or for God to vindicate their own and His righteousness by the destruction of the world and the re-construction of His Kingdom with them as His subjects. Jesus Christ affirmed human life and showed us that the ultimate rest of our love of God, of our commitment to value, lies in our attitudes toward and treatment of other human beings . The Church , the community of those who call Him "Lord," far from being in retreat from the world is 'rather thrown into the world to participate in God's continuing reclaiming restoring, dignifying, humanizing action. In the realm of human sexuality I, as a churchman, feel moved to confess that a great deal of the blame for preserving, if not indeed creating , the fears and guilt of sex which permeate our culture, lies at our feet. The failure to see sexual relationship in any other light but the functional one of reproduction has resulted in t he limitation of sex to the purely physical with no concept at all of t he depth of significant interpersonal trust, empathy and love of which sexual intercourse, at best, is the expression . Of course our generation in the Church has Page 4: modified these ancient views but the pall of centuries of sin-obsessed taboos and misanthropic caricatures of human nature still blankets our culture and informs our mores. The current reduction of sexuality to the status of experience devoid of relationship and responsibility to a biological function needing only satiation, to a medium for mass marketing seems to me to be only the expected result--the acting out of a low view of sex which we have fostered. With regard to homosexuality and homosexual practices the Church has maintained a consistent, perhaps because unexamined, attitude. Between Thomas Aquinas' 13th Century designation as peccatum contra naturum and 1950, no theologian, to my knowledge, has seriously reexamined the nature and meaning of this phenomenon. 2 As mentioned earlier, the ice has been broken and perhaps a thaw is on its way if enough heat is generated. D. S. Bailey in England has done a remarkable study of the historical roots of our attitudes and now Helmut Thielecke, in Germany, has come out with a forthright o.pener to theological discussion. A word of caution and perhaps of reprimand to us is in order at this point. As D. S. Bailey reminds us, we are all in the habit of attributing instinctively to our favorite whipping boy, the Church, every idea or development of which we may disapprove. To be sure the Church is not blameless but surely it is not wholly responsible for the present condition either. We must see the Church as trying earnestly, in each generation, both to conserve values from our tradition--values and tradition from which, in part we gain our identity--and to respond openly to the new in human experience in terms of attempts to understand God's leading. Page 5: Sometimes she does the former more effectively than the latter . Naturally her decisions are limited to and by the knowledge and understanding of the time. Thus, from our superior position, we should not feel justified in deriding the 6th Century rationale for supporting repressive legislation against homosexuals because homosexual acts cause earthquakes, plague and other natural disasters. This was the level of knowledge and understanding of causation current in that day. Bailey puts in pugently: "It is not as if throughout the last two millenia reluctant legislators had been forced by the spiritual authority to enact laws and to prescribe punishment which they secretly detested.,,3 Having said this, we also recognize that the medieval attitude of the Church with regard to the problem at hand must be brought up to date. The Church, for all her weakness, can be an opinion-leader and can influence culture as she has in the past. II. THE NORMATIVE IMPORTANCE OF THE BIBLE Before we can consider relevant passages it is in order to discuss our stance toward the Bible. We cannot simply write off the Bible as being irrelevant . It has helped mold the attitudes of Western Civilization . Even though grossly abused by many, it is still normative in the life of the Church, that is, it provides the norms, value structure and guidelines for understanding contemporary life and God's purposes for history; it is still influential, often negatively so, in decision making in our time. Page 6: The typical, unthinking approach to the Bible is that of the literalist, and in varying degrees perhaps we all employ it. This is the approach which says, "That's what it says--and its God's word, so .... " Many homosexuals reject the Bible because they are literalists. Because of a half dozen brief passages describing homosexual acts as grievous sin; they say that the Bible can have no relationship to contemporary life. The literalist must necessarily be highly selective in his choices of the words which he takes to be God's word. For example the Old Testament command for circumcision of the male as a sign that he was a son of the covenant is set aside by the Christian because of the new covenant in Christ, but many are not so consistent when dealing with the Old Testament Sabbath laws. The elaborate regulation for proper observance of the Sabbath which is Saturday, the seventh day, are transferred to the Christian Sunday, the Lord's Day meant to be a day of rejoicing, even though Jesus said, "The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath." The verse, "Slaves be obedient to those who are your earthly masters" (Ephesians 6:5) was taken to be God's word in support of the institution of slavery until the interpretation of other portions of Scripture supported a confluence of political-historical-economic forces which overthrew slavery and caused reconsideration of that verse in its proper context . The command that witches should be burned to death was taken at face value in Salem, Massachusetts and other places until the human spirit was sickened and revolted at the fiendish excesses enacted and until witchcraft was shown by modern science to be a combination of superstitution and coincidence. Page 7: An approach or stance for understanding and appropriating the Bible today includes: (1) The affirmation that the Bible is not the Word of God, but the words of men in which and through which, we believe, the living, active, constantly contemporary Word of God comes to men . (2) The Bible passage is to be interpreted in terms of the experiences, life-setting, and problems of the writer of the particular section, as well as of the purposes for which it was written. (3) The passage is to be further explicated in the light of our contemporary experience and knowledge. Here we try to see it in perspective with our social-psychological-historical-philosophical as well as existential knowledge . There may not be agreement for sometimes, in fact often, the Bible stands in judgment on our contemporary life, but the task is to discern, as nearly as possible, the meaning for us today. (4) The realization that the Bible writers faced the same basic existential questions which we face, but their answers are time-caught, as are ours, and valid only for them. The values they affirmed by their answers are of significance to us. (5) The whole Bible is to be seen in light of the Gospel of Jesus Christ and the experience of the early Church. III. A CONSIDERATION OF RELEVANT BIBLICAL PASSAGES A consideration of Biblical passages which specifically refer to homosexual practices must precede any attempt to see our problem in the Page 8: perspective of the Christian faith. There are about a dozen places in the Bible which have been seen as supporting the idea that our current laws and attitudes toward the homosexual are true to "God's law.,,4 Five Instances of Mis-translation The first five we shall consider have been shown to have been due to mis-translation, an error since corrected in the R.S.V. In I Kings 14: 22-24; 15:12; 22:46; II Kings 23:7; and Deut. 23:17-18 there are references to what was apparently a fertility cult flourishing in the temple at Jerusalem. Such cults were more the rule than the exception among primitive peoples; the mystery of fertility and man's utter dependence upon its continuation in plant, animal and human for his survival was hedged in by a variety of religious rituals including sacred prostitution. The concept (strange to our ways of thinking unless one thinks of the Playboy cult, where, however, the values guaranteed are virility and success) was that the devotee guaranteed fertility of crops, animals, and of his wife (wives) by participating in sexual intercourse with the prostitutes who were dedicated to serve the diety in charge of fertility. (There's more than one way to get people into church, I guess). Bailey has shown5 that, whereas the King James Version translation correctly rendered the Hebrew noun Qedheshah ("consecrated one") as (female) temple servant (or prostitute) they erred by translating the masculine form of this noun (Qadhesh, QedheshIm, plural) as "sodomite," thinking no doubt that it referred to a male homosexual temple prostitute. They gave, apparently, no thought to the utter incongruity of homosexual prostitutes Page 9: serving in a fertility cult. The correct translation is as in the R. S.V., "male cult prostitute," whose duties, along with those of his female counterpart, were deplored in successive passages and finally banned and their houses destroyed by King Josiah about 625 B.C. (II Kings 23:7; Deut. 23:17- 18). This error having been corrected in current translations would seem not to be worth mentioning except that the King James Version is still very influential, more especially perhaps with the literalists among us. Sodom and Gomorrah This brings us to the Biblical passage which has perhaps been most influential in justifying our civilization's legal and social abhorrence of homosexuality and homosexual practices. That i s the story of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen. 19:1-28) . Throughout the centuries, especially in the eras before modern science, and even today among literalists, this story has been proof positive that God abhors homosexuality, to such a degree, in fact, that he literally destroyed two whole cities with fire and brimstone from heaven . Recapping the story briefly, God was bent on destroying Sodom and Gomorrah "because the outcry against . (them) is great and their sin is very grave" but Abraham importuned Him to first search for as few as ten righteous men who, if found, would justify a change in God ' s plan (Gen. 18:20-33) . So God sent two emissaries, male angels, to Sodom and they lodged for the night in the house of Lot (Abraham's nephew) . The "men of Sodom, both young and old , all the people to the last man" (19:4) surrounded Lot's house and demanded that he bring out the visitors "that we may know them." (19 :5) When Lot refused, offering them his two daughters instead, they became angry and would have stormed Page 10: the house had not the angels struck them blind. In the morning, when Lot and his family had fled, the city was utterly destroyed. The issue lies in the meaning of the yadha' (to know) . This verb is used ten times in the Old Testament to denote sexual intercourse (as in Gen. 4:1, "Now Adam knew Eve his wife and she conceived and bore Cain." Bailey points out that this verb is used nine hundred forty-three times in the Old Testament of which fewer than a dozen uses denote coitus, and that furthermore these latter always refer to heterosexual coitus. Another Hebrew verb (shakhabh) is used directly to describe "both homosexual and bestial coitus, in addition to that between man and woman."6 Thus there is no necessity linguistically to see the verb y~dha' as implying a desire for homosexual acts. In fact, it could well be translated "get acquainted with. " This linguistic argument alone would prove little were it not for the fact that the "Old Testament depicts Sodom as a symbol of utter destruction (cf Isaiah 13:19; Jeremiah 49 : 18; 50:40), and its sin as one of such magnitude and scandal as to merit exemplary punishment, but nowhere does it identify that sin explicitly with the practice of homosexuality.,,7 Two quotations from the 6th Century B.C. prophets illustrate this: But in the prophets of Jerusalem I have seen a horrible thing: they commit adultery and walk in lies; they strengthen the hands of evildoers, so that ,no one turns from his wickedness; all of them have become like Sodom to me. (Jer. 23:14) Behold, this was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had pride, surfeit of food, and prosperous ease, but did not aid the poor and needy. They were haughty and did abominable things before me; therefore I removed them when I saw it. (Ezekiel 16:49-50) Page 11: In the latter verses the words " abominable things" could lend themselves to homosexual interpretation in light of later attitudes toward Sodom, but in the Old Testament " abomination" or "abominable things" is the "conventional term for idolatry."8 How did the homosexual interpretation of Sodom' s sins originate? Bailey, after thorough study of the writings of the period, finds that the idea began in the second century B.C . in non- Biblical writings of the Jews . This was the period of Greek ascendency and rule in Palestine and a life-and-death struggle ensued, over more than two centuries, between the more orthodox Jews , who did not want Judaism contaminated with Greek ideas and practices, and more liberal Jews who embraced Hellenistic customs and manners. Homosexual practices were among the more objectionable Hellenistic Customs eschewed . (A listing of such practices, manners, customs, etc. which were in controversy would include dress, speech, athletic activity, architecture, sculpture , etc .; some Jews wen t so far as to seek surgery which would remove the scars or marks of circumcision in order to be more Hellenistic.) Appearing first as an allusion in the late second century B. C. - - for example, "that ye become not as Sodom which changed the order of nature" (Testament of Naphtali, 3:4-5) ca . 109 B. C. --the concept of t he sin of Sodom as homosexual practices developed more directness in t he first century B.C . and came to full flower in the writings of Philo and Josephus in the first century A. D. Philo' s imagination ran wild as he described men of Sodom who threw off from their necks the law of nature and applied them- Page 12: selves to deep drinking of strong liquor and dainty feeding and forbidden forms of intercourse. Not only in their mad lust for women did they violate the marriages of their neighbors, but also men mounted males without respect for sex nature which the active partner shares with the passive. (DeAbr . 26 : 134-136) Josephus, the Jewish historian and contemporary of Philo, writes Now when the Sodomites saw the young men (the angels) to be of beautiful countenance, and this to an extraordinary degree • .. they resolved themselves to enjoy those beautiful boys by force and violence . (Antiquities I. xi. 3:200) It is significant that the Rabbinical literature, according to Bailey, "reflects scarcely anything of this development." With the single exception of an allusion to adultery in the Midrash on Genesis, "no sexual (let alone homosexual) implications can be read into these conceptions (Rabbinical interpretations) of the sin of Sodom ... Traditionally , the offense of the Sodomites was supposed to be that of the dog-in-the-manger." The early Church Fathers, taking Philo and other Hellenistic-Jewish writings at face value, set the tradition in the Church for the homosexual interpretation of Sodom's destruction.9 The significance of this whole disclosure lies in the fact that we cannot, in truth, say that Sodom proves that God is categorically against homosexuality. Bailey puts it sharply in the concluding chapter of his important book: It has always been accepted without question that God declared his judgment upon homosexual practices once and for all time by the destruction of the cities of the Plain. But Sodom and Gomorrah, as we have seen, actually have nothing whatever to do with such practices; the interpretation of the Sodom story generally received by Western Christendom turns out to be nothing more than a post-Exilic Jewish re- interpretation devised and exploited by patriotic rigorists for polemical purposes. Thus disappears the assumption that an act of Divine retribution in the remote past has relieved us of the responsibility for making an assessment of homosexual acts in terms of theo- Page 13: logical and moral principles. It is no longer permissible to take refuge in the contention that God himself pronounced these acts "detestable and abominable" above every other sexual sin, nor to explain natural catastrophes and human disasters as his vengeance upon those who indulge in them. 10 The Six Specific References The exposure of the historical roots of error in interpretation of the Sodom story leaves us with six remaining passages in the Bible which explicitly designate homosexual practices as gross sins, five dealing with males and one with females. These can neither be ignored nor explained away, but they can be put in perspective. It may be well to point out, at the outset, that the Bible shows no knowledge of homosexuality, per se; it knows nothing of the condition of homosexuality in distinction to heterosexuality, the complexity of human sexuality, or the possible causes of sexual inversion. All the references are to homosexual practices as acts of choice and of will. The two references in the Old Testament are in the Levitical Holiness Code, the codification of laws for maintaining spiritual, ritual, and ceremonial purity and separation from other peoples . Leviticus 18:22 is imbedded in a long passage proscribing incest, intercourse during menstruation, adultery, bestiality, and, incongrously on the surface, child sacrifice: "You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination." Leviticus 20:13 likewise is in the midst of a passage repeating essentially the same list of grievous sins, with the addition of the death penalty, rather than exile, for those who commit the immoralities of child sacrifice, incest, adultery, homosexual acts, and bestiality: "If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall be put to death, their blood is upon them." Page 14: Two things must be said about these very specific statements about homosexual acts between males: (1) The fact that homosexual acts appear in a listing of offenses which are attributed to Egypt ("where you dwelt") and Canaan ("to which I am bringing you"), and are considered an "abomination" raises the question of underlying meaning. Bailey discusses "abomination" (To ebhah) in this perspective: Research fails to establish any satisfactory positive support for the allegation that homosexual practices were customary among the nations. surrounding the Hebrews ... it is not impossible that the attribution in question (i.e. of homosexual practices in Egypt and Canaan) is simply a piece of rhetorical denigration ...designed to intensify Israel's sense of national "holiness" or separation as a peculiar people dedicated to Yahweh. Supposing this to be the case, it would seem that the significance of To ebhah (abomination) in these verses has often been misunderstood. This term, as we have seen, is closely associated with idolatry and designates not only false gods but also the worship and conduct of those who serve them. By a natural extension of meaning, however, it can also denote whatever reverses the proper order of things and this seems to be the connotation (of abomination in these verses) ... Such acts are regarded as an "abomination" not ... because they were practiced by Egyptian or Canaanite idolators (for of this there is no proof) but because, as a reversal of what is sexually natural, they exemplify the spirit of idolatry which is itself the fundamental subversion of true order ••. They (these laws) condemn homosexual acts •.• between males as typical expressions of the ethos of heathenism which Israel must renounce no less than religious and cultural syncretism with the nations which bow down to idols .ll Until proved wrong by Hebrew scholars, this interpretation is stimulating to this writer. The Holiness Code sought to fence out the alien world and to establish rules for the separation (holiness) of the People of God . Seen in this light, homosexual acts then are proscribed as an indication of idolatry, the reversal of the true order. At this juncture, it is seen that child sacrifice is not incongrously included in the listings quoted above, but rather would tend to support this interpretation of idolatry. Page 15: This leads directly to my second comment. (2) For the Christian, the Jewish legal code has been superceded by the Gospel of Jesus Christ. As Thielicke suggests, "It would never occur to anyone to wrench these laws of cuItic purification from their concrete situation and give them the kind of normative authority that the Decalogue, for example, has." We tend to deal with the Holiness Code selectively, naturally rejecting all instructions for animal sacrifice, all injunctions regarding ritual purification, such as after childbirth, menstruation, the handling of anything dead, etc., as well as all dietary laws such as eating flesh with blood in it; and accepting, as in line with the Christian Gospel any of the admonitions against behavior which causes harm or abuse to another human being or dishonors God. It is the Gospel which frees man from the Law that becomes the criterion for the Christian. To accept Leviticus 20:13 (that those guilty of homosexual acts should be put to death) and to reject, for example, Leviticus 20:25 ("You shall therefore make a distinction between the clean beast and the unclean"), or Leviticus 20:27 ("A man or woman who is a medium or a wizard shall be put to death, they shall be stoned with stones."), is inconsistency of the rankest sort, to say the least. This, however~ still leaves us with the problem of homosexuality and homoerotic acts as they may be seen in light of the Gospel. To this we will turn in a later section. Probably the best known New Testament verses on our problem are Romans 1:26-27: For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. Their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing Page 16: shameless acts with men and receiving in their own persons the due penalty for their error. These verses serve as illustrations of Paul's discussion of why man (he seems to be referring specifically to Gentiles, i.e . non-Jews) does not know God or does not live as though God exists . Even without any special revelation, as that granted to the Jews, he implies that man should be able to acknowledge the Creator in the very facts of Creation : "Ever since the creation of the world his invisible nature, his eternal power and diety, has been clearly perceived in the things that have been made . " (vs . 20) He goes on to say that man, refusing to honor God, turned instead to "images resembling mortal man or birds or animals or reptiles (thus God has abandoned them) • . • to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator . " (vss . 23-25) Then follow the verses which concern us: this would-be- autonomous man's refusal to accept his creatureliness by honoring the Creator is exemplified by disorders in the natural relationships of man to woman. "Because the lower and the higher, the creature and the Creator, are exchanged ('perverted') the result is a perverse supremacy of the inferior desires over the spirit ."13 Paul could just as well have chosen other examples of human behaviour as a means of illustrating the distortions of the Creator ' s purposes by man's willful refusals to acknowledge his dependent status : pride or sloth would have served as well to point out "the hidden connections between the Fall, as a disordering of creation, and the pathological changes in existence in the world as a whole."14 He is obviously discussing original sin ("Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity" (vs. 24) as Page 17: exemplified by specific acts contrary to the Creator's purposes. It is important at this point to bear in mind that Paul is talking about concrete libidinous acts, of a homosexual nature, and is not discussing the pre-disposition to homosexuality or what could be called constitutional homosexuality, which characterizes some persons. The theological issue here is not in the concrete acts, but in the meaning of the homosexual condition, as an empirical fact, in light of God's order of creation. It would have been out of place for Paul to have discussed this issue in this context, even had he known of the reality of constitutional homosexuality. But the common interpretation that verses 26-2 7 of Romans I indicate that homosexuals have been abandoned by God (unless they become heterosexuals) is certainly not consistent with Paul's purpose in this whole passage. This issue will be dealt with in section IV of this paper. It must not be supposed from anything that has been said to this point, that Paul was not rejecting homosexual acts. In I Corinthians 6:9-10 he includes them in a catalogue of unrighteous practices which will deny the kingdom of God to persons guilty of such offenses : Do not be deceived: neither the immoral, nor idolators, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God. (It is very misleading and unfortunate indeed, as Bailey has pointed out,15 that the translators of the Revised Standard Version, now so widely used in our land, have elected to combine two separate Greek words denoting homosexual practices into the word which can only mean all persons of homosexual pre-disposition, without regard to libidinous practices on a par with adultery. The meaning is obvious in the Greek text where malakoi Page 18: (meaning in this context "effeminate" or "the passive male partners") and arsenokoitai (referring to the active males in the homosexual acts, sometimes also being rendered simply as "sodomites") are used to refer to specific homosexual practices. It is clear that again Paul was speaking of such acts, without qualification, as being seriously sinful. A similar catalogue listing of grievous sinners for whom the law has been made includes "sodomites" in company with murderers, kidnappers, liars, perjurers, and "whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine." (I Timothy 1:9-10) Summary of Biblical Evidence Even though the two Old Testament verses (Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13) can be considered as of historical interest but not of contemporary relevance because of their setting in the rules for cultic purification, and the lack of clarity in their underlying meaning, and even though the Sodom story has been shown to have been used fallaciously in condemnation of homosexuality, the four verses cited from the New Testament (Romans 1:26, 27; I Corinthians 6:10; and I Timothy 1:10) indicate with no possibility of qualification that homosexual practices were considered by Paul (and the writer of I Timothy) as concrete sins on a par with adultery and murder, as evidence of the original sin with which the human race is infected. Thus the moral question has been illuminated somewhat, but the theological issue of homosexuality remains unopened in the New Testament. Toward the tentative exploration of this theological question we now turn in the next section. Page 19: IV. A LARGER BIBLICAL VIEW OF HOMOSEXUALITY We must begin this final section by setting the context for theological discussion from two perspectives: (1) a consideration of the causality and the definition of homosexuality; and (2) meditation on the meaning of the writer ' s personal knowledge of homosexuals; for theological reflection , to be true to its essential nature, must be grounded in contemporary phenomena and knowledge. Most persons who have given any thought to the problems of the definition and the causality are aware of t he vast sea of confusion into which this leads. Everybody seems t o have an opinion on causation from the extremes of " I (he) was born this way" to "My (His) mother made me (him) this way." From genetics, to psychodynamics, to social-cultural conditioning, theorists run the gamut, for there is truth in all factors . Most of the research and writing in this field has been done by psychoanalysts, psychiatrists, anthropologists, and psychologists with little or no attention from sociologists . In the midst of much continuing hard work the confusion seems to be settling into definable patterns which give us a great deal of guidance on these basic problems . The recent book Sexual Inversion (The Multiple Roots of Homosexuality)16 edited by Dr. Judd Marmor, Clinical Professor of Psychiatry at the University of California at Los Angeles, and President-Elect (1965) of the Academy of Psychoanalysis, brings a great deal of order into this chaos and offers refreshing analyses of the current state of various theories . The introduction to this anthology , written by the editor, Dr. Marmor, is a frank and open-ended critique of current views of homosexuality and it will be helpful to lean heavily, in this section, on Page 20: what appears to be the latest (and in this layman's view the best) attempt to put homosexuality in perspective as a human phenomenon. There are a variety of reasons why persons participate in homoerotic practices: from the true homosexual, for whom heterosexual experience is neither possible nor desirable; to those who engage in transitory homosexual acts because of enforced deprivation of heterosexual outlets over long periods of time (prisoners and military personnel, for example),17 or because of rebellion or hostility, or for money and status (as, for example, the young male prostitutes, many of whom have little homosexual predisposition), or the adolescent experimentation with which many are personally familiar. A definition of homosexuality must "exclude patterns of homosexual behaviour that are not motivated by specific, preferential desire," says Dr. Marmor and he, therefore, offers the following definition: (T)he clinical homosexual (is) one who is motivated, in adult life, by a definite preferential erotic attraction to members of the same sex and who usually (but not necessarily) engages in overt sexual relations with them.18 This writer is not entirely clear why Marmor uses the qualifier "clinical" here, but the significant phrase is "definite preferential erotic attraction," with its implication that the patterns of need and behaviour are a part of the personality structure of the individual and the desire is the same, even when the other alternative is present. This means, then, that an individual having a "definite preferential erotic attraction to members of the same sex," may in all respects but this one be as like another individual who has a "definite preferential erotic attraction" to members of the opposite sex as any two persons can be alike. The common tendency to stereotype all homosexuals on the basis of the most Page 21: deviant or most bizarre behaviour of some is a cultural prejudice, the nonsense of which becomes obvious if we make the equally absurd assumption that all heterosexuals are alike, or are to be judged by the mos t bizarre behaviour of any heterosexual. Dr. Marmor develops this thought further: One reflection of this stereotyping is the almost universal belief that homosexuals are not to be trusted "with young people of the same sex. The assumption that t hey are somehow less in control of their impulses than are heterosexuals is the same kind of assumption that underlines white prejudice against Negroes or native-born prejudice against foreigners. In all these instances, the feeling is a reflection of fear based on lack of intimate knowledge of the people involved. A homosexual individual -is neither more nor less trustworthy, necessarily, with young people of the same sex than a heterosexual is trustworthy with young people of the opposite sex. 19 Without sacrificing the force of this claim that there is no "homosexual personality" ~, Marmor qualifies the above statement. He reminds us that, because of the extreme pressures of a society which makes the homosexual's "behaviour ipso facto maladaptive", he tends "statistically (to be) more likely to feel inadequate and to show evidence of less adequate ego formation" than the heterosexual: (T)here is, nevertheless, as wide a personality variation among homosexuals as among heterosexuals: from extremely passive to extremely aggressive ones; from quiet introverts to loud and raucous extroverts; from hysterics to compulsives; from sexually inhibited and timid types to sexually promiscuous and self-flaunting ones; from irresponsible sociopaths to highly responsible and law-abiding citizens. 20 With regard to causality, the origins of homosexuality are seen now to be multi- factorial, including socio-cultural, psychodynamic, biological and situational. "There is yet no single constellation of factors that can adequately explain all homosexual deviations...21 Page 22: Investigations into the possible genetic origins of homosexuality so far have proved relatively fruitless . There is some evidence that a chromosomal abnormality, originating perhaps in the mother's ovaries as in Mongolism, may be the mechanism involved in many of the cases . . . (but) the nature of this defect can, at the moment, be only a matter of guesswork. It should be pointed out, however, that it need not influence the direction of the libido directly and that its action can be indirect via general personality characteristics. Environmental factors do, of course, playa part in most genetically determined conditions ... the degree to which genetic and environmental factors are important, in homo- 22 sexuality, as a whole and in any individual, remains uncertain. We have assumed naturally, on the basis of limited experience, that heterosexual is the biologic norm and that therefore "normal" and natural" mean "heterosexual." Strange as it sounds to our ears, this may not in fact be the situation. All the evidence from comparative zoology indicate that bisexuality or "ambisexuality" is the biologic norm and that exclusive heterosexuality is a culturally imposed restriction . 23 In addition there is some evidence that sexuality operates adaptively, that is that at birth a human being is psycho-sexually neutral and this potential "permits the development and perpetuation of divers patterns of psycho-sexual orientation and functioning in accordance with the life experience each individual may encounter and transact. ,,24 The human being--unlike the animal lower on the evolutionary scale which has a complex inherited pattern of instincts subject to little manipulation by the environment--is born "not with complex instinctual patterns, but with relatively unfocused basic biological drives . The direction these drives take in human beings and the objects to which they become attached are subject to enormous modifications by learning...25 This means that a Page 23: human being has what could be called bi-sexual potentialities and that the direction his sex drives take is determined to some degree by the positive and negative learning he attains from his environment. Marmor goes so far as to affirm that on the basis of research by Money and by Hampson and Hampson into the origins of sexual behavior and gender role, "the objects of human sexual drives are experimentally determined rather than biologically determined." And he concludes, on this basis: that there is nothing inherently "unnatural" about life experiences that predispose an individual to a preference for homosexual object-relations, except insofar as this preference represents a socially condemned form of behavior in our culture and consequently carries with it certain sanctions and handicaps.26 While admittedly all this is theory, based on research which no doubt will be extended and re-examined, the concept of bi-sexual potential presents a serious problem for the theologian, because from the doctrine of creation which includes "male and female created He them" the assumption has always been that the sex roles of male and female are immutably a part of the order of creation. Marmor is refreshing and a bit unusual in the experience of the writer when he considers the question of whether homosexuality is, as such, a sickness. He states, with remarkable and welcome candor that The concepts of psychoanalysts are all derived from the study of homosexuals who have sought psychoanalytic therapy or else have been referred by external difficulties .. . a strong possibility thus exists that traditional psychoanalytic concepts about the characteriological defects of homosexuals are based on a skewed sampling of homosexuals and may not accurately represent the spectrum of personalities present in the total homosexual population ... lf the judgments of psychoanalysis about heterosexuals were based only on those they see as patients, would they not have the same skew impression of heterosexuals as a group?27 Page 24: One other factor ought to be mentioned in this brief summary of the causes of homosexuality and that is the power of social-cultural role expectation in the determination of gender- role patterns. Every culture has developed patterns of expectation of "masculine" and "feminine" behaviour and these patterns vary greatly among cultures. Anthropologists and psychologists have noted marked variations in these gender-role patterns in human societies. This can only lead to the conclusion that the common assumption that our "Western concepts of masculinity and femininity are rooted in the biological difference between the sexes" is fallacious. 28 Social-cultural factors are a powerful determinant in the acquisition of gender-role by the individual. The person whose body build, and/or interests fits the pattern has significant emotional support, of which he may be unaware, for this proper development. But the individual whose physique, inclinations, or interests do not fit, faces conflicts with culture and with self. In our culture the unathletic or poorly coordinated boy and the unattractive or "masculine-looking" girl are sometimes ... "pushed" into inverted gender roles, not only bht reactions of people on the outside, but also by the distortion of their own self-concepts, which are similarly dependent on the dominant social values of their environments. Even such non-physiological personality attributes as mathematical ability in a girl or artistic talent in a boy may be endowed by a culture with values that then tend to push such children t~ward distorted self-concepts and inverted gender roles. 29 This realization leads the theologian to ask the hard question of the helpfulness of a theological construct which may well be social-culturally conditioned, and of the effectiveness of a culturally-accommodated church. Page 25: (2) The theological issues have been raised inevitably and abruptly for this writer by the experience of working together with homosexuals on projects of common concern. From a traditionally naive acceptance of the cultural norm of heterosexuality and its accompanying attitudes of ignorance and condescension of homosexuality, and of rejection of the idea of such perversion (with, however, no conscious rejection of the homosexual person) he was suddenly faced with t he realization that something didn't add up . Life isn't that neat and simple. The writer has seen "gay" persons accept Christ and join His body . Was grace witheld? This same question was raised by the elders of Jerusalem when they had Peter on the carpet for baptizing Cornelius, a Gentile. He had been amazed when the Holy Spirit had directed him to the home of a non-Jew and had likewise prepared Cornelius for his message . "Truly," he said, "I perceive that God shows no partiality, but in every nation anyone who fears him and does what is right is acceptable." (Acts 10 : 34-35) In Peter ' s experience I see a parallel to my own. The question comes in Peter's phrase, "does what is right." Is it possible that homosexuality can be "right" for some persons? I have come to know and admire some homosexuals who are mature and responsible persons. They have fought through God knows what kind of hell in the identity-formation crisis, and still face daily the threat of the ruination of their lives, and the loss of jobs and social standing if their true natures were known to employers and the authorities . Yet, these persons are committed to relationships which are fulfilling and have redemptive qualities. The plumbline of judgment must be my own perception of the capacity of these persons for openness to other human Page 26: beings, for mature and responsible social involvements, and for love in its fulfilling depth. I must, in the face of the church's "no", speak a loud "yes" to these persons, for I have seen the marks of self-giving Christian love upon their lives. With these two contemporary perspectives in mind--current definitions and theories of causality,and the admittedly subjective (but not therefore invalid) experience of the writer--we turn finally to ask questions of our theology and to propose tentative guidelines for a theology which includes the phenomenon under consideration. 1. The Creation of Man So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. (Genesis 1:27) Man, created male and female, in the image of God, raises at once the question of obvious physical sex differentiation and what has been taken as inevitably concomitant, the psycho-sexual expression of this sex differentiation. Are they the same onto logically? The Hebrews believed that a man was incomplete without a woman and children. The good life was the family life, barrenness was a curse. (This may explain the extremity of punishment for persons involved in homosexual practices in Leviticus 20 : 13). They thus affirmed the unity of sex difference and of the psycho-sexual expression, which is part of the Judeo-Christian view of man. Without in the least belittling the ontological reality of this unity, we must ask the question, "Does this fit all of the facts?" Thielicke discusses this unity as follows: The differentiation of the sexes is so constitutive of humanity that, first, it appears as a primeval order (Gen . 1:27; 2:18ff) and endures as a constant despite its deprivation in the Fall Gen. 3 :16), and, second, Page 27: that to it is attributed symbolic value for the fundamental structure of all human existence, that is to say, for the existence of man in his relationship to his fellow man, for the fact that he is defined by his being as a Thou in relationship to a Thou.30 It is apparent to this writer that, perceptive as this statement is, it nevertheless errs by equating biological (and perhaps psychological) sex differentiation with essential being. To say that, to the factor of sex distinction "is attributed symbolic value for the fundamental structure of all human existence" and to qualify this statement, as Thielicke does, by further stating that this means a man's relationship to his fellow man defines him as a man, is to affirm the ontological unity of biological sex difference and psycho-sexual expressions, that is, that such unity is inherent in the creation of man. If we assume that scientists, working on the frontiers of anthropo logical knowledge, are moving toward what may one day be determined to be a true assessment of man's psych-biologic-social nature, then we must question this unity. For, as discussed above, if male-and-female, at birth, is not more than a physical differentiation (in terms of the eventual kind of sexual relationship which may develop), and if the potentiality for sexual expression is neutral (or "ambisexual") at birth so that the direction which the sex drive takes in seeking expression and the "choice" of another human being to which the drive shall be attached are truly conditioned by learning, then Thielicke has not taken all the facts into account. For "the differentiation of the sexes" may not be so "constitutive of humanity" as he assumes. Page 28: Does the answer to the question of what it means to be a human being hinge on heterosexual union? This question is ultimately ridiculous, but it would seem to be required of Thielicke's statement above. The real question is also implied by Thielicke. This is the question of relationship, what he calls "a Thou in relationship to a Thou." He quotes Barth with approval "that man does not have" the choice to be fellow-human or something else . . . Man exists in this differentiation, in this duality.31 because Barth is saying the same thing about sex differentiation . With the first part of Barth's statement this writer could not be more in agreement. Certainly man is defined by his relationship--he has no choice but to be "fellow human". But must the "fellow human" be in relationship to a fellow human of the opposite sex? The theological norm would correctly be seen as "fellow-human relationship". But there is a good possibility, given the current theories of sexual nature as noted above, that man is defined in relationship to fellow man, as a Thou in relationship to a Thou devoid of biological differentiation. What does it mean that man is made "in the image of God, male and female"? Does it mean that man must be united with woman to be in relationship to God? Certainly not! In this I am in agreement with Thielicke: On the other hand, the theological ontology of human existence must not go so far as to imagine that it can express the idea of imago Dei by means of this differentiation . It is true that this differentiation is very important as a medium of our relationship to God and our fellow man and thus is one of the media in which, through which and despite which that relationship is realized. The imago Dei, however, both in its implications for our creaturehood and its Christological implication, expresses our unmediated relationship to God.32 Page 29: When we speak of man's essential nature and his essential relationship to God in the eschatological dimension (that is, in the ultimate intention of God) sex differentiation is of little importance. In support of this unqualified aloneness before God, this "unmediated relationship" as the meaning of man being made in God's image, we recall Jesus' statement that "They neither marry nor are given in marriage" in the Kingdom of God (Mark 12:25); that Paul, thinking in terms of the eschatological end of time, completely separated sexuality from life (I Corinthians 7:lff); and "there is neither male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus" (Galatians 3 : 28). It is important to point out here that there is no implied distinction of importance or rank between man and woman. In the first creation story, the verse quoted above, there are no distinctions of value or relationship to God. Both man and woman are created in God's image, hence both are equally in relationship to Him, and both "receive the blessing as well as the command to subdue the earth." (Genesis 1:28ff)33 2. On The Fall and Homosexuality As a Result of Original Sin The second account of creation (Genesis 2:4-3:24) contains the story of Adam and Eve and the act of disobedience which eventuated in what theologians call the Fall of Man. By this myth is explained a fundamental fact of human experience--the tragic contradiction between man's essence and his existence, between what man senses he was meant to be and what he is. The myth affirms the Creator's good intent, and the creature's perversion of that intent; it recognizes the essential estrangement of a man from his Creator, hence from other men and even from self. Such a myth is a necessity to capture and personify the existential longings for Page 30: purpose and meaning and relationship in life, and the pervasive quality of paradox in man's existence: for example, his capacity for goodness is equalled by his capacity for evil, his freedom is limited by his willingness to be bound . This is not the place to discuss the merits of the concept of the Fall except to say that it is not to be interpreted biologically in that we inherit from one man and woman our sinful natures, nor is it necessarily to be assumed that any such ideal state existed in history from which men have fallen. 34 Rather, it is every man's story-the Creator's intent and every man's distortion of that intent. From the perspective of the Fall and the concept of original sin-that is, estrangement and assumed independence of creature from Creator-one can view homosexuality as a perversion of the original or intended order of nature, insofar as homosexuality is a condition caused by human sin. This would be true of the socio-cultural determinants, which are the result of generations of ignorance, of outdated taboos, of a t00- narrow view of life, and of a cumulative social fabric of sins against the deviant. It is also true of the social-psychological conditioning (also cumulative) which occurs in the family, which can distort human personality unknowingly. But original sin cannot serve to explain the possible genetic factor in homosexuality any more than in mongolism or some other congenital defect, unless the theologian were to say that mutations are the result of original sin, which would be patently ridiculous. When we posit the question of the existence of evil we can account for moral evil (sin) as being due to man's free choice and deliberate acts (which may have cumulative social-psychological effects), but we must also face the presence of natural evil--the congenital deformity, to name one. Page 31: These must be seen as (1) works of the devil, or some other personification of evil at war with God; (2) as deliberate acts of God, hence not ultimately evil ; (3) as evidence of the existence of an as yet "uncreated chaos" over which the Creator has not yet assumed control; or (4) as part of the statistical chance the Creator must take in his working to bring his Creation to perfection. Assuming the reality of the possible genetic factor in the genesis, of homosexuality, the Fall does not explain all the possibilities of causality. Even if we assume , for the moment; that homosexuality is a manifestation of creation put out of order by original sin, Thielicke is certainly correct when he says (T)here is not the sl!ghtest excuse for maligning the constitutional homosexual morally or theologically. We are all under the same condemnation (original sin, the guilt of which and fact of which we all participate in) and each of us has received his "share" of it. In any case, from this point of view the homosexual's share of that condemnation has no greater gravity which would justify any Pharasaic feeling of self-righteousness and integrity on the part of "normal" persons. 35 3. The Thou-Thou Relationship It was argued in a previous section that the current ontological doctrine which affirms that man's existence as man, in fact that which makes him human, is "his being as a Thou in relationship to a Thou," that is, . another human being . We took issue with the claim that sex differentiation, even as a symbolic value, is seen as fundamental to the structure of this relationship. Now in Genesis 2 : 25 this question comes sharply before us once more: Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and cleaves to his wife, and they become one flesh. (Genesis 2:25) Page 32: There is no intention to deny the validity of this, but simply to ask whether it fits all the facts? Certainly, in this verse more is implied by "one flesh" than sexual union, though that is an important constituent. Rather, the sexual union must be seen as the expression of a relationship of mutual love, of empathy, of confidentiality, and of trust. There is little evidence that heterosexual union can produce these qualities of relationship, but much evidence that such union does serve to symbolize, enact, express and even enhance such qualities already existent. Cannot the same qualities be a possibility for a homosexual union? This writer thinks so. He has known a number of homosexual couples who have developed highly successful relationships over relatively long periods of time, one of 25 years and several of more than 10 years. Admittedly, these are rare, from all that is known. Indications are that the socia-cultural and psychological pressures on the homosexual account for his comparative inability to establish permanent relationships comparable to marriage of heterosexuals. Recall Marmor's conclusion that in all ways, save one, homosexuals exhibit as wide a range of personality variation as heterosexuals, and that the tendency "to feel less adequate and to show evidence of less adequate ego formation" is inevitable in a society which proscribes their every manifestation of the sexual nature with which they have been endowed. 36 Thielicke recognizes the grave hazards facing the homosexual which make permanent relationships more difficult to achieve but not therefore less desirable than for heterosexuals . I quote this long passage for its magnificent description of the problem: Page 33: 1. The homosexual does not have the benefit of living with a supportive order than is informed by a traditional ethos such as that of the institution of marriage. Instead of having at his disposal a set of prefabricated decisions which are made for him by the tradition and make it easier for him to find his way about, he is to an unimaginably greater degree thrmm back upon himself. Since he generally begins only gradually to recognize his disposition, he goes through phases of terrible loneliness and stages of groping and uncertain improvisations. 2. Otherwise than in the "normal sphere", the non-ingrained normative attitude easi ly produces a propensity toward the excessive, toward rapidly changing partnerships (promiscuity) and thus a sabotage of even that relative "order" which the homosexual could achieve on his basis. 3. The ostracism the homosexual suffers through the criminal law and the defensive instinct of society leads him to frequent very dubious circles. He cannot risk any public attempt to make advances . Whereas the "normal" person is permitted to regard a representative of the other sex as a potential partner and is exposed only to the possibility of being refused (without thereby being socially or morally compromised), the homosexual runs the danger of encountering a "normal" person, with a l l the consequences that this may involve . This search for a partner of his own kind in the shady areas of society means an extraordinarily heavy spiritual burden and, what is more, a dangerous temptation especially for the person who really ,vants to live an ethically responsible life. 4. The same burden and temptation result from the fact that the homosexual must wear a mask and act like a hypocrite before friends and acquaintances, and as a rule even in his mm family, but nevertheless live in constant fear of discovery and its consequent compromise of character. Thus he is thrmvn into a situation of permanent conflict.37 Under these conditions, it would seem that logically and theologically there is no reason to deny the possibility of marriage to the homosexual couple, subject to the same privileges and restrictions that inhere in heterosexual marriage. Creativity, certainly in the context of man as being considered cocreator with God, is not limited to pro-creation . There are many ways in Page 34: which man is called upon to share creativity with God: to bring order and meaning out of personal and social chaos, to bring to fulfillment that which is only potential, to mention only two . Reuel Howe speaks in his writings of what this writer feels is the highest type of human creativity in this context . Howe, affirming that a person is a person only in meaningful relationship to another (the Thou-Thou relationship discussed above), says that we can "call one another into being. " By responsible, responsive, personal, caring relationships one person can call another into being--that is, can help him become truly a person by the act of affirming his being . 38 Man's deepest longings are not for sexual relationship, per se, but for significant self-affirming and other-affirming relationships. Sexual promiscuity, both hetero- and homo-, has, among other drives, this universal desire to escape loneliness and personal extinction by non-affirmation of personhood. Perhaps this is the reason Jesus was much more lenient with the sensual sinner (the adultress and the prostitute) than he was with the pious hypocrite and those who were not in responsive, affirming relationships with persons. The Gospel proclaims that we are accepted by God, that to be "in the Kingdom" is to be both accepted and therefore accepting persons. Christ was concerned about the quality of the relationships between persons, and pointed out that relationship to God is only possible through responsible relationships with other persons . He taught us that love of God and neighbor liberates man into fullness of life-- liberates us from the bondage of estrangement, of anxiety, of hostility. It is part of the mission of the Church to enable these kinds of person Page 35: affirming relationships to occur. There is no indication in Christ's teachings that the quality of life he lived and which he envisioned for all men, and which the Church is called to manifest in the world, was limited to heterosexually-oriented persons. If the homosexual is accepted by God, a belief which is implicit in this paper, then he can be an accepting person, and this includes self-acceptance. Thielicke is provocative at this point: What then does "acceptance" mean here? It can mean to accept the burden of this predisposition to homosexuality only as a divine dispensation and see it as a task to be wrestled with, indeed--paradoxical as it may sound--as a talent to be invested. (Luke 19 : l3f)39 And when the "master of the servants" comes and s ettles accounts with us (Matthew 25 : 19, Luke 19 :15) he will not ask what talent we have had (none of us asked for what we got) for he knows t hat already, but he will ask to see what we have done with that which has been given us. The question of ethics, of responsible, responsive relationships, comes naturally' to the fore at this point, but that cannot be taken up here. Thielicke points out We may assume that the homosexual has t o realize his optimal ethical potentialities on the basis of his irreversible situation.40 The homosexual, no less than the heterosexual, needs understanding and sympathetic pastoral guidance in his struggles for ethical fulfillment, as well as the spiritual and emotional support of a church which enables redemptive relationships to occur . These are largely non-existent at the present time, and remain one of our tasks for the immediate future, while we hammer out a theology which will include him as a part of creation about which the Creator is concerned. Page 36: Footnotes 1. The Wolfenden Report . (Report of the Committee on Homosexual Offenses and Prostitut i on, New York : Lancer Books , 1964) 2. Bailey, Derrick Sherwin , Homosexuality and the Western Christian Tradition. (New York : Longmans , Green and Company , 1955) . p . Vlll. Bailey says "the tradition (regarding homosexuality) has not undergone any significant, alterations since the end of the Middle Ages." 3 . Bailey , Ibid , p . ix . 4 . The remark attributed to someone in the San Francisco Police Department on the occasion when ministers from CRH were informing the police of the forthcoming ball (January 1, 1965) that "If you aren't going to enforce God's law , we are," is a good example of the assumed righteousness of society ' s attitude . (See "The Council on Religion and the Homosexual" by Del Martin in Essays on Religion and the Homosexual, Vol . I , p . 20 . n . d . ) 5 . Bailey, op . cit . pp . 49-53 . 6. Ibid , p . 3. 7. Ibid , p . 9. 8 . Ibid, p. 10. 9 . Ibid . pp . 10-26 . 10 . Ibid, p . 155. 11 . Ibid, pp . 59- 60 . 12 . Thielicke, Helmut , The Ethics of Sex . Translated by John W. Doberstein . (New York : Harper and Row, Publishers , 1964) 13 . Ibid , p . 279. 14 . Ibid, p. 282 . 15 . Bailey, op . cit. pp . 38f . 16 . Marmor, Judd, Editor , Social Inversion (The Multiple Roots of Homosexuality). (New York : Basic Books, Inc ., 1965) 17 . See Reiss , Albert J . , Jr . , "The Social Integration of Queers and Peers," in Ruitenbeek , Hendrick M. , Editor , The Problem of Homosexuality in Modern Society . (New York : E. P . Dutton & Co ., Inc . , 1963) , pp . 249ff. Page 37: 18. Marmor, op. cit., p. 4. 19. Ibid, p. 19. 20. Ibid. 21. Ibid, p. 5. 22. Pare, C.M.B., "Etiology of Homosexuality : Genetic and Chromosomal Aspects," in Marmor, Ibid, pp . 77-79 . 23. Marmor, Ibid, p . 11 . 24. A quotation from the Hampson's report of their studies of the acquiring of the gender role by humans, reported by Marmor, Ibid, p. 9. 25. Ibid, p . 10 . 26 . Ibid, p . 16 . 27 . Ibid. 28 . Ibid, p. 13 . 29 . Ibid. 30. Thielicke, op . cit. , pp. 3f. 31. Ibid, p . 4. 32 . Ibid, p . 6 . 33 . Ibid, p . 7. 34 . E.g. If Thielicke's statement (Ibid, p . 283) "the status of existence which we all share as men in the disordered creation that exists since the Fall," is a historical statement, then it does not make sense, though theologians have been talking in these terms for centuries. If, on the other hand , he is speaking metaphorically of existential reality--the persistent distortion and disordering of the Creator's intent by the would-be-autonomous creature--"since the Fall" refers to every man's history and to a culmulative social fabric of sin and the results of sin into which every man is born, hence the " disordered creation which we all share as men," then the Fall can be a meaningful concept . 35 . Ibid, p. 283. 36 . See above, pp . l8f . Page 38: 37. Thielicke, op. cit ., p. 286 . 38. See Howe, Reuel, Man ' s Need and God's Action. (Greenwich, Conn .: The Seabury Press, 1957) and Herein Is Love . (Valley Forge, Pa .: The Judson Press, 1961) 39. Thielicke , op . cit ., p . 284 . 40. Ibid, p. 285 . Page 39: Available from Glide Urban Center Room 100 330 Ellis Street San Francisco, California 94102 SOc per copy; 7 or more copies 40c each Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Homosexuality: A Contemporary View of the Biblical Perspective by The Rev. Dr. Robert Treese (39 pages) Description An account of the resource Prepared for the Consultation on Theology and the Homosexual, sponsored by Glide Urban Center and The Council on Religion and the Homosexual in San Francisco, August 22-24, 1966.